Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: texace on June 13, 2001, 02:28:00 AM
-
Is utter crap. What is the government trying to stop? "The traffiking of drugs into this country" So? Big deal. Here's something to think about...
(Based loosly on essays written by Moby on the "Play" album)
I don't think the government has the right to police what I do to my body. If someone does something that jepordizes someone else's civil rights, fine, punish them. But why should someone be locked up for doing something that has no visible reprecussions on someone else.
What I do to my body is my own business and I think the government should just stay the hell out.
I'll problably get flamed or told down, but I wanted to see if anyone has the same opinion.
;)
-
Yeah i know. If the DEA:s budget, which is 1,200,000,000$ would be spent on treatment of hard drug addiction, you could imagine the results of that!
Treatment with legalization of soft drugs and making hard drugs prescription drugs to hard addicts, would end almost all drug crimes which is about 90% share of all crimes made. That would also be quite cheap solution to drug issue. BTW its much more effective, than making US as secure as jails, since theres severe drug problems even in super security jails.
But hey, imagine all those unemployed cops! We wouldnt certainly want that to happen!
-
Nothing inspires citizens to relinquish their rights and money to the government like a war. If the government doesn't happen to have a real war to fight, they just invent one.
-
I've heard (unconfirmed) that quite a large section of prisoners in US jails are there for various forms of drug related crimes, and a good deal of them simply for using drugs. Any truth to this?
-
Drugs, alcohol, smoking, car seatbelts - all those thigs that only endanger the user. As long as I (the taxpayer) do not have to foot the bill for treatment, I do not care what people do to themselves.
A considerable proportion of the inmates in US prisons (around 1/3) are for drug-related crimes because the law mandates mandatory sentence for poseccion of mimiscule amounts of drugs.
miko
-
Santa, not true at all. :rolleyes: It only happens to some movie stars and Athletes. The rest of them out of the publics eye get a slap on the wrist and small fine. :)
Texace, I don't mind grass, but I think if that or all the drugs were leagalized to do with as you please to yourself. I think eventually it would turn into hurting someone else. It could be a family member or a close friend you got caught stealing money from because you lost your job when you dropped a pallet of sheetrock on your boss' foot because you weren't paying attention while you were snuffen a line of coke. Everything has a chain reaction. Drugs is nothing but a chain with an ancher attached to it.IMHO. :D
[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: NHFoxtro ]
-
NHFoxtrot...
Texace, I don't mind grass, but I think if that or all the drugs were leagalized to do with as you please to yourself. I think eventually it would turn into hurting someone else. It could be a family member or a close friend you got caught stealing money from because you lost your job when you dropped a pallet of sheetrock on your boss' foot because you weren't paying attention while you were snuffen a line of coke. Everything has a chain reaction. Drugs is nothing but a chain with an ancher attached to it.IMHO.
same CAN be said for alcohol addiction
-
Tough subject.
I used to be pretty "anti-legalization". I think that all this "harmless" talk is partly wishful thinking. There are negative effects both personally and societally.
All that aside, I had to ask myself this question:
Is it easier for a 14-year-old to get a bottle of bourbon or a baggie of marijuana/line of coke?
I would generalize that it would be easier to get the drugs almost anywhere in the US.
Therefore, perhaps it IS time we once again abandoned the "Prohibition" experiment and put the government in charge of standardization of the product and the regulation of sales and advertising. Think of the tax revenue! :D
"We're from the Government; we're here to help!"
Jokes aside, it is obvious that Prohibition of drugs isn't working any better than it did with alcohol.
It's probably time we "faced the facts".
-
Originally posted by pugg666:
NHFoxtrot...
same CAN be said for alcohol addiction
I agree, Lack of performance, late to work, call in sick Fridays and Mondays. I've been thru that as kid. Now I enjoy my cocktails on my weekends. :D
-
Originally posted by NHFoxtro:
Santa, not true at all. It only happens to some movie stars and Athletes. The rest of them out of the publics eye get a slap on the wrist and small fine. :)
Santa is absolutely correct. My sister is a corrections officer at the facility in Sonora. She estimates that between 60 and 80 percent are there on drug-related offenses.
Since the drug war began, prison business is booming. So much so, that private corporations are now the largest investors in this enterprise.
