Like the gov can control any of this. The government can not do the job of parents. A lot of people think the gov can regulte morality, ethics and proper behavoir...they can't. It did not work during prohibition, it has not stopped drugs use of any kind. It is a cop out by parents trying to find an excuse...ain;t my fault, the gov should have stopped it...bull.
TheYanks04 wrote:Like the gov can control any of this. The government can not do the job of parents. A lot of people think the gov can regulte morality, ethics and proper behavoir...they can't. It did not work during prohibition, it has not stopped drugs use of any kind. It is a cop out by parents trying to find an excuse...ain;t my fault, the gov should have stopped it...bull.
Agree, but my point is if you want to make an issue that only a small portion of kids do steroids, you need to conisder all drug use.
I agree with Yanks04 that you can't expect the government to have any MAJOR control. I also, don't think you can blame parents 100%, you can raise a kid and tell him all you want about how drugs and things are bad, but if he wants to try something he will find a way no matter how much a parent has told him or taught him. I have seen it first hand.
Phatferd wrote:I don't disagree with you on that. If you want to be specific then we need to look at this WHOLE thing as a DRUG issue in general. I am including alcohol in with drugs.
Even if 2% of kids are doing steroids on a HS campus it's 2% too many. Alcohol is something we will never get kids to not do, and I don't really have a major issue with it. I do think a lot of kids abuse it, but I am of the mindset that you have to let kids try things and learn about it rather than just telling them its a bad thing.
With that said, there are certain things you cannot let kids experiment with, steroids and other drugs are some. If you take your numbers Agnes and include all drug abuse I bet it get's close to 50% and that is the scary issue.
If you are of the mindset that you just have to let kids try things, then doesn't that apply to steroids, too? Seriously, the health consequences of alcohol far, far outweigh those of steroids, so if you are making the decision solely on the dangers of experimentation, you ought to let them try steroids, and make alcohol illegal (note, I'm not advocating that!).
Actually, you can't just add up the numbers because the kids that abuse alcohol make up the vast majority of those who try other substances. So, if you look at the alcohol and smoking numbers, you generally have about the top end estimates of substance abusers.
Phatferd wrote:I don't disagree with you on that. If you want to be specific then we need to look at this WHOLE thing as a DRUG issue in general. I am including alcohol in with drugs.
Even if 2% of kids are doing steroids on a HS campus it's 2% too many. Alcohol is something we will never get kids to not do, and I don't really have a major issue with it. I do think a lot of kids abuse it, but I am of the mindset that you have to let kids try things and learn about it rather than just telling them its a bad thing.
With that said, there are certain things you cannot let kids experiment with, steroids and other drugs are some. If you take your numbers Agnes and include all drug abuse I bet it get's close to 50% and that is the scary issue.
If you are of the mindset that you just have to let kids try things, then doesn't that apply to steroids, too? Seriously, the health consequences of alcohol far, far outweigh those of steroids, so if you are making the decision solely on the dangers of experimentation, you ought to let them try steroids, and make alcohol illegal (note, I'm not advocating that!).
Actually, you can't just add up the numbers because the kids that abuse alcohol make up the vast majority of those who try other substances. So, if you look at the alcohol and smoking numbers, you generally have about the top end estimates of substance abusers.
I wanna make sure that I understand what you are saying. You mentioned trying. Are you saying that you would rather your kid inject steroids once than having a beer once??
Phatferd wrote:With that said, there are certain things you cannot let kids experiment with, steroids and other drugs are some. If you take your numbers Agnes and include all drug abuse I bet it get's close to 50% and that is the scary issue.
If you are of the mindset that you just have to let kids try things, then doesn't that apply to steroids, too? Seriously, the health consequences of alcohol far, far outweigh those of steroids, so if you are making the decision solely on the dangers of experimentation, you ought to let them try steroids, and make alcohol illegal (note, I'm not advocating that!).
Actually, you can't just add up the numbers because the kids that abuse alcohol make up the vast majority of those who try other substances. So, if you look at the alcohol and smoking numbers, you generally have about the top end estimates of substance abusers.
I wanna make sure that I understand what you are saying. You mentioned trying. Are you saying that you would rather your kid inject steroids once than having a beer once??
Look at my last paragraph in that statement. When I was in HS, and maybe it was a lot more recent than you guys, however, times have changed kids are put into more contact with things than ever before.
I don't think kids should try steroids, cocaine, speed, heroin, ecstacy and a list of other things. When it comes to alcohol I don't think you can tell a kid not to do and show him what abusing it can do and expect it will prevent him from ever doing it. No matter how much you preach something, if he is put into a situation and wonders what it will do, he will test it out. I would rather him test it out and get it out of his system in a couple years than have him go through that when he is an adult who needs to fend for himself and in some cases has a family.
Lofunzo wrote: I wanna make sure that I understand what you are saying. You mentioned trying. Are you saying that you would rather your kid inject steroids once than having a beer once??
Read what I wrote: "...if you are making the decision solely on the dangers of experimentation, you ought to let them try steroids, and make alcohol illegal (note, I'm not advocating that!). "
And there's no need to inject steroids. Pills and creams can also be used to deliver them.
So, let's say this: You're 14 year old son is going to a party where there will be either A: free steroids or B: free beer. After which party is he more likely to be alive?
GotowarMissAgnes wrote:So, let's say this: You're 14 year old son is going to a party where there will be either A: free steroids or B: free beer. After which party is he more likely to be alive?
That's a loaded question, there are many factors that go into what makes something safer. Is he driving home from the party himself? Is a Designated Driver driving him home? Are there other drunks driving on the roads? Is he tired after the party and dozing off?
You can't assume one or the other is safer there are other elements to the situation.
Lofunzo wrote: I wanna make sure that I understand what you are saying. You mentioned trying. Are you saying that you would rather your kid inject steroids once than having a beer once??
Read what I wrote: "...if you are making the decision solely on the dangers of experimentation, you ought to let them try steroids, and make alcohol illegal (note, I'm not advocating that!). "
And there's no need to inject steroids. Pills and creams can also be used to deliver them.
So, let's say this: You're 14 year old son is going to a party where there will be either A: free steroids or B: free beer. After which party is he more likely to be alive?
There is a big difference between trying something or abusing it.
Phat.......I was actually quoting Agnes there but I like your last post. You really can't answer that without more information.
Agnes.......Let me ask you this. What is more damaging?? Having 1 serving of alcohol per day for 10 years or 1 serving of steroids per day over the same time period??
GotowarMissAgnes wrote:So, let's say this: You're 14 year old son is going to a party where there will be either A: free steroids or B: free beer. After which party is he more likely to be alive?
That's a loaded question, there are many factors that go into what makes something safer. Is he driving home from the party himself? Is a Designated Driver driving him home? Are there other drunks driving on the roads? Is he tired after the party and dozing off?
You can't assume one or the other is safer there are other elements to the situation.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by TheYanks04 » Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:58 pm 
