 | | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) on a related note (well, somewhat at least) The preacher at my church asked how many people in the congregation had been involved in automobile accidents...out of a group of about fifty people, just under a dozen raised their hands. (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) For the moment, yes. Are you concerned that there may actually be a sound reason that people should maintain the ability to defend themselves? (...) Though I am not well read on this issue, I can imagine many reasons why arms may not have been (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Spot on. Those that sacrifice freedom for peace shall have neither. (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Heh, if I'm not mistaken, the prefered *get-away* method is the use of an automobile... (...) Well, of course, that explains why so *few* people die in automobile accidents. And certainly no under-age drivers ever get ahold of a vehicle and go (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Just out of curiosity, is there any basis for this assertion? Or real-world precedent, other than romanticized and falacious notions of the "Old West?" (...) Why should a witness feel a need to stop a crime, thereby placing himself in harms' (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Kind of like the old west, eh? Oh wait, that was called the Wild West for a reason. You'd even more people shooting each other for trivial reasons than they do now. God only knows the carnage that would happen on the freeways. I mean in excess (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Which is a violation of the constitution. (...) Which is a violation of the constitution. (...) It should be training for none. Chris (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
Dan, please stop profaning here. In the thread about eduporn you keep profaning but using an asterix in place of one letter. I don't buy that that is appropriate. In this note you didn't even bother. Please do. (...) I prefer to have better than the (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) shocking. Do you mean this: Based on 1998 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over 37% of the 866 people who died from unintentional firearm wounds were under the age of 21 ? Shockingly low if you compare it to what (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Like the BATF? I agree. (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) <doing a little jig> Bring it on baby. There is one and only one way to bring the next American revolution on and that's to outlaw a significant class of weaponry. I'll tell you what...you'll be the first against the wall. (...) Agreed. It (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Originally to produce a state where the citizenry would have it in their power if they ever deemed it necessary to overthrow the governance by force. Now to maintain (and try to get back to) a state where the citizenry would have it in their (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) I mean wrong. Counterfactual. Not correct. (...) I'm in a somewhat different boat. I've thought this through and through and I'm convinced that it is a disservice to not treat sexuality as a casual and natural physical loving gesture. It would (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Cute. But the point remains that more deaths are caused yearly by handguns than by stabbings, and in any case multiply-fatal stabbings are rare, and certainly don't often involve the same number of victims as a shooting spree. (Again--not that (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Really, what do we need handguns and automatic weapons for except to protect ourselves from assholes with the same weapons? Get rid of them all and it significantly lowers the odds of getting shot or accidentally shooting yourself. If someone (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) total (...) distorted, (...) you (...) state (...) current (...) stupid (...) Are you cluless or what? Yeah I'm really meaning it. I know what sort of place Turkey is, but do you really? For your information, political islam is very strong (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Doesn't it disturb you that a guy with a knife killing eight Japanese schoolchildren makes worldwide news, and yet mass murders in the US often barely get a mention beyond local news? Doesn't that tell you something about this country? I would (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) You honestly believe that having a huge domestic market has no effect whatsoever on a criminals' access to weapons? That criminals would obtain handguns just as easily without a gun shop in every high street? That every handgun-related death (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) And this is something we need to be extremely carefull of. Anyone can become a suspect. Probing of suspects (and witnesses) must be based on careful documentation of the expectation of finding something. Extreme care must also be taken to keep (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) And how many illegally held guns were at one point were in the hands of Joe Public legally? How many were obtained due to poor storage on the part of Joe Public (eg under the bed/pillow)? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) All those poor naive people in Great Britain.... :-) Bruce (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) And I suppose you think the people committing premeditated crimes own those guns legally? And banning handguns would keep them from owning them? You're not really that naive, are you? (...) No, that's by soccer moms and yuppies. I'd like (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Maybe you can, but don't tell that to those Japanese schoolchildren... -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) It's considerable harder to conceal a shotgun or rifle. My 12-gauge is considerably better for "home defense" than a handgun, anyway, and for the paranoid, a high-powered rifle is better for sniping at Guv'mint Troopers. Any idiot can point a (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) One would hope not. However, knife-wielding madmen are rare - thankfully! (...) How would you see the reduction happening - education? Or perhaps reducing the type of guns up for sale? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Generally, it's considered quite hard to carry a concealed automobile into a public building for the purposes of committing a crime. This is further complicated by the typical size of vehicle that seems to be favoured by the American market. (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) I don't know if that's a tenable stance; one could as easily argue that a knife-wielding madman lurks in the bushes, but that doesn't mean we should outlaw knives *or* bushes. The only material difference between a gun and a knife (or a club, (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) What you are saying is very true. I was skipping over a whole lot of details (due process, search warrent, etc.) and going directly to the loss of certain rights as a convicted criminal. In jail, certain rights are removed or reduced. (At (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Is this really the best you can do. Which members of the gun owning public stopped your courts dragging away alleged communists during McCarthy’s reign? (...) You are trivialising the debate. Falling pianos no doubt have their victims too. The (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