Regarding this post by Foxtrot: Texace, I don't mind grass, but I think if that or all the drugs were leagalized to do with as you please to yourself. I think eventually it would turn into hurting someone else.
Theft and burglary are still punishable offenses. If you commit a crime to support your habit, you SHOULD be prosecuted regardless of the legality of drug use.
[ 06-13-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]
-
This is kind of interesting in a wilight zone kind of way.
Argument for treatment. Sounds good. Nice touchy feeley type of thing. Main problem is that the addict has to WANT treatment for it to work. Real world parallel is AA for alcohol addiction. Now if the substance was not banned by law, why SHOULD an addict want treatment? After having spoken to seveal addicts, booth under arrest and not they almost all agreed on one thing. The LIKED the feeling of being high and would do it again in almost any way they could. Only ones disagreeing were those who, like the AA patients, hit bottom and wanted to rebuild a life / family.
No victims of drug useage. Nice sounding but flawed statement. That is the same as saying there are no victims of alcohol abuse. There are thousands of people each year who pay a penalty in only one area due to alcohol abuse. That is on the roads of the US. Still better than 40% (probably closer to 60%) of fatal wrecks are "alcohol related" Like many of the other drugs out there alcohol affects the brain. Something that should be clear and functioning to operate deadly equipment in a crowded environment like an urban street / highway. Many other problems related to alcohol such as family / spousal abuse, health issues, lack of self control and violent behavior outside of the family happen due to te abuse of this legal substance.
Lets not EVEn talk about tobacco. Still legal but blamed for health problems relatede to addiction. Think about it. Who would be responsible for the problems related to addiction of other newly legalized substances. Would it be the tax payers, government or business who make /market / tax / provide the stuff that will be the subject of lawsuits over the problems related to the use / abuse of the new legal item? Please don't claim that there are no known health related problems to use of even such minor drugs as marijuanna. Over use of ANYTHING has health problems just like tobacco. Hell even artificial sweeteners have cancer inducing properties if overused.
Santa, the term drug related in regards to prison is very vague. In some cases mere possession of the drug DID result in jail time. Particularly in 3rd offens areas. However, there are many there who committed other crimes while on or searching for drugs. Burglary, assault, murder, robbery and many of these would be considered "drug related" since drugw were either part of or the motive for the actions committed. This does not exclude those who trafficed in drugs getting others to use so they could support their own habit. Starting kids young into the use of "softer" drugs insures a steady resale market. It is not uncommon to see kids even in grade school who have been exposed to or use drugs.
Current substances and newer ones are out there and are being touted as "safe" highs. Ecstacy is one that is big on the "scene" right now. I suppose you could call them new trends. They are still causing deaths due to complications, overdoses and actions taken while high. It's a big deal for kids at raves right now as it has yet to be declared a banned substance. Although that is likely to happen very soon unless it has already been done. Not too sure myself.
I have no idea, really, what shgould be done. I do know that the roads are hazardous enough right now with the impairment of alcohol alone. I have a real hard time with the concept of sharing the road with a large number of people who are using some other substance that has an effect on the brain. I aslo include legal drugs here as well. It makes no difference if the impairment is from legal or non legal substances. The results are just as harmful in traffic.
The next few years are going to be "interesting". I just hope it isn't in the same vein as the chinese curse.
I think it will all come down to a final view of personal responsibility. Are people responsible enough to "police" their own behavior. So far the record is pretty abysmal. I don't know that the "war" is winable but I truly fear the repercussions of an unconditional surrender.
Mav
-
was gonna post picture - never mind :)
instead the great peter tosh!
legalize it, yeah - yeha, and i will advertise it.....
[ 06-13-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
An important thing to remember is that declaring war usually causes the enemy to escalate. The size of the profits available in big time drug dealing has greatly increased the amount of violence associated with it. There was Cocaine use in the US back in the '50's (and well before), but it was relatively cheap, and the market was small. Since the declaration of the War On Drugs, we have Cocaine Barons who could (and have) bought whole countries.
There is no doubt that simply repealing all of the drug laws would not solve drug problems, but fighting an expensive and totally unwinnable war has created a lot of those problems. Another approach is needed, and decriminalizing and controlling them is at least worth a try - it can't do worse than things are now. They could start with those, like pot, that are known to be less destructive than alcohol, and go from there.
