US watchdog says caffeinated alcoholic drinks unsafe

The question is: If youngsters can have sex at any time and place they want, why is it necessary to prevent them from drinking this kind of beverage?

From an evolutionary point of view, there are no rules to govern the amoral behaviour of people who want to do as they please. Surely it's up to them to decide what they want to do? Who are we to judge what is good for them?

The only reason I can see for trying to prevent people from drinking these drinks is that someone actually cares whether they live or die. And caring is not something that comes in the same breath as evolution. Evolution doesn't care one way or the other - only that natural selection will take care of the weak - they will simply die out. Nature rules.

Contrast this with the caring and loving creator who made us.

The kids that are drinking this stuff are many of the same kids that will be trying illegal drugs and alcohol, regardless if they have this drink or not, which they can easily blend themselves anyway. If we ban all useless and/or dangerous products, there will be nothing left. On a positive note, it is an opportunity for the ruling class to show us how much they really really care about us and please make sure the cameras catch Schumer's good side.

From an evolutionary point of view, there are no rules to govern the amoral behaviour of people who want to do as they please.

That's wholly incorrect. Morality is an evolved mechanism for social cohesion. Ethics is the evolution of morality into communicated guidelines, and laws would be the logical codification of ethical ideologies.

And caring is not something that comes in the same breath as evolution.

Again, incorrect. Caring is a driver for evolution. If you care for your children, there is a greater chance that your particular template will continue onwards. This is potentially part of the reason why Pandas are going extinct. They kill their own children often.

only that natural selection will take care of the weak

Incorrect again. Natural selection takes care of the least adaptable, physical or social strength is but a small portion of that aspect of survivability.

So black coffee at bars and rum and coke are now illegal? Thanks nanny state, I might hurt myself with all this freedom if you don't take it away from me.

What's next, banning books so their sharp corners can't poke my eye out?

Thanks again for showing us how retarded your priorities are, teamObama!

How about instead we:

Control illegal immigration at the boarder and eliminate their incentives to come here;

Stop the massive loss of industry and wealth flowing into China because our "one world" politicians sold us down the river for a few cents;

Put the kibosh on private banking "interests" directing our national currency and corrupting our economic system and force the "Federal" Reserve to be audited.

The question is: If youngsters can have sex at any time and place they want, why is it necessary to prevent them from drinking this kind of beverage?

Sex doesn't generally kill you, and we go to fairly great lengths to promote protection to back that up.

The concern is that people are not aware of the dangers - you probably wouldn't drink 6 cans of an energy drink, why would you do it mixed with booze? They could post warning labels on the cans, but for practical purposes that doesn't work that well and is more expensive in any event.

As Skeptic mentioned, society is build on protecting each other. Stop being a sociopath.

Also, I haven't read the legislation but I'm reasonably sure that
a) they aren't stopping you from mixing it yourself
and
b) there would be a limits on what constitutes "dangerous" anyway. Or at least there should be.

Anyone who is for this kind of idiocy I must assume you're in favor of the continued ban on weed, and of course why wouldn't you be for a ban on tobacco or especially alcohol...oh wait...haven't we TRIED all that crap before?

How did that/how is that working for us?

Contrast this with the caring and loving creator who made us.

Which one was that again? There seem to be so many these days and I haven't met any of them.

The question is: If youngsters can have sex at any time and place they want, why is it necessary to prevent them from drinking this kind of beverage?

Youngsters? This stuff can only legally be sold to anyone of legal drinking age which is a whopping 21 in the US. These 'youngsters' haven't been minors for three years. (Yes I'm aware that underage drinking happens, but that's not what this is about. There are different laws that deal with that)

Have sex at any time any place they want? Indecent exposure law doesn't really make that statement true. Or do you mean any time any place they want within the privacy of their own homes or in the privacy of a hotel room or on their own property if it is not in public view? Anywhere else is pretty much against the law too.

Contrast this with the caring and loving creator who made us.