In the spirit of not trying to pick a fight, I'll include my opinion to this topic and hope for the best... Is it true that Hitler managed to remove weapons from the common people in Germany sometime before he went on his mad killing spree? And (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) This seems problematic. The minute a crime is committed, presumably they have no idea whodunnit. So who exactly forfeits rights? And which ones? I guess I disagree. Among our rights (which are not forfeited even as a suspect) are due process. (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) It could be argued that handgun/gun ownership actually restricts freedoms. I would feel a little oppressed if I knew that behind the twitching curtains in my area lurked a potential gun. Or if during an argument in a bar between two strangers (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) I still can (although it is not a "top 4 list"). The fact is that Turkey is an oppressive country which is, as you say, "trying to imitate playing in the first league". I think it is important that everyone knows what sort of place Turkey is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) You are joking, I presume? (...) Yet, if you arm everyone you get less violence? No. What you get is every petty crime or malicious act escalating rapidly into a violent and murderous one. You get negligible non-violent crime rates, and huge (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) This even happens on Lugnet: (URL) (...) It is about to become law in New York State. There are plans to do the same in the UK: (URL) (...) Indeed. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) I'd hate to put words in Jason's mouth. But when I read his text I immediately thought about how your constitution has allowed persecution and discrimination on the grounds of political views and race in the last 50 years. I can think of no (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I really don't agree. In a country like mine, you can't go fully democratic since there is no common sense majority that prevent the population from total collapse into some stupid "islamic republic" thing, just like in Iran. In a (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
Well, I know your post must have been a joke by the tone you took, but..... Outlaw handguns, and only outlaws will have them. And all that would do is make rifles and shotguns "the firearm of choice in violent crimes and murders" sooner or later. I (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
I think the basic idea is having the handguns leaves the likely possibility of being shot with one. Plus, the way our media portrays violence with handguns, it creates a climate where the possibility is even more likely. Getting rid of the handguns (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Erm - so that someone can nit-pick and flame me? I did write a load of stuff in reply to this, then deleted the lot. It just occured to me that I'd then have to spend the next year trying to explain 'irony'. What's the betting I have to anyway (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essential nature of mankind
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Simpson writes: (big clipping) (...) Would you mind telling me why you consider Portugal was "the worst of the bunch"?? In fact, it DID start slave trade in the Atlantic; but it also began ANY sort of trade routes (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) You mean "wrong" to you? Sexuality is a very personal thing and people have different levels of it. Some wish to be private, some are more open, so it's not realistic to say either is "wrong." Sexuality is an intimate part of an individual and (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Yeah--a journal is, traditionally, a private forum for articulating one's thoughts. A letter to the papers could easily be construed as a statement of intent. I'm still torn, though; in college I argued passionately for the impossibility of (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I can agree that if the writing was a breach of a predetermined parole condition, then he does deserve to be punished. If it was not, then I feel that it is an invasion of privacy which cannot be tolerated. The individual in the (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) That's true, but I think Tom's point is that this is a dangerous thing to allow the courts. Even if it can sometimes avenge or even prevent crimes, the link between most kinds of writing and future events is too tenuous to generaly admit as (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Handgun Death Rate
|
|
