The end of civilization

[shamus]

2 years makes a huge difference...

Say a 20 year old male has "relations" with his 17 year old girlfriend. He could go to jail. If she was 18 he wouldn't.

Say that same 20 year old male is out drinking and gets caught with a beer. He's in trouble with the law. If he were 21 he wouldn't be in trouble with the law.

2 years makes a difference.

Here's a thought...

I like going to my local convinence store for a soda. Fred, an 82 year old down the street also like to go there for a soda. The store has a no shoes, no shirt, no service policy.... Fred walks in wearing only swim trunks. Should he be served? He's an ex-fireman.. a if you will "Pillar to the community".

I say no. It's store policy. Same with places that require a jacket an tie.

There is no end of civilization because an 82 year old woman had to take off her hat. It was a slow news day and the story got picked up.

 

[geo]

They didn't ban hats, they just want you not to wear it inside. They still let you in with the hat, as long as you carry it and not wear it, right? That's you would normally do with a fedora, anyway.

 

[tonyb]

Boy, it's starting to feel a bit hostile in this joint. I've been reluctant, until now, to weigh in on this thread, but that comment about the Americans with Disabilities Act can't go without a challenge. My closest relationship is with a wheelchair user. That experience has me convinced that the ADA doesn't go far enough. It has loopholes large enough to drive an 18-wheeler through. Many, many businesses are exempt from its requirements. Whatever "hardships" the ADA "imposes" on businesses and government agencies are as nothing in comparison to what those myriad exemptions impose on people with disabilities.
Labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" tend to obscure more than enlighten. Indeed, the utterance of such terms often amounts to little more than name-calling. I've been a crime victim on more occasions than I care to recall (residential burglaries, auto theft, assault and threats thereof, etc., etc.), yet I remain what many would call a "liberal." I maintain my longtime membership in the American Civil Liberties Union. I have taken exception with some of the ACLU's positions, but on balance they come out all right by me. A few years back the ACLU billed itself as "The Most Conservative Organization in the United States" (or something quite akin to that), seeing how it is committed to conserving the individual freedoms enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and the court decisions reinforcing them.
Yes, some "liberals" can seem more than a bit self-righteous and authoritarian. But these days the greatest threats to our personal freedoms are coming from the so-called "conservatives."
Oh, by the way ... One night many, many years ago I found myself seated at the bar in what was perhaps the seediest dive in Seattle. It was one of those places that served its mostly alcoholic clientele until they either ran out of money or got so drunk they could no longer muster the coordination to raise their glasses from the bar to their mouths. The bartender informed me that I had to remove my hat. The very idea of it seemed so absurd that for a moment I thought he was joking. I concluded that he just didn't like me and was looking for a reason to run me out of there. It was one of those events that we straight white males rarely experience--this just plain not being welcome because of some trait that we either have no control over or which causes others no real harm. Of course I didn't like it, but it gave me a taste of what some people have to deal with on a regular basis.

 

[Raindog]

I think what's objectionable is the blanket ban. The old lady incident typifies this. A largely unclothed man in a store is a bit different to an old lady wearing a hat. An old lady wearing a hat is different again to a young teen covering himself in a hoodie.
Anyone enforcing these rules should see that. Everything should be done on an individual basis. Blanket rules always screw up society, whatever they apply to.


Jeff.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Ah, but let's say she were a violent drunk (i know a number of violent drunkard old ladies). Let's further conjecture the one day she got drunk and violent and should have been arrested but left before the police arrived. If the hat was covering her face she'd get away without being punished. A bit of a stretch but not too much.

My mother works in a store, and she says one of the worst shoplifting offenders is such a "pillar" of the community.

In this particular case, she was not a rabble-rouser. But you can't judge a book by its cover.

bk

 

[Raindog]

Still no excuse for a blanket ban in my opinion Baron
We worry about petty crime so much that we'll give our freedom up? If we weren't so scared of being sued we'd deal with the rabble and scum in the way we used to (shove 'em in stocks and humiliate the sods). They deserve contempt.
As for the drunk old lady? Give her a crate of cyanide laced beer if she's that dangerous. Rather that than subject the whole of society to restrictions



Jeff.

 

[Kaleponi Craig]

The UK is run by people who are trying to control us by trying to scare us.

That's been going on here in the US since Sept. 11, 2001...KC:cry:

 

[Marc Chevalier]

[QUOTE="Doc" Devereux]I'm starting to think about moving to South America.[/QUOTE]

Go to Chile. Men still wear suits and ties there -- even fedoras.

 

[RedPop4]

Interesting thread.

 

[Doh!]

Beware the little old ladies!

If you can stand one more story:

Soon after "The Shoe Bomber" ruined flying for everyone, I was in a security line at the airport and they were instructing random people to step off to the side and remove their shoes so they could inspect them. Literally, right in front of me in line, was a little old lady who had to walk with the assistance of a cane.

Now, if you had to inspect the footwear of a suspicious character, would you choose A) the little old lady or B) a thirty-something guy with a full, dark beard (me)?

Even if their mandate was to inspect every 7th person's shoes, how 'bout a little wiggle room there to actually check the person who, you know, was the more likely threat? I breezed past the gate, no problem.

Now, of course, all shoes should be removed -- not just those of life-threatening little old ladies. Thanks, "Shoe Bomber!"