Which one was that again? There seem to be so many these days and I haven't met any of them.

I think he's talking about your mom. At least that's how I took it. My mom made me, with a little help from my father.

Anyone who is for this kind of idiocy I must assume you're in favor of the continued ban on weed, and of course why wouldn't you be for a ban on tobacco or especially alcohol...oh wait...haven't we TRIED all that crap before?

How did that/how is that working for us?

Stick a box of caffeine pills in a budweiser and tell me how that works out for you. The reason why these are being considered for a ban is the same reason why they don't sell 1600mg aspirin, it's really bad for you and very easy to accidentally overdose.

Stick a box of caffeine pills in a budweiser and tell me how that works out for you. The reason why these are being considered for a ban is the same reason why they don't sell 1600mg aspirin, it's really bad for you and very easy to accidentally overdose.

Oh, of course, how stupid of me...

Two of these drinks will deliver 6-8 cups of coffee worth of caffeine and alcohol close in amount to 4 beers. I guess I can see where the issue arises. I love those drinks, but I wouldn't want to drink more than one, especially after reading a study on what alcohol/caffeine mix does with your brain when you go to sleep. It's just not healthy. Drinking is not healthy in general (but a lot of fun), and these drinks take it to a whole new level. The worst part is I would keep drinking them if I didn't read the research that was presented against these things. I now understand they're very harmful, but I bet most people still don't know or can't understand exactly what sorts of ill effects this would have on their brain/body even in "moderate" quantities (~2 cans)

From an evolutionary point of view, there are no rules to govern the amoral behaviour of people who want to do as they please.

That's wholly incorrect. Morality is an evolved mechanism for social cohesion. Ethics is the evolution of morality into communicated guidelines, and laws would be the logical codification of ethical ideologies.

I see your logic, but ethics and legalities are often hindered by the unethical motivations controlling bodies. consider murder vs the death penalty vs war...same action.

but seriously, mixing stimulants and depressants? Didn't Elvis go out like that? next they will be selling ammonia and bleach in the same bottle for ultimate cleaning power!

From an evolutionary point of view

People that have a delusion that Evolution doesn't exist simply don't comprehend what it can do.

Survival governs evolution. Getting selected out because a drug is being aimed at you IS evolution in action but that does not in any way mean the we humans can't decide the purveyors of said drug are reprehensible.

My morals will not go away just because you don't understand evolution. Morals are an emergent behavior of human interactions and those interactions were shaped by evolution AND learning. We evolved brains AND a sense of how others feel. I have no problem with labeling that sense, morals.

The only reason I can see for trying to prevent people from drinking these drinks is that someone actually cares whether they live or die.

Yep. Which is something we evolved. Caring for other members of our species. It enhances survival in social species. It has been shown in experiments that chimps have a sense of fairness.

Continued

Are you going to claim that chimps learned fairness from the Bible? Especially considering the way fairness is in short supply in the Bible.

Contrast this with the caring and loving creator who made us.

That Bible shows Jehovah, either directly or indirectly, murdering:
All the first born in Egypt
40 Children for taunting a prophet
Two cities that HAD to have children in them
EVERYTHING on that crawled or breathed air that weren't on a boat that weren't on the Ark via a flood that never happened.
And that is without bothering to look for more.

Kevin, evolution is proven to occur. It isn't going to away simply out of aggressive ignorance on your part. Demanding that we join you in ignorance won't change reality.

And I am still waiting to see you even try to support your claims or beliefs with a shred of evidence that can stand up to a moments scrutiny. He you almost never try at all.

When was the Great Flood Kevin? You don't seem to have enough belief to say when.

Ethelred.

Sorry, tried trimming this but it is still two parts.

So black coffee at bars and rum and coke are now illegal?

No. They got threatening letters from people that don't actually make laws. They interpret them. Badly in this case.

It IS generally recognized as safe, for values of safety regarding recreational alcohol. Kalua has been on the market for a long time and Rum and Coke is a popular drink.