(...) I found similar, though slightly differing, stats at (URL) In 1998, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Suicides with firearms took the lives of 17,420 Americans. Homicides with firearms took the lives of 11,798 (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) It's entirely possible that a PRIVATE journal entry (I'm reluctant to call it a "journal of fantasy" since it's difficult to establish after-the-fact whether a journal was intended as fantasy or as a plan of attack) can represent one's (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) Sure! I think most American parents think that. I'm perfectly comfortable with the fact that a majority can be wrong. I'm not talking about what most people feel. I'm talking about what I think is right. I think that most people feel the (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) I am not sure you were both comparing like-with-like. But I would be interested in seeing a more comprehensive comparison. In most developed countries average crime levels are statistically low. What is important is fear of crime… that is what (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) Who mentioned "printed news". Porn seldom makes the news in the UK... not in the paper I read at any rate. I was think more of educated debate. (...) It was a jest. My religious views are my own, I am not about to inflict them on anyone. Scott (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Could you elaborate on this a bit? Thanks. (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Interesting. It was illegal in England too, under the Puritanic rule of Oliver Cromwell. Curiously though, of all the cases brought to trial throughout London, only one ever secured a conviction - in most cases, the jurors wouldn't register a (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) follow-on article at the bottom too, but that is terrible. I mean, the guy is a convicted child molestor, on probation. So, maybe reconsider his probation or schedule some more therapy[1][2] - something appropriate. But to convict him in that (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) That was a rhetorical question, right? I am sure that almost all judges have, but, scarily, more and more no longer know or care what it means. (which that survey I posted a link to recently brings out.) (1) That said I can't advocate (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) over (...) case). (...) Disbarred??? How about dragged into the street by his hair and stoned to death? What kind of idiot creep judge hasn't read the first amendment? Chris (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) This makes it sound like you're saying that adult movies are demeaning to women because that's what the news in the UK prints. What??? (...) Well, I suppose each work is directed toward a specific demographic. But what I meant is that the (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) change (...) much (...) Nope. I hadn't read anything about that. It sounds like a dumb stance on both sides. Here is a snip from a note I posted on another forum in a discussion in which a Welsh woman was asserting that she was statistically (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) I'm glad somebody agree's with me :-). (...) Actually here in the uk we are having problems with increasing amounts of both government and buracrecy. I read the other day that half of our new laws come from Brussels. The European Union is (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) True. This in fact appears to be true of all governments, no matter whether they start out just and democratic or not. And that's my issue with government, it's what our founding fathers tried to combat, imperfectly. We have a bill of rights (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Change of direction
|
|
(...) I can't beleive your more scared of me! When we're you intending to run into me? you've already acknowledged I live in a different country. Is your fear of governmental oppression intellectual or paranoid? (bit below the belt, but what the hey (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) I see now - you don't live in the US, so you just can't quite appreciate the freedoms we have (they're eroding, though, unfortunately. And if more people in the US think like you, they'll erode much faster). (...) YOU. Him I may never run (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Well if the guy lived in Northern Island I bet he'd be put away under the prevention of terroism act. In the right climate a government will make for itself, laws strong enough to defeat the current challenge against it. My earlier answears (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
Hmmmm...I guess I'd better burn all those sci-fi stories I was writing, i'd hate to thrown in prison for starting a war and killing thousands of people...oh and the way some of those people died...I must be deranged to ever have thought such things (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) Har har har! No, dude, I mean don't you think most parents feel it's wrong to have sex in front of kids? (...) Put it this way, would you like to watch your parents have sex? I think parents showing affection is great! Kissing, hugging and (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) No, actually, you're not. At least, you shouldn't. If they're fiction, they have no base for a nonfictional case against you. If you HAD the materials for a bomb in the house, that would be one thing, but plans? You scare me. (...) Yes, the (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
I hope you don't live in the US and have any power in elections. If you do, I should look into citizenship in other countries. Writing a PRIVATE journal of fantasy has absolutely nothing to do with an ACTUAL crime, nor even intent. If we start (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Yes Look if someone has convictions for bomb making and you find a fake plan of a bombing campaign in his home, your gonna put 2 and 2 together and put him away. How do you know it was 'fake' he's gonna say that isnt he. Same in this case (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Let me add to that. Fictional writings that were never published or distributed and intended for my own private use (enjoyment?). (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) So, you're saying that the government can arrest me for fictional writings about something that is illegal, but never took place anywhere but in my head? And that it's right?! -Duane (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) 10 years! he should have got twenty, he was already on probation, He probably would have done it evetually and locking him up hardly counts as a loss to society! I think what society gains from the removal of the risk he posed far outways any (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
That's just beyond belief. I can't adequately express the outrage I'm feeling over the stupidity of the judge that actually let this happen (make no mistake, the judge is the only one to blame for this, he has the ultimate power in the case). I (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) OK, here's a nicely vague one for you. (URL) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) I can't agree more on this. Many people think it a cliche, but it's the truth - "My wife is my best friend" I wouldn't have it any other way. (...) No, no harm in it, as long as you realize they are in Denial if they think they aren't having (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
