A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Photographing children



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1782  
Old April 29th 05, 07:35 PM
Dwight Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jer" wrote:

Dwight has already been brainwashed into
believing the government is here to save
his silly ass. Most of us know better.



And you believe what, Jer? That the government is here to harm you? That a
government elected by the people should be disbanded because it prevents you
from doing whatever you want? Or do you just prefer a government ran by
Jer's rules alone?

Stewart


  #1783  
Old April 29th 05, 07:46 PM
Dwight Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steve" wrote:

(snip) Nobody expects you to know the intricacies
of alcohol laws in different jurisdictions. They're
probably complicated enough in your own state and
county. That you didn't even know that there are dry
counties anywhere is the issue. If you were unaware
of something about our most widely abused drug
that is so widely known, why should your
unsubstantiated claims about other drugs be accepted?



I don't know the specific drug laws in every town, county, or state
either, nor would I likely waste time researching that since it is
essentually a local issue. After all, that is not really germane to the
issue being discussed here - the general question of whether illegal drugs
should be illegal.

Stewart


  #1784  
Old April 29th 05, 08:05 PM
Dwight Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steve" wrote:
(snip) If you ever got a blow job in some of
the places where it's illegal you're a criminal
and possibly a felon. Even though your crime
had no victims you could be doing long, hard
time in prison. (snip)



Oh, come on, Steve. Can you name a single person in this country doing
"hard time in prison" solely due to an blow job? If not, lets stick to
reality.


(snip) Do you see the line that reads "arrests
ruin lives and are a disappointment to families"?
Wasn't that similarity the entire point of the
exchange? That an arrest causes harm to the
person arrested and his family, regardless of
the crime the arrest is for?

Except for asking if we thought robbery should
be legalized because the arrest has a negative
impact on the robber. (snip)



Perhaps you need to be reminded of the actual exchange at this point. You
claimed drug arrests are "ruining a lot of people and their families." I
responded by pointing out that "arresting a bank robber ruins his life and
is a disappointment to his family, but would you truly argue for
legalization of bank robbery on those grounds?" There was no comparison
there between drug use and bank robbery, and no comment about the
"similarity of the punishment for two crimes." Instead, the only thing
mentioned was the similarity of both arrests ruining lives and disappointing
families. If you still cannot understand that, further explination is
useless.

Stewart


  #1785  
Old April 29th 05, 08:14 PM
Dwight Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote:

(snip) As someone else pointed out, the
measurement is fallacious because I would
be able to perform many tasks after five joints
which would be difficult for the dead guy
who downed 35 "glasses" of alcohol.



The pamphlet didn't say anything about 35 glasses of alcohol, only the
rough comparison to six or seven glasses. I used that to extrapolate the
greater estimate for those consuming larger quantities of marijuana.

Stewart


  #1786  
Old April 29th 05, 08:17 PM
Dwight Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mxsmanic" wrote:

Dwight Stewart writes:
Why would you consider the National Institute
on Drug Abuse, managed by Democrats under
President Clinton and now by Republicans under
President Bush, with the same conclusions under
both parties, to be anything other than an
independent site?


The name alone seems to reveal a certain bias.



Why? The agency exists to address the specific issue of drug abuse. Drug
_use_ is addressed by the FDA.

Stewart


  #1787  
Old May 3rd 05, 10:00 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 05:25:51 GMT, "Dwight Stewart"
wrote:


wrote:
How goddamn dare you accuse me in a
public forum of being a drug user, you
arrogant jerkoff?

I am completely in favor of legalization,
but have never in my entire life used any
illegal drugs.



I think you protest just a little too much.


TS.

You're also very quick to
assume the title of drug user when nothing was said to pin that directly on
you. As I said earlier, most people in this country seldom discuss drugs.


What planet is your country on? You cqn hardly turn on the TV
or go to the local supermarket without hearing the discussion.

Of
those who do, most don't see legalization as an option worthy of
consideration.


In your tiny town maybe. Come on out to the west coast and
hear reality.

Therefore, when one sees someone fanatically


Your simple-minded characterization.

arguing in favor
of legalization, not just discussing it in passing, it is certainly
reasonable to wonder if that person has personal motivations for doing so -
motivations beyond just politics or taxes.


Like hell it's reasonable. Unless you're the kind of
narrow-minded jerk (which you have shown yourself to be) who has to
mpute criminal motives to those who don't agree with his pontifical
generalizations, gleaned from governmeb=nt pamphlets.


Stewart


  #1788  
Old May 3rd 05, 10:04 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 18:35:13 GMT, "Dwight Stewart"
wrote:


"Jer" wrote:

Dwight has already been brainwashed into
believing the government is here to save
his silly ass. Most of us know better.



And you believe what, Jer? That the government is here to harm you? That a
government elected by the people should be disbanded because it prevents you
from doing whatever you want? Or do you just prefer a government ran by
Jer's rules alone?


What kind of pisass logic teacher taught you that anything not
A must therefore be Z? We have lots of other choices of letters.



Stewart


  #1789  
Old May 3rd 05, 10:05 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 18:46:30 GMT, "Dwight Stewart"
wrote:


"Steve" wrote:

(snip) Nobody expects you to know the intricacies
of alcohol laws in different jurisdictions. They're
probably complicated enough in your own state and
county. That you didn't even know that there are dry
counties anywhere is the issue. If you were unaware
of something about our most widely abused drug
that is so widely known, why should your
unsubstantiated claims about other drugs be accepted?



I don't know the specific drug laws in every town, county, or state
either, nor would I likely waste time researching that since it is
essentually a local issue. After all, that is not really germane to the
issue being discussed here - the general question of whether illegal drugs
should be illegal.


Don't you get dizzy living out there in the Land of Circular
Arguments.



Stewart


  #1790  
Old May 3rd 05, 10:14 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:42:50 GMT, "Dwight Stewart"
wrote:


"Steve" wrote:

Dwight Stewart wrote:
Do you really equate oral sex and illegal
drug use?


Of course I do.



I'm sure you do. However, since most people see those as two entirely
different things, I doubt it is true for most reading your comments.


(snip) You offered an argument based on the similarity
of the punishment for two crimes, and then used it to
make yet another bizarre leapt indicating your inability
to see how different the crimes themselves are. (snip)



Now you're trying to twist my words. Beyond the context given (arrests
ruin lives and are a disappointment to families), I said nothing about "the
similarity of the punishment for two crimes." Therefore, I didn't use that
to make a leap to anything.


(snip) You've taken many opportunities to make leaps
of ignorance by going beyond the scope of any given
analogy and coming up with bizarre extrapolations. In
this case (snip)



The only bizarre extrapolations here seem to be coming from your own mind,
not anything else. Have you not noticed that you seem to be the only person
here coming to these strange conclusions about the things I've said. Most
others, even those who disagree with my views, seem to have no problem
comprehending exactly what I'm saying.


Bullcrap -- most of wht you write is barely above the level of
gibberish.

In reality, I suspect you also
understand very well what I'm saying, but just don't like what is said.

Stewart


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Photographing children Owamanga Digital Photography 2538 May 3rd 05 10:14 AM
Best cat breed with young children at home -L. Digital Photography 2 February 11th 05 01:49 AM
Best cat breed with young children at home -L. 35mm Photo Equipment 0 February 7th 05 08:30 AM
Books on Composition, developing an "Eye"? William J. Slater General Photography Techniques 9 April 7th 04 04:22 PM
Photographing children Steven Church Photographing People 13 October 21st 03 10:55 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.