Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Loss of Freedoms List (Vanity Post)
Cornpone | 25 Jan 2005 | Cornpone

Posted on 01/25/2005 4:37:42 PM PST by Cornpone

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-265 next last
To: Dan Evans
But I would rather that the 14th amendment were repealed because it gives way too much power to the federal government. We have state constitutions with their own bill of rights.

With the repeal of the 14th Amendment, would states then have the power, under the federal constitution, to again disenfranchise blacks? (assuming they changed their own constitutions).

101 posted on 01/25/2005 10:03:27 PM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet

Why does that surprise you?

If I take my dog to a park I have to keep her on a leash or get a $100 fine if caught. There is no exception to this rule even if a dog is trained.


102 posted on 01/25/2005 10:03:45 PM PST by dervish (on the limb and walking backwards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

San Fran just banned smoking outside in parks.


103 posted on 01/25/2005 10:07:27 PM PST by satchmodog9 (Murder and weather are our only news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: dervish
Well, I'm a dog owner and dog lover, but I guess I don't find leash laws at all unreasonable. I'm frankly glad dogs are required to be on a leash - but maybe that's 'cause I used to jog a lot, and I've run into a few that I wish had been on a leash.

There are off-leash parks in my area, by the way - are you sure there aren't any in yours?

104 posted on 01/25/2005 10:14:46 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Christine Fraudoire is not my governoire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: secretagent

I think the answer is basically yes.


105 posted on 01/25/2005 10:20:36 PM PST by Cornpone (Aging Warrior -- Aim High -- Hit'em in the Head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: secretagent
With the repeal of the 14th Amendment, would states then have the power, under the federal constitution, to again disenfranchise blacks? (assuming they changed their own constitutions).

Yes they would. Assuming it were repealed, do you think there is a danger of that happening?

106 posted on 01/25/2005 10:20:53 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Southack

Gun bans in individual townships are annoying; but my main point is about the loss of gun rights at the federal level. There are plenty of "common sense" restrictions on the ability of individuals to purchase guns, and on the types of guns they are allowed to purchase. Most of these did not exist before the 1960's, and none of them existed before the 20th century. There are now age restrictions, restrictions on buying guns across state lines, and restrictions on ordering guns through the mail. You can't buy firearms without going through a background check to make sure you haven't been convicted of a felony or domestic violence (another "common sense" restriction-----I mean, who is going to defend the 2nd amendment rights of somebody with a domestic violence rap on their record?) There are entire classes of firearms that are now banned. If I knew for a fact that no more rights would be taken away, I could probably deal with it; but I have a feeling that somewhere down the line we'll be taken the way of our enlightened neighbors in Canada, the UK, Australia, etc. We've already taken the first steps.


107 posted on 01/25/2005 10:25:08 PM PST by Junior_G
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Junior_G
"There are now age restrictions, restrictions on buying guns across state lines, and restrictions on ordering guns through the mail. You can't buy firearms without going through a background check to make sure you haven't been convicted of a felony or domestic violence..."

That's too broad of a statement. You *can* buy guns across state lines. You *can* buy guns through the mail. You *can* buy guns without a background check, too. Legally.

Gun shows, for instance. Estate sales. Classified ads. Private sales of guns require no background check, no backdoor government registration of a new gun owner.

Likewise, any firearm made in 1898 or before, or any modern made *copy* of an 1898 weapon or earlier, can be sold through the mail, across state lines, and with no background checks.

So you can buy all of the 1898 Mauser sniper rifles and Winchester repeaters that you care to own. You can buy 1898 six shot pistols, or modern made copies of those weapons, too.

Bankers (i.e. lenders), can even repossess modern firearms, should the debtor default, without a background check.

108 posted on 01/25/2005 10:42:27 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Junior_G
"my main point is about the loss of gun rights at the federal level. ... I have a feeling that somewhere down the line we'll be taken the way of our enlightened neighbors in Canada, the UK, Australia, etc. We've already taken the first steps."

We've already taken the first steps to roll all of that back. The federal Assault Weapons Ban is dead. D E A D. Dead.

The federal ban against arming commercial pilots is likewise dead.

