- This topic has 65 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
I saw this in another thread:
I’m waiting for the day that they will make it a requirement by law.
I guess it’s time for a discussion of laws, and what they really are.
A law, simply stated, is a way for one group to regulate the behavior of another. This regulation can be carried out at gunpoint, if necessary.
Which behavior do you really feel is so important that it requires that kind of action?
Any behavior that can negatively affect the quality of life of other people.
So long as a bad action doesn’t cause (physical/spiritual) damage to others, I feel there is no need for a law to be out there restricting people.
Any behavior that can negatively affect the quality of life of other people.
That’s pretty restrictive. Based on that broad logic, you can ban cars because they cause noxious emmissions that negatively affect me.
The Wolf
Wolfish Mussings: since you do not agree to my reason for having laws, you must have some really Philosophical explanation for having them. I’m all ears…
About your specific question, I wouldn’t go so far as to ban cars, but i would agree to having laws (which thankfully we do) such as speed limits, DWI, etc.
minimally edited, in blue
LOL 😉 Did wolfishmusings put in a complaint about this?
not yet
Wolfish Mussings
Bodek — it wasn’t particularly funny.
Mod – How about a law against needlessly embarrassing someone? Oh yeah, we have one of those — “malbin p’nei chaveiro” and all that…
But then again, I guess since I don’t always toe the party line, I don’t qualify as “chaveiro.” So, never mind — I withdraw the complaint. Make fun of my name.
Why stop there? Why not go for “Wolfish Pukings?” or “Wolfish Droppings?”
Yeah, I joke around in the CR too — but at least when I do it, it’s never directed at anyone else or at anyone else’s expense.
And, lastly, Mod, if you’re going to take cheap potshots at someone, at least have the courage to identify *which* mod you are.
The Wolf
“WolfishMusings” – That isn’t your “name”, but rather a silly (to put it nicely) moniker that you use as an online pseudonym. So let’s not get carried away here in righteous indignation.
Volvie,
Does it matter whether it’s my name or a pseudonym? It obviously bothered me.
The Wolf
wolfish: you are soooo super sensitive, bodek obviously made a typing error.
Rochelle,
No, he didn’t. The mod edited it to add in the extra s. That’s the meaning of his comment (in bold) at the end of Bodek’s post
It wasn’t a typo — it was malicious.
Mod — If I’m wrong, let me know and I will gladly apologize.
The Wolf
Rochelle is correct, I *thought* that was obvious. The typo (double s) was made by the poster, I’m sure not maliciously. I turned one s to blue to “remove” it. I could have actually removed it but I wanted to point out the posters mistake to “kid” with him. It had nothing to do with you, only that Bodek made a *funny* typo. If you are somehow offended , I’ll gladly remove my edit, just let me know.
btw wolfish : I happen to know bodek personally and bodek doesnt have a mean bone in his/her body…
Rochelle,
You misunderstood. I was not accusing Bodek, I was accusing the mod of altering the word “Musings” by adding an extra letter. I thought the edit was the addition of a letter, not the recoloring of it.
Mod,
My sincere apologies. I suppose I was feeling a bit touchy this morning and overreacted at what I thought was an insult on your part. I’m sorry about the misunderstanding and the overreaction.
The Wolf
Last time i checked, the word mussings was not found in the dictionary.
My sincerest apologies about the unintended insult.
Bodek,
To muss something means to mess it up. But, as I said, I never suspected you of ill-will. It was the mod whom I suspected of adding the extra letter to make fun of my moniker. And again, I apologize to him for my error.
The Wolf
Wolf – Then why the comment “Bodek — it wasn’t particularly funny.”?
Anyways, why not get back to answering Bodek’s actual point that set off this whole brouhaha?
I thought he was “LOL” ing the mod’s edit.
The Wolf
To get back to the point (as volvie suggested):
I didn’t think your idea was wrong, Bodek — it just needs to be refined further. Using your logic, cars can be banned outright. Your idea was good, but needs further elaboration or restriction.
The Wolf
Yes, lets get back this thread back on topic before the mods close it…
Haifagirl: I guess it’s time for a discussion of laws, and what they really are.
A law, simply stated, is a way for one group to regulate the behavior of another. This regulation can be carried out at gunpoint, if necessary.