So no it's not illegal since the courts will throw it out. Maybe they are just bluffing and hoping no one will notice.

Control illegal immigration at the boarder and eliminate their incentives to come here

Sounds good to me. The Republicans ignored this for eight years. Now they have the chance to ignore it another two at least. The reason they ignore it is that REPUBLICANS hire illegal aliens and don't want the boat rocked. Rhetoric is all you are going to get from either side.

More

Part two

Stop the massive loss of industry and wealth flowing into China because our "one world" politicians sold us down the river for a few cents;

Reagan started that crap, got 5 megabucks from Japan after wards. Industry continues it. So you are demanding that the Obama administration interfere MORE with business than the Republicans have. Not disagreeing with the goal just the way the complaint is aimed at only one of the TWO responsible parties. I know government CAN solve problems.

Put the kibosh on private banking "interests" directing our national currency and corrupting our economic system and force the "Federal" Reserve to be audited.

You do know that this is Nanny State stuff don't you? I guess not. Perhaps you aren't clear on the Nanny State concept. So you might stop using the phrase until you gain a better understanding.

Ethelred

"Forget left or right, democrat or republican, there are only two kinds of people in the world, those that would control the actions of others and those who have no such desire." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Forget left or right, democrat or republican, there are only two kinds of people in the world, those that would control the actions of others and those who have no such desire." - Robert A. Heinlein

Now if people would jsut forget the left or right when they cast such aspersions.

"Forget left or right, democrat or republican, there are only two kinds of people in the world, those that would control the actions of others and those who have no such desire." - Robert A. Heinlein

Now if people would jsut forget the left or right when they cast such aspersions.

Or if people would remember what Robert A. said when they advocate a policy that's about nothing more than controlling people. A healthy dose of introspection is what everyone (left, right, center whatever) needs on this issue.

Three cheers for Heinlein.
I reached that same conclusion after listening to 'progressives' and 'populist' statists here and elsewhere.

Response to Ethelred:

Sounds like we agree on most of it, but you seem too intelligent to really be stuck in a republican - democrat dichotomy when describing the problem. Is the Red/Blue game something grown ups should be playing?

I'm not sure what you meant in your response to my comments on the Federal Reserve; I think I know what a Nanny State is and I argue that a Nanny State for your body isn't too ashamed to be a Nanny State for your economic "protection."

It all flows back into control - A corrupt state must control its captive population because it fears the natural consequences of its evil and foolish behavior.

Petty wrangling like this caffeinated liquor kerfuffle are just symptoms of a much deeper pathology: The government's need to keep the population "children" so their domination of the relationship can be justified by a false parental authority.

After all, we must be protected from our liberties and possessions, just like little children.

Modernmystic said

Or if people would remember what Robert A. said when they advocate a policy that's about nothing more than controlling people. A healthy dose of introspection is what everyone (left, right, center whatever) needs on this issue.

I accidentally gave you a one, sorry about that, a little, because I thinking of Marjon at the time, who clearly has RAH poisoning and never notice that RAH had a lot of stuff just plain wrong, The Crazy Years for instance. However your response to getting a single ONE from me was bit over the top. Once would have been reasonable EVERY bloody post is not something I will take lightly. Heck I would tolerate several and even all posts on this thread because I just plain goofed and that was my fault.

You do realize that this means war.

Ethelred

seem too intelligent to really be stuck in a republican - democrat dichotomy when describing the problem. Is the Red/Blue game something grown ups should be playing?

Not Red Blue. Rational vs. Irrational which unfortunatly includes much of the Republican Party these days.

I think I know what a Nanny State is

We don't have a Nanny State. Take a look at the homeless. People starve to death in this country.

A corrupt state must control its captive population because it fears the natural consequences of its evil and foolish behavior.

We don't have that either. The Soviet Union did and China still does.

The government's need to keep the population "children" so their domination of the relationship can be justified by a false parental authority.

