My money's on Mr Fabulous. If that's not a rockin' wrestling' stage name I don't know what is.
Alcohol fuelled violence
- Thread starter moyjos
- Start date
My money's on Mr Fabulous. If that's not a rockin' wrestling' stage name I don't know what is.
I grew up in this environment,and got the "cuts" more than once and the beach bat in primary school,it does teach you respect.
We have turned soft to any form of punishment because of all the do gooders.
Saw an article in Sunday's paper about a teacher who has been verbally abused, spat on, punched, kicked and generally treated like a punching bag by a small minority of students.
Finally - after being punched, spat and told to f*** off by a student refusing to work in class, he put the student in a headlock when the student tried to punch him again ... and then the teacher was sacked!
What a stupid world we are coming to - that a student can treat a teacher like that and be kid-gloved!
We need more teachers like that IMO. Probably the first discipline the kid's had in his life.
Apparently police are now discovering the prevalence of steroids and drugs in the offenders (mainly steroids) which indicates very low self esteem - which is a trait of most bullies.
Also, once upon a time there were unwritten rules about a bit of biffo - two guys, outside by agreement, above the belt, stopped when one guy had had enough ... none of this stomping or group or continuing after a guy is down stuff ... unfortunately, through fear of intervention by society as a whole has made it acceptable ... if everyone in the immediate area stood up and said "no" thru their actions, then it would again become unacceptable ... no point in just one person saying "no", it has to be all.
And - although so many are to PC to say - it is also shown that most of these young men come from either abusive homes or, very much so, from single parent mother home ... they have no positive male roles models in their formative years ... if their only male role model is dad (or mum's latest boyfriend or no role model at all) who drinks til passes out, hits, swears and does drugs, then it is learnt that this is what "men" do.
Early self-esteem and purpose-in-life intervention is required ... not helped by the rapidly changing "role" of men in society - no longer are they simply the breadwinner ruling the family roost with discipline.
Last edited:
I find it strange how we have lots of restrictions on where we can buy alcohol, and it's very expensive, yet we still have these problems.
In Brazil alcohol is very cheap (even by local standards - 750ml of 40% sugar cane spirit for $3 anyone?), can be bought very easily at petrol stations for example at all kinds of hours and they don't seem to have the same issues (although they have many other).
What is it in our culture? Are we bored/unhappy?
In Brazil alcohol is very cheap (even by local standards - 750ml of 40% sugar cane spirit for $3 anyone?), can be bought very easily at petrol stations for example at all kinds of hours and they don't seem to have the same issues (although they have many other).
What is it in our culture? Are we bored/unhappy?
What?
We should hold ourselves to Brazil standards? One of the most violent and poorest countries on earth. They have enormous problems with drugs, crime and alcohol. The two countries couldn't really be any different...
From the second paragraph in Wikipedia page on: Crime in Brazil: "It is believed that most life-threatening crime in Brazil can be traced back to drug trade and alcoholism."
Years ago I used to teach golf at High Schools to Year 9 and 10 kids.
It was an initiative organised through the VGA (Vic Golf Association) and we got paid by them as a contractor.
The schools were given the Golf Coach's number and arranged lessons directly with them/us.
One day, I was working with a group, and in typical fashion; a number of the boys of this age group were often smart arzes and know-it-alls....disruptive, disrespectful and so on.
Some of the girls were no better - but usually the boys were the trouble.
I learned to recognize the troublemakers pretty early in the classes, and separated them, and the rest was smooth sailing to a degree.
This one particular day, there were a couple of cool dudes up the end of the line (I hadn't separated them as yet), and instead of hitting balls down onto the footy oval in front of them, they decided it would be way more cool to turn 90 degrees and fire their balls over onto the tennis courts where other kids were playing tennis.
They were doing it only when they thought I was not looking of course, but what they hadn't realised was I had learned long ago that I needed to be up one end of the line working with some kids, but watching the other end of the line for just such instances.
So, I ejected them from the class and told them to go and report to the Principal.
They proceeded to tell me to get farcked, and said that I couldn't eject them from the class. Then laughed.
Then I informed them that I did not work for the school; I worked for me.
So, I'm the boss of this caper and you are expelled.
You have never seen a quicker reversal of attutude in your life, but it was too late. I said "Put the clubs down, and go to the Principal's office now, or I will go myself and this class will be over."
