Guest guest Posted December 1, 2000 Report Share Posted December 1, 2000 is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has always been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits of drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. This apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to past destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed him in a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for by my f**cking tax dollars. Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to have a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, with time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? Here's why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors diagnosed me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. I fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I had paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to help me or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be even more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three whole months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong with you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! -- Regards, B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 1, 2000 Report Share Posted December 1, 2000 Well, it seems that the same thing is happening here in the states, though instead of being paid for by tax dollars, thousands (millions?) are being sent to treatment which is covered by their insurance. So, my (and everyone else's) premiums go up, just like your taxes. Would be nice if we could convince the world that these losers don't need these vacations... they need to get a handle on their own lives, and get their hands off our money. But try convincing 270 million morons (just a quick guesstimate) of that. What's up with that? > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has always > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits of > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. This > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to past > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed him in > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for by my > f**cking tax dollars. > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to have > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, with > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? Here's > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors diagnosed > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. I > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I had > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to help me > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be even > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three whole > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong with > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > -- > Regards, > > B > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 1, 2000 Report Share Posted December 1, 2000 Coolguy, etc., Did you check out that asinine " join together " site? http://www.jointogether.org/ They actually claim that treatment for drug and alcohol addiction is as effective as treatment for " other chronic conditions. " Where in the hell do they get off making a claim like that???? I've been firing off e-mails to that group (including their Executive Director) challenging one thing after another... things like distorted numbers relative to " drunk driving " deaths... second hand smoke... treatment, etc. I'm so wound up over that web site, and organization that I just joined the ACLU... LOL.. reading my mail this morning just cost me $35-. Re: What's up with that? Well, it seems that the same thing is happening here in the states, though instead of being paid for by tax dollars, thousands (millions?) are being sent to treatment which is covered by their insurance. So, my (and everyone else's) premiums go up, just like your taxes. Would be nice if we could convince the world that these losers don't need these vacations... they need to get a handle on their own lives, and get their hands off our money. But try convincing 270 million morons (just a quick guesstimate) of that. What's up with that? > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has always > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits of > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. This > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to past > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed him in > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for by my > f**cking tax dollars. > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to have > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, with > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? Here's > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors diagnosed > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. I > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I had > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to help me > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be even > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three whole > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong with > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > -- > Regards, > > B > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 1, 2000 Report Share Posted December 1, 2000 Hello Chris This really sucks. It just shows how far the XA mafia have gone in pushing their thing. Although the AMA sai that alcoholism was a disease, they do not sign up to the AA version officially at all - as the APA alcoohl abuse and Alcohol Depepndence diagnoses clearly show. I do wish you the very best for your future health and happiness. I am really pissed that in the West, including the UK, BS " treament " is wasting money desperately needed for treatments that actually work. Only tonite I walked past a gigantic, tax funded Homeopathic hospital. I'm sorry for folks who are into homeopathy, but imo, and that of the great majority of doctors and scientists, it's a crock of distilled water. If ppl says it works for them fine but I dont see why tax money should go on this sort of thing, and insurance companies should have the right not to cover it if they wish. Also, I think these homeopathic remedies should have labels