President of child abusers...

Go cry to your momma or go troll elsewhere. You are going on ignore since you are currently not banned.

 

aww, did the bad man pull apart your illogical statements?

 

mahmood; here is a story of social workers 'straight up' kidnapping a child, the removal was illegal & followed no procedure, no court orders were in place, nor did the police remove the child thus it was illegal as ruled so by a high court judge.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2249463,00.html

 

There are police officers who torture thieves but this doesn't mean that thieves are justified to hide themselves. They still have to surrender themselves and return what they have stolen . - especially it they have stolen my stuff -


.

 

Guilty to proved innocent huh?

Police who torture thieves, do so after arresting them they still follow procurdure. Whilst in the above case the so-called professionals are not only failing to follow the law & kidnap a baby but also torture the mother in doing such.

They did not return the child until a judge ordered the child be returned.

 

Oh boy the gateway drug theory, I love it. So far from reality.

A question for everyone:
For those of us who have used at least marijuana and alcohol in our lives, which did you use first?

/Not trying to compare alcohol to marijuana, you'll see where I'm going with this in a bit.

 

Nobody claims that a human-made regulation would be perfect - except some religious fanatic -. This still wouldn't qulify a person to be his/her own judge and jurry especially when another person is involved and especially when that person is a child and specially ....

In the case that you mentioned the woman has managed to persuade the court but even if she hadn't, I would be naive to claim that the system is perfect.

.

 

Alcohol of course Years and years before I ever tried pot.
I also smoked cigarettes years before I ever tried pot.

 

There is a good reason for this, and it's not the fallacious "gateway drug" theory. The reason is simple: availability. The easiest of drugs to acquire when you can't get them is alcohol and tobacco: you just need someone who is 21/18 to get them for you. Between older brothers, older friends, lenient parents, you can usually get access to either by 14 or 15 if you want it bad enough. The next most available thing is pot. It's pretty easy to acquire, by high school there is a good amount of potheads, and they all know the dealers.

Logically, it follow that most people try alcohol and tobacco, and then weed later; it's just the probability of coming across it. This is why use of harder drugs typically comes last, not because other drugs lead to them, but availability.

I can make phone calls and 5 minutes from now be out the door to many different people to pick up weed. If I wanted painkillers, or coke, or shrooms, or acid, I'd have to talk to friends to find a dealer, and overall, it's just much harder to find. If I were to want to pick up heroin or meth or some of the craziest of drugs, I don't even know if I'd be able to find someone to purchase them from.

The gateway drug theory is a fallacy; the reality is that drug usage on a timeline typically concurs with overall availablity and usage percentages across a population. Alcohol and tobacco are the most widely used drugs (aside from caffeine and the like), and so most people typically are exposed to them first. Then comes weed, and then the harder shit. The reason some people stop at alcohol, or stop at weed, or stop at some other drug, typically is because they've found their personal line on how far down the rabbit hole they want to go.

Taking away weed won't break the chain, people will just jump from booze to painkillers, or from booze to hallucinogenics. It's not a chain, but rather a logical progression in intensity. On the other hand, legalizing weed will cause an initial spurt in usage, but will rather quickly even itself out, and overall in the long run will probably not raise usage that much.

 

Amazing. I'm reading this post and it's obvious that GRIM, Mahmood and I know that Mahmood, not only is wrong, but knows himself he tried and got burnt...
Mahmood is completely off context, and he knows it...

 

I am a firm believer making pot legal will do more for keeping it out of the hands of minors than keeping it illegal.

As it is it's such a common 'illegal' drug it's actually easier to come by on a regular basis for children than tobacco or liquor is. Afterall the person selling the pot much of the time is someone in their very own grade who bought a larger bag from a bigger dealer.

They do not ask for ID, care about age laws, if you're a minor or not.

Tobacco and liquor can be stolen, you can pay someone old enough to buy them for you, etc it however makes it more difficult from my own personal experience.

To simply test a substance, tobacco or liquor is obviously much easier, to use a substance though on a regular basis I firmly believe it's the other way around.

 

Being in college, alcohol is an easy acquisition now. But in my high school years, I could get a dime bag many times easier than I could get a bottle of vodka. Legalization and regulation certainly aren't fool proof, but they are magnitudes more effective at discouraging underage usage than D.A.R.E. and the WoD.

 

You don't have to persuade a court of anything, facts are facts, the kid was born was took right away from the mother without a court order, the act is illegal.

These are supposed to be professionals, they know the law, they take children everyday but they are just starting to think they are above the law.

And your right regulations are broke everyday in some organizations more than others though.

 

DCFS CPS family courts foster care all though out the USA are doing a huge disservice to the children and family's of America..
Here if you care to view the truth...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAyMdECo9GE

 

Thank you for keep proving my point.
There are two possibilities:
1. They have broken the regulations which in this case there is no problem with regulations and the problem is with human nature. This doesn't justify ...

2. There is a problem with regulations which again wouldn't justify people to break it and be their own judge and jory - haven't I said it before? -. Specially when somebody elses is involved.

3. There are problems with both which both results apply.

.

 

Mmmm glad someone knows what they're talking about. When I like something I do it a lot. I'm on the computer for hours a day, hooked on computer games, hooked on riding my crotch rocket, hooked on whatever foods I like, and yes "hooked" on bud. If you have an addictive personality to begin with you're going to do it. I've yet to snort a line or shoot up or any hard drugs so w/e. Experience > what you learned from D.A.R.E.