Is this April 1?

[big tony]

i agree, put a cap in their ass, speaking of cold turkey i need a snack, off to the pill cupboard, mmmmmmmmm

[EMDEE]

Other commitments have meant that I have not been able to contribute to this debate for a while.

What has been noticeable in recent decades is the increasing emphasis on rights of individuals in society, which is a commendable enough trend. However, there appears to have been a corresponding decrease in the acceptance that with rights come responsibilities.

These people are responsible for their own condition. Why should the British taxpayer have to foot the bill to provide medication for these individuals who are in this situation because of their own fecklessness?

None of us can be in any doubt of the dangers of drug addiction; it has had a high enough profile for long enough, and anyone who chooses that option for their life is making a conscious decision in the knowledge that:

1. It is an illegal activity
2. It has the potential to wreck their lives

Anyone who has the sheer arrogance to partake in this activity is also accepting the consequences of their actions, including the possibility of finishing up inside.

It doesn’t help when high profile iconic personalities or role models are doing it, but the problem is that they have the wherewithal to indulge themselves and be able to avoid some of the problems that go with addiction.

Why should anyone go against the guidelines of society and then expect that same society to grant them compassion? They are the ones who are out of line, not the taxpayer.

I have never involved myself with illegal drugs for the above reasons, among others, and don’t see why anyone in my situation should be expected to have understanding of the situation of those who have deliberately done the opposite.

[ionnsaigh]

Welcome back

[ionnsaigh]

EMDEE

The taking of drugs in society stretches back through time. Addiction is an underlying condition that we all share
be it activated or not. People take drugs for a number of varied reasons, including recreation. Young people tend to be more susceptible to this. Human nature as it is, has within it's core the strong desire to investigate new experiences. Some climb the highest peaks fully aware of the dangers involved in that activity, some race fast motor cars, some explore underground caverns while others dive the deep. some go to the Moon. Using your own rationale these pursuits can be arguably used to dissuade in an entirely objective fashion. That can't be argued against unless you consider that at least in terms of behaviour. You are putting the horse at the back of the cart.
Humans must be taught that some course of action can result in negative outcome. We teach our children to behave using the premise of safety and well being. All activity precedes intellectual analysis, for example Mary Rose sat on a tack Mary Rose it is only after the event not before. Knowledge isn't an inherent condition quite the contrary where do you draw the line in terms of "fecklessness" As some are clearly aware of their actions and others are not, you have got to take this fact into account before casting judgement, your argument doesnt it brushes with the broadest of strokes, by all accounts a sweeping generalisation. Would you have denied Queen Victoria- the royal junkie- medical help, or would it be more selective choice?. Guidelines are a commendable function in a civilised society however that is what they are only guidelines which in them selves are in the process of development and change, however they have a worrying feature that forbids self exploration and freedom of choice by the sanctions that society will impose on those who dare transgress. Society must have understanding of the human condition and such have compassion to those individuals who take a course of destruction. Any civilised community would reject your analysis as being one without compassion which is at the end of the day is an aspect of love. On a personal level I was aged Ten when I had my first mountain climbing accident, it could be argued that I didn't fully appreciate the consequences of my actions- then again from your point of view this possibility would not come into the equation and that my unconscious body should have been left on a barren hillside to die as why should you the taxpayer pay for my feckless actions. Start to love your neighbour- have some degree of understanding the tender frailty of the Human condition.

[Sweltered]

Since when was rock climbing illegal? unless of course you were causing damage. You are confusing "the potential to wreck their lives" with it being dangerous. I don't think that was Emdee's point.

Where do you draw the line at loving your neighbor? Does it stop at junkies or should we embrace paedophiles and rapists too?

Our neighborhood ran a family off, coz they were selling drugs. I will not have that going on near my kids, and thankfully the state of Florida has the sex offenders list online, where you can see a picture and the details of their vehicles and their address. Shame they don't do the same for dope peddlers.

I'm guessing this will hurt your sensibilities about their human rights...personally I think they should have a brand on their forehead!

[Bobbie En Tejas]

Society must have understanding of the human condition and such have compassion to those individuals who take a course of destruction.