The whole group was pin-drop quiet and these two heros then headed off to the office for whatever was to happen. Probably nothing, but they were gone from my sight, and a bit embarrassed into the bargain..
The Class then proceeded in relative peace and enjoyment from then on....model behaviour.
The difference was only because they knew I was not part of the school system, and not bound by their rules and regs.
Interesting thing is when the price of cigarettes when up thought the roof
Sales figures stayed the same but sales figures for bread and milk went down
Go Figure
I remember Economics 101. There was a thing called price elasticity of demand- which measures how people respond to changing prices. Alcohol, cigarettes and petrol were comparatively inelastic- which meant that people tended not to change their consumption much with a change in price. This was a reason why those products tended to be targeted by governments for taxes.
There is far too much money for the government to lose if they outlawed smoking.
Simple economics.
Then why are they trying and succeeding to decrease smoking rates?
I guess it depends how long it takes for the cancer sticks to get you
It will happen one day, most public areas are now off limit, can't even smoke in your own car in certain circumstances.
They collect money in the short term but have to pay out for health care in the long term. I don't know which is the higher.
And yet I saw an article several weeks ago claiming that smoking wasn't bad for health at all. My uncle, who died from smoking related emphysema, would have been interested to know that.
And yet I saw an article several weeks ago claiming that smoking wasn't bad for health at all. My uncle, who died from smoking related emphysema, would have been interested to know that.
Because you can treat smokers how you want in terms of increasing tax revenue from them and they will come back for more.
A few tweeks around the edges and people will think you are a champion of public health. It's an easy political victory.
FWIW I'm an ex-very light smoker, who is in favour of the banning of smoking indoors in public areas. But geeze, the moral highground brigade are pretty tedious. Live and let live. Smelling smoke is not going to kill you.
Lots of different economic measures and studies have been done and it depends on what point they are trying to prove.
In terms of straight health costs, smokers easily pay their way. Well above their way in fact, and are less of a drain on the health system than people who for instance play rugby and get injured.
Long term, if loss of future income is taken into account it is more expensive, but then future medial costs (e.g. dementia care etc) should also be taken into account.
I can sorta understand the older folk smoking and not giving up due to addiction...I see loads of them still choofing away irrespective of the cost to their health and their wallet etc - not as much info available for them in the old days.
(My mum died of smoking related lung cancer at aged 67 a few years ago)
But the younger kids (teenagers)...it's incredible that they smoke in this day and age given the volume of bad press, and info about the dangers and so on.
Just the pictures on the packets would make me think "No more; I don't want to be a total idiot."
(My mum died of smoking related lung cancer at aged 67 a few years ago)
But the younger kids (teenagers)...it's incredible that they smoke in this day and age given the volume of bad press, and info about the dangers and so on.
Just the pictures on the packets would make me think "No more; I don't want to be a total idiot."
But smokers are not coming back for more. Of course some are and some always will but overall rates are decreasing - that's a fact. If the government wants people to continue smoking then why are they trying (and succeeding) to stop people smoking - you're argument doesn't make sense.
Not taking a moral stance on it at all. I'm an ex-smoker and couldn't care less what others do to their body, but I have to say I'd rather they eventually got rid of it. I don't mind the odd smoke but I'd rather my children never had the option, it is a filthy and expensive habit and you don't realise how disgusting it smells and looks until you stop.
If the government was serious about stopping people smoking they would make it illegal - just as they did with synthetic drugs.
But, it is too profitable and tobacco companies are too powerful, so it won't happen.
And apologies - I wasn't trying to imply you were that kind of person. I had a longer post I edited down and so the meaning was lost.
But, it is too profitable and tobacco companies are too powerful, so it won't happen.
And apologies - I wasn't trying to imply you were that kind of person. I had a longer post I edited down and so the meaning was lost.
How's that working out? Not very well.
How illegal? Lock up in jail illegal? Or speeding fine illegal?
No way, they cant just turn around one day and say "smoking is illegal from today onwards", it's been ingrained in our culture for far too long for this, there would be outrage from a significant minority of voters.
In my opinion they'll reduce the numbers until smokers are less than 5% of the overall population then look at getting rid of it (I think it's around 15% now). They aren't going to want to keep on spending the millions and millions they currently spend trying to stop youngsters from taking up smoking and encouraging people to stop smoking.