We're voting on new bills this year to prevent the gun-banners from suing our gun manufacturers out of business (needed tort reform).

We've rolled back, federally, the various state, county, and city anti-gun laws that were being used to arrest gun owners from merely driving through certain areas.

...And state after state (now 46 out of 50) has passed CCW laws in our favor!

109 posted on 01/25/2005 10:47:58 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Southack
In 1920, it was illegal for men to buy beer.

Today we can't buy DDT to control mosquitoes and as a result, millions around the world have died of malaria.

In the 1930's, gold was illegal to own ($100 limit).

Today gold is virtually illegal to mine.

In the 1940's, our military was racially segregated and the government mandated at gunpoint how many ounces of sugar you could have in your pantry.

Today, schools, businesses and government have racial quotas and the government mandates how much water you can have in your toilet.

In the 1950's, Blacks were being beaten by policemen, hosed by firemen, bitten by sheriffs' dogs, as well as prevented from even *registering* to vote by Jim Crow laws.

Today, Black families are burdened with crime. Their children are raised without their fathers in dysfunctional families in cities much worse than the 1950's.

In the 1960's, it was *legal* to pay women less than men for the same job

Today, honest businessmen are sued by women for all kinds imagined grievances -- like claiming they are entitled to the same pay for "comparable work".

In the 1970's, it was illegal to drive more than 55 miles per hour.

Today it's illegal to sell a car that doesn't get the proper gas mileage as per federal CAFE requirements.

In the 1980's, it was illegal to use the Internet for profit.

Today the Federal government makes a profit on the Internet.

In the 1990's, it was illegal in most states to carry a concealed handgun.

Today you can't carry a sharp object on an airplane.

110 posted on 01/25/2005 10:56:20 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Southack

We are losing ground on every other issue, though - and it is only because the politicians FEAR us gun owners that they are restoring our rights, not because they believe in firearms ownership.

The right to shoot back at the government when it steps over the line is the most important of all, but if we could organize on behalf of other rights, in a monolithic bloc, the way we have on behalf of RKBA, we might be able to reverse the depradations of our other rights by the statist scum, also.


111 posted on 01/25/2005 10:58:40 PM PST by fire_eye (Socialism is the opiate of academia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"Today you can't carry a sharp object on an airplane."

Sure you can (besides your mind)!

I can carry a knife, pistol, rifle, smoke a cigar, and sip my favorite beverage all while flying *my* plane.

What you are talking about isn't a restriction on private transportation, but on mass transit.

Well, mass transit, be it busses or aircraft (regardless of who operates them), is a lot like being in public. You don't expect to be able to run around naked in a public park, for instance, but you can run around naked inside your private house.

Same thing with aircraft. What you carry in a private aircraft is quite different than what you can carry in some form of public transportation.

So if you want to be free, use your freedom to purchase private property such as your own aircraft (they actually aren't even very expensive if you buy them used).

112 posted on 01/25/2005 11:04:21 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"Today it's illegal to sell a car that doesn't get the proper gas mileage as per federal CAFE requirements."

No, that's not an accurate statement. Vipers, I assure you, do not meet federal fuel mileage guidelines.

113 posted on 01/25/2005 11:06:20 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"Today the Federal government makes a profit on the Internet."

Even if true, that's no loss to your freedom or rights.

114 posted on 01/25/2005 11:06:56 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Southack

The 2nd amendment allows us to bear arms in public places. It isn't restricted to our home or our private vehicles.


115 posted on 01/25/2005 11:11:17 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: fire_eye
"We are losing ground on every other issue, though..."

Compared to women who have the right to vote today that they didn't have in 1910?

Compared to Blacks today who have the right to vote but were prevented from so doing by Jim Crow laws into the early 1960's?

Compared to being able to trade stocks over the Internet today versus going to jail for so doing if you made those Internet trades in the 1980's?

Compared to the 55 mile per hour federal speed limit that lasted into the 1980's?

Losing ground?!

116 posted on 01/25/2005 11:11:58 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet

There are some parks that have dog runs, but not all. People are permitted to walk dogs on these extend-a-leash contraptions that are downright dangerous because they are near invisible and allow the dog to go far anyway. But that's ok because it's a "leash."