Compassion is one thing, enabling is another.

[ionnsaigh]

Sweltered

Should society show compassion to rapists and paedophiles, yes of course it should. It's all very well saying that your neighbourhood ran off a family who where dealing in drugs- oh aye great stuff- so where did the family go.
away from your kids aye -then it becomes someone else's problem-but what do care they are away selling drugs to other people's children. You give NIMBY a complete new dimension by such a reckless act why didn't the community contact the law enforcement agency after all that is what they are paid for is it not. The totally irresponsible mob rule action only serves to drive the problem underground, and in the final analysis creates an even more dangerous environment for all concerned. It is of interest to note that sex matters are predominant in your post, sex and drugs are wonderful things why do you debase these natural occurrence's As far as hurting my sensibilities are concerned, you don't give a toss about these particularly when you advocate the branding of people, where did that ugly thought come from- did you take that over with you, or pick it up in the land of the free.
If it happens to be the former then Scotland has lost little in the way of our collective understandings of who and what we- as a people- are. More importantly the values that we attach to justice and fairness, your limited scope of morality, I'm happy to say isn't shared with most members of the tribe. If any of my sons had your meagre mean mentality I would be horrified and wonder where I went wrong or what evil. had befallen them. You have my compassion.

[Sweltered]

Sweltered

Should society show compassion to rapists and paedophiles, yes of course it should. It's all very well saying that your neighbourhood ran off a family who where dealing in drugs- oh aye great stuff- so where did the family go.
away from your kids aye -then it becomes someone else's problem-but what do care they are away selling drugs to other people's children. You give NIMBY a complete new dimension by such a reckless act why didn't the community contact the law enforcement agency after all that is what they are paid for is it not. The totally irresponsible mob rule action only serves to drive the problem underground, and in the final analysis creates an even more dangerous environment for all concerned. It is of interest to note that sex matters are predominant in your post, sex and drugs are wonderful things why do you debase these natural occurrence's As far as hurting my sensibilities are concerned, you don't give a toss about these particularly when you advocate the branding of people, where did that ugly thought come from- did you take that over with you, or pick it up in the land of the free.
If it happens to be the former then Scotland has lost little in the way of our collective understandings of who and what we- as a people- are. More importantly the values that we attach to justice and fairness, your limited scope of morality, I'm happy to say isn't shared with most members of the tribe. If any of my sons had your meagre mean mentality I would be horrified and wonder where I went wrong or what evil. had befallen them. You have my compassion.

Keep it.

By running them off I menat that the appropriate agencies were alerted and they took the appropriate action. The owner of the property wrote to us all appologising for bringing such elements into our neighborhood. I just hope the kids (who were used to deliver the drugs) have a better life now, than they were being dragged into.

You might be comfortable living with that going on 2 doors down, but I'm not used to it and I won't stand for it.

As for branding of offenders, that is probably more popular than you want to believe, and isn't a new idea. These people do not deserve any compassion. Being a parent of 5 yr old twins, my biggest fear is abduction by a sexual predator. If I can do anything to prevent that happening to ANY kids, I will.

I'll you to pat them on the back and tell them not to be bad boys and girls

[jester and the fool]

I like to keep things simple and straight forward,so forgive me if i come across a smidge confused but bottom line is "Sweltered" is saying move em out,not in my back yard sort of thing. The authorities move em out.
"Ionnsaigh" is saying no,no thats not right,after all where are they going to go,society must show them compassion.
Now i am fortunate enough not to have had to look into the eyes of victims of said rapists & paedophiles.As far as i am aware there are the hunters and the hunted all through the animal kingdom always has been always will be.We as humans have surpassed anything else in this field,we kill for fun.Every animal will try to preserve their own life as well as their offspring when neccessary by whatever means avialable to them.It is in the make up.Now the rapist/paedophile are the hunters and their pray are the hunted obviously.I cannot understand a parent of any child,being able to look into their eyes after the trauma and still want to show compassion.Would you after being brutally raped be able to look into the face of your rapist and show him compassion.You say society should show compassion,what if these rapist/paedophiles stick their finger up to societyand tell you where to shove it,and there will be some,what is society to do then?I dont pretend to have any answers.
heres the confusing bit:

COMPASSION:- a feeling of pity that makes one want to help or show mercy.