Which behavior do you really feel is so important that it requires that kind of action?
Bodek: Any behavior that can negatively affect the quality of life of other people.
So long as a bad action doesn’t cause (physical/spiritual) damage to others, I feel there is no need for a law to be out there restricting people.
Wolfishmusings: That’s pretty restrictive. Based on that broad logic, you can ban cars because they cause noxious emmissions that negatively affect me.
Wolfishmusings: I didn’t think your idea was wrong, Bodek — it just needs to be refined further. Using your logic, cars can be banned outright. Your idea was good, but needs further elaboration or restriction.
I agree that my explanation for having laws can use some help.
Anyone out there in cyberspace have a better definition?
Or is Wolfishmusings the only other person besides me in this CR?
Haifagirl-policeman men carry guns for emergency. They will not shoot if you didn’t take your cpr course!
I was the one who made that comment about making a law to learn cpr. That doesn’t mean that it should be done with force. Rather it should be a requirement that people over a specific age group must attend a course.
There should be some kind of a consequence for those who don’t follow. For example:
Low income pple can’t receive govt funding until they attend a course and pass the exam, and higher income pple should have to pay compensation.
It can also be made a requirement for immigrants if they want to become US citizens.
I think its important but that’s just my opinion.
This can only be to our benefit.
You don’t have to discuss laws that might pass, what about forcing us to wear seatbelts? and if you think they shouldn’t have the right to force us into wearing one, do they have the right to force us to have the kids wear one?
you could debate pot, cell phones while driving, spanking, etc….
on a side note out of all the laws i still don’t understand why they never passed one tha twould stop gas stations from selling beer, what a bad concept!!
haifagirl – Are you opposed (or how do you otherwise explain)…
the seatbelt laws?
underage drinking (not driving) laws?
etc.?
I think the law regarding which animals one is allowed to domicile in NYC should be changed. The very first animal listed (Health Code 161.01) as illegal is (gulp) wolf.
I guess until the law is changed, I need to move out of the city…
The (illegal and fugitive) Wolf
Wolf: I don’t think there are any laws against stuffed animals… You could stay.
haifagirl – The Torah outlaws certain activities (dangerous or otherwise.) There is no reason the law of the land should be any less.
and a law made a group of men who THINK they know what’s best for us.
haifagirl – The nations of the world are commanded as one of their 7 laws (Noachide) to establish laws.
And often we do know the reason the Torah prohibits activities. i.e. Dangerous activities being assur in many cases due to its danger. There is every reason for the law of the land to outlaw dangerous activities.
The Torah isn’t libertarian.
When those in Washington pass restrictive laws they are not thinking about following the 7 Noachide laws or concerned with Torah at all.
Also Torah does not talk about seatbelts so who gets to decide what is ‘dangerous’.
I think it is extremly dangerous for any smaller then average child to attend public school as the law requires becaus ethe bullies gravatat toward those they most easily abuse and the abuse sometimes turns deadly as in a case in NYC a few years ago where some bully punched another kid and killed him with one punch.
Others simply keep punching till they achieve their desired damage to their helpless victims.
SO if are going to use Torah to say dangerous things should be outlawed that woudl require keeping small children out of public shcools and possiblys huttimng them down altogether not just because of bullying but drug dealing (and I am talking about dealing on bahalf of the teachers who demand kids be doped up on Ritalin which affects the same brain centers and cocaine).
Also what about laws that have nothing do with danger such as all the unconstitutional animal ‘rights’ laws?
SO if we are going to use Torah to say dangerous things should be outlawed that would require keeping small children out of public schools and possibly shutting them down altogether; Not just because of bullying but also because of drug dealing (and I am talking about dealing also on bahalf of the teachers, who demand boys be doped up on Ritalin which affects the same brain centers and cocaine).
Sorry my typing is bad I know, so I just cleaned up this paragraph a bit because I thought it was unreadable.
I know I have other typos, but I think people can at least tell what I am saying in those other ones.
re: forcing people to take mandatory CPR courses. Please. Although I personally wish everyone WOULD take such courses (both my husband and I are Red-Cross certified), you cannot mandate this. Not everyone is a) physically capable of doing CPR, especially after a certain age, when arthritis, cardiac, and pulmonary problems might be an issue, preventing them from doing it effectively and correctly or b) of a temperament to learn how to do it properly. I think it should be taught in all schools, but you cannot force people to learn how to do this. I do think EVERYONE should be properly taught how to do the Heimlich Maneuver.