- Yoj
[ 06-13-2001: Message edited by: Yoj ]
-
I think it strongly depends upon the situation and drugs involved. As it stands, it would probably be best for drugs like weed to be legalized and government regulated. For anything like cocaine, crack, speed, ecstasy, heroin, etc, there is no way in hell I would support legalization of these things. Frankly, they scare me sh*tless.
Marijuana (sp?) is no more dangerous than alcohol; less so, on a social level. But when you move into "hard" drugs, they are far too harmful to not just the user, but those around him/her.
It's not a matter of the government controlling what you do to your body. In the long run, it has ZERO control over that. It certainly doesn't stop people from getting high, does it? It's a matter of protecting the people around you.
-
Well..they legalised drugs here in January (only light ones)
<looks out of the window>
...
I see nothing changed :D
Saw
-
Reposted from another thread: http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=002163 (http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=002163)
The following is my view and what I, backed up by a thorough study and facts, of Marijuana and why I believe it could be legalised. Other drugs, those are a gamble.. and you are gambling with your life!
"Now I meant no disrespect to you and I understand your position. I'm just going to lay it all out on the table though, so you can understand where I am coming from.
I've SEEN alchohol take one of my parent's lives at a very early age. It's not pretty sitting next to your parent that is bloated and yellow with jauntice from a failed liver at the age of 12. I can guarantee you, alchohol is by far 100times more damaging to the body than marijauna is. Unless that marijuana is laced with something or has been sprayed with something.
I've had my fair share of drugs... LSD, Mushrooms (psylosomethingerother), MDMA/MDA(Ecstasy), speed, alchohol and marijuana. I won't touch heroin, cocaine, or PCP.
You can overdose on all of the above, except for one. Which one?
Marijuana.
Marijuana, if used regularly, thickens the cells walls of your mind. However, the effects dissipate if a period of time without using it goes by. The period of time is dependant entirely on how heavily you use it and how often you use it.
There are as many carcinogens in joint of marijuana as there is in a pack of 20 cigarettes. If used with alchohol, the damage on your liver increased 10 fold.
NOW, if you eat marijuana, in spaghetti sauce or brownies or whatever, the damage to yourself is nill.
In the end, if used properly the damaging effects of marijuana are FAR FAR less than that of the two substances currently circulating the USA as "legal" drugs- Tobacco and Alchohol. The damage to your lungs from Tobacco (and the other chemicals they throw in there) is irreversible. After 10 years, the damage to your lungs from smoking marijuana begins to reverse itself and slightly rejuvinate. Never all the way, but the chances of getting cancer from it are FAR less than that of smoking tobacco.
Alchohol, well you are just pulling punches with the devil right there. If you overdose on alchohol (alchohol poisoning) you need to go to the hospital IMMEDIATELY. If you don't, well you'll either be walking around with a half functioning liver, brain dead or be dead.
In the end it really matters nothing whether they legalize it or not. It'll always be around, and it's EASIER for your KIDS to get marijuana than you could ever imagine.
You make something illegal and the people that are drug running will simply target the most susceptible group, that being children.
It's just as easy for your kids to get marijuana as it is for them to get cigarettes or alchohol when they are underage. I'm not saying legalizing it will reverse that, but it's something to think about.
Yes, I have been arrested for marijuana. While it's "the law" not to smoke marijuana, it's rather redundant. I can see laws for shooting someone, carrying a knife around, or something that otherwise affects someone else. But seriously, you are targetting people because they feel like experiencing something?
If you (not you ammo, general) like to drink and enjoy getting drunk, who are YOU to say that *I* or someone else can NOT get high? You are a hypcrite and utterly ignorant of what you are fighting. (again, not you ammo)
I don't want drugs legalized, but I would like to see marijuana legalized in my future. (I'm young, so I can wait till my generation is in government offices! ;-)
Half of these so called "facts" floating around government offices on "faq sheets" are blown up with misnomers and lies.
You know why marijuana is illegal? Someone decided it was a good idea to fill the television airwaves in the '20s with propaganda that kids will beat their mothers up to just "get high".
