Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Social Issues > Bullying

Bullying Until recently, Bullying has been identified as a major concern in our Society.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 13th, 2012, 02:35 PM   #41
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 59,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1344886627' post='420626

How did you determine selling raw milk in LA county is illegal? I can't confirm that.
My wife was sitting next to me when I clicked on the link about the raid. She knows more about stuff going on the the raw milk realm than what i do, and she mentioned she heard it was illegal to sell raw milk in LA. I know it is illegal to sell it even here in Minnesota unless it is being bought directly at the farm on which it is produced.



Quote:
On topic, "fighting back" doesn't always involve weapons. In fact, it rarely does.
I was going by the whole tenor of the article when I asked whether the author was advocating armed resistance at the farm. Time after time in the article, the author mentioned American's lack of "defense skills" in dealing with criminality. True, the author didn't use the term "defense skills" in the paragraph about the raw milk, so he could have been referring just to protests in that paragraph, but it seems odd to me that he would go back and forth in his train of thought. In the very next paragraph, he again laments that we aren't learning defense skills, which I can only interpret as referring to physical defense.




It's very clear to what he was referring regarding raw milk, and it wasn't armed resistance.



Here's the best I can find on unpasteurized products in California, and on the raids which seem punitive only, as the businesses resumed operation shorty after the raids.





Quote:
3 arrested on raw-milk charges



The owner of a Venice health food market and two other people were arrested on charges related to the allegedly unlawful production and sale of unpasteurized dairy products, a spokesman for the Los Angeles County district attorney's office said.






The arrests of James Cecil Stewart, Sharon Ann Palmer and Eugenie Bloch on Wednesday marked the latest effort in a government crackdown on the sale of so-called raw dairy products.



The owner of a Venice health food market and two other people were arrested on charges related to the allegedly unlawful production and sale of unpasteurized dairy products, a spokesman for the Los Angeles County district attorney's office said.



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]The arrests of James Cecil Stewart, Sharon Ann Palmer and Eugenie Bloch on Wednesday marked the latest effort in a government crackdown on the sale of so-called raw dairy products.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]Prosecutors in Los Angeles alleged that Stewart, 64, operates a Venice market called Rawesome Foods through which he illegally sold dairy products that did not meet health standards because they were unpasteurized or were produced at unlicensed facilities.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]Palmer, 51, has operated Healthy Family Farms in Santa Paula since 2007 without the required licensing for milk production, prosecutors allege. She and her company face nine charges related to the production of unpasteurized milk products.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]Bloch, a Healthy Family Farms employee, is charged with three counts of conspiracy.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]The arrests followed a one-year investigation during which undercover agents purchased unpasteurized dairy products from Healthy Family Farms stands in Los Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, said Matthew Krasnowski, a district attorney spokesman. The products included unpasteurized goat milk, cheese and yogurt.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]The arrests came the same week that federal and state health officials warned the public about a food-borne illness outbreak tied to ground turkey contaminated with antibiotic-resistant salmonella, an outbreak in which one Californian has died and 76 others have fallen ill so far.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]It also marks the latest salvo in the government's crackdown on unpasteurized dairy products.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]In June 2010 investigators raided the Venice grocery store, seizing stacks of unmarked jugs of raw milk, cartons of raw goat and cow milk, and blocks of unpasteurized goat cheese, among other grocery items. [/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]Regulators alleged that Rawesome broke the law by failing to have the proper permits to sell food to the public.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]Still, no arrests were made and Rawesome reopened the same week. Stewart said at the time that Rawesome didn't need such permits because it wasn't technically a retailer. He contended that the store was a private club whose members paid an annual fee and service charges to obtain products directly from farmers.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]While the raid was taking place in Venice, another was occurring at Palmer's Healthy Family Farms in Ventura County. There, California agriculture officials said, the farm owner's milk processing plant had not met standards to obtain a license to sell raw milk or raw milk products. Shortly after the raid, Palmer was back in business.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]Demand for all manner of raw foods has been growing, spurred by heightened interest in locally produced, unprocessed products.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]But government regulators contend such products can be dangerous; there is scientific evidence linking disease outbreaks to raw milk. The milk can transmit bacteria, which can result in diarrhea, dangerously high fevers and in some cases death.[/font]



[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]Raw milk, in particular, has drawn regulatory scrutiny, largely because the politically powerful dairy industry has pressed the government to act. It is legal for licensed dairies to sell raw milk at retail outlets in California, according to research by the National Conference of State Legislatures. But the number of such outlets has dwindled amid retailer concerns over potential litigation.
[/font]



http://articles.lati...k-raid-20110804
imaginethat is offline  
Old August 13th, 2012, 02:37 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,991
I need a scorecard just to keep track of who I'm supposed to hate. At least on TV they give little captions below each of the guests on the the talking heads programs.