I guess this is a narrow pet peave (pun intended) of mine. I have a wonderfully trained dog who I control better without a leash, she heels beautifully, than most people do with a leash. Yet I get harassed when she is walking at my side and we are minding our own business.

I walk her off leash, but because the parks are patrolled, I leash her when I walk in the park. Such is the irony of my situation.

I do sympathize with the hazards of running and dogs and cars.


117 posted on 01/25/2005 11:12:41 PM PST by dervish (on the limb and walking backwards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"The 2nd amendment allows us to bear arms in public places. It isn't restricted to our home or our private vehicles."

Yes, and the 1st Amendment allows us the freedom to disrobe in public, not just in our homes or private vehicles.

118 posted on 01/25/2005 11:13:30 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Car manufacturers are forced to have a minimum fleet mileage on all the cars they sell. As a result, we have a lot of very small cars on the road along with very big SUV's and trucks exempt from the regulations. A very dangerous situation created by the government.
119 posted on 01/25/2005 11:16:35 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"Car manufacturers are forced to have a minimum fleet mileage on all the cars they sell."

Restrictions on *companies* are very different beasts than are restrictions on individual human freedoms.

120 posted on 01/25/2005 11:18:55 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Even if true, that's no loss to your freedom or rights.

Taxation is a loss of freedom. It's money you are no longer free to spend.

"Their is not greater tyranny than to force a man to pay for something he does not want simply because you think it is good for him" -- Robert A. Heinlein.

121 posted on 01/25/2005 11:19:24 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"Taxation is a loss of freedom. It's money you are no longer free to spend."

Indeed. And you'll notice that we've lowered the top tax bracket from 70% under JFK down to almost half that today.

Thanks to the 3 federal income tax cuts under President Bush so far, a family of four earning $40,000 per year only pays fourty-eight Dollars ($48) in annual federal income taxes now (a Tax Freedom Day of January 1).

The estate tax is now dead, again thanks to President Bush. No longer do families have to sell their father's farm simply to pay their estate tax bill.

The double-tax on dividends is almost completely gone now, too.

Thus, we are moving in the correct direction on the tax issue, just as we are gaining back our gun rights, gold rights, voting rights, Internet rights, etc.

122 posted on 01/25/2005 11:23:27 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Restrictions on *companies* are very different beasts than are restrictions on individual human freedoms.

Nevertheless, the manufacturers lost some freedom to decide what kind of cars they will manufacture. And the rest of us suffer because of it.

123 posted on 01/25/2005 11:24:51 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Indeed. And you'll notice that we've lowered the top tax bracket from 70% under JFK down to almost half that today.

But governments still collect about as much as they always did. Inflation continually drives us into upper brackets. Tax codes are so complex that it is meaningless to cite one statistic in marginal income tax rates.

The best way to gauge how much they tax us is to look at how much they spend.

124 posted on 01/25/2005 11:30:50 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"The best way to gauge how much they tax us is to look at how much they spend."

Only if the population hasn't grown, and only if there hasn't been any inflation.

125 posted on 01/25/2005 11:33:32 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Yes, and the 1st Amendment allows us the freedom to disrobe in public, not just in our homes or private vehicles.

Maybe a few horny judges think nudity is the same thing as free speech but most sober people don't think so.

126 posted on 01/25/2005 11:35:41 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Southack
So yes, we are substantially more free today than in 1890, 1934, or even 2002.

Try to own a modern produced howitzer, tank or attack helicopter. In 1890-1933 you had EVERY right to own every weapon the US Army and Navy had.

127 posted on 01/25/2005 11:45:34 PM PST by Centurion2000 (Nations do not survive by setting examples for others. Nations survive by making examples of others)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Compared to being able to trade stocks over the Internet today versus going to jail for so doing if you made those Internet trades in the 1980's?

Of course, today, you can go to jail for selling a stock if you had information that the public didn't have. It doesn't do you much good to be able to trade stocks if you aren't free to use information.

