# Personal Responsibility is Cool! #173



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

The world seems to be in upheaval and there has to be a reason. Could it be we've all lost a sense of personal responsibility?

https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/dentonandsasshow/episodes/2019-09-10T22_47_24-07_00


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Aldi's is a German Owned Grocery chain that has been in the US for 40 years. Aldi's also owns the Trader Joe's stores.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Way to go, good people of New Jersey!
https://www.dcclothesline.com/2019/...ago-not-a-single-magazine-has-been-turned-in/


----------



## 23897 (Apr 18, 2017)

Slippy said:


> Aldi's is a German Owned Grocery chain that has been in the US for 40 years. Aldi's also owns the Trader Joe's stores.


Not quite correct. Aldi split into two companies - Aldi Nord and Aldi Sud, after the two brothers who owned and ran Aldi had a disagreement about cigarettes. Aldi Nord has Aldi stores in the US whereas Aldi Sud operates as Trader Joe's. But they are two separate companies.

Fangfarrier

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

fangfarrier said:


> Not quite correct. Aldi split into two companies - Aldi Nord and Aldi Sud, after the two brothers who owned and ran Aldi had a disagreement about cigarettes. Aldi Nord has Aldi stores in the US whereas Aldi Sud operates as Trader Joe's. But they are two separate companies.
> 
> Fangfarrier
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Appreciate the correction my good man! We don't shop at Aldi N or Aldi S..but I've bought my fair share of 2 Buck Chuck Wine from Trader Joes in the past!

https://www.businessinsider.com/trader-joes-two-buck-chuck-wine-review-charles-shaw-2019-4


----------



## MountainGirl (Oct 29, 2017)

@Denton @Sasquatch

What change would you propose to give the responsible family member the legal ability to contain crazy cousin Eddie? Eddie has the right to not be contained against his will...and yet, the personal responsibility you promote doesn't (generally speaking) have the legal teeth to do what's needed. Thanks!


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

MountainGirl said:


> @Denton @Sasquatch
> 
> What change would you propose to give the responsible family member the legal ability to contain crazy cousin Eddie? Eddie has the right to not be contained against his will...and yet, the personal responsibility you promote doesn't (generally speaking) have the legal teeth to do what's needed. Thanks!


Simple. It's a cultural change that is needed. Rather than looking to the government to do things, such things should start at the family level. 
Crazy Eddie's family should have a sit-down with him.


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

MountainGirl said:


> @Denton @Sasquatch
> 
> What change would you propose to give the responsible family member the legal ability to contain crazy cousin Eddie? Eddie has the right to not be contained against his will...and yet, the personal responsibility you promote doesn't (generally speaking) have the legal teeth to do what's needed. Thanks!


To me it's really simple. The family has the responsibility to keep Eddie contained. Maybe not physically but they can make sure Eddie can't get his hands on a gun. If Eddie gets his hands on a gun and starts pointing it at people or shooting them then a polite society has the responsibility to put Eddie down. It takes a village...an armed one.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

We kept our crazy Eddie up in the attic. :devil:


----------



## MountainGirl (Oct 29, 2017)

Sasquatch said:


> To me it's really simple. The family has the responsibility to keep Eddie contained. Maybe not physically but they can make sure Eddie can't get his hands on a gun. If Eddie gets his hands on a gun and starts pointing it at people or shooting them then a polite society has the responsibility to *put Eddie down*. It takes a village...an armed one.


Ah see, there's the rub.
In the armed polite society - that would work. But this aint that.
My version of a 'red flag law' - would enable only 'responsible family' to legally quickly do what is needed. *Not neighbors, school officials, a pissed-off ex, etc.*
From personal experience - 'containing' someone (in this case it was a family member) is a complicated process through the courts - which it should be - to protect individual's rights. No easy answers here, and I hope y'all never have to go through it... especially when a 'sit-down' isn't nearly enough. It's a start - but if you have to do more... good luck.


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

MountainGirl said:


> Ah see, there's the rub.
> In the armed polite society - that would work. But this aint that.
> My version of a 'red flag law' - would enable only 'responsible family' to legally quickly do what is needed. *Not neighbors, school officials, a pissed-off ex, etc.*
> From personal experience - 'containing' someone (in this case it was a family member) is a complicated process through the courts - which it should be - to protect individual's rights. No easy answers here, and I hope y'all never have to go through it... especially when a 'sit-down' isn't nearly enough. It's a start - but if you have to do more... good luck.


 Problem here is we are discussing an issue that, with some reason and understanding, could be worked out. But that's not what's really going on. The real agenda here is this being another tool of the Left to confiscate guns, control the masses and keep power.

As with anything they propose that is for safety or "for the children" it's all smoke and mirrors. A trojan horse.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## MountainGirl (Oct 29, 2017)

Sasquatch said:


> Problem here is we are discussing an issue that, with some reason and understanding, could be worked out. But that's not what's really going on. The real agenda here is this being another tool of the Left to confiscate guns, control the masses and keep power.
> 
> As with anything they propose that is for safety or "for the children" it's all smoke and mirrors. A trojan horse.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


 And that's the sad part about it. If it could be kept from being abused it wouldn't be a bad thing. But, it is like you say. Thanks for your reply.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

Sasquatch said:


> Problem here is we are discussing an issue that, with some reason and understanding, could be worked out. But that's not what's really going on. The real agenda here is this being another tool of the Left to confiscate guns, control the masses and keep power.
> 
> As with anything they propose that is for safety or "for the children" it's all smoke and mirrors. A trojan horse.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Indeed! Red Flag Laws have a huge potential for abuse. On it's face it sounds logical, the socialist will make it sound logical and ask who wouldn't agree? why wouldn't you agree to such a sensible plan? It's sales 101. But, you have to ask yourself, who is making those red flag law decisions and what's their agenda? It's not like any other government maintenance program or deep state ABC agency hasn't been subject to abuse of power and corruption, right? It's a very slippery slope and the death knell of this republic.


----------