This is a fantasy. You seem to think a couple of idiots constitute the whole government. As I already pointed out it is pretty much guaranteed to be killed in the courts if it is ever put into practice.

Ethelred

People starve to death in this country.

So why do top 'liberals' focus on fat kids and worry about too much salt in food?
Busy body regulators all over the country at all levels try to force their neighbors to live in a why they, the 'well educated' think they should live.

So why do top 'liberals' focus on fat kids and worry about too much salt in food?

Why do you make things up instead of dealing with reality?

Busy body regulators all over the country at all levels try to force their neighbors to live in a why they, the 'well educated' think they should live.

Yes Republicans are trying to cram their religion on everyone else.

So when are you going to stop playing evasion games? And poking at straw men?

Ethelred

People starve to death in this country.

So why do top 'liberals' focus on fat kids and worry about too much salt in food?
Busy body regulators all over the country at all levels try to force their neighbors to live in a why they, the 'well educated' think they should live.

You mean like the republican anti-abortion bullshit?

You simply want people to live your way. That's the only difference between the people you don't like and the people you do. You agree with the ones you do. The tactics are the exact same, except, the "liberals" as you like to call them do go after the middle and lower classes. If you're not rich Marjon, why would you ever vote republican?

Best part of this whole deal is the fact that you're a political hack. You sit on the agricultural commision of a town that's zoned for zero agricultural land. How disingenuous are you?

You simply want people to live your way

Sure, I want everyone to respect life, liberty and property. Don't you?

You sit on the agricultural commision of a town that's zoned for zero agricultural land.

What town is that? That's news to me.

So when are you going to stop playing evasion games?

Yes, whey are you going to defend your statist, socialist positions with data? Yes, please defend the cost overruns at the US Post Office, Amtrak, the union bailouts at GM, the chaos on the US-Mexican border....

Sure, I want everyone to respect life, liberty and property. Don't you?

No, you want everyone to respect your life, your property. No one respects you marjon, because you're a liar.

What town is that? That's news to me.

Chelmsford has you listed in that seat, Mr. Swenson. I'd provide a link but it also has your personal information as well (phone and address), and not everyone is as ethical as myself with other peoples' information.

I want everyone to respect life, liberty and property

I do. I also want the original Pursuit of Happiness. Of course the problem of property owners using it as a weapon.

Yes, whey are you going to defend your statist, socialist positions with data?

That looks like evasion to me. I have most of the world with functioning states.

You have one example of your idea of Utopia. No government, no scary liberals with their awful laws, nothing to stop property owners from doing what they want.

You have Somalia. Enjoy.

Yes, please defend the cost overruns at the US Post Office

Its been effective since Franklyn started it. Does what its supposed to do. Allowed EVERYONE in the US to communicate efficiently and cheaply. Of course it is NOW a bit obsolete. Happens to every business.

Amtrak

Well that one hasn't worked out as well as Hoover Dam or the Interstate Highway system.

the chaos on the US-Mexican border

Which is due to Mexico sucking big time.

Ethelred

Ethelred,

I'm confused by your identifying "Republicans" as a singular entity. Neither "party" has any strong leadership or central will, and even among party members there is no consensus. Instead of focusing on media titles, shouldn't we be considering individual concepts and their merits?

If you don't consider what we have a Nanny State, I shudder to think of the conditions that reach this threshold in your mind. Nanny States are not for the protection of the people, but the protection of the state.

Do you assert that our state is not corrupt? Or that it does not manipulate and control information to avoid the consequences of its behavior? The courts are the protection against this sort of thing, but the federal appeals courts are seeded with apparatchiks and they can hardly betray their friends in power.

Well that one hasn't worked out as well as Hoover Dam

The Hoover dam could not be built today in 4 years.

Does what its supposed to do. Allowed EVERYONE in the US to communicate efficiently and cheaply. Of course it is NOW a bit obsolete. Happens to every business.