on them saying " Most doctors consider this as simply plain water and valueless for relieving illness. " P. > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has always > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits of > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. This > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to past > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed him in > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for by my > f**cking tax dollars. > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to have > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, with > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? Here's > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors diagnosed > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. I > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I had > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to help me > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be even > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three whole > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong with > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > -- > Regards, > > B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2000 Report Share Posted December 2, 2000 I glanced at that site, Roy. It seemed like typical leftist drivel to me. No reason to go off half cocked and join the ACLU, who are mostly leftist whackos themselves. I dislike Rush Limbaugh, who coined the term leftist whacko, but that doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of leftist whackos and their cronies permeating our country with their disingenuous ideas. So this website is anti-guns and pro-social-spending. Thats really not a big shock to me. Its from Massachusetts, wow I am even less shocked. I agree with you, I think their ideas are really half-baked, but it's supposed to be a free country, Roy, however asinine that happens to be. Here is something funny from that site: <<Serious discussions also are underway to lift the IMD exclusion that blocks most Medicaid funding of residential treatment, she added. " When you see how far we've gotten in pushing that issue ... it says something about how people are starting to see addiction as treatable, " Chalk said.>> Like I said, they are effective at permeating our country with their disingenuous ideas, and the above quote shows one person's pride of that fact. That was the third paragraph on this page: http://www.jointogether.org/sa/default.jtml?O=265099 What's up with that? > > > > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has > always > > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits > of > > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. > This > > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to > past > > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed him > in > > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for by > my > > f**cking tax dollars. > > > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to > have > > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, with > > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? > Here's > > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors > diagnosed > > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. I > > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I had > > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to help > me > > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be even > > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three > whole > > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong > with > > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > > -- > > Regards, > > > > B > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2000 Report Share Posted December 2, 2000 Hi Pete The plain water would be enough if it would just make them go away. Whether the water is a cure or a placebo is not really important, if there is not really a disease to cure. It appears to be nothing more than another money making venture. The AMA is only representative of about 35% of the doctors in America anyway and from my understanding, hold no real administrative clout. They only endorse of deny really. AA loves to throw around the statement that the AMA thinks alcoholism is a disease. I am still at a loss to find substantiation of this claim in writing. But even if they are or are not endorsing the disease model, why should I be held ransom through tax dollars, to people who have chosen addiction as a lifestyle. I don't even start to get all that resentful until I can't get treatment or support for illness myself, because that help is being redirected to that facet of the treatment industry, and it doesn't work. The same people that attend 12 step meetings and treatment appear to be the ones that revisit the lifestyle, again and again! Self inflicted destruction is indeed a sorry choice. So is suicide, long or short term realized. Perhaps if the treatment industry began to realize that 12 step, religious indoctrination does not even provide a short term deterrent, to this behavior, then other methods could more readily be attempted and perhaps even realized as a viable alternative. What's up with trying to race this 12 step horse to death? It hasn't worked ever with any mentionable success rate! Why do they persist in insisting that it could work? Money!!! But, it's my money and yours too! In the meantime, my friend is probably doing 3 inventories a day at this point to prepare himself for a new release into meeting land. That always follows treatment doesn't it? Humiliating, boring meetings over and over, every day until you are so sick of them you go and drink and or use again just to fulfill your own AA learned prophecy. The wheel keeps on turning! Thanks for your kind thoughts, Pete! -- Regards, B > From: 12-step-freeegroups > Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups > Date: 1 Dec 2000 20:36:25 -0000 > To: 12-step-freeegroups > Subject: Digest Number 484 > > Also, I think these > homeopathic remedies should have labels on them saying " Most doctors > consider this as simply plain water and valueless for relieving > illness. