Jeebus: 10% of Washington DC Residents are Addicts

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Can't you read, Moonie? That's 'not what he was saying'....dummy.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: BOBDN

We will never eradicate drug use. Keeping it in the black market like a festering infection won't cure it. Bring it out in the open and deal with it.

..smartest thing I have ever heard you say. Philly, is that you?

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: gistech1978
but once you take that first drink or hit
your free will goes by the wayside?
you cannot determine how your life will turn out?

No your free will does not go by the wayside. Thier are very few substances that will instatly addict you. You have to work at it. Those are the people I have a problem with, and I admit I have no sympathy or regard for them. IMHO we would be better off if we could eliminate them from society.

Now, I know you won't be offended by this because it is their ideas you are espousing.

You are a Nazi.

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: BOBDN

We will never eradicate drug use. Keeping it in the black market like a festering infection won't cure it. Bring it out in the open and deal with it.

..smartest thing I have ever heard you say. Philly, is that you?

No, it's me. BOBDN.

Is that you Ultra Quiet?

 

[Moonbeam]

The notion that it's the parents is also a part of the problem. Mayn families have children who are drug free and drug addicted. It's also a matter of luck.

 

[Moonbeam]

Anybody interested in a deeper look into this issue regarding Teens can click the audio link here and scroll down the page to the Oct 1 program on that subject. The author interview also has a web site here.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: BOBDN
The "war" on drugs is a joke.

If we want to end drug use we're in for a surprise. People have been using drugs for millenia.

Legalize all of it. Everything.

Then regulate it just like alcohol or any other intoxicating substance. Then provide treatment instead of incarceration. People are functional during treatment and can work to provide for themselves either wholly or partially until they are cured of addiction.

Drugs like pot should just be legal. That's a no brainer.

Put the criminals out of business, release all those people who were convicted on drug posession charges only. Review the rest of the drug related cases.

We will never eradicate drug use. Keeping it in the black market like a festering infection won't cure it. Bring it out in the open and deal with it.

This clearly is a sign of the end times. In general I agree with BOBDN. Perhaps we should talk about it more, and then we can disagree Probably on the "provide treatment" part.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Can't you read, Moonie? That's 'not what he was saying'....dummy.

I read in my own way.

 

[Zebo]

Hows that "war on drugs" workin?

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Hows that "war on drugs" workin?

Currently it isn't. But I have a plan. Vote for me in 2004.

 

[gistech1978]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: BOBDN
The "war" on drugs is a joke.

If we want to end drug use we're in for a surprise. People have been using drugs for millenia.

Legalize all of it. Everything.

Then regulate it just like alcohol or any other intoxicating substance. Then provide treatment instead of incarceration. People are functional during treatment and can work to provide for themselves either wholly or partially until they are cured of addiction.

Drugs like pot should just be legal. That's a no brainer.

Put the criminals out of business, release all those people who were convicted on drug posession charges only. Review the rest of the drug related cases.

We will never eradicate drug use. Keeping it in the black market like a festering infection won't cure it. Bring it out in the open and deal with it.

This clearly is a sign of the end times. In general I agree with BOBDN. Perhaps we should talk about it more, and then we can disagree Probably on the "provide treatment" part.

well its been proven, that no amount of punishment will stop the addict. we have been trying this for 30 years. not even tnitsuj's proposal that all junkies get shot. that will not deter someone from shooting up, smoking up or whatever. if death wont deter some of them, 20 years in the pokey wont either.
treatment is the only rational alternative right now, and its cheaper than the pen too, and has a higher success rate than the pen, too.

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

I'm saying some people no matter how many opportunties you give them are just screw ups.

You can't read so well can you.

Nice attack to substantiate your spin. Why not just 'kids with so many opportunities'? Why not "a man was shot by the police last night"...why "A black man was shot by a white cop last night in a white neighborhood with 99.9% of the residents being white and average per capita income placing them in the wealthiest 1%..."

Whatever you say, buddy...puff, puff, give.

Maybe I am stupid...but what exactly are you trying to say. I don't understand.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The notion that it's the parents is also a part of the problem. Mayn families have children who are drug free and drug addicted. It's also a matter of luck.

Moonster,
A solution is an economic one. It involves the home schooling of kids. Creating the ability of parents to be parents. Home schooling in areas where peer pressure is drug use oriented would reduce the opportunity and pressure.
I use to think couples should not have the right to procreate with out the ability to provide the upbringing for those kids that fosters reasonable behavior...
We use schools as baby sitters for the two worker parents. It seems the drug issue correlates with this condition.
Parents can create a good foundation on which to build or a poor one.
After the age of 18 if the kid fails the life test.. having all the positive factors provided them... then it is their problem and society in general needs dealing with it in a realistic manner.

 

[gistech1978]

there are societial factors, yes
homeschooling? im not sure if i agree with that.
so by homeschooling you shelter your child from everything, making them completely socially inept when they turn 18 and head to college EDIT: or when they enter the real world and get some McJob.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: gistech1978
there are societial factors, yes
homeschooling? im not sure if i agree with that.
so by homeschooling you shelter your child from everything, making them completely socially inept when they turn 18 and head to college.

Not if done properly I know many well "adjusted" home-schooled people. Home-schooling isn't only "sheltering" I think I would have gotten a better education if my parents had homeschooled as I am very self-motivated and results oriented.

Luny - I am in agreement with your overall assesment. It obviously isn't everything but it'd be a good place to start

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: gistech1978
there are societial factors, yes
homeschooling? im not sure if i agree with that.
so by homeschooling you shelter your child from everything, making them completely socially inept when they turn 18 and head to college EDIT: or when they enter the real world and get some McJob.