128 posted on 01/25/2005 11:52:51 PM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone
Discrimination implies the right to choose..nothing more. We should all have the right to choose our associations in our private lives.

Yes, giving people the right to discriminate may bring back segregated lunch counters in some towns, but society and the free market has ways to deal with that.

But, as you say, it is much more important that people have the right to choose their associations because it is one of the best ways that free people can manage evil. And it is the best mechanism for the free market to maintain efficiency. A man should not have to worry about being sued because he has too many white males employed on his engineering staff.

129 posted on 01/26/2005 12:07:04 AM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Junior_G
Are you actually trying to imply that we have more gun rights now than before? Prior to 1934, there were no gun control laws whatsoever.


Yeah, but it didn't apply to everyone.


Real men don't whine.

130 posted on 01/26/2005 2:10:37 AM PST by rdb3 (The wife asked how I slept last night. I said, "How do I know? I was asleep!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
But I would rather that the 14th amendment were repealed because it gives way too much power to the federal government. We have state constitutions with their own bill of rights.


I don't think so. This nation has been down that road before. We can study the results.

No thank you.


Real men don't whine.

131 posted on 01/26/2005 2:15:08 AM PST by rdb3 (The wife asked how I slept last night. I said, "How do I know? I was asleep!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone

the complete and total elimination of the 4th,5th,9th and 10th amendments to the constitution


132 posted on 01/26/2005 2:44:41 AM PST by freepatriot32 (http://chonlalonde.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Annie03; AntiBurr; Baby Bear; BJClinton; BlackbirdSST; BroncosFan; Capitalism2003; dAnconia; ...
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
133 posted on 01/26/2005 2:46:35 AM PST by freepatriot32 (http://chonlalonde.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Southack

number of gun control laws in 1792 when the constitution was ratified 0 number of gun control laws in 2005

20,000 any questions?


134 posted on 01/26/2005 3:00:56 AM PST by freepatriot32 (http://chonlalonde.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend

BTTT!!!!!!


135 posted on 01/26/2005 3:02:52 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Likewise, prior to 1986, you could be arrested for merely passing through a city or county that forbade guns...even if your own guns were stored in the trunk of your car.

Got a challenge for you get some guns and put them in the trunk of your car then drive through the city o f chicago and let me know when you do so i can call the police and you can see first hand how free you are to carry guns through citys that have outlawed them.

136 posted on 01/26/2005 3:04:06 AM PST by freepatriot32 (http://chonlalonde.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Kleon

I don't have the freedom to discriminate against homosexuals even though I have every moral and health reason to do so.


137 posted on 01/26/2005 3:05:35 AM PST by thoughtomator (Favorite Dish: Spotted Owl Teriyaki)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: secretagent
Encroachment on the constitutional right to assembly

Examples please.

Churches having to hire homosexuals. No male only clubs although females fortunately still have this freedom. Attempts to ban Christian clubs on public schools. How many examples do you want?
138 posted on 01/26/2005 3:11:32 AM PST by lbmorris11 (America defeating terrorism and Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

I don't worry about responsibility Al Gore said he'd take care of me.


139 posted on 01/26/2005 3:13:22 AM PST by lbmorris11 (America defeating terrorism and Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dljordan

I am 27 and I agree we are losing our freedoms.


140 posted on 01/26/2005 3:21:04 AM PST by lbmorris11 (America defeating terrorism and Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
I don't think so. This nation has been down that road before. We can study the results.

What road was that? The road we are on now is leading us to serfdom.

141 posted on 01/26/2005 8:09:38 AM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: dervish

Did you actually mean "Increased" drinking age?


142 posted on 01/26/2005 8:28:29 AM PST by DuncanWaring (...and Freedom tastes of Reality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: lbmorris11

We started losing our freedoms when we started demanding the government take care of everyone.


143 posted on 01/26/2005 8:30:04 AM PST by AppyPappy (If You're Not A Part Of The Solution, There's Good Money To Be Made In Prolonging The Problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
What road was that? The road we are on now is leading us to serfdom.


Some student of history you are. My grandparents were "serfs" here, if they were lucky.