Seatbelts SHOULD be mandatory for ALL people in a moving vehicle. Unbelted people become projectiles in an accident, and take the concentration of the driver off the road.. Unbelted drivers, can lose control of the wheel upon impact. End of story.
It is far safer to drive with seat belts.
The libertarian approach would be to legalize marijuana, crack and cocaine too for all people – adult and minors.
In a nutshell you are arguing that narcotics — i.e. crack and cocaine — would result in no negative consequence to society if legalized and made freely available to all?
volvie
The consequences to society of legalizing vs. criminalizing crack and other forms of cocaine require careful and thoughtful analysis. It is not necessarily as simple as you might think.
I personally never gave the matter much consideration. But I’m sure haifagirl will present some thoughtful comments on the matter.
She’s probably sleeping right now.
Drugs impair people and under the inlfuence they harm to others.
One example is that case of the Jewish guy who was just executed in Florida and many
excused him saying “It’s not his fault it was the drugs, he was on”.
Whether legal or illegal, drugs are traffiked by organized crime.
If leagl they are increasingly taxed and the Mob simply maked billions by selling it on the street without paying the tax.
Users to, pay or it (and with taxes it will never be ‘cheap’) break into peoples houses and rob and sometimes kill for the money to keep getting high.
None of this happens on the basis of someone not wearing seatbelts.
And it is not the governments right to tell us we are obligated to risk drowning or burning up in a horrible death because the seatbelt could not get undone after the accident.
It does not matter which way is ‘safer’, it matters that we have the right to decide for ourselves which risk we wish to take or not take.
Now the state wants to forbid salt in preparing food, next will be illegal to buy or sell, then fired foods will be illegal, eventually we will be allowed to eat only a few uncooked vegetables (cooking might make them carcinogenous)and fruits and even bread could eventually be outlawed since some people get fat eating too much bread.
Wolf: I don’t think there are any laws against stuffed animals… You could stay.
Alas, while I am fat, I am not a stuffed wolf.
The Wolf
Drugs impair people and under the inlfuence they harm to others.
One example is that case of the Jewish guy who was just executed in Florida and many
excused him saying “It’s not his fault it was the drugs, he was on”.
One could make the very same argument about alcohol. Why should narcotics be different in this regard? Or are you in favor of prohibition as well?
Whether legal or illegal, drugs are traffiked by organized crime.
I think you’re wrong here. They are trafficked by organized crime because they are illegal. If they were legal, they would be regulated on an open market, much as alcohol is today.
If leagl they are increasingly taxed and the Mob simply maked billions by selling it on the street without paying the tax.
Do you see a lot of mob activity involved in tax-free beer?
Users to, pay or it (and with taxes it will never be ‘cheap’) break into peoples houses and rob and sometimes kill for the money to keep getting high.
You could say the same about alcohol, cigarettes and other addictive substances. However, that doesn’t happen for a reason. The reason is economics.
When drugs are illegal, the dealer takes substantial risk in trafficking in the drugs. To compensate him/her for this risk, higher prices are charged. Since the drugs are very expensive, it is likewise expensive to maintain a habit.
If drugs were legal (as alcohol and cigarettes are), there would be more open competition on the market. This would drive prices down. In addition, if the drugs were regulated, then there would be no need for the dealer to take the risk — people would buy the drugs at lower prices on the regulated market.
In the end, you’d have people stealing to buy drugs — at about the same rate that people steal for other legal substances today — which is not much.
Mind you, I’m NOT in favor of legalizing drugs. But the arguments you put forth are just wrong.
The Wolf
I think it is extremly dangerous for any smaller then average child to attend public school as the law requires becaus ethe bullies gravatat toward those they most easily abuse and the abuse sometimes turns deadly as in a case in NYC a few years ago where some bully punched another kid and killed him with one punch.
If you think bullying does not occur in yeshivos, then I have a bridge to sell you. As a parent of a child who has been bullied (yes, with physical abuse) I can tell you with certainty that it happens and exists — and probably far more often than you think.