Well.. in school the kids are in another enviornment where they can cut school or develop behavior issues consistent with that. If the school is at home then it gives the parent the control the school system seems to not want anyhow. After school the parents have the control and can monitor to a greater degree the goings on of their kids.
Even a lower educated parent will learn as they teach their child (ren) and the higher educated can provided a bit more..
But, what is more important is the relationship.. getting to know your child and they you.

It would also save money, if that was an issue..
Folks want kids but, the problem ones, for the most part, could have avoided the trap by a different approach, I think.. If you live in DC it is a lot different than living in suburban Salt Lake City..

 

[gistech1978]

sure its all well and good if the parent wants to learn along with the child
my problem with homeschooling is this....there are no standards!
you could "teach" your kid that the earth is only 4000 years old.

this issue should probably be its own thread.

i know D.A.R.E doesnt work, nothing has worked.

im not saying youre wrong LR- im just think that a large percentage of homeschooled children would present a whole other host of societal problems.
how is a single inner city DC mom going to homeschool her kids?
sure suburban SLC soccer mom can do it. they can afford to buy the books, take the kids on a field trip, invest upwards of 6 hrs a day educating your child.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

I'm saying some people no matter how many opportunties you give them are just screw ups.

You can't read so well can you.

Nice attack to substantiate your spin. Why not just 'kids with so many opportunities'? Why not "a man was shot by the police last night"...why "A black man was shot by a white cop last night in a white neighborhood with 99.9% of the residents being white and average per capita income placing them in the wealthiest 1%..."

Whatever you say, buddy...puff, puff, give.

Maybe I am stupid...but what exactly are you trying to say. I don't understand.

I am saying that your use of emotionally-loaded words to further your argument only weakens your argument with many...you use 'suburban' and 'million dollar houses' like they should have some negative connotation attached, and they do in the eyes of many.

In order works, I asked you why you could not have just said 'kids with unlimited opportunities' and why you chose to use ?suburban kids in million dollar plus houses with unlimited??

Was a million dollar house not strong enough...the "plus" put your argument over the top? I am saying you sugar-coat your arguments to what think is most popular...like the "white cop kills black kid" analogy I used previously...why not ?cop kills kid? Why? ?because the ?black on white? and ?rich vs. poor? and ?inner-city vs. suburbs? sells?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: gistech1978
sure its all well and good if the parent wants to learn along with the child
my problem with homeschooling is this....there are no standards!
you could "teach" your kid that the earth is only 4000 years old.

this issue should probably be its own thread.

i know D.A.R.E doesnt work, nothing has worked.

im not saying youre wrong LR- im just think that a large percentage of homeschooled children would present a whole other host of societal problems.
how is a single inner city DC mom going to homeschool her kids?
sure suburban SLC soccer mom can do it. they can afford to buy the books, take the kids on a field trip, invest upwards of 6 hrs a day educating your child.

You seem to be uninformed as to what standards home-schooling parents have to follow. It isn't a free-for-all.
There are MANY places parents can get the teaching materials needed to homes-school. Is investing 6hrs in your child's learning and growth too much to ask of a child's PARENT(S)?

CkG

 

[gistech1978]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: gistech1978
sure its all well and good if the parent wants to learn along with the child
my problem with homeschooling is this....there are no standards!
you could "teach" your kid that the earth is only 4000 years old.

this issue should probably be its own thread.

i know D.A.R.E doesnt work, nothing has worked.

im not saying youre wrong LR- im just think that a large percentage of homeschooled children would present a whole other host of societal problems.
how is a single inner city DC mom going to homeschool her kids?
sure suburban SLC soccer mom can do it. they can afford to buy the books, take the kids on a field trip, invest upwards of 6 hrs a day educating your child.

You seem to be uninformed as to what standards home-schooling parents have to follow. It isn't a free-for-all.
There are MANY places parents can get the teaching materials needed to homes-school. Is investing 6hrs in your child's learning and growth too much to ask of a child's PARENT(S)?

CkG

well, i was not aware of stringent standards being applied to homeschooled children.
sure, if there are PARENTS involved. and hubby or mommy makes enough money so the other parent doesnt have to work.
if there is PARENT....then what? is our govt. going to subsidize this woman(or man) not working, staying @ home teaching her children and keeping them free of drugs and crime.....potentially?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: gistech1978
well, i was not aware of stringent standards being applied to homeschooled children.
sure, if there are PARENTS involved. and hubby or mommy makes enough money so the other parent doesnt have to work.
if there is PARENT....then what? is our govt. going to subsidize this woman(or man) not working, staying @ home teaching her children and keeping them free of drugs and crime.....potentially?

"stringent" - maybe not, but like I said - it isn't a freeforall like it seems you were trying to imply.
Yes, Parent(s) need to be involved. So what is more important to you - money or your kids education and future?
No, being a single parent shouldn't be subsidized since it was that person's choice to have a child and they should take the responsiblity seriously. Homeschooling isn't for everyone, but that doesn't mean that you can't be ACTIVELY involved in your childs education. The school system isn't your child's parent/babysitter - it is only for a structured learning center to help give a child basic knowledge. I could go off on and on about our educational system - I've been threatening it for a while...I might just have to start a thread on this sometime when I have more time to give to such a discussion.

It isn't a perfect solution - I'll grant that, but it most definately would be a start and would create a good foundation to build upon.

CkG

 

[Red Dawn]

Jeebus: 10% of Washington DC Residents are Addicts

And that's just on Pennsylvania Ave

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Jeebus: 10% of Washington DC Residents are Addicts

And that's just on Pennsylvania Ave

Is Bush included in those statistics?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Jeebus: 10% of Washington DC Residents are Addicts

And that's just on Pennsylvania Ave

Is Bush included in those statistics?

Nah he's been Clean and Sober for awhile!