Then you support abolishing the USPS?

Of course the problem of property owners using it as a weapon.

If a property owner uses his property as a weapon, it violates the property rights of others. It is function of the state to protect the property rights of all citizens, equally.

Chelmsford has you listed in that seat, Mr. Swenson

Do you believe everything you find on the internet?

FTR:

http://en.wikiped..._Company

FTR:

http://en.wikiped..._Company

More evidence of the govt protecting its power.

Do you believe everything you find on the internet?

No, but I do believe everything that is backed up by public record when it comes to political hack seat holders.

Are you backpedaling because you've been caught describing yourself when you speak of political corruption?

Do you believe everything you find on the internet?

No, but I do believe everything that is backed up by public record when it comes to political hack seat holders.

Are you backpedaling because you've been caught describing yourself when you speak of political corruption?

You obviously believe what you want to believe. Not living up to your name, SH.

I'm confused by your identifying "Republicans" as a singular entity

The block voting and persecution of moderates fits that shoe. Its been pretty narrow for decades and is worse now.

shouldn't we be considering individual concepts and their merits?

I do. What does that have to do with the present level of block voting by the Republican Party? Or the Right Wing.

If you don't consider what we have a Nanny State

If you can't see homeless people you don't live in the United States.

Nanny States are not for the protection of the people, but the protection of the state.

You sure do have some strange fantasies.

Do you assert that our state is not corrupt?

Generally it isn't. I suspect you have a Special Definition of corrupt.

Or that it does not manipulate and control information to avoid the consequences of its behavior?

President Bush did start that with Desert Storm but generally its false. Fox is simply not the only media.

Cut a lot not worth more

Ethelred

You obviously believe what you want to believe. Not living up to your name, SH.

Would you like me to prove my assertion? I have quite the evidence trail buddy, but it all has your personal information attached to it. I wouldn't want to release it without your ok. Especially since it has your home phone and address listed as well.

Ethelred,

I'm afraid the universes we each live in aren't close enough to warrant meaningful communication.

Have a great holiday everyone!

Especially since it has your home phone and address listed as well.

Assuming the name you found is his then I could already get that information. In fact I saw it but didn't bother to do anything with it.

I was not able, in the short time I tried, to actually confirm anything that it had anything to do with Marjon. Unlike the time Barakan posted stuff about Oliver. That I confirmed but it took a fair amount of time.

Be careful what you post. It doesn't take much sometimes. For instance I will NEVER hand out my real name around here. Its not exactly John Smith. There is only ONE person with my name in the world.

Some people aren't even close to rational. At least not when angry. They hold grudges and take them into the real world.

Ethelred

I'm afraid the universes we each live in aren't close enough to warrant meaningful communication.

I knew that. I am into reality and you are into well, you have a problem with clear thought in areas where you have preconceptions that are interfering with your WILLINGESS to deal with the world in a realistic way.

Australia HAS a Nanny State for instance. They don't have homeless people staying in the library on cold days and freezing, even here in Anaheim, at night. They don't have children living in motel rooms using hangers as guns to play. That isn't TV. I see it happen.

The world, even a few miles from the Magic Kingdom, can be a harsh place. Radical Conservatives help make it that way.

The weird thing is that so many of the are Social Darwinists yet deny the existence of Evolution. Really strange that is.

Ethelred

Australia HAS a Nanny State for instance. They don't have homeless people staying in the library on cold days and freezing, even here in Anaheim, at night.

"Charities estimate there are more than 100,000 homeless people in Australia with indigenous people the hardest hit.

This transient population includes families with small children and divorced women as well as those suffering addiction and mental illness.

Some are without a place to stay for a few days, while others spend their lives looking for a safe place to sleep in doorways and parks. "

http://news.bbc.c...4303.stm

Sleeping in doorways and parks, sounds like Santa Barbara, CA.

Well then even Australia isn't a Nanny State. So the US isn't even close.

Thank you

Ethelred