144 posted on 01/26/2005 8:48:32 AM PST by rdb3 (The wife asked how I slept last night. I said, "How do I know? I was asleep!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone

Mandatory access to sidewalks for wheelchairs.
Laws that require you to separate your trash.
Laws that prohibit you from asking some questions of interviewees.
Laws that require schools to have a girls team for every boys team in a sport.
Union laws backed up by force of government that prohibit a math teacher from coming in early to work with her students.
Random stops of vehicles without a search warrant to look for drunks.
The law that enables police to enter, search and leave your house without you knowing it.

Just a few to start.


145 posted on 01/26/2005 9:21:15 AM PST by The Westerner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freepatriot32
"number of gun control laws in 1792 when the constitution was ratified 0"

How many Black slaves could buy, own, and bear guns in 1792?

146 posted on 01/26/2005 9:23:36 AM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans
"The road we are on now is leading us to serfdom."

Repealing alcohol Prohibition is leading to serfdom?! Legalizing gold ownership in the 1970's is leading us back to serfdom?

Abolishing sugar and gasoline rationing is leading us back to serfdom? Banishing Jim Crow laws is leading back to serfdom?

Repealing wage and price controls is leading us back to serfdom? Eliminating the 55 mile per hour national speed limit is leading us back to serfdom?

Sunsetting the Assault Weapons Ban is leading us back to serfdom?! Killing the federal ban against commercial airline pilots packing heat is leading us back to serfdom?!

Legalizing the ability of citizens to use the Internet for profit is leading us back to serfdom?! Giving women the right to vote is leading us back to serfdom?!

It's no wonder that you 3rd Party types have no national popularity...you have no comprehension of reality.

147 posted on 01/26/2005 9:30:03 AM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone; secretagent; Dan Evans
The constitution explicitly establishes that which cannot be breached by any government entity.

Many of our laws today are unconstitutional. Its just that no one cares to challenge them.
61 Cornpone







The constitution constrains the federal government to specific enumerated powers. Anything else it leaves to the states and the people.

One of the things left to the states: the power to establish state sponsored religions.
68 secretagent






Many states have written into their constitutions, a bill of rights that were very similar to the US constitution. This is not redundancy.

Originally, most of the items in the US bill of rights only restricted the US Congress. If you read it carefully, you will see that the 2nd amendment gives all of us the right to bear arms.
But the first amendment prohibits only Congress, not the states, from abridging religion and free speech.
Supposedly that all changed after the 14th amendment.
95 Dan Evans






True, our Constitution, in Art VI, explicitly establishes that it cannot be breached by any government entity. -- Fed/State or local, ALL officials are pledged to support the US Constitution and its Amendments as the supreme Law of the Land.

"Congress shall make no law" meant what it said, but did not mean that only Congress was so restricted. The 10th made clear that States were also prohibited powers, among them the power to infringe on peoples RKBA's.

After the civil war, southern States were denying freed slaves the RKBA's, under the pretense that the BOR's did not apply. The 14th was ratified to end that controversy.
148 posted on 01/26/2005 9:30:12 AM PST by jonestown ( A fanatic is a person who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." ~ Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Southack; Dan Evans
"Repealing alcohol Prohibition is leading to serfdom?!..."

" “PROHIBITION is better than no liquor at all,” argued Will Rogers, Oklahoma's most famous cowboy. Clever minds in his home state are now hoping another ban on booze will bring better results. Starting this week, alcohol is outlawed from campus at the University of Oklahoma (OU).

The university's president, David Boren, a former Democratic senator, has forbidden fraternities and dorms from having alcohol on the premises (sororities are already dry). Even students who are 21 years old, and thus legally allowed to drink in the state, are now allowed to booze only at organised Friday and Saturday night events. Anyone caught violating this policy three times, on or off campus, will be suspended under a new “three-strikes” rule. (excerpt) The Economist, 22 Jan 2005

149 posted on 01/26/2005 9:42:06 AM PST by Cornpone (Aging Warrior -- Aim High -- Hit'em in the Head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: stumpy

that's beautiful


150 posted on 01/26/2005 9:46:55 AM PST by satchmodog9 (Murder and weather are our only news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-265 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson