crazymf

You'll know when we separate when our cheque bounces and we don't return your phone calls. Enough talk.

liberal chit

A motorcycle. I do a lot of riding. I've answered my cell in my vehicle occasionally so I'm just as guilty as the next guy. I don't know what a hands free unit works like or if it's any better. The article talks about laws governing careless driving etc, but none of us thinks we do anything wrong when we talk on our phones. And BD is right, there isn't enough enforcement. My opinion is they should be banned in 'moving' vehicles somehow. I was riding behind a fellow last year on another bike when I witnessed him take not one, but two consecutive calls while riding his bike. The phone was clipped to his back pocket. Unbelievable.

Don't let the door hit you on the a**.

As a bike rider of 31 years, I have never before been subjected to so many unaware drivers in my life as in the past few years. It seems to me that somedays, more drivers than not have a cell phone next to their ears. I've been cut off many times and it is truely becoming a hazard. This article tries to illustrate that prohibiting cell phone use in vehicles isn't the answer. If it's not, then what is? It's scary out there. http://www.safety-council.org/info/traffic/cell-laws.html

To begin with, TakeaNumber is so closed minded liberal that I won't find common ground to even start a dialogue with. Next, attitude sucks. Insulting me with every reply doesn't garner any respect whatsoever. That's my insight on that.

Laws are not guidelines. They are laws. They have to be obeyed or you can be a criminal or at the least face recrimination for it of some kind. We don't have the luxury of deciding which laws we have to obey or not. That's what keeps society on an even keel. Only in retrospect are people martyrs for pushing for reform of laws. Otherwise, they are criminal lawbreakers. ie. scumbags If you so desire to get pissed, that IS your right as it is LEGAL. Forget the ramifications and so forth. That's a different extended argument. Dope is ILLEGAL. That's the difference. Many judges agree with me on this. It's hard enough to get through the day without getting killed because some idiot thinks he's above the law. If you want to start a new thread about cell phone use in cars, which is legal, I'll be all over it. We can switch places. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Crazy, crazy, crazy. The thought just occurred to me that in choosing your handle, your subconscious mind was at work. Whatahoot! But, not to worry, there are still a few of us here who're willing to help set ya straight. Damn decent, doncha think? You nearly drove me over the divide last night when I read some of your pennings on the topic of whathisname being threatened with extradition to the U.S. I sure did want to make an immediate response, but dya know, your offerings fairly wasted me. Zapped the energy from my soul. So I went to bed. Lo and behold this morning, the following little gem landed in my lap, so still tired from last evening, I thought I'd forward this along instead. But here's a warning t' ya. If you and some of the others here don't get a grip I'm going to have to split this popsicle stand and take my erudition elsewhere--to a group with the capability of understanding, recognizing and utilizing plain common sense. This is not rocket science. But I can say with no undue modesty that never before landing here and reading what some of you eggheads have to say have I felt like such a mental giant!!!!! A fawking mental giant!!! Now before I lose my cool, start reading the quote...... Oh, fer gawd's sake, go the mile. Read the rest of the story. Commonsense stuff just a bit more to go.......stretch that mind........strightforward stuff, no? ..........and just plain good common sense. Now, doesn't that feel good? Refreshing, eh wot? And what about that bonus! Insight into Bushco's war in the ME--you know the one......that heinous, diabolical and ILLEGAL war where killing, maiming and traumatizing innocent men, women, and children is the preferred method of spreading freedom and democracy. Didn't it make you weep? But Buschco's best weapon? The one he and his ilk use against you. What is it? Why, the stupidity of the unthinking masses--of course. He and his kind rely on it--and d ya know what, the masses never disappoint. And don't ...............I beseach you........... hurl any more pap about obeying laws. Get to the meat of the matter. Challenge yourself. Dig. Deep. Deeper. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We used to call people like you hippies. Don't know much, but everything is wrong and needs fixed. People before you were idiots, blah, blah, blah..... Give your head a shake.

Agree with first statement. Second statement is a 'separate' issue, of which I may also agree with you. It is your opinion that perhaps this law is rediculous, and mine is that it is still a law. That's almost completely different slants on the debate. My personal opinion on the matter aside, I agree with you that if the general will of the people can change this law. It hasn't happened yet, so let's defer this debate until there's more substance for it. Same sex marriage: You're right. I don't agree with it. However, I abide by the will of the people, which I'm not sure has been served in this case. Am I willing to martyr myself and get into a same sex marrige to make my point??? Not likely. No consensus on SSM. We didn't get to vote did we? This doesn't disagree with what I said. You're hung up on my term 'scumbag'. Replace it with 'law breaking citizen' and re-read what I said. At the time, he was. The law turned out to be unjust in pretty much everyones opinion. It wasn't at the time.

Laws are not guidelines. They are laws. They have to be obeyed or you can be a criminal or at the least face recrimination for it of some kind. We don't have the luxury of deciding which laws we have to obey or not. That's what keeps society on an even keel. Only in retrospect are people martyrs for pushing for reform of laws. Otherwise, they are criminal lawbreakers. ie. scumbags If you so desire to get pissed, that IS your right as it is LEGAL. Forget the ramifications and so forth. That's a different extended argument. Dope is ILLEGAL. That's the difference. Many judges agree with me on this. It's hard enough to get through the day without getting killed because some idiot thinks he's above the law. If you want to start a new thread about cell phone use in cars, which is legal, I'll be all over it. We can switch places.

So if you deem the traffic law that says you need to actually stop at stop signs to be immoral, then it's ok to disobey it? You are then a martyr? No, you're still a scumbag and you'll kill people because you don't obey the law. When there is some form of 'consensus' that a law doesn't work, change it. When laws don't conform with basic human rights, they need changed. Most of us in Canada don't think smoking dope is not a basic human right. When we do, the law will be changed.