The Wolf
What would you say to those people whose lives were saved only because they were thrown from a vehicle in an accident?
a. Such cases are few and far between. Seat belts save vastly more lives than they may cost.
b. People thrown from vehicles still become projectiles and can injure other people and themselves.
The Wolf
how would you respond?
In the front seat? Then you’re not riding in my car.
In the back I tend to be more lenient *if* they are adults.
The Wolf
Drugs impair people and under the inlfuence they harm to others.
One example is that case of the Jewish guy who was just executed in Florida and many
excused him saying “It’s not his fault it was the drugs, he was on”.
One could make the very same argument about alcohol. Why should narcotics be different in this regard? Or are you in favor of prohibition as well?;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
Alcohol has legitimate uses such a swine on Shabbos and Pesach.
drughs like Cocaine have no legitimate use.
;;;;;;;;;;;;Whether legal or illegal, drugs are traffiked by organized crime.
I think you’re wrong here. They are trafficked by organized crime because they are illegal. If they were legal, they would be regulated on an open market, much as alcohol is today. ::::::::::::
I’m not wrong as I will, show below.
;;;;;;;;;;;If leagl they are increasingly taxed and the Mob simply maked billions by selling it on the street without paying the tax.
Do you see a lot of mob activity involved in tax-free beer?;;;;;;;;;;
There is plenty in Ciggerrettes and Gasoline from which the mob makes billions per month just in NY and New Jerseey.
;;;;;;;;;;;Users to, pay or it (and with taxes it will never be ‘cheap’) break into peoples houses and rob and sometimes kill for the money to keep getting high.
You could say the same about alcohol, cigarettes and other addictive substances. However, that doesn’t happen for a reason. The reason is economics.;;;;;;;;;;
No one breaks intio someones hoem to get his “Ciggerrette fix” but a meth addict will.
Anmd an alcoholic would not succeed, he’d be too drunk.
:::::::::::When drugs are illegal, the dealer takes substantial risk in trafficking in the drugs. To compensate him/her for this risk, higher prices are charged. Since the drugs are very expensive, it is likewise expensive to maintain a habit.
If drugs were legal (as alcohol and cigarettes are), there would be more open competition on the market. This would drive prices down. In addition, if the drugs were regulated, then there would be no need for the dealer to take the risk — people would buy the drugs at lower prices on the regulated market. ;;;;;;;;;;
cigarettes are over 7 dollars a pack (perhaps 10 dollars in some places, up to half of that price (or more?) is just for taxes.
The mob can sell them at half price and make a bundle.
;;;;;;;;;;;In the end, you’d have people stealing to buy drugs — at about the same rate that people steal for other legal substances today — which is not much.;;;;;;;;;;
The addictions and motivations to get the next fix are extremly different, any drug treatment counselor or doctor can confirm this for you.
;;;;;;;;;;Mind you, I’m NOT in favor of legalizing drugs. But the arguments you put forth are just wrong.’;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
You ‘thought’ they were wrong, that does not make them wrong.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;The Wolf
I think it is extremly dangerous for any smaller then average child to attend public school as the law requires becaus ethe bullies gravatat toward those they most easily abuse and the abuse sometimes turns deadly as in a case in NYC a few years ago where some bully punched another kid and killed him with one punch.
If you think bullying does not occur in yeshivos, then I have a bridge to sell you. As a parent of a child who has been bullied (yes, with physical abuse) I can tell you with certainty that it happens and exists — and probably far more often than you think.
The Wolf ;;;;;;;;;;;;;
Where did I ever say otherwise?
Where did I ever say otherwise?
Admittedly, you did not.
However, if you say it’s dangerous to attend public school because of bullies, then would you say the same about yeshivos since the same problems exist there?
The Wolf
Where did I ever say otherwise?
Admittedly, you did not.
However, if you say it’s dangerous to attend public school because of bullies, then would you say the same about yeshivos since the same problems exist there?;;;;;;;;;
Yes I would; Which is another reason why on another thread (which I cannot seem to find now)I said that boys need to learn to fight and defend themselves against bullies whether in yeshivah or anywhere else.
But my point about bullying in public schools is that the government commands
people to go to public school while then claiming to be so worried abouyt people not being in danger that they now want to outlaw salt.
The liberal hypocrisy is astounding.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.