They just had a bit on Dateline or some other show in the last few days discussing this. How kids can say oral sex is not sex is beyond me - I think it's just Major Denial, a way to justify doing as much as they can without thinking about any (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
|
(...) Right! We have some impressively vague and unenforced laws. For example, apparently Bill Clinton and Gary Condit(1) may both be "sex offenders" under DC law, since adultery is illegal in DC. Matters not whether all parties involved consent or (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) Nah, Eddie van Halen. :-) Bruce (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) I am no expert either, but that is the usual criticism it endures in the UK. I disagree that adult cinema is geared towards "toward the satisfaction of male sexual fantasy and desire". I imagine it is directed towards a sub-group of male (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Oh, you mean like Jiang Zemin or perhaps Augusto Pinochet? :) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Who said unfettered? (...) Perhaps you should move to Cuba? (...) Sometimes you surprise me... but not this time! Scott A (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) Either do I, but I intend to be a good parent. But I am glad the safety ne is there to protect kids... not just my own. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) I expect you mean this: (URL) is worth noting that in some areas of the UK tossing a stone at a window counts as attempted burglary. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) Some. I'm not really sure what you're asking. Did you want names and addresses? (...) I suspect that even if there are not specific and precise laws about it there are generally vague laws that could (and would) be used to prosecute the (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) I gather it was from the former president of your country? Jennifer Clark (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Porn for sex education
|
|
(...) Huh? What parents wouldn't be shy demonstrating sex to their kids in person? I'm pretty sure there are laws against performing sexual acts in front of your children anyway. Or maybe you meant demonstrating it as in talking and showing pictures (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Not to mention that a dictatorship is often more easily changed than a democracy - you only generally have to get rid of one person (and maybe some key henchmen). (...) It certainly would free up a lot of money wasted on jails and the court (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) Now why is that I wonder? Get it out in the open. It wasn't too long ago that homosexuality (for an example) was socially taboo for subject matter. Now people tend to take it as a matter of course. I beleive that the media had a huge hand in (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) But what is marginal? And I disagree that all three could be included. I can envision a gallery selling 20x24" matted prints of a naked six year old and his dog playing in a sprinkler. Would that under any reasonable set of circumstances be (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) How so? Consumer demographics are highly male. Thus, the adult cinema is geared toward the satisfaction of male sexual fantasy and desire. To whatever extent the activities depicted are less than perfectly representitive of norml life (that is (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
|
|
(...) I am saying I do not care about the lions morals. Saying a lion has no morals, is like saying it cannot drive a car - it is irrelevant. I view calling a lion “amoral” as negative, as it is saying it has not got what we view as being “good”. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
|
|
(...) Again, I'm tremendously unclear. Please try and explain in more than 2 sentences. Try and summarize in a couple ways-- that might help. As near as I can tell, you mean one of two things: 1. You mean to say that we cannot tell if animals have (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) Because, I expect, people do not want to know. Domestic violence exists, but too many in society turn a blind eye. (...) Was it a few months ago - Is that the guy who did not wear a helmet? (...) I do not believe that parents always know best. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) It might be a way to curb that type of violence, yes. So why not show that type of violence in movies? Get it out in the open. Don't hide it from your children. Allow them to see the violence and have a chance to understand that it is wrong (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) I may well have. (...) The stereotypical porn movie is demeaning to woman. If I were to teach anyone sex education, it would be more than a functional analysis. Sex education should, at the very least, be in the context some sort of well (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) A good question. If it is publically avaible it could include all 3. But I see your point. But lets leave the marginal side of kiddy porn aside for now. (...) My view would be that individuals who use this material may need help in some way. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) A good question. If it is publically avaible it could include all 3. But I see your point. But lets leave the marginal side of kiddy porn aside for now. (...) My view would be that individuals who use this material may need help in some way. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
|
(...) As I cycle to work, cars do not screech around corners. Buildings do not explode. But I am sure that behind a couple of doors a husband is beating a wife. A dad is beating his kids. A mother may be beating her kids too. The reality is that (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
|
|
(...) Well I still think it is. I view moralising as rather sanctimonious. To say an animal is without them is negative - in my opinion. (...) Amoral is negative. (...) Evaluate comes to mind (...) Read Larry's message again. Assess the tone. What (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
|
|
(...) No. Not at all. I meant consumption levels. I used to share an office with a guy who has utter contempt for anyone who is more than a pound overweight, gay or a Catholic(1). I was thinking of him when I wrote the text. He lives in the USA (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Around we go again...
|
|
(...) Well? Is there a contrary view? Scott A (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
