Re: Can a cell phone set off a car alarm?

In article <MPG.1edee0f71db969439896cb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, krw wrote:

(SNIP previously quoted material)

Seems living is illegal in Europe. Having fun certainly is.

I would find exceptions - such as legal drinking ages in at least some
European countries!

Germany - old enough to lift and drink from a beer mug

France - old enough to lift and drink from a wine glass

And I see the USA having more problems with alcoholic beverage
consumption despite laws affecting that more "Puritan" than those of
France and Germany!
(Although USA laws against driving motor vehicles while intoxicated,
despite getting more harsh in the past couple decades, are still on the
"liberal" side compared to probably most or all of Europe!)

Now, I see the USA to change its laws regarding usage of recreational
drugs...

Either make them as harsh as my highschool German teacher said Germany's
were (spend 2 years in "The Joint" if caught with half a joint) or make
them like USA's laws regaerding most recreational laws were in 1900 - when
marijuana, cocaine and opiates were *legal*! There was a time back then
when Coca-Cola legally had an influencing level of cocaine!
This "middle-of-the-road" business of drug laws I find to be the worst
of all worlds - profit motive for criminal gangs! Minor modification
towards more severe enforcement against the supply without doing so
against the demand increases rewards as well as risks on the supply side -
some criminal gangs get more dangerous and more criminal to enjoy the
increasing reward of the higher price from reduced supply - have you heard
of the "law of supply and demand"?

Meanwhile, I have found USA to be divided, among other ways, to be
divided between "puritans" and "freedom-loving outlaws".
And the "cold war" between these two divisions escalated during
"Prohibition" - which indicated that USA had more "freedom loving
outlaws" than "puritans". And the "war escalation" between these sides
during the "Prohibition years" had an effect of reducing "respect for the
law" on the part of a majority of Americans.
Oh, on only on a semi-sidetrack: I have heard of some roots of "NASCAR
racing" being transportation of back-then-constitutionally-illegal potable
liquids having a significant ingredient being ethanol.

Oh yes, back in the first half of the 20th century in USA, the political
party that was more on the "puritan" side was the Democrats!
And, in the times around 1960, consider that back then the Republicans
were truly "fiscal conservatives", and in 1960 people who had the issue of
increasing military/"defense" spending (as well as in general or on
non-military issues favoring higher Federal spending) voted Democrat!
In the early 1960's, it was Democrats who favored tax cuts not matched
by spending cuts as "good for the economy" - while in the early 1980's
Ronald Reagan made that electable by the voters as being on the Republican
side!

Now the Republicans are puritans in the commoners' bedrooms while being
libertarian as to what happens in boardrooms - while Democrats flounder,
try to get success where Republicans did, or get success where they
opposed Republicans in the past, mostly catering to the bribers that see
more expectation of bribing (giving campaign contributions to) Democrats
tahn to Republicans.

This "overall mess" can get fixed by voters detecting and voting for
qualified and "semi-qualified" politicians other than the "usual ones"
that get more advertisements and as a result owe more favors!
Oh, and vote in the "primary" elections!

Also, I do advise to vote for reasons other than "hot button" issues or
for a contestant being able to "read the polls"!

If there is an election contest where the most-advertised distinction
(even if paid mostly by one side) is taking a side on abortion or "gay
marriage" or how-severely-/-how-unconstitionally to persecute whoever
"witch hunts" get most favor from persecuting, I would favor whoever obeys
his/her conscience more than polls or campaign contributors (higher ad
output).
I consider tyrants limited by conscience to have a better track record
on average than rulers and lawmakers that are either (and/or for
that matter) "poll readers" or "owing more favors" (to those who paid the
candidates).

- Don Klipstein (don@xxxxxxxxx)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: {OT} the party of obstruction
    ... One run by Democrats LA and one run by Republicans MS. ... The Democrats can't get out of their own way in the rebuilding of NO. ... "The laws in this city are clearly racist. ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)
  • Re: Note to Swamp (and Phil)
    ... most of the democrats and a few republicans in the U.S. Congress ... live) are not equivalent to gun laws in NYC. ... Most of the 'proposals' restrict the supply of firearms. ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Should Inmates in Federal and State Prisons get Tamiflu?
    ... The Democrats pass idiotic laws, and the Republicans are idiotic enough to enforce them as written. ... So, yeah, the laws are "trumped up", by Dims, and used by "Neocons", who are given the power to use them by the mainstream Republicans. ...
    (misc.survivalism)
  • Re: Trolling Now A Federal Crime!
    ... Democrats had to vote yes to get this by. ... Another reason not to blame only Republicans is that had Al ... are trying to pass laws about it. ... they're trying to tell me were and when I can smoke. ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action)
  • Re: Re: Democrats and Nazis Have a Lot In Common; So Why do Leftist Democrats Malign Republicans as
    ... > National Socialists are certainly not Democrats. ... > not Republicans. ... > Germany. ... Hitler didn't like either of them. ...
    (alt.politics)