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2000 Report Share Posted December 2, 2000 Coolguy. Your aversion against anti-gun attitudes is really interesting from an European angle. I think you're a decent guy, no question about that, but you're statement is not easily understood from my point of view. The only thing I know for sure is, that if your laws on weapons were implemented in Denmark, the society at large would suffer. And the costs for social services would rise! Bjørn coolguy wrote: > I glanced at that site, Roy. It seemed like typical leftist drivel to > me. No reason to go off half cocked and join the ACLU, who are mostly > leftist whackos themselves. I dislike Rush Limbaugh, who coined the term > leftist whacko, but that doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of leftist > whackos and their cronies permeating our country with their disingenuous > ideas. So this website is anti-guns and pro-social-spending. Thats really > not a big shock to me. Its from Massachusetts, wow I am even less shocked. > I agree with you, I think their ideas are really half-baked, but it's > supposed to be a free country, Roy, however asinine that happens to be. > Here is something funny from that site: > > <<Serious discussions also are underway to lift the IMD exclusion that > blocks most Medicaid funding of residential treatment, she added. " When you > see how far we've gotten in pushing that issue ... it says something about > how people are starting to see addiction as treatable, " Chalk said.>> > > Like I said, they are effective at permeating our country with their > disingenuous ideas, and the above quote shows one person's pride of that > fact. That was the third paragraph on this page: > http://www.jointogether.org/sa/default.jtml?O=265099 > > What's up with that? > > > > > > > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has > > always > > > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits > > of > > > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. > > This > > > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to > > past > > > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed > him > > in > > > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for > by > > my > > > f**cking tax dollars. > > > > > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to > > have > > > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, > with > > > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > > > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > > > > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? > > Here's > > > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors > > diagnosed > > > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. > I > > > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I > had > > > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > > > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > > > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to > help > > me > > > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > > > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be > even > > > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > > > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three > > whole > > > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > > > > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong > > with > > > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > > > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > > > -- > > > Regards, > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2000 Report Share Posted December 2, 2000 > Coolguy. > Your aversion against anti-gun attitudes is really interesting from an European > angle. What is the European angle? Is it that I should not be able to arm myself to protect myself and family? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 Tommy. The European, or should I say Scandinavian angle is, that the State has got a monopoly on armed violence. Personally I've come from military families on both sides, and my father educated sergeants for the infantry in Northern Norway. I've been raised with weapons and had aiming and breathing exercises with my fathers rifle when I was a child. We often played on military shooting grounds and competed on finding bullets etc. But I learned some rules as to the proper use, and think of myself as a responsible person who would not abuse a weapon. Several years after my military duty, in which I got an A in shooting, I had an AG-3 with ammo in my home, legal. If I had lived in USA, I would probably have tried to get a license. I like weapons. I can fully appreciate your wish to be able to defend your family, even though I think that this natural feeling is abused for political purposes. As things are in Denmark, I feel I'm able to protect my family within reasonable limits. We've got two dogs, one long haired german sheep dog, and he's very protective. The police can be here within 10 minutes, and I don't think I would feel more safe if every crook outside were armed. Unless AA should develop armed attacks on adversaries :-), I can see no reason for being worried as things are. But as I said, if I lived in USA, I would probably have several weapons because I like weapons, but I hope not because otherwise I would be afraid that someone should attack my home and kill my family. I wouldn't like to live like that. Well then, shortly, the European angle is that you'll be safer if you're not allowed to arm yourself with the purpose to defend your family. Bjørn Tommy Perkins wrote: > > > Coolguy. > > Your aversion against anti-gun attitudes is really interesting from > an European > > angle. > > What is the European angle? Is it that I should not be able to arm > myself to protect myself and family? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 >Your aversion against anti-gun attitudes is really interesting from an European angle.