The Vicodin made me do it!!!

Jarod said:
Vicodin is narcotic mixed with acidaminaphen. If you take enough to abuse it, you will soon die of liver poisioning. That is why its not abused widely like the Codone drugs like Roxi, Oxi, and Hydro...
Click to expand...
ASA belongs to the group of medications called analgesics (pain relievers), anti-inflammatories, and antipyretics (fever reducers
No more than 4g. of ASA should be taken in any 24-hour period.
 
Rana said:
Wow, several karma hits for that one.
Click to expand...

Um... no...

1. You need an ID to buy a gun, but not to vote.
2. It is easier to vote than to buy a gun.

Anybody who believes the opposite of number 2... Is a bit insane.

The Right to own and bear arms is the only right listed in the Constitution that one must constantly beg to be allowed to exercise. Imagine if the Right to Vote was restricted as much as the right to bear arms. A nice background check when you went in to vote, for instance... Maybe a bit of actual picture ID to show... Don't worry, the FBI doesn't keep a list of "how" you vote... If you plan on voting for President you'll need a class 3 voting license, those only cost $1000 per year to keep up and take a more serious background investigation.

I'm sure you'd support a few of those measures since you think it is "easier" to buy a gun than to vote...
 
Granule said:
And? In states like New York & California, it's next to impossible to legally own a handgun in the first place. Bad example on your part.
Click to expand...

That is 2 out of 50 states. Sounds like you are the one using a bad example. And the state and local gov'ts have done that. I have no control there.

But the laws concerning narcotics are federal laws.

Granule said:
Uh-huh. The Left has been chipping away at gun rights for decades. The attack has been so subtle & drawn out, that it completely escapes people like you.
Click to expand...

Please share some of the ways they have chipped away at gun rights in the last 20 or 30 years? yes, there was the Assault Weapons ban, but it expired. What else?

Because in that time the SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. And in that time, how many states have gone to a "Shall Issue" law concerning CCW permits?

If you need help I can suggest a few. You see, I am one of those "you people" who are members of the NRA, a hunter, a recreational shooter, and a gun rights advocate. But this completely escapes you because I called you on your "Why not ban medications too?" nonsense.


Granule said:
That's one experience. Try sharing your little success story with frustrated New Yorkers.
Click to expand...

The New Yorkers have to go thru same things I do to get meds. But their state laws are different for firearms. These are not federal laws. Perhaps if New Yorkers voted for different politicians they might get something changed.

Granule said:
Your point is moot, as that will never happen as long as we live in a free society. The original point was that mind altering substances can contribute to why someone decides to open fire on the public. I'd hate to be the physician who helped facilitate Holmes' fascination with mind altering substances.
Click to expand...

If he displayed symptoms that showed a need for Vicodin, then the physician should have prescribed it.

Granule said:
That makes zero difference if you're someone who intends to break the law anyways. See?
Click to expand...

Your original question was about banning medicines. So it certainly does matter. If we are talking about people who intend to break the law, then no law matters.
 
WinterBorn said:
That is 2 out of 50 states. Sounds like you are the one using a bad example. And the state and local gov'ts have done that. I have no control there.
Click to expand...
No, it's more than that. And those two states alone, make up a significant percentage of this country.

WinterBorn said:
Please share some of the ways they have chipped away at gun rights in the last 20 or 30 years? yes, there was the Assault Weapons ban, but it expired. What else?
Click to expand...
Keep going, Giggles. Let's take it back to the last 200 years. We'll discuss the subtle changes that have taken place over that time span.

WinterBorn said:
Because in that time the SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. And in that time, how many states have gone to a "Shall Issue" law concerning CCW permits?
Click to expand...
And how many states actually give a shit about the 2nd Amendment? You'd never guess that California or New York does.

WinterBorn said:
If you need help I can suggest a few.
Click to expand...
Then why don't you stop flapping your gums and suggest a few? ;)

WinterBorn said:
The New Yorkers have to go thru same things I do to get meds. But their state laws are different for firearms. These are not federal laws. Perhaps if New Yorkers voted for different politicians they might get something changed.
Click to expand...
Perhaps somebody should tell them that, WB. I'm quite certain the state of New York could benefit from your wisdom.

WinterBorn said:
If he displayed symptoms that showed a need for Vicodin, then the physician should have prescribed it.
Click to expand...
Silly Utopian. He probably faked the symptoms, and the doc unwittingly facilitated his fascination with mind altering substances.

WinterBorn said:
Your original question was about banning medicines.
Click to expand...
Yes it was. Interesting how you straightway deviated from it. ;)
 
Granule said:
Keep going, Giggles. Let's take it back to the last 200 years. We'll discuss the subtle changes that have taken place over that time span.
Click to expand...

You were the one who said that Dems have chipped away at our rights for decades. So tell us what they have done in the last 20 or 30 years?

Granule said:
Silly Utopian. He probably faked the symptoms, and the doc unwittingly facilitated his fascination with mind altering substances.
Click to expand...

And you do you suppose, in your obvious wisdom, that Drs can tell whether a patient is in pain or not? Do you have some new gadget that can measure it?
 
WinterBorn said:
You were the one who said that Dems have chipped away at our rights for decades. So tell us what they have done in the last 20 or 30 years?
Click to expand...
The Brady Bill in addition to the ban on assault weapons. That's two chips in the past 20 - 30 years. Now let's take a sneak peek at coming attractions, shall we?

"Democrats passed the Brady Law and the Assault Weapons Ban. We increased federal, state, and local gun crime prosecution by 22 percent since 1992. Now gun crime is down by 35 percent. Now we must do even more. We need mandatory child safety locks. We should require a photo license I.D., a background check, and a gun safety test to buy a new handgun. We support more federal gun prosecutors and giving states and communities another 10,000 prosecutors to fight gun crime."

http://issues2000.org/Celeb/Democratic_Party_Gun_Control.htm

Sure, on the surface it sounds like the Dems are doing America a great service, but can you detect any potential problems that most definitely can trail this kind of zeal?

WinterBorn said:
And you do you suppose, in your obvious wisdom, that Drs can tell whether a patient is in pain or not? Do you have some new gadget that can measure it?
Click to expand...
I think doctors (in general) are lazy about their diagnoses and would rather cash a check than get to the root of an illness -- especially the GPs.
 
Damocles said:
Um... no...

1. You need an ID to buy a gun, but not to vote.
2. It is easier to vote than to buy a gun.

Anybody who believes the opposite of number 2... Is a bit insane.

The Right to own and bear arms is the only right listed in the Constitution that one must constantly beg to be allowed to exercise. Imagine if the Right to Vote was restricted as much as the right to bear arms. A nice background check when you went in to vote, for instance... Maybe a bit of actual picture ID to show... Don't worry, the FBI doesn't keep a list of "how" you vote... If you plan on voting for President you'll need a class 3 voting license, those only cost $1000 per year to keep up and take a more serious background investigation.

I'm sure you'd support a few of those measures since you think it is "easier" to buy a gun than to vote...
Click to expand...
Well shit Damo.....though #1 is completely wrong, you need ID to vote. Just not a picture ID like a drivers license.

Also, last time I tried killing someone with my vote it didn't work out to well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top