Just think about the children?

There are already drugs on the street. And your kids will face that offer some day. Stop pretending you can hide them from it. I remember seeing it when I was in high school and middle school. To a kid, the fact that it is taboo will only increase the desire. That is one of the primary problems with alcohol consumption among young people today. Countries without underage bans on alcohol do not have rampant drunken children stumbling around the streets. Back to drugs, though. A lot of these illegal drugs came into use originally in medicine. Your outcry about meth, for instance, ignores the fact that it was distributed by both the Allies and the Axis in World War II. It has horrible side effects and is intensely addictive. Teach people that. It still has medical use, but is avoided due to the drug trade. Tobacco usage is going down. You think it's because tobacco is illegal now? Drugs are here. They always have been. If your child chooses drugs after you have educated them on how many such substances would tear their lives apart, then they would have chosen drugs when that guy at school offered them. The only difference in the two worlds is that one market was supplied from Mexico and cost our government a fortune in an impotent attempt to stop, the other was regulated and taxed.

Yay, math!

In other news, did you know that, as impact speed increases from 5 mph to 25 mph, the energy that needs to be managed increases by 2400 percent!? That is just stunning! I think that we must start considering the children here, and lower all speed limits to 5 mph immediately. And ban driving in parking lots. With all of the obstructed views, it is just too dangerous, and I am not going to be held responsible for teaching my children about running into streets blindly.

I wasn't aware that the only thing less than too much was zero. Reductio ad absurdum does not work with a false dichotomy. That said, constraint on the power of government should belong to the people, and technically does, but you never actually see citizens voting intelligently. I honestly don't know how to fix the system, as I feel the problem is inherent in the nature of people today.

I say "pssh" to that concept. The idea that copyright should cover bad luck makes it sound more like a form of life insurance. Copyright exists to promote invention. Why should artists have so much protected beyond life?

What if, instead of the holy pedestal of [career that produces art], you were a coal miner? They get payed pretty well and have great retirements benefits. If you keep working, you will provide for your family quite well. Two years later, you are hit by a bus. It's horrible, but there is no reason for someone from the mine company to step in and continue paying your family. Everyone wants to protect their family. Designing arbitrary laws to do so at a loss to the public is foolish. The world has become too compassionate.

The human body survives off of calories. The most calorie dense foods, in a calorie per dollar sense, are junk foods. A $3 bag of chips packs about 1700 calories. $3 worth of sweet onions packs about 300 calories. Around here, yes, it is more expensive to eat healthy. Although a big bag of carrots looks like a lot, it isn't as easy to subsist on.

You're right, I'm tired of having humans in charge of the government. The world focuses on money too much now. It's the primary goal. A pity primary goals aren't something nobler, like achievement.

I have always hated this statement, as it's a logical fallacy. If it were true, the greatest nation in the world would not only let all of it's most deplorable citizens do anything they want, it would give them candy in the process. Statements like this garner admiration because they sound neat. They also serve as a tool for people looking to have evidence to support their opinions on any nation, since basically any nation will prosecute their worst criminals.