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

I only have one word to say to that

That's been going on here in the US since Sept. 11, 2001...KC:cry:

BULL (EDITED-- Matt Deckard -- really guys, watch your language!)
DR

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

It's called socialism

No, the problem we have here is the fallout from the wholesale destruction of communities, and the insistence that "there is no such thing as society" by successive Tory governments in the 1980's and 90's. The criminal classes now are those who grew up under Thatcher, and the children of those who grew up under Thatcher - treated with contempt by the Tories and still believing that the government is not interested in them. This October 1987 quote from Thatcher has done far more harm to society than any pronouncement by any imaginary "liberal elite"



So what does this tell us: you're on your own, the government won't help you. So the government may decimate the coal industry and close down the mining community where you, your family and friends live, but don't expect them to offer anything in the way of alternative employment. You're not entitled to anything, and that includes the free education and health care you've been enjoying for the last 50 years. The children that grew up under that regime are todays parents and they have instilled this contempt for society in their own offspring.

This 'liberal elite' that is the rights favourite bogeyman is no more than a shabby diversion tactic designed to point the blame away from their own failings.

ANd that is why your country is a mess. It's called entitlement syndrome and you apprently suffer from a nasty bout of it. It isn't Liberal Elitism, it's called laziness and thinking you should get something for nothing. Liberals have run Lousy-ana for years and look at what their Liberal Socialist Utopia got them in New Orleans. Mass poverty, but yes I know (sarcasm on) It's Bush's fault (sarcasm off). Spare me the Thatcher is evil crap.
DR

 

[Salv]

ANd that is why your country is a mess. It's called entitlement syndrome and you apprently suffer from a nasty bout of it. It isn't Liberal Elitism, it's called laziness and thinking you should get something for nothing. Liberals have run Lousy-ana for years and look at what their Liberal Socialist Utopia got them in New Orleans. Mass poverty, but yes I know (sarcasm on) It's Bush's fault (sarcasm off). Spare me the Thatcher is evil crap.
DR

So you're quite happy for a government to destroy entire industries - as Thatchers Tories did with steel, shipbuilding and coal - and offer nothing as an alternative for the workers who depended on those industries for their livelihoods? The steel working, shipbuilding and mining communities weren't expecting something for nothing - they had already given their labour for many years. Crucially, they undestood that the government had no plans to look after them anyway and so they were in fact expecting nothing from the Tories in return for that labour. Why do you think there was a miners strike in 1984/85? The Tories narrowly averted a strike in 1981 after announcing 50 pits were to close, then backing off when a strike was threatened. In 1984 they announced 20 definite pit closures with the losses of 20,000 direct mining jobs. Allied to those job losses were the peripheral jobs associated with the pits - shops and businesses in the mining communities weren't going to have many customers once the pits closed. The mining industry had always functioned on the agreement that the pits would be mined until they were exhausted - the Tories were now closing the pits not because they were empty of coal, but because they deemed them inefficient, and to hell with the communities affected by the closures because, remember, "there is no such thing as society."

So, no I won't spare you the 'Thatcher is evil crap', just as I don't expect you to spare me the 'liberalism is evil' crap.

 

[BellyTank]

That's been going on here in the US since Sept. 11, 2001...KC:cry:

It's been going on a lot longer than that- keep 'em scared- keep em quiet, loyal and under control.

B
T

 

[Baron Kurtz]

I
Now, if you had to inspect the footwear of a suspicious character, would you choose A) the little old lady or B) a thirty-something guy with a full, dark beard (me)?

If the Palestinian troubles have taught us nothing else, it's taught us to trust no-one. Every demographic has been used by the Palestinians to carry bombs into Israel.

I have also seen old women pulled aside at security and searched. You can look at it two ways: Either the security folks are being entirely objective (good) or they're desparately trying to assure us that they're not racist in their choices of who to search (bad).

Thatcher was merely practising the prevailing (to this day) economic theory. All else must be in second place to the market. Screw the people. Well, they only elected us, right? Funnily enough - even to her - society mattered when there was an election in the offing. Now that we're in power we can do anything we want. All we need to do is tell them we're doing a good job. In the absence of effective opposition (thinks: Labour under Kinnock) this works.

Thought i'd get this in before the thread closes down.

bk

 

[Salv]

Thatcher was merely practising the prevailing (to this day) economic theory. All else must be in second place to the market. Screw the people. Well, they only elected us, right? Funnily enough - even to her - society mattered when there was an election in the offing. Now that we're in power we can do anything we want. All we need to do is tell them we're doing a good job. In the absence of effective opposition (thinks: Labour under Kinnock) this works.

Thought i'd get this in before the thread closes down.

bk

Excellent points Baron.

 

[jamespowers]

I think this thread is getting a bit out of hand, completely off topic and the kitchen sink arguments are coming out. Let's keep the expletives to a minimum and the discussion to the case at hand. [bad] :deadhorse

Regards,

J

 

[John in Covina]

Close it down!

 

[shamus]

Now what if an sweet little old 82 to 84 year old lady, wearing a hat wanted to click on this thread and post something about being a pillar to her community, and someone closed it down? Discriminating against her, simply because of something political being said.

And now, we're back to where this thread began....

 

[Kaleponi Craig]

It's been going on a lot longer than that- keep 'em scared- keep em quiet, loyal and under control.
B
T

Over 60 years ago, in the face of the Depression and a growing fear of world war, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself". Sadly, in recent years our leaders have taken the opposite view. The "good old days" were not good just because men wore wonderful hats and suits...KC