A new year, a new start. Let's start with something called common sense. Try to apply it to what is happening around you, and spread it around. Some examples of the lack of common sense and the intrusion into our personal space:
1. The 30 second idling rule.
2. Banning guns.
3. Smoking laws.
4. Taxpayer paid abortions.
5. Free needles and drugs.
6. Bailouts.
7. HRC's
8. Lack of property rights.
9. Coalitions.
10. Unions.
11. Global warming.
12. House arrest for murder.
Those are just a few examples of how special interest groups and socialists are taking away our individual rights for the "good" of society. Feel free to add your pet peeves.
Free society? How free are we anymore? You can't open a bar that allows smoking because it will take away business from other bars. If we actually had property rights, they could not dictate to us like this is Russia. This is supposedly for the good of society because smoking, though legal is socially undesirable, but at the same time we are told that marijuana should be legalized and special smoking rooms should be allowed for those who want to toke up.
We are told that we should herd our children into daycares, for their own good, that having a child actually raised by one of their parents is undesirable for society. The family has become a threat to socialists because it forms the basis of a secure and stable society.
Common sense has disappeared to be replaced by political correctness and multiculturalism. Special interest groups abound, mostly funded by governments, the majority of them are only interested in restricting our freedoms, or intruding into our lives with stupid laws. A 30 second idling rule in Edmonton during -30 weather, is just stupid, but the lefties at city hall have nothing better to do than plan how to make us peasants conform to their socialist ideals, meanwhile our streets are a snowy mess.
I am really, really sick of all the rules and regulations that are designed to take away our freedoms while allowing special interest groups more power. Where has common sense gone?
19 comments:
Today new laws come into effect re the sale of cigarettes.
This may sound very unsympathetic but why not ban skiing and other snow sports when a person is killed by an avalance.
I wonder how many of those who are injured or killed either quit smoking or never smoked because it was dangerous to their health.
We will hear of loss of profits from all stores that sold cigarettes, loss of tax revenue, and those profits have to be made up somewhere.
Yikes, I just watched the names of all ctv staff responsible for their news casts. Got to be over 100 of them, and to think it takes that many people to come up with so many mistruths.
Let us hope the budget has common sense in it.
Your post is spot on. It will only get worse as the economy continues it's slide in 2009.
Attacks on personal liberty will be justified by 'the greater good'.
DanT - greater good. Thanks for mentioning that. This whole "greater good" sounds so much like communism and it does worry me sometimes. In Ontario, our health care system is falling apart and our premier is more interested in banning cigarette displays, cell phone use in cars (I agree with that one), bottles, etc. This whole social engineering thing sounds so much like communism that it's scary.
13. People running around making stuff up.
14. Children without parental consent allowed at firing ranges.
15. Prime Ministers that lie.
16. Use of the phrase "unborn child" -- no such thing.
17. Certain provinces raping the landscape.
I could go on and on and on.....
"I could go on and on and on....."
.....would they be uneducated, untruths as well? Raping the landscape, PULEEZE, do some homework and get out more and better yet quit reading the propaganda.
You can have your precious "nanny state" but we prefer to do as much of it on our own as possible.SHEESH!
Can we start referring to the TROLLS as a "special interest group"? Honestly, they can ruin a perfectly great cup of java!
A fairly standard conservative shopping list of what's wrong with society.
In any case, I have one point to make - Needle exchanges (5 on your list) actually save the country tons of money by reducing rates of HIV and Hepatitis, resulting in a reduced strain on the health care system.
Also, I'm not sure where you got the "free drugs" bit from. Were you referring to the NAOMI project? That was a research study, and certainly doesn't represent public policy, at least not in Canada.
"I could go on and on and on....."
If only you would...go on and on and on...into the sunset and never return. If only.
BTW - you're still an idiot. Your input made no sense whatsoever. Your wish for PMs who don't lie is a bit late - Chretien is no longer in office and, thankfully, we have an honest and morally stalwart PM. Thank God for that.
Pearce Richards,
I agree with you about the free drugs/health care debate.
It is the better of the 2 evils.
Cheers!....Happy 2009 everyone, btw
Pearce - your argument re: free needles makes sense in the context you mention. However, I would prefer to see addicts become un-addicted. I find it unfair that diabetics must buy their own needles while drug addicts, many of whom do not work or pay taxes, receive free needles to continue what is essentially supporting an illegal industry - the selling of illegal drugs. Diabetics, for the most part, are not responsible for being diabetic. I say "most part" because those who become diabetic through bad diet and lifestyle choices did have a choice at one time.