Lies, misnomers and general misedjucation... but I digress.
If it's something you like doing and you hurt no one else (victimless crime), man you really should be allowed to it. Kind of like organized religion, you know..."
-SW
-
Originally posted by Saintaw:
Well..they legalised drugs here in January (only light ones)
<looks out of the window>
...
I see nothing changed :D
Saw
AFAIK Belgium only decriminalized posession of cannabis. To get all the positive results sales should be goverment controlled like in Holland.
:rolleyes:
[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: mora ]
-
I say legalize 'em all. Sure the hard stuff is dangerous. If someone is dumb enough to OD on something, better off for the gene pool I say! ;)
As for the argument of driving under the influence (of ANY substance that impairs your ability to operate a vehicle) I say up the penalties. One strike and you're out. License revoked, car impounded, and jail time. That's just if you're pulled over without hitting anyone. You hit a car while DUI, it's attempted murder. You kill someone while DUI; it's premeditated, IMO. As it is now, people can rack up multiple DUI's and still be free. Some lawyers handle nothing but DUI cases! Why? Because people will pay you to get them off easy!
If people want to be dumb and slowly (or quickly) kill themselves, hey, more power to them. Only punish them (and do it severely) when their "recreations" hurt other people.
As to the effects of my ideas? I dunno. I do know less people will be arrested for just possessing/purchasing drugs.
BTW, I feel the same way about prostitution. If someone doesn't respect themselves and wants to sell their body for sex, let 'em! If someone is dumb enough to go screw someone that gets screwed daily by a different person each day, let 'em! We let women have sovereign control of their bodies when they want to abort unborn children, why do we tell them they can't use their bodies to make money? Why do we tell them they can't take drugs, but they can drink/smoke themselves to death? Makes no sense to me where we draw these lines.
-
Swulfe, you forgot to mention... Marijuana does permanent damage to your short-term memory. Not a major medical problem, but not a good thing, yes?
-
Swulfe, you forgot to mention... Marijuana does permanent damage to your short-term memory. Not a major medical problem, but not a good thing, yes?
Whotta crock of toejame!
Now; where in hell did I leave my papers?
-
Originally posted by ispar:
Swulfe, you forgot to mention... Marijuana does permanent damage to your short-term memory. Not a major medical problem, but not a good thing, yes?
Actually, the new research has found that this is not true at all. The damage isn't permanent.
Heard this one the other day... Marijuana users consume 40% more calories than non-users, but the obesity rate (don't recall the figure) is much lower.
WRT consensual crimes, I'm against all of them. I think most if not all of them have some sort of legislative morality bent to them. The government really shouldn't concern itself with: what the people put in their bodies, what two consenting couples do in the privacy of their own home, whether you bought the woman a house so you could have sex with her or you just handed her $100, or how much you paid for that concert ticket.
-
Neg Ispar, government funded studies and solo-scientist's studies have proven that the thickening of the cell walls that make up your short term memory begin to reverse itself after you discontinue use of marijuana. It can take up to 2 to 15 years for the effects to lessen by 70%, but by that point old age might have already ravaged your mind to a useless state! ;)
-SW
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
Neg Ispar, government funded studies and solo-scientist's studies have proven that the thickening of the cell walls that make up your short term memory begin to reverse itself after you discontinue use of marijuana. It can take up to 2 to 15 years for the effects to lessen by 70%, but by that point old age might have already ravaged your mind to a useless state! ;)
-SW
I wouldn't give much credit for a US goverment(DEA) funded study in this issue. No matter what the outcome is.. :D
[ 06-15-2001: Message edited by: mora ]
[ 06-15-2001: Message edited by: mora ]
-
Legalize it all. Drugs, prostitution, gambling, in general anything that affects an individual because of that individual’s decision. I don’t need to be saved from myself. The process of evolution and natural selection should be enough.
Did I also mention tax the hell out of it?
Oh and Hangtime, get yourself a bat and you wont have to worry about them papers ;)
Zippatuh
-
This is part of a post I made on AGW. But it would seem to fit here. BTW, I've now graduated from law school and am studying to take the Bar in AZ.