If you could feel that after you or your children were brutalised,then i applaud ypu,whether i could respect you .... i hope you will never need to find out.

[Beachcomber]

If you could feel that after you or your children were brutalised,then i applaud ypu,whether i could respect you .... i hope you will never need to find out.

As a father of five, I can honestly say that I would gladly pull the lever, that opened the trap-door, that stretched the neck, and send the evil b@stard on the fast-track to Hell, and not lose a moment's sleep over it.

[ionnsaigh]

Jester your not a fool
Fool your not a Jester.

Well your correct up to a point- however your analysis slips down the slippery slope into the depths of subjective sentiment. To show compassion means to see the scenario without letting feelings blind your judgement. It is only in this state of mind that you can show compassion, as the latter can only function effectively within the realms of objectivity. All humans will kill for fun is really another sweeping generalization- we all have the potential to kill for fun ,however very few humans will kill for fun- they may kill through absolute necessity in order to survive, this attribute for that is what it essentially is, we share in common with all life forms. To get back to the real point, you openly admit that you have never looked into the eyes of the victim, the chances are pretty high that neither has Sweltered. To show compassion one has to look not only into the eyes of the poor traumatised victim, you have to look the monster in the eye. One doesn't negate the monstrous severity of the crime because of the human rights of both victim and culprit. To show compassion doesnt include a reduction in our horror of the crime committed. To have the ability to show compassion is a truly valuable ingredient in the pot that makes us- who we are. This can only be seen as a strong, a heavy value based moralistic thread that has been passed from one to another. Put it this way I know what I'd prefer.

[Sweltered]

I just thought you didn't think anyone should take responsibility for their actions, but I see you don't think they should be punished either.

Do you think these monsters felt compassion for their victims! If they did, they should jump in front of a bus the first time they felt the urg to act. There is no excuse, no argument, no treatment for them.

[jester and the fool]

As we live in what is generally accepted to be a democratic society, i acknowledge your right to your views Ionnsaigh,although whether i personally agree with them...well i am able to choose are'nt i.

as a footnote ,if you or any member of your family were attacked would you still be able to"see the scenario without letting feelings blind your judgement"and therefore give compassion? (not going to get a Y/N answer are we)

Anyway i have put my twapence worth in,smaltzy and general,and in bits,in my eyes, misinterpreted.I am now getting dizzy,going round and round the mulberry bush.

As a Post Script can i just say that if you were/are a sales person Ionnsaigh I would not trust you.WAY TOO MUCH GOOBA GABBA (IN THE NICEST POSSIBLE WAY).

a pleasure

jester and the fool

[ionnsaigh]

As we live in what is generally accepted to be a democratic society, i acknowledge your right to your views Ionnsaigh,although whether i personally agree with them...well i am able to choose are'nt i.

as a footnote ,if you or any member of your family were attacked would you still be able to"see the scenario without letting feelings blind your judgement"and therefore give compassion? (not going to get a Y/N answer are we)

Anyway i have put my twapence worth in,smaltzy and general,and in bits,in my eyes, misinterpreted.I am now getting dizzy,going round and round the mulberry bush.

As a Post Script can i just say that if you were/are a sales person Ionnsaigh I would not trust you.WAY TOO MUCH GOOBA GABBA (IN THE NICEST POSSIBLE WAY).

a pleasure

jester and the fool

Aye yer right enough you don't have to agree- that is the beauty of discussion in a free medium. If any member of my family was brutalised I would bay for blood I would subject them to a torturous existence for ever and a day, who wouldn't ? That is precisely the point that I'm attempting to convey. Society in general must for the sake of not encouraging mere retribution have as an external means to view and make objective judgement at that particular point lacking (with good cause) to the victim.

[Annie]

jester and the fool Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 3:03 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I like to keep things simple and straight forward,so forgive me if i come across a smidge confused but bottom line is "Sweltered" is saying move em out,not in my back yard sort of thing.