As for drug addiction - it doesn't happen overnight and I am sure that, along the way, every addict had some family member or friend trying to intervene - to no avail. I would prefer to see help go to the victims of another person's addiction for they are the innocent bystanders, so to speak.
Some common sense:
no 'special' treatment for Quebec, we can't afford a 'special needs' province, anymore.
SQ has to get a job.
Reforming healthcare, private clinics with services paid by public funds (like in Quebec).
Provinical borders wide open for trade and worker mobility.
In his book Agenda for Nation Building; Iggy writes
"There is no more effective way to deny the rights of others than to claim that they are denying yours”
I would say that is typical Liberal "common sense" on Hunter's list.
SQ has a job, thank you. I am what Hunter considers an "elitist". ie I have a university degree.
Why do you have a problem with smoking laws? The health systems ends up paying the costs for people that smoke.
Have all those non smoking groups given any thought to the loss of tax revenue from stores that sold this legal product. Think of a small store, making 1000./wk on cig sales. That is a loss of 56,000/yr, probably the reason for at least 2 layoffs, and 56,000 less of profit=less corporate taxes=increase in illegal cigs bought on the black market.
Smoking can maybe take over 70 yrs to kill a person, whereas skiing, snowboarding, snowmobiling can kill you in seconds.
What cost is incurred by these people. Even after 8 deaths, idiots went out again and killed themselves. It is just so easy to put the blame for health costs on smoking, if a person has ever smoked in their life. Funny how obesity has increased since all the smoking laws. A person over 80 dies, and smoked as a teenager, blame smoking.
How many die of overdoses and what do those addicts cost the system. I wonder how many of the no smoking groups think a joint is ok. Ever notice how there is more viral infections around now, or flu and even asthma. Maybe that second hand smoke killed all those viruses. And no, I don't smoke and my husband quit about 50 pounds ago.
MaryT: The cigarette figures you are using are gross, not net! I doubt a small store nets $1000/wk in sales. As to the health costs of smokers -- talk to any doctor. 80% of lung cancers are smoke related.
And the snowmobilers. -- I believe that we should have a lottery (just in Quebec) where you have to guess date and time that the first snowmobile goes into a lake. Person closest to exact time wins!(PriceIsRight rules in effect).
80% of lung cancer is caused by cigarettes, if you ask a doctor.
What causes the other 20%.
I have had several friends and relatives die of lung cancer that never smoked in their live and no family member did. They did not frequent places with 2nd hand smoke. And yes, small stores do make that kind of money, I do the financial stmts so know what I am talking about. In larger chain stores it would be higher.
Non smoking rules have shut down several bingo hall, where money for numerous charities was raised. Those people are still smoking and playing bingo etc but it is at Indian Casinos.
We are supposed to have freedom of choice, not dictatorship by some do gooders.
Nicotine in in a lot of foods and other products, not just cigarettes.
Have you ever seen news reports of major fires, and the people, with kids, watching it. They wouldn't dare smoke but have no qualms about watching a tire factory or mfging plant, or even a home burn. What is burning and what is in that smoke.
How many people are out on the roads in this weather, without proper clothing or tires or skills, taking chances and causing accidents and death, but they sure would not have a cigarette as it is dangerous. That is what gets me, the double standard of these non smokers.
MaryT: It's not the nicotine that kills you....
East of Eden:
I agree, I would rather not see people addicted in the first place. I would also love to see increased spending on treatment facilities.
But the spirit of harm reduction is acknowledging that people are addicted right now, and are contracting HIV right now. Harm reduction also acknowledges that people relapse in their recovery. The point is keeping these people alive and infection free until they can successfully stop using.
I agree though, it is a weird double standard that diabetics must buy their syringes. Maybe they should start pretending to be addicts, and use the needle exchanges haha. Or maybe there should be a needle exchange at every pharmacy, so they can take advantage of them as well.
Pearce - all kidding aside, I think you make a very valid point. Perhaps there should be a needle exchange at the pharmacy for diabetics. Needles are expensive and unless one has a health plan, they come out of the person's pocket - in addition to the cost of insulin.
Perhaps the needle exchange for addicts should come with an obligation to enter rehab - the addicts could continue, for a while, to take their drugs while supervised at a rehab facility.
Good points, maybe just a needle exchange isn't enough, how best do we get addicts into rehab. Maybe we should re-look at mental health institutions that provide not just needles but actual beds for people suffering from addiction.
I think people suffering from diabetes who need insulin to stay alive should be the first ones who get free needles and insulin. Without insulin, they die. Why should addicts rate higher than diabetics as is the case right now?
Post a Comment