Let me preface this by saying that in my time at law school I've worked for the US Attorney's Office prosecuting misdemeanors, including drug offenses. Right now I'm working for the San Francisco DA's office. And I'm helping prepare the prosecution of a murder case where the defendant was a habitual drug user and was one a three day meth-amphetimine binge when he beat his girlfriend's head in. My father is a Asst. County Attorney in Arizona and has worked with the SouthWestern Border Alliance which is a multi-departmental organization fighting drugs in Arizona, California and New Mexico. Of his two best friends, one is a DEA agent and the other is getting ready to retire from the US Customs service. Both of these men have spent their lives as local and government law enforcement officers. All of us have been, in one way or another, on the "front lines" of the drug war. And they all feel the same way I do.
The biggest cause of crime in the US and the biggest waste of our money is the "Drug War". The US spends over $400 billion every year on this rat hole. A Asst. Dist Attorney I work with said it best, "If they could show me that just 50% of the drugs on their way to our streets are being stopped, I'd say it was worth it. But they can't. If more than 6% of the drugs bound for the US are stopped, I'd be suprised."
Now what does this have to do with gun crimes here in the US (what it has to do with the amount of money used to fund para-military police forces and crime in third world countries is a whole other subject. See: Why the War on Drugs has Failed)? Simple.
Do you know that the US has seen per capita murder rates just as high as the 1980's and 90's? Yep, during the 1920's and early thirties. An average of 8.27 murders per 100,000 from 1920-34 and 9.48 per 100,000 for 1980-94 (National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics, Revised, July 1999). Now what do these two periods of time have in common? A war on drugs. A war on booze and a war on cocaine. The fact that criminal elements had taken control of a major aspect of society and were willing to kill to keep it. One war the government was forced to admit has failed, one it is afraid to.
So here is my contention. End the War on Drugs and you will reduce violence as a whole and as a part of that, gun violence. I'm willing to bet cash money that gun violence would be reduced by 70%.
Look back at the amount of money the government wastes on the Drug War. And the drug industry continues to make $400 billion a year. Hell, place drugs under the FDA and make sure they're quality. Right there you save money on bad trips ending up in the hospital (which cost the taxpayers). Then tax the bejeezus out of it the same way we do booze and cigarettes. Make it illegal for people under 21. Can you imagine the amount of money you'd make?
Think about what that money could be used for. Billions of dollars for schools for the improvised inner cities where most of this violence takes place. Better schools and education. Give these kids something else to do besides shoot each other over turf and drugs. Pay for rehab and prevention. Right now most of the prevention and rehab centers are paid for by taxpayers. And they are underfunded to the point of being almost ineffectual. Pay for daycare and healthcare. Pay for programs to teach skills. Give these kids some hope for the future. A place to belong besides the gang. Pay for more teachers and counselors and maybe things like Columbine and San Diego might be prevented.
You do that and you reduce the feeling these kids have that they must kill to prove themselves. Or to pay for their drugs. Or gain acceptance by their gang. It is the only way. And when you've done that, you've reduced the amount of violence period. Because, while school shootings get the headlines, the real problem is in the inner cities. Reduce the violence there and you'll see a huge reduction across the board.
I'll say this again, you legalize drugs (and control them) and you'll reduce violence, including gun violence, by 70%. And if we do that we wouldn't be having this conversation because it wouldn't matter if I had guns or not.
Let me leave you with one thought. Never in the history of mankind has a disease been cured by attacking the symptom. You may hide it. You may even help people forget it's there. But it will never be cured that way. Ever. It will continue to be a problem until it kills you.
You must attack the cause. Or else you waste your time.
On June 6, 1998, a surprising letter was delivered to Kofi Annan, secretary general of the United Nations.
"We believe," the letter declared, "that the global war on drugs is now causing more harm than drug abuse itself."
The letter was signed by statesmen, politicians, academics and other public figures. Former UN secretary general Javier Perez de Cuellar signed. So did George Shultz, the former American secretary of state, and Joycelyn Elders, the former American Surgeon General. Nobel laureates such as Milton Friedman and Argentina's Adolfo Perez Esquivel added their
names. Four former presidents and seven former cabinet ministers from Latin American countries signed. And several eminent Canadians were among the signatories.
