Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Chairboy on April 22, 2008, 11:40:51 PM
-
http://www.writeidea.org/2008/04/rep-paul-broun-ga-to-try-to-stop-sale.html
Interesting story, Rep Paul Broun is trying to pass a law making sale of Playboy and other nudie mags illegal at PXs. It's ironic that the very people defending our freedoms (like that of the press) will be victims of such a silly censorship.
-
as far as I recall, someone has been trying to do this since 1979... not saying it couldnt happen..but... they fail at it.
-
I think stores should be able to sell what their customers want, but ... doesn't an owner of a store have the right to choose what to sell?
-
Does the Representative from Georgia own the PX more than the soldiers who shop there?
-
Does the Representative from Georgia own the PX more than the soldiers who shop there?
The Representative of Georgia represents the owners who live in his district.
-
I don't think i ever bought a porn magazine in the 13 years i was in the military. Of course this was before you couldn't go out and have a beer for fear of being harassed by the cops/mps and before the fear of aids set in. What i find funny is he's trying to ban a magazine, thank the lord he doesn't know about the internet. :D
-
Congressman Paul Broun, a Conservative Republican from Georgia has introduced a bill (H.R. 5821) that bans the sale of pornography on military installations.
Why am I not surprised that someone that wants to restrict personal freedom is a Republican?
-
Why am I not surprised that someone that wants to restrict personal freedom is a Republican?
Wait just a minute. Don't forget what happened in 1998 (i think....) when a group of democrats banned all the other mags cept playboy and a few others. I'll look it up, I could be talking out my bellybutton here but I know it happened....I was there.
-
I find the party affiliation makes less and less of a distinction these days when you're talking about Democrats and Republicans. They both seem to be following the same script.
-
I find the party affiliation makes less and less of a distinction these days when you're talking about Democrats and Republicans. They both seem to be following the same script.
Sad but true.
-
Why am I not surprised that someone that wants to restrict personal freedom is a Republican?
The proposal does not restrict personal freedom. It proposes a company policy.
If you can't get them at the PX, there's always a subscription.
>>Oh and in order to become policy, 220 some odd congressmen and 51 senators must agree that it is a good idea. Some of them would even have to be Democrats.
-
Would he even have the ability to do that? All PX/BX facilities are on Federal property.
As hoity toity as I usually sound, I gotta say (as long as it ain't children in the porn) who really cares? They're just nudie magazines.
-
This can't be allowed to happen. It would increase the risk of cancer for all servicemen.
-
Would he even have the ability to do that? All PX/BX facilities are on Federal property.
He can't ban them, but he is a congressman. He can introduce bills; it's what they do. In order for it to pass though, he needs a bunch of other congressmen to agree with him.
-
For maximum effectiveness, our military must be shielded from distractions, including sexual. :salute
-
As a former Marine and Naval Medical officer, I am deeply concerned for the welfare of our troops and their mission.
The article only listed part of his quote -- cutting out the middle. Undoubtedly the liberal press wanted to stack the deck against this Congressman's hard hitting analysis of the dangers of pornography. I googled and found the rest:
As a former Marine and Naval Medical officer, I am deeply concerned for the welfare of our troops and their mission. It was reported by General Petraeus in the recent congressional hearings that due to the hand calluses incurred in many maintenance and field combat roles, some soldiers have become too chafed in their nether regions to comfortably wear their BDU pants. This has led to a serious reduction in mission readiness that stands to reverse the initial success of our surge policy.
While some may argue that the improved grip strength from Playboy related recreational activities provides a combat advantage, the corresponding increase in hair on our fighting men's palms has led to lower practical marksmanship. Apparently, the increase in sweat makes it more difficult to properly grip the rifle. Similarly, at least one tragic rollover accident in the Stryker brigade is attributed to sweaty palm induced failure to grip the control wheel during an aggressive maneuver to avoid a suspected IED.
Were we still poised to fight our Cold War adversaries in the more temperate northern climates of Europe hairy palms might not be a problem, and might in fact be an advantage. A warm, furry hand keeps the trigger finger nimble when it nears zero outside. Had our brave Marines had Playboy during the Korean war, the withdrawal -- or should I say "advance to the rear" -- at the Chosin reservoir would likely have been much easier to endure. But, we cannot always be preparing to fight yesterday's war, and we have to adapt to today's challenges of desert combat.
Most alarming of all, there has been a dramatic increase in the need for corrective vision among the highly trained American pilots and airmen who rely on their vision for both mission success and survival.
Hard to argue with that. Sometimes the rights of those in the military have to give way to practical operational realities.
Charon
-
lol Chairboy. Gave me a chuckle. :aok
-
Was kinda funny in the late '70s and early to mid '80s that Jane Fonda Work Out tapes were not banned from the AFFEES yet when you found one in the PX someone had taken a Black marker to them and wrote either "Traitor" or "B*tch" across the covers...
They didn't sell.
Just an Observation.
Mac