Gun Freedoms and Crime - Page 2

rickanderson · #51 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

Well, a glass of red wine a day supposedly makes one live longer.

A lie perpetrated on the masses by crack addicted doctors trying to sell their book on Oprah. If a glass of red wine a day is good for you then the earth is flat.

**jawn_tech** · #52 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 01:46 AM

Well we'll just see now won't we. I'll bet you 500 Canadian dollars I live until I'm 200.

rickanderson · #53 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

Well we'll just see now won't we. I'll bet you 500 Canadian dollars I live until I'm 200.

Jawn

I hope you *do* live to 200. Keep in mind however that correlation doesn't equal causation so it might not be the daily glass of wine that should get the credit. It's probably more likely that you scared the grim reaper away with your hatchet.

\o/

Clicken · #54 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickanderson

Sure do click; and it doesn't fall prey to party line tripe.

You can call the research of the American Heart Association “party line tripe” if you want, but Why?

I will post the following AHA link and quote because yes, there are risk with alcohol consumption which should be considered.

Alcohol and Heart Disease -- Pearson 94 (11): 3023 -- Circulation

Quote:

the following recommendations may be made for the individual patient who is considering beginning or continuing to drink alcohol.
1. Consult a physician for an assessment of the benefits and risks of alcohol consumption. Persons with a personal or family history of alcoholism, hypertriglyceridemia, pancreatitis, liver disease, certain blood disorders, heart failure, and uncontrolled hypertension, as well as pregnant women and persons on certain medications that interact with alcohol, should not consume any alcohol. Any recommendations should be tailored to the individual patient's risks and potential benefits.
2. If no contraindications to alcohol consumption are present, moderate consumption of alcohol (one or two drinks per day) may be considered safe.
3. Alcohol should never be consumed when operating machinery or motor vehicles.
4. The risks and benefits of alcohol consumption should be reviewed periodically as part of regular medical care. In the event of excess consumption, problem drinking, or deleterious consequences of drinking, recommendations for alcohol consumption should be revised.
5. Adolescents and young adults should be targeted for assessment and advice before potentially deleterious habits of consumption become established.

Also, The benefits are limited to certain individuals...

Quote:

A large number of observational studies have consistently demonstrated a J-shaped relation between alcohol consumption and total mortality.5 This relation appears to hold in men and women who are middle aged or older.6 7 8 9 The lowest mortality occurs in those who consume one or two drinks per day.10 In teetotalers or occasional drinkers, the rates are higher than in those consuming one or two drinks per day. In persons who consume three or more drinks per day, total mortality climbs rapidly with increasing numbers of drinks per day.

**jawn_tech** · #55 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickanderson

Jawn I hope you *do* live to 200. Keep in mind however that correlation doesn't equal causation so it might not be the daily glass of wine that should get the credit. It's probably more likely that you scared the grim reaper away with your hatchet.

Well it's a bet I'm not scared to make at all. Mainly because if I lose, you'd have a tough time collecting money from a dead guy. Ha!

Quote:

Originally Posted by clicken

A large number of observational studies have consistently demonstrated a J-shaped relation

That would be J for jawn_tech.

I'm here all week, try the veal.

rickanderson · #56 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clicken

You can call the research of the American Heart Association “party line tripe” if you want, but Why?

Why? Because it's not true. "May" be beneficial is a far cry from "being beneficial". Don't believe the lies Clicken. Alcohol is poison, plain and simple...and having just a bit doesn't change that fact. Saying a bit of alcohol is ok for the body is like saying a few cigarettes a day is cool. Good one.

Rick

Clicken · #57 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 08:47 AM

Okay then, are you suggesting that Jesus was intentionally poisoning the people when he turned the water into wine?

rickanderson · #58 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clicken

Okay then, are you suggesting that Jesus was intentionally poisoning the people when he turned the water into wine?

The Bible speaks of "fermented" and "unfermented" wine.

Dubbya · #59 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clicken

Okay then, are you suggesting that Jesus was intentionally poisoning the people when he turned the water into wine?

Dunno about anyone else, but I see where this is going...

cw1865 · #60 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickanderson

Saying a bit of alcohol is ok for the body is like saying a few cigarettes a day is cool.

...and water is necessary for life, but you can give yourself water 'intoxication' if you drink too much of it because you can upset your body chemistry.

Much of modern medicine is a doctor trying to weigh the net effect of certain substances on the body. I'm not a scientist so I will defer judgment to the experts on the subject, but the cigarette example is a poor analogy.

rickanderson · #61 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cw1865

...and water is necessary for life, but you can give yourself water 'intoxication' if you drink too much of it because you can upset your body chemistry.