< This is typical of European observations about US attitudes about guns. They think we're out of our friggin' minds. Every time something like a Columbine happens, we usually make it easier to get and carry guns. The right wing gun lobby will point to the recent decline in violent crime rates and say it's because more folks are packing. (It's more related to employment.) I think they may be right. What's up with that? > > > > > > > > > > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has > > > always > > > > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits > > > of > > > > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. > > > This > > > > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to > > > past > > > > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed > > him > > > in > > > > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for > > by > > > my > > > > f**cking tax dollars. > > > > > > > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to > > > have > > > > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, > > with > > > > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > > > > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > > > > > > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? > > > Here's > > > > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors > > > diagnosed > > > > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. > > I > > > > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I > > had > > > > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > > > > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > > > > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to > > help > > > me > > > > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > > > > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be > > even > > > > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > > > > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three > > > whole > > > > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > > > > > > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong > > > with > > > > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > > > > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 > But as I said, if I lived in USA, I would probably have several weapons Bjorn, That's where I live. BTW the Atlantic is already raging and the winds are forcast to get up to 50 kts. tonight. http://avalonpier.com/piercam.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 Re: What's up with that? > But as I said, if I lived in USA, I would probably have several weapons Bjorn: Unfortunately, you would have bought into the paranoid-hysteria mongering which is perpetuated by the gun lobby and the right wing fringe here. The same groups that would prevent you from coming here in the first place by closing our borders to immigration with reactionary, protectionist, exclusionary policies. Well, maybe not you...I assume you are white, being from northern Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 Ok, I'll shut up now, I promise. :-) http://www.harrybrowne.org/stands/imm.htm Jim > Bjorn: > > Unfortunately, you would have bought into the paranoid-hysteria mongering > which is perpetuated by the gun lobby and the right wing fringe here. The > same groups that would prevent you from coming here in the first place by > closing our borders to immigration with reactionary, protectionist, > exclusionary policies. Well, maybe not you...I assume you are white, being > from northern Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 I don't think the snipped sentence gives credit to my balanced post. Actually it was I who ignited this thread. At first I was nearly accused of something, and now I'm accused of the opposite. Reminds me of a trench warfare. It's dangerous to be in no man's land :-). In Denmark weapons are not a big issue, but some people, like collectors, members of sports clubs, home guards and registered hunters have their weapons at home. Years ago there were some episodes with home guards involved where they used their weapons to commit suicide or jalousie murder, but I think the control has got better so that psychic unstable persons are asked to return their weapons. But we don't have this attitude that it's your constitutional right to have a gun in order to defend yourself or your family. This kind of thinking would be thought of as weird, that's what I wanted to say about the European angle, but I can surely understand the dilemmas you are facing. My personal view on weapons are pragmatic. If I lived somewhere where guns were essential for survival, I would have one. But I rather be without unless for sports or interest. Bjørn dlmooneymsw wrote: > Re: What's up with that? > > > > > But as I said, if I lived in USA, I would probably have several > weapons > > Bjorn: > > Unfortunately, you would have bought into the paranoid-hysteria mongering > which is perpetuated by the gun lobby and the right wing fringe here. The > same groups that would prevent you from coming here in the first place by > closing our borders to immigration with reactionary, protectionist, > exclusionary policies. Well, maybe not you...I assume you are white, being > from northern Europe. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 I agree with the observation that the decline in crime (and violent/firearm crime) is down more due to a strong economy... crime rates are down more in the states with stricter gun control. Re: What's up with that? >Your aversion against anti-gun attitudes is really interesting from an European angle.< This is typical of European observations about US attitudes about guns. They think we're out of our friggin' minds. Every time something like a Columbine happens, we usually make it easier to get and carry guns. The right wing gun lobby will point to the recent decline in violent crime rates and say it's because more folks are packing. (It's more related to employment.) I think they may be right. What's up with that? > > > > > > > > > > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has > > > always > > > > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits > > > of > > > > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. > > > This > > > > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to > > > past > > > > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed > > him > > > in > > > > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for > > by > > > my > > > > f**cking tax dollars. > > > > > > > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to > > > have > > > > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, > > with > > > > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > > > > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > > > > > > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? > > > Here's > > > > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors > > > diagnosed > > > > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. > > I > > > > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I > > had > > > > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > > > > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > > > > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to > > help > > > me > > > > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > > > > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be > > even > > > > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > > > > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three > > > whole > > > > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > > > > > > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong > > > with > > > > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > > > > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 > But we don't have this attitude that it's your constitutional right to have a > gun in order to defend yourself or your family. Actually, I dont believe the 2nd Amendment says Americans have this right either. It actually says the " Right to bear arms against the State " if they are oppressors - it doesnt say the right to have them for self-defense against other citizens, or even have the right to personally own one! It is only by implication that it is interpreted as the right to own one. However this still clearly shows what a crock the 2nd Amendment argument is. So, with a trusty saturday night special ppl are going to take on B52s, nuclear stealth bombers, etc owned by the Federal Government? Or do this mean that private citizens should have the right to own these? Clearly the only possible significe it can have in modern times is meaning it's ok to join a justifiable rebellion by the Armed Forces, but even then, who gets to say when it's reasonable? Having part of a Nation's constitution the right to overthrow the Government thus constituted and answering to that Constitution is the kind of lunacy that fortunately up until is only on the other side of the Atlantic - but for how long! P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 Pete, most (at least I think most) Constitutional scholars [this may open up a whole new debate] understand the second amendment as applying to the right of States to maintain a militia. The 2nd amendment starts out by stating that's what it pertains to. I believe that it is misconstrued by many to read that the citizens have the right to bear arms... meaning what??? As you said... where do we draw the line? May I own a rocket launcher just in case my home is attacked by tanks? Re: What's up with that? > But we don't have this attitude that it's your constitutional right to have a > gun in order to defend yourself or your family. Actually, I dont believe the 2nd Amendment says Americans have this right either. It actually says the " Right to bear arms against the State " if they are oppressors - it doesnt say the right to have them for self-defense against other citizens, or even have the right to personally own one! It is only by implication that it is interpreted as the right to own one. However this still clearly shows what a crock the 2nd Amendment argument is. So, with a trusty saturday night special ppl are going to take on B52s, nuclear stealth bombers, etc owned by the Federal Government? Or do this mean that private citizens should have the right to own these? Clearly the only possible significe it can have in modern times is meaning it's ok to join a justifiable rebellion by the Armed Forces, but even then, who gets to say when it's reasonable? Having part of a Nation's constitution the right to overthrow the Government thus constituted and answering to that Constitution is the kind of lunacy that fortunately up until is only on the other side of the Atlantic - but for how long! P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 Let's be clear what we're talking about. 2. Right to keep and bear arms. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. > Actually, I dont believe the 2nd Amendment says Americans have this > right either. It actually says the " Right to bear arms against the > State " if they are oppressors - it doesnt say the right to have them > for self-defense against other citizens, or even have the right to > personally own one! It is only by implication that it is interpreted > as the right to own one. However this still clearly shows what a crock > the 2nd Amendment argument is. So, with a trusty saturday night > special ppl are going to take on B52s, nuclear stealth bombers, etc > owned by the Federal Government? Or do this mean that private citizens > should have the right to own these? Clearly the only possible > significe it can have in modern times is meaning it's ok to join a > justifiable rebellion by the Armed Forces, but even then, who gets to > say when it's reasonable? Having part of a Nation's constitution the > right to overthrow the Government thus constituted and answering to > that Constitution is the kind of lunacy that fortunately up until is > only on the other side of the Atlantic - but for how long! > > P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2000 Report Share Posted December 3, 2000 Re: Re: What's up with that? > My personal view on weapons are pragmatic. If I lived somewhere where guns > were essential for survival, I would have one. But I rather be without unless > for sports or interest. > > Bjørn > If I lived somewhere where guns were essential for survival, I would have two, with at least one well concealed and handy. But since I don't live in such a place and don't intend to, I don't mind having spilled the beans on my strategy. Dave Trippel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 Please would someone on this board explain how I can get unsubscribed. I went to the board and ask for them to drop me and they even sent a response that I was unsubscribed, but I still get all the messages. PLEASE TELL SOME ONE TO UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!!! Thank you Jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2000 Report Share Posted December 6, 2000 What's up with that? > > > > > > > > > > is a dear sweet person and I love him dearly as a friend. He has > > > always > > > > been kind to me and my family. Recently, had a return to his habits > > > of > > > > drinking and cocaine abuse after the untimely split up of his