The terms I recognize only too well, meant to give us all a much needed sense of security and safety; terms such as "strict measures," "regulations" and "close scrutiny," only serve to further confuse and concern me, now that I have some life experience. It took me far little time and energy than I'd expected, to find a number of reliable sources on the subject of emerging and undetectable pathogens. As it turns out, we are pitifully ill-equipt, our bodies and our minds, and certainly our actual equipment, even having excellent people in the field, to detect, identify, or certainly to eliminate, the number of pathogens that are developing as we read this article even. There is no comprehensive, or accurate test; there is nothing reliable for us to look to or work with or plug in, that can promise the eradication of or even treatment for or even to somewhat predict, the number of emerging infectious threats. Sadly, the one thing that we are figuring out, after generations of collective experience, is that if a food is grown organically by local farmers that we know, or ourselves, we have a healthier option than the one that is grown out of chance and hope for the best. We have learned that processed foods and massive amounts of sugars, syrups and sodium, are harmful. We have figured out, just by looking around us and feeling our own bodies, that there is something wrong with the trust we have so quickly and so willingly put into those whose businesses are for profit. So I suspect that we are going to have to think more like the "buyer beware" libertarian idea, however unappealing this is, and research every place we get our food. And we cannot accept food grown in anything that comes with it promises of "strict measures," "regulations," and "close scrutiny."
If you will do your homework, you will find that the pharmaceuticals, chemicals and other toxins are of man made origins and not part of the network you described. You need to do some homework before you pollute with bad information.
<p>The response below ("Tell you what") was meant for the same person you responded to.</P>
<p>So everyone, see what happens when you return fire in a crowded theater? :-)</p>
Wisc. resident: please refer to response below regarding Australia. The prime minister at the time said (paraphrase) we will not allow this American disease to infect us.
If "Social Laws cannot fix this problem." (sic) why have any laws at all?
It's a little to easy to express sadness over the innocent children and adults without expressing a need to address the problem.
You haven't really thought this through, have you?
Many of those who bemoan any fire arm regulation seem to be the same people who believe abstinence is the best method of birth control. By their logic the best gun control would be total eradication of guns. No more guns, no more gun deaths.
The idea that arming yourself for "self-protection" will keep you safe has been nearly universally disproved. It is far more likely that you or someone you love will be harmed by your firearm if you own one.
The very idea that "only Criminals, US Military,and Law Enforcement will have a means to control our personal lives,,,(sic) is an adolescent paranoid delusion with no basis in reality. Please join us here in the fact based 21st century.
Pages