Much of modern medicine is a doctor trying to weigh the net effect of certain substances on the body. I'm not a scientist so I will defer judgment to the experts on the subject, but the cigarette example is a poor analogy.

cw

take a sip, a small sip of...lets say, gin, now watch how your body naturally reacts to it....it convulses...and rejects it

now take a drag of a cigarette and inhale.....take note of how the body naturally convulses...and rejects it...

one doesn't have to be "an expert" to know that both are poisonness.

thats all we really need to know.

Rick

kgun · #62 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clicken

Okay then, are you suggesting that Jesus was intentionally poisoning the people when he turned the water into wine?

Does that imply that he could not do the opposite?

activeco · #63 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgun

Does that imply that he could not do the opposite?

lol
Well, at least the industry is trying hard to achieve it:
30 Second Wine Advisor - wineloverspage.com

cw1865 · #64 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickanderson

cw

take a sip, a small sip of...lets say, gin, now watch how your body naturally reacts to it....it convulses...and rejects it

now take a drag of a cigarette and inhale.....take note of how the body naturally convulses...and rejects it...

one doesn't have to be "an expert" to know that both are poisonness.

thats all we really need to know.

Rick

That analysis is superficial at best. Your body would have a similar reaction if you took a mouthful of saltwater from the ocean and yet there are many times where they will literally stick a saline solution IV drip right into your arm. While I am not sure of the actual salinity of one versus the other, the IV drip's salinity is clearly greater than the salinity of fresh water. If your point is that no matter what quantity, alcohol will have a harmful effect, I agree with you, your body must always metabolize it and that metabolization will always stress the liver and other parts of your body. Notwithstanding, while the alcohol is in your blood, its doing other things besides being metabolized and again the scientists have apparently conducted studies which suggests that small quantities of alcohol benefit the cardiovascular system.

Many chemicals act in this manner. Steroids and narcotics both have legitimate uses, both of which have serious side effects.

**jawn_tech** · #65 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubbya

Dunno about anyone else, but I see where this is going...

Me too, and the direction is definitely...

... OFF TOPIC!

Just trying to be subtle here... My poor "guns and crime" thread.

Clicken · #66 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 03:07 PM

Darn, you beat me to it JT...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubbya

Dunno about anyone else, but I see where this is going...

Well, did you think it would go like this…

Quote:

Originally Posted by rick

The Bible speaks of "fermented" and "unfermented" wine.

HUH? In the book it doesn’t specify which kind, it simply refers to wine. Regardless...

Quote:

Originally Posted by rick

You're right....but it's also true that people who drink and smoke are pretty much stupid since only a stupid person would willingly poison the body.

Unless you care to demonstrate the smart side to those activities.

You asked for a demonstration of when it would not be stupid. You have been offered references to enlighten you that there are circumstances for certain individuals for which it is not considered to be stupid.

If you do not accept the information then fine, that is your privilege. If you want to continue with stupid comments which you can not defend, then fine however I do not see the purpose of taking the thread off course any further.

cw1865 · #67 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

I don't mean the spouse wouldn't get a license / permit to own a gun, just not keep it at the residence. It would be like keeping a liquor cabinet at home while the spouse has a history of crime stemming from alchoholism. Things like this can always be stipulated by a judge as a requirement for one's sentence, release, rehabiliation, etc.

Basically the bill I'm theorizing doesn't ban guns, but gives more room for judges and family services type of agencies to make the determination on a case-by-case basis.

In some cases it would be hard to enforce. But similarly, speed limits are hard to enforce in some areas, but there's still a speed limit, and a cop has the power to write a ticket, if they catch someone speeding. That's a deterrent to some, but not all. But because it's a deterrent to some, any reduction in deaths it provides makes it worth it, hence the speed limit being made. That's the rationale I'm going with in the case of broadening certain types of limitations to owning guns and accessing guns.

i.e., a judge would theoretically have the power to say in lieu of serving jail time or living in a half way house, the convict could live at home provided no guns were kept in the house, by anyone.

OK, back on topic.

To address your previous post, I agree, as a condition of parole the states can impose virtually any rational condition on a parolee, after all the alternative for the parolee is to remain in prison.

I also agree with the general premise that the mere difficulty of enforcing a law is not an excuse not to have a law. It is difficult to enforce many laws and there are many 'difficult' to enforce laws which must remain on the books.

As a general rule I tend to approach regulation from an economic point of view, which I am sure our friend kgun will appreciate. Essentially you seek to regulate in a manner where the benefits of the regulation exceed the cost of enforcing the regulation. With respect to the 'enforceability' of a regulation, I also prefer regulations which are 'self-enforcing' or to have regulations which are enforceable because there is a clear 'chokepoint' of enforceability.

To illustrate this point, we will return briefly to your example of speeding. I agree, it is difficult to enforce and no, it wouldn't be wise not to have a speed limit. The way the system is currently set up, the police have to see a