Couldn't we have one side just wear pointy hoods or swastika armbands? I mean, how's a guy supposed to know who to hate this week?
Podium Pentothal is offline  
Old August 13th, 2012, 02:40 PM   #43
Retired
 
highway80west's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 17,105
Frankly, I really see no difference in raw milk and pasteurized milk. But since I am lactose intolerant, it does not make any different to me.
highway80west is offline  
Old August 13th, 2012, 02:43 PM   #44
Retired
 
highway80west's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 17,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Podium Pentothal View Post
I need a scorecard just to keep track of who I'm supposed to hate. At least on TV they give little captions below each of the guests on the the talking heads programs.



Couldn't we have one side just wear pointy hoods or swastika armbands? I mean, how's a guy supposed to know who to hate this week?


Probably better to go see a theater performance at a Bird Cage theater. The announcer there would tell you who to hate. Though it is easy to hate those who paint swastikas or wear white hoods, unless one is a neo-nazi (God help us).
highway80west is offline  
Old August 13th, 2012, 04:48 PM   #45
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Let it soak in: "Untimately someone arrived who was armed and Hasan was brought down."



The numbers vary, but averaging them about two percent of the population hold a concealed weapons permit, about 6 million of them. Who knows how many people carry weapons without a permit?



The facts regarding the theater shooting are sketchy. How big is the theater? How smoky was it inside? We do know, 12 people were killed and 58 wounded in around two minutes. Two minutes doesn't sound very long, but in the situation two minutes was a long time.



A well-trained, armed citizen with a laser sight could pull off a head shot at 20-30 meters ... and justice would have been served expeditiously.



Just food for thought, and don't forget "untimately someone arrived who was armed and hasan was brought down."


so 2% of the population have a concealed carry permit and some without a permit carry anyway. you are arguing that there are already millions of armed citizens wandering around society.



if your statistics are accurate and there are people with guns scattered among us then whenever there is a spree killing, there would have been a few armed citizens in the vicinity. where were they? why is it so rare for a shooter to be brought down by an armed civilian if there are 6 million plus armed civilians out there? maybe there are not that many actually carrying, maybe there are but they run as fast as the others. they are hardly going to admit it, "well, i saw the shooter and knew i had a gun on my hip, but i was terrified and ran like hell."



if the solution to spree killings is going to be armed citizens, then there needs to be a whole lot more of them, they need to be able to carry everywhere, into schools, into cinemas, without restriction, so there is nowhere a spree killer can go where nobody is armed. do you think this would make society a safer place?
hot dragon is offline  
Old August 13th, 2012, 07:29 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 59,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1344864740' post='420562

Let it soak in: "Untimately someone arrived who was armed and Hasan was brought down."



The numbers vary, but averaging them about two percent of the population hold a concealed weapons permit, about 6 million of them. Who knows how many people carry weapons without a permit?



The facts regarding the theater shooting are sketchy. How big is the theater? How smoky was it inside? We do know, 12 people were killed and 58 wounded in around two minutes. Two minutes doesn't sound very long, but in the situation two minutes was a long time.



A well-trained, armed citizen with a laser sight could pull off a head shot at 20-30 meters ... and justice would have been served expeditiously.



Just food for thought, and don't forget "untimately someone arrived who was armed and hasan was brought down."


so 2% of the population have a concealed carry permit and some without a permit carry anyway. you are arguing that there are already millions of armed citizens wandering around society.



if your statistics are accurate and there are people with guns scattered among us then whenever there is a spree killing, there would have been a few armed citizens in the vicinity. where were they? why is it so rare for a shooter to be brought down by an armed civilian if there are 6 million plus armed civilians out there? maybe there are not that many actually carrying, maybe there are but they run as fast as the others. they are hardly going to admit it, "well, i saw the shooter and knew i had a gun on my hip, but i was terrified and ran like hell."



if the solution to spree killings is going to be armed citizens, then there needs to be a whole lot more of them, they need to be able to carry everywhere, into schools, into cinemas, without restriction, so there is nowhere a spree killer can go where nobody is armed. do you think this would make society a safer place?


