On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Sam wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 12:14 AM, denstar wrote: >> >> Is porn dangerous? Violent video games? Words like "fuck" and "shit"? >> >> To some extent, apparently, "safe" is in the mind of the beholder. >> >> I'm not saying I'm down for shit- just saying. >> >> Crap examples, but still, there's precedent, no? If it were up to me, >> there wouldn't be, but this is re-al-it-eee. > > It's not the toy that's being banned, it's the reward that's not > allowed if you order crap food. > So now matter how educational the toy is you can't give it away with > low nutrition food.
If cigarettes were good for kids, old smokey Joe would have probably been o.k.. Or maybe not. Remember He-Man? >> I bet they [almost] shoved a gun in her face! Were all like "CEASE >> AND DESIST, BITCH! GET ON THE GROUND! GET ON THE GrrOUUUND!", >> prolly, too. > > She did cry. I didn't, when they did something similar to me. In my case they said "ASSHOLE" though, plus I was like 16. And I wasn't even breaking the law! ...unlike homegirl here. :) ... >> Exactly. And this is what is interesting. You know what the sane, >> most-reasonable response will (would?) be, yet here you are- >> >> Arguing what- that a S.W.A.T. team is going to bust through the >> ceiling (probably landing in the ball pen, crushing a couple of >> toddlers), yelling "IMPACT!"? > > OK I get it.. So you are saying if you ignore that law under no > circumstance will anyone ever enforce with a gun holstered Why do you persist with putting words in my mouth? *Did* I say that? Did I even /imply/ that? =) I'm saying it is, in this case, highly unlikely any armed, government-issue-jack-booted thugs will ever be involved. You yourself-- I mean, dude, get a grip. :) If you want to talk about the Real Deal, let's talk. There have already been several examples of a better (by far) application of this logic, why not discuss them, versus artificially beating this virtual horse? Explain to me a logical chain of events that ends with a gun in the face of a McD's manager over this law. This reasoning is comical, except for the fact that people *really do* end up on the business end of a law enforcer's pistol, with way less, and even no, justification. For Christ's sake, we were just talking about Ruby Ridge! Is your point that laws can suck, or what? Has anyone argued that laws don't sometimes suck? Maybe even all the time? Or is it that Government is Evil, because it has Force at it's disposal? Would you rather have police just yell "No!" in a firm voice at the crazy guys with the machine guns? And you don't mind warrantless wire-taps?!? Government back-doors in *all* of our communication systems?!? If you want to argue that this is a sucky law, which I happen to agree with, could you at least be sane about it, so we don't look like nincompoops, and get dismissed out of hand? ;) Why am I constantly left wondering where your sense of perspective has got off to? =)p Man. I've developed a mean streak, even with all the emoticons, neh? Fsck'n abysses. ;) :Den -- Those who give hoping to be rewarded with honor are not giving, they are bargaining ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:331338 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