The drug policies the world has been following for decades are a destructive failure, they said. Trying to stamp out drug abuse by banning drugs has only created an illegal industry worth $400 billion U.S. "or roughly eight per cent of international trade." The letter continued: "This industry has empowered organized criminals, corrupted governments at all levels, eroded internal security, stimulated violence, and distorted both economic markets and moral values." And it concluded that these were the consequences "not of drug use per se, but of decades of failed and futile drug war policies."
- Source: United Nations Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention, Economic and Social Consequences of Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking
The actual number spent by the Federal Government domestically to fight drugs is 19.2 billion (Source: Office of National Drug Control Policy)
Then you throw in $273,841,000 that was given to other countries by the State Department ( http://www.state.gov/g/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2000/index.cfm?docid=887 (http://www.state.gov/g/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2000/index.cfm?docid=887) )
Plus $8 billion spent on drug offenders in prision (a whole generation of black Americans) - (Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Profile of Jail Inmates 1996) Now realize that this number is 5 years old, so that it may be up to $10 billion.
So that adds up to roughly $30 billion. Which is still a hell of a lot of money. Right now the Department of Education's budget is $38 billion (Source: US Dept of Education Budget Office)
-
PS, go read a book called "Desperados" by Elaine Shannnon.
She was working for Newsweek and went to Mexico to cover the death of Enrique Camerana. He was a DEA agent in Guadalajara who was kiddnapped from the DEA office's parking lot, tortured horribly and who's body washed up on shore a week or so later.
She ended up writing a whole book about the "Drug War". And the failure it is.
-
Is this a joke?
http://www.salon.com/ent/music/feature/2001/06/20/rave_feature/index.html (http://www.salon.com/ent/music/feature/2001/06/20/rave_feature/index.html)
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: mora ]
-
No - its just sad. And more evidence of the persistance of wrongheadedness.
Unfortunately, with this "war on drugs", the politicians have boxed themselves in. After decades of demonizing all drugs (except the ones that are okay), no politician wants to be the first to say "hey, we made a mistake". You can be sure their opponent would leap on that with both feet in the next election and yell "soft on drugs" and "endangering our children" and so on.
- Yoj
-
No, not a joke. It didn't mention another substance often masqueraded as MDMA (ecstasy). Rat poison.
This is because there is no regulation. But with substances like this, what else is there to do. Scary stuff!
-
I am proud to say that we are at the moment the NR1 supplier of XTC in the world!!!
The netherlands this is.
I think that when drugs are mentioned, it should also include alcohol and even coffee and sigarettes.
Governments are spending way too much money on drugcontrol. I mean, whatever people want to have, they WILL get it, not matter what.
Some countries have death penalties for alcohol and drug abuse, i say abuse because they call it that way.
People will still keep smugling because there will always be buyers.
The US should put money in gun control, this is some serious problem in the US in my eyes.
I realy don't wanna argue with someone who keeps a gun at home. He may be waiting for me with it if i insult him. Too big a risk.
But then again, i did not grow up with guns around me. People in the US are probably used to it.
The constitution was an ok rule when it was written, but this is the year 2001 guys!!!
Back to drugs, i think people should grow their own dope.
It is realy easy, i have done it myself and it was good. :)
If the government legalizes drugs, they can control it and they can put tax on it. This will be one hell of a money input for the country, realy! Just like fuel and cigarettes.
I think the US and some other countries have to go a long way, they should also take another close look at this censored music thing.
There is this song from Wheatus, "teenage dirtbag" which comes from the US. The word gun has been replaced by some mumbling.
For christ's sake, are we not allowed to know the gun?????
Not to mention other songs.
This scares the hell out of me, freedom of speech huh??
Well, to all the people who are trying to limit us; SUCK MY ASS!!!! :)
This is starting to look like Joseph Goebbels's job in ww2 for the nazi regime.
People were also kept dumb back then.
Greetings,
Stefan.
-
Hmmmm. Ok, I'm British but have lived in the Netherlands (Amsterdam) for 2 years now......I thought I'd gotton used to the strange way Cloggies construct sentances in English, the wierd mindset, the odd points of view, the "Is not possible" response when they havnt understood you.......however, with regard to the above post I'd just like to say: What?
(http://www.swoop.com/images/logo_small.jpg)