Yeah, but some of us think the style of democracy in Canada in general needs a makeover. For instance, this: http://www.republicofwesterncanada.com/index2.html

Why? What do you mean? Elaborate please.

Canada should terminate the GG position as it pertains to the queen. We do not need it. Waste of tax dollars, especially Clarkson. I know it'll never happen as the position is integrated into the highest level of government. Of course I also think the whole 'queen' concept is outdated. That whole bunch is a waste of skin. They are terrible role models. Divorces, scandals, etc. Tsk, tsk you guys. The royal family is nothing more than Englands pet people and serve nothing more useful than living history for tourism. Does she have political clout? Maybe some, but only from a tradition standpoint.

Holy crap, I never thought of that!! Can I have your address. I gotta tell my best friends you called them queers. Ok, enough fun. You guys are too serious. This is mostly moot anyway because I don't hear any gays piping up for this thread.

Maybe some costs are ours, but the thread is about the Americans grabbing him. You're saying they grab him, extridite him, which I understand hasn't happened yet, prosecute him and incarcerate him all using our money? I think the truth is somewhere between you and I. Agreed. You make all sides of the debate. We do not have to agree with, but we have to accept all laws that are in place. By virtue of the fact that they are laws in place, we would be criminals otherwise. However, in our society we are free to work to change the ones that aren't acceptable or working properly. We are not too far apart here. I happen to agree with this law because I don't smoke dope and don't see a need to change it. I respect your opinion, however, and if the law is changed, have at 'er. That would be your choice, law or no law. Just don't look for support from me if you get busted.

I make fun of everyone equally, even myself. I am not a racist or a bigot. Rednecks like me have this quality. Maybe you learned something today.

I give up. You guys are right, I'm a redneck. And I call queers queers. You guys weren't even happy when I tried to walk some middle ground here, so why should I bother. Not only that, you guys don't seem to have a sense of humor. Hey, you know why the queer Indian went to town last Saturday night? Why, to blow a few bucks of course. Ok don't laugh, no sense of humor remember??

His mother should have named him Paul. I keep calling him that. Sorry. Black Dog and Trial and Error- Nice arguments. I agree with a lot of it. However, don't brand me as a moralist. People like myself are called 'law abiding citizens'. I knew the argument for alcohol would come up, it always does when this debate starts. You're absolutely right about people trenching themselves with booze. That's the slang term for that and dope is the slang term I use for marijuana, whatever. Just today I found out one of my employees was busted driving for lunch for no insurance. In Canada, insurance is mandatory as you know. She was whining about it and the fine and so forth. I mentioned that she should have been fined more. Why? So next time she remembers what a hardship it was and perhaps will cover herself. It's merely a law. A law that says insurance must be on your vehicle. People need to buy into laws so that we can 'know' that the other person has insurance. Laws put everyone onto the same playing field. They tell us how to behave. Without laws, anarchy prevails. I certainly don't want to have to tell other people how to live and conduct their lives. That's their business, under the umbrella of laws. I view laws as 'standards' that we all have to live by. If you don't want to live under those set of standards, that have been decided on by lawmakers over hundreds of years, then you deserve to be in the klink. The laws of this land are what the citizens of this land are compelled to abide by, like them or not. There are means to change laws and I agree maybe some should be changed. Until they are, we have to live by them. I am a technical person (electrician) and if everyone in my trade did not practice to the same standards, we would be killing each other on a regular basis. That's why I view laws as I do. Until someone changes the law on dope, Emery goes down, and I agree with it. At least he's going down on Uncle Sam's buck, not ours. I think it's a good deal that my tax dollars aren't being spent prosecuting this, yes, scumbag. If the country eventually gets enough dopeheads in the federal government, perhaps the law will change. As I've made clear, I don't think dope lends itself to a good productive life and that's my opinion. If it wasn't against the law, I could bitch about it as you are now, but the law would still be the law.

Why scumbag? Are you saying that Paul Emery is an upstanding citizen? If the DEA took a regular citizen off the street that wasn't breaking laws, then I'd be up in arms BIG TIME. If he's innocent, let the courts decide. Scumbags break laws. Dope is illegal. You deal dope/seeds to grow dope/whatever, and the law is broken, you're a scumbag, 'in my opinion'. Most of us actually believe that law and order works and support that. If the laws that enabled the DEA are actually not good, time will tell and they will be changed. I also believe that.

I was wondering when this thread was coming. I agree with everything you said. I just hope those people deserve and appreciate it. From everyone I've talked to who's been there, the place is a clusterf**k with rampant poverty and a completely different reality.

Except Emery wasn't traffiking weed: he was selling seeds, which contain no THC. That would be like the Yanks busting the local greenhouse for carrying poppys. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Irrelevant what he did. He busted some laws or they wouldn't want him. If we ever legalize dope, it'll be interesting if they let these scumbags back out of jail.

I was joking of course, but trying to illustrate how such a small place can cause a lot of dispute. I'll back out of this thread now because I know nothing about it.

I know, put a border right down the middle and guard it just like Berlin used to in the cold war. Keep a 6000 man armed battalion there for any trouble that may arise. Better yet, they can have it on even days and we'll have it on odd days. Does it really matter if the border is 10 miles here or there in the middle of nowhere???

Why not just drop a bomb on Hans island and get rid of it? Next...

I would not oppose decriminalizing dope if that's the will of the people. My problem is that while it's illegal, it is a criminal offense to posses or traffic it and people should be prosecuted. I think perpetual dope use leads to uselessness and unmotivated behaviour. At least the burnouts I knew were.