Exactly, peruse any "gun nut" website, and learn that only a percentage of people with concealed carry permits actually carry a weapon on them.



Yes, you're damned right, there does need to be a lot more of them. And, just like in the "Old West," yes, if more people were armed, society would be a safer place.



I don't like this state of affairs, but it's better to deal with reality as it is rather than how we wish it to be. The reality is: Spree shootings almost always occur in "gun-free zones."
imaginethat is offline  
Old August 13th, 2012, 08:20 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
the reality is this: spree shootings are vanishingly rare.



lawyes argue hard cases make bad laws. in other words, don't make legislation aimed at a particular specific instance. a spree killing is a freak event. most people are never going to be exposed to such an event, regardless of how many armed citizens there are. this isnt because of the gun laws, or any regulation, its because it is incredibly rare for a person to make the decision to carry out a shooting spree.



you are advocating a solution that would affect everyone, everywhere, all the time, in order to protect a very very few on very very rare occasions. and your solution would expose everyone, everywhere, all the time, to the risks of impulsive shootings, accidents, arguments getting out of hand, genuine misunderstandings that lead to a weapon being drawn. now it isnt going to happen often that there is an accidental shooting because someones gun went off by mistake when they were getting their wallet out, it isnt going to happen often that a break up in a restaurant leads to the jealous jilted lover pulling their gun out in the heat of the moment. but these things will happen more often if there are more guns out there. they will still not be common but they will be a thousand times more common than a spree killer.



there may be reasonable arguments about arms in general, but the argument that society needs to be armed to protect people from spree killers is flawed, its like reccommending cyanide to treat a sore throat.
hot dragon is offline  
Old August 13th, 2012, 09:35 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 59,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
the reality is this: spree shootings are vanishingly rare.



lawyes argue hard cases make bad laws. in other words, don't make legislation aimed at a particular specific instance. a spree killing is a freak event. most people are never going to be exposed to such an event, regardless of how many armed citizens there are. this isnt because of the gun laws, or any regulation, its because it is incredibly rare for a person to make the decision to carry out a shooting spree.



you are advocating a solution that would affect everyone, everywhere, all the time, in order to protect a very very few on very very rare occasions. and your solution would expose everyone, everywhere, all the time, to the risks of impulsive shootings, accidents, arguments getting out of hand, genuine misunderstandings that lead to a weapon being drawn. now it isnt going to happen often that there is an accidental shooting because someones gun went off by mistake when they were getting their wallet out, it isnt going to happen often that a break up in a restaurant leads to the jealous jilted lover pulling their gun out in the heat of the moment. but these things will happen more often if there are more guns out there. they will still not be common but they will be a thousand times more common than a spree killer.



there may be reasonable arguments about arms in general, but the argument that society needs to be armed to protect people from spree killers is flawed, its like reccommending cyanide to treat a sore throat.


I'm not advocating any solution. I'm telling it like it is.



Me? I'm stupid. I think "God" will protect me, and enable me to act correctly in the benefit of the most lives saved. It's illogical, I know. Even so, it's my basis, my bottom line.
imaginethat is offline  
Old August 14th, 2012, 04:55 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
dusty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: north east usa
Posts: 3,944
you people are in here every day all day long

thaTS not normal.
dusty is offline  
Old August 14th, 2012, 05:49 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusty View Post
you people are in here every day all day long

thaTS not normal.


you're right.



no, hang on.



with respect, i am not that happy to accept dustys judgement on what is normal.
hot dragon is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Social Issues > Bullying

Tags
back, fight



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fight The Good Fight intangible child Political Talk 0 June 21st, 2010 07:48 PM
Californians fight back against attack on traditional marriage garysher Gay and Lesbian Rights 135 October 18th, 2008 03:49 AM
Stem cell research supporters fight back CNN Current Events 6 June 25th, 2007 04:59 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.