Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!hoptoad!amdcad!decwrl!labrea!husc6!bbn!uwmcsd1!marque!ddsw1!gryphon!richard From: richard@gryphon.UUCP Newsgroups: alt.flame Subject: Re: Rock concert problems (was Drugs) Message-ID: <1900@gryphon.CTS.COM> Date: Wed, 14-Oct-87 03:44:26 EDT Article-I.D.: gryphon.1900 Posted: Wed Oct 14 03:44:26 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 17-Oct-87 10:45:31 EDT References: <1770@crash.CTS.COM> <61600001@cdp> <1004@puff.wisc.edu> Reply-To: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA Lines: 104 Summary: What you don't know would make a great book In article <1004@puff.wisc.edu> mading@puff.wisc.edu (Eric Mading) writes: >Greatful Dead concerts have been a common source to base arguments for legal- >izing drugs on by comparing them to heavy metal concerts. The real reason thereare fewer problems at Dead concerts than heavy metal concerts is not drugs, but >more so the music played and the fans. Most heavy metal concerts do not attractbikers with long hair; in fact, I think there are more longed-hair bikers at What about short haired bikers ? >Dead concerts than at heavy metal concerts. The problems and violence at heavy >metal concerts is because of the fans (most of whom are in their mid to late >teens) and the music, which is more like screaming at the top of the lead >singer's lungs. Meanwhile, Dead concerts attract an older audience (late 20s- >early 40s) and the Greatful Dead plays more mellow music that some heavy metal >band like Bon Jovi, Motley Crue, or Ratt. > >At most heavy metal concerts, the fans (high school kids drunk on cheap liquor >or stoned on pot or crack) are very rowdy and don't consume as much drugs as >Dead fans (former or current hippies tripping on LSD). But the Dead fans >have more experience with drugs. > >I don't approve of drug use. I believe that alcohol should not be illegal, >because it is harmless used in moderation, and why should the majority of >Americans be deprived of their daily beer because of the one out of seven >who become maniacs when they get drunk. But the same is not true of pot ? > Besides, alcohol is a depressant, >so there would be a lesser chance of problems with alcohol than cocaine or >marijuana, which are stimulants. ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong. Also, I think you'll find alcohol doing more damage than pot. >Caffiene is a stimulant, so we could just >tax caffiene in sodas or coffee. But most new sodas out today have no >caffiene (I think only Pepsi, Coke, and RC Cola have caffiene) Wrong. Mountain Dew and "Jolt"...there are others. > and decaf >coffee is available, so the coffee industry would not object to a caffiene >ban. You can bet your ass that they would. >I would like to see a ban on tobacco, but there are two reasons that >that will never happen: 1) The tobacco industry is too strong to allow a ban Holy shit! A fact! How'd that sneak in here ? >2) Tobacco growing is an important part of our colonial history. If it wasn't >for Virginia tobacco farms, the colonies might have perished. Of course, this >was 350 years before the dangers of smoking were known. But, golly gee whiz Batman, slavery and lynching were an important part of "our colonial history" and *somehow* they got banned. >I would like to see >a smoking prohibition which would make it illegal to smoke, and would allow >only chewing tobacco. That makes sense. It's a lot more plesent death to die from mouth cancer than from lung cancer. > This would not be objectionable to the Tobacco Institute a group of so-called scientists who keep saying that smoking's not dangerous >and cancer-causing while they are struggling with smoker's cough. Wrong again, little one. They will object vehemently to the banning of any tobacco product. > As for LSD, >I think that's a depressant. Ok everyone, all together now, ...one...two...three..WRONG. In fact, Albert Hoffman wanted to see "his problem child" used, in mild doses as an *anti-depressant*. >However, I think we should just leave our drug >laws the way they are. These netters who are posting that drugs should be >legal are drug addicts who should check in to a rehab center. (you have been wrong about everything else, what indication do we have that you are right about this ?) Hmm, I think a lot of netters have just been slandered -- quick, call Lippmans lawyer. Besides, who would be left to post to talk.politics.misc if this really happened ? Golly, I guess the new school year really has started. Get back to church, 'ya little dweeb. Your mother's calling. "Hope this helps" - have a nice death. -- Richard J. Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the keys in my ignition..."