 |
|
03-05-2005, 12:00 PM
|
#31
|
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,887
|
I agree with SMTW....it is not a direct relationship - but I think a preson who uses dope might be more likely to dope horses than one who doesn't. What is so crazy about that? The frequent drug users is already comfortable breaking the law and rules obviously do not mean anything to hims, so why would he not dope a horse? It is not the case of hurting your "pet" but more the case of winning money.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 12:30 PM
|
#32
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,334
|
Tom, if somebody wants to argue that a person who uses drugs may be more likely to also use them with horses, while I don't particularly agree, I can certainly see their point. The law perspective, however, is completely lost on me. Honestly, what percentage of people don't smoke pot because it's illegal? I don't think it's an issue of comfortablility with breaking the law as much as a personal issue of consumption.
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 12:55 PM
|
#33
|
|
Quintessential guru
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
|
I do not smoke pot because it is against the law. If you consume pot you are breaking the law, in other words you are disregarding society's rules to indulge in personal enjoyment of chemically altering your body.
Therefore, it may be concluded if you break the rules for one reason ie. personal enjoyment you may have no reservations about breaking the law for personal pecuniary (personal enjoyment) gain through chemically altering an animal's body.
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 12:58 PM
|
#34
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,334
|
So if pot was legal,SMTW, you would be smoking it?
If you lived in a state where it's been decriminized for personal use you would smoke it? If you went to Amsterdam you would smoke it?
According to the laws in MANY states, oral sex is illegal. How do you feel about that? Are people who engage in oral sex in those states also more likely to drug their horses?
Last edited by the little guy; 03-05-2005 at 12:59 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 01:03 PM
|
#35
|
|
Lacrimae rerum
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: at my house
Posts: 7,308
|
I can't say for sure, cause I've never partied with a horse like that, but smoking out with a horse sounds expensive. Then on top of that, imagine all the oats he would want! 
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 01:14 PM
|
#36
|
|
Quintessential guru
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
|
the little guy:
Apples and oranges on both. BTW I believe the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on oral sex as a privacy issue between consenting adults striking down sodomy laws, that were selectively enforced anyway.
Smoking pot in Amesterdam is irrelevant as the discussion is about the willingness to break laws. The discussion is not whether or not pot is harmful or beneficial if ingested.
The discussion is about the willingness to break rules and this particular trainer has demonstrated his willingness to break rules for his personal enjoyment and gain.
I
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 01:56 PM
|
#37
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,334
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
I do not smoke pot because it is against the law. If you consume pot you are breaking the law, in other words you are disregarding society's rules to indulge in personal enjoyment of chemically altering your body.
Therefore, it may be concluded if you break the rules for one reason ie. personal enjoyment you may have no reservations about breaking the law for personal pecuniary (personal enjoyment) gain through chemically altering an animal's body.
|
I'm sorry, somehow I must have misinterpreted the above statements. I thought you said you didn't smaok pot because it was against the law....sorry for my confusion. I also somehow misinterpreted the second paragraph to understand that you thought if someone breaks the law for personal enjoyment ( which is at least where I place oral sex ) they would have no reservations about breaking the law for personal " pecuniary " gain through chemically altering an animal's body.
I don't know what I was thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 02:31 PM
|
#38
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,636
|
The argument about breaking the law is probably a better argument.
Would the argument change if you lived in a state that had decriminalized it? I think in some western states it has been decriminalized. Also in Maryland, it has been effectively diminished as a crime, because there is a defense based upon a medical need.
The medical needs have been explanded to include like: "I really need it get my appetite back..."
Well not exactly, but close to it. THe effect has been to decriminalize it in effect. Large quantities (over a pound?) will still get people in trouble.
It is also effectively decriminalized in certain towns like where the Univ of Wisconsin or the Univ of Miami of Ohio.
Would horses raised on those areas be less likely to be drugged or more? I mean if your argument has merit than maybe there would be that effect.
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 02:36 PM
|
#39
|
|
Quintessential guru
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
|
the little guy:
You are confused. I was clear I do not smoke pot because it is illegal to do so in the U.S. What is not clear about obeying or disobeying a law?
Your prior argument, which you ignored in your last post, is irrelevant as the activities you referred to are not illegal (oral sex) anywhere in the U.S. maybe that is where you are confused.
BTW I have heard about women performing oral sex on horses and other animals. So maybe this shows what people are willing to do to themselves and with themselves extends to their behavior towards animals.
So what is your point? This specific trainer has shown a propensity to disregard the law for his personal enjoyment and gain. Are you confused because I am not willing to break the law for my own personal enjoyment?
As I stated in response to your question regarding how many people do not smoke pot just because it is illegal, I am one of those people.
The reason I do not smoke pot is because it is against the law in my society and for no other reason.
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
Last edited by Show Me the Wire; 03-05-2005 at 02:45 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 02:40 PM
|
#40
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 283
|
Oscar Barrera
For some reason this thread brings back memories of Oscar. Claimed Shifty Shiek, out of a 80k race and three days later wins a grade 3 race with him. Much talk about drug use with Oscar however I am not sure he ever had a positive test with any of his horses. Anyone know for sure? JimL
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 02:57 PM
|
#41
|
|
Quintessential guru
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
|
JPinMaryland:
No, because it is still illegal on a national level. The individual State may not prosecute you, but the federal government will. So if you smke pot in a decriminilzed State you are still breaking the laws of the federal government.
This is different from the little guy's take about a certain type of sex. That activity was never illegal on the federal level of laws and was only illegal in certain states. Totally, apples and oranges for comparison regarding the type of personality needed to disregard rules and regulations and law breaking.
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 03:12 PM
|
#42
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,334
|
So it is a question of which laws, Federal or State, YOU choose to observe?
Well, now I'm finally clear.
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 03:40 PM
|
#43
|
|
Quintessential guru
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by the little guy
So it is a question of which laws, Federal or State, YOU choose to observe?
Well, now I'm finally clear.
|
If that is what you understand, so be it. I did not make a distinction saying I observe only federal laws and not state laws or vice-a versa.
I unsucessfully tried to clarify the misconception you had about a certain type of sexual activity and I also addressed the behavior of some people towards animals to butress the point that people may have a peopensity to do acts to or with their animals that the people participate in? Strange how you glossed over that observation. 
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 03:45 PM
|
#44
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,334
|
The oral sex law was just a point. I find your entire argument that a person that chooses to break a law ( in this case the victimless crime of smoking pot ) is more likely to break other laws ( in this case doping a horse which not only affects that animal but also has the widespread effects of altering the results of a sports contest ) to be unfathomably narrow-minded, and in the nicest way I can say it, just flat out wrong.
What's next, a person who smokes pot is also more likely to murder someone than a non-smoker? Where does it stop? I don't have a problem with agreeing to disagree, but thinking like yours, at least on this issue, baffles me.
|
|
|
|
|
03-05-2005, 04:35 PM
|
#45
|
|
Quintessential guru
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
|
the little guy:
That is not my point. That is your interpretation. All laws have classifications and differing penalties relating to the enforcement.
Your oral sex argument was apples and oranges on this point too. Oral Sex if illegal was more akin to a traffic ticket than a serious crime. Possession and use of a controlled substance is a serious crime. It takes a certain type of personality to break the rules, laws and risk serious consequences for personal enjoyment. This shows the rules do not apply to me mentality type. This type of mentality is more easily transferred to other type of rule breaking. That is my point about the illegality issue.
My original point about the analogy is also still on the table by the two types of behavior I described.
And smoking pot is not a victimless crime, because of the greed involved, which leads to ancillary crimes against innocent bystanders.
If you ask me you are the naive and narrow minded one assuming I give all bad or illegal behavior the same moral weight.
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
Last edited by Show Me the Wire; 03-05-2005 at 04:37 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
