Banning consumption itemsFollow

Yes. When you're looking at kiddie pics in the back bedroom, you're contributing to those kids being abducted and molested.

Aside from the obvious public versus private property issue. The other difference is that *you* can ban smoking in your own house, not the government. So the government saying you can't smoke in your own home or car is a massive infringement of property rights.

You mean things like banning gay marriage? Or just things you don't personally approve of.

Never personally tried Four Loko, but I'm the alumni advisor for my fraternity and this drink has become pretty huge on campus in the last year. It comes in an extra-large can (16 - 22 oz), and contains 12% alcochol, so it's the equivalent to 3-4 beers plus at least a cup of coffee's worth of caffeine. The problems are that it's ultra cheap ($2.75/can), and that it's clearly not designed to be a beverage that you sip slowly (hence the nasty flavor). It's meant to be chugged or at least consumed in the same amount of time that it would take to drink a beer.

You can't really compare Four Loko to wine since wine is more expensive, and is usually consumed more slowly (and wine doesn't contain caffeine). Red Bull and vodka is another bad comparison, since that also costs a lot more, and people don't usually mix 4 shots of vodka with 2 cans of Red Bull to make a single drink. Cost is really the biggest reason that Four Loko is so popular - it really is just about the cheapest way possible to get drunk quickly. I've seen guys using Four Loko to play Beiruit and other drinking games, and that is what worries me - they're going to get fucked up far worse doing that than they would if they were drinking the usual watered down ****-flavored beer. And that, I suppose for them, is the point.

College kids are always going to get drunk on cheap alcohol, sometimes to the point of passing out and/or requiring medical attention. 9 kids getting hospitalized in Washington state isn't nearly enough evidence to show that Four Loko is by itself increasing the rate at which this happens, so I'm hesitant to buy into the panic that seems to be gripping the media and many campus administrators right now. Educating kids and teaching them that there's a fine line between being pleasantly sloshed and puking/passed out, and that that line is different for everyone, is always going to be more effective than banning a particular beverage.

You've got a point about the caffeine, but there are some cheap wines out there. When I was that age, Thunderbird and Boones Farm wines were the cheap drink of preference. And they were *really* cheap. But then again, we used to be able to buy wine coolers in 2 liter bottles, so I suppose that's something too!



Nah. They mix two shots of vodka with 1 can of Red Bull to make a single drink and then have several of them. I have a friend who drinks that all the time. He can usually get two glasses out of a single Red Bull + vodka (about a shot or so plus half a can for each drink). It's not uncommon for him to go through 4 of them in an evening while we're playing cards and whatnot.

And when you buy in bulk at Costco, I'm pretty sure it's cost equivalent.


The real difference is that you have dumb young college kids drinking. And guess what? Just like we did when I was that age, they're going to drink too much and too fast and get sick and do stupid things. There is nothing new about that. Blaming the drink of choice is just dumb.

It's not so much barking at shadows as observing that we should avoid adopting methodologies to deal with social problems which may be used later as precedent to make social changes we don't agree with as much as the one that's right in front of us. Doubly so when there are more direct and honest means by which we could address those things.

It's not about starting with an assumption of some grand schemers, but with the rather sensible fact that when you open yourself up to manipulation you increase the odds that someone will do so. Whether someone intends for such things to happen down the line or not is less relevant than the reality of what will tend to happen. If legitimate banks used methodologies for handling estates which required the recipients to first forward some amount of cash to the bank in order to free up the assets to which they are entitled, one could reasonably conclude that this would increase the odds of people falling for Nigerian type scams, right? Same deal here. If we make the process of banning things like cartoon characters and toys a "normal" means of manipulating society, then people will be more likely to accept similar such methods in the future.


It does not require some evil plot to set in motion, but does increase the odds that someone will take advantage of it after the fact. This is why the methods we use to do things do matter as much if not more than the goals we have when doing them.

They don't? Oops.

In my defense, it takes me a loooong time to drink one drink. And I hate how Red Bull and Vodka tastes, but if you had some triple sec, it's not so bad.

Ahhh, Boones Fuzzy Navels - bringing back (some) memories of my childhood.

four loko is basically made to be drank alone without additional alcohol.

One can is all anyone should need to feel the effects of alcohol unless they are an extreme alcoholic.

Edited, Nov 10th 2010 8:43pm by Bardalicious

I can understand that and maybe I'm weird but I'd rather spend those $2.75 on two good beers than on one can of filth that's twice as potent.
I personally drink because I enjoy the taste, the entertaining side effects of alcohol in said beers are just that, side effects.

Edited, Nov 11th 2010 8:17am by Aethien

I disagree with the Happy Meal ordinance, not because it's ethically wrong but because I don't believe it's going to be effective. Require full disclosure of nutritional information in plain English in readable font and let it go at that. The parents who are worried about nutrition aren't the parents who are taking their kids to McDonald's as more than an occasional treat, anyway.

I have an acquaintance who used to reuse the McDonald's packaging. He'd ladle some mac and cheese or whatever into a Big Mac container (this was back when they used Styrofoam) and the kids would yum it up. I wonder when they figured it out.

Death Penalty!

Youtube would disagree with you.