marriage. > > > This > > > > apparently was too much to pay logical attention to and he resorted to > > > past > > > > destructive behavior. So bad was his return to infamy, that it landed > > him > > > in > > > > a treatment center here in Canada for a three month vacation, paid for > > by > > > my > > > > f**cking tax dollars. > > > > > > > > Why does he get this preferential treatment? Because, he was deemed to > > > have > > > > a disease by the medical profession here and placed in this facility, > > with > > > > time off work to receive the 12 step treatment, which he has previously > > > > undergone, unsuccessfully, obviously. > > > > > > > > Now you may say this happens every day and why should this bother me? > > > Here's > > > > why! I had a $70,000 a year job and became very ill. The doctors > > > diagnosed > > > > me with lupus and it became impossible for me to maintain my employment. > > I > > > > fought with insurance companies, the government disability plan that I > > had > > > > paid into for 25 years, and the best I could get was 2 weeks sick leave > > > > benefit from the unemployment insurance program here. It seemed that > > > > indeed, I had contracted a real disease and nobody here was going to > > help > > > me > > > > or my family, short of the welfare program. But in the same breath, my > > > > friend can claim to have the drinker's disease which leads him to be > > even > > > > more abusive toward himself and contract the snorter's disease, and the > > > > government and community will give him whatever he asks for, for three > > > whole > > > > months. All I can say is, is this a great country or what? > > > > > > > > Want to get help? If you get sick, don't tell them, what's really wrong > > > with > > > > you! Tell them you have alcoholism and you need treatment. Break out the > > > > f**ckin' slogans and let's party!!!! > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2000 Report Share Posted December 7, 2000 Thanks Coolguy. What didn't anybody tell me in the first place, or maybe I'm just more attentive by now. First of all I think you have a very strong argument, and secondly I think your paradigm that highlights to the differences between the 'old' and the 'new' world is crucial. So then, thanks for showing me where your shoes were standing. I can really appreciate the intentions behind your post, and I really believes I can understand some of the peculiarities connected with the presidential election far better. Actually I think I've become a bit suspicious about Gore, but I also fear Bush. I got this idea, that with a government as ours, and a land like USA, it could easily end in fascism. But we'll not get fascism with our kind of government, because there are differences in culture. Therefore I think I'll try to make you understand where my shoes are standing, as mutual understanding is a much better starting point for a further discussion. Best Bjørn Coolguy wrote: Foremost, in my views, is the idea I hold that the US government, unlike most, if not all European governments, is granted its limited power, aye, its freedom, by the people, unlike the opposite which is true in European nations - that the government grants it's people their freedom (and any limited power that results from that freedom). That difference was a milestone in 1776 and continues to be (less and less, of course) the major difference between the US and nearly every other nation. To me, this is the true difference between the new world (which was supposedly discovered in 1492, but in my view originated in 1776) and the old world. To me, the countries in the western hemisphere that formed governments exactly like, or as extensions of, those in the Eastern hemisphere are not part of the new world in this context. The new world, to me, applies more to methods of broad social interaction instead of geographic location. With that in mind, follow me as I explain that the purpose of the United States government is to _protect_ the rights of it's citizenry, unlike European nations which _grant_ it's citizenry rights. In your country, you have not ever been granted the right to own any weapon you choose, and so you must have extreme difficulty understanding what it is like to have (had) that right. You've acknowledged that if you had that right you would pursue it. On the other hand, American citizens did not grant their government with the authority to ensure us this right on a whim. We, the people, granted our government the _obligation_ to protect this right because we fought a war to earn this right (and several other rights we deemed crucial which have also been under attack ever since). In the US government, there are checks and balances by means of the three branches of government, let me know if you need further clarification. These three branches were devised primarily to ensure that the government did not become oppressive to it's people. The purposeful and ultimate check, potentially more powerful than any or all three arms of the government, is the citizenry itself, and the government's obligation to allow those citizens to be able to enforce their will is seriously affronted whenever their right to bear arms is imposed upon. When I watched the men and women in Belgrade this past autumn, and saw the citizens ready to (attempt to (1)) enforce their will, it reminded me of this ever important detail. When the Floridians and the rest of the nation have been stirred by this election, it reminded me and I was grateful that Americans still hold that power to overthrow unjust tyranny by blood if needed. That power is rightfully theirs by the blood of their forefathers. When (not if) total gun-control is accepted, we will be relinquishing our authority over our own government, and we will have succumbed to the old world style of governance where government grants power to the people as opposed to the people granting power to the government. The correct use of the US government is corroding, as anyone can see, but slowly nonetheless. We have allowed this government to overstep itself severely, and indubitably it will fall as all other Empires before it have, but for those of us living within it who understand this much, we don't want this downfall, and we will avert it, however futile, as well as possible every step of the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.