A Leawood father who heard his teen-aged son on the phone last night making what the father thought was a drug deal called police to turn him in, police said.
Leawood police Maj. John Meier gave this account:
"The father said, 'I think he may be having some drugs delivered to the house. I want to
give you permission to search my house and if you see a car leaving,
stop it.'
"Somebody did deliver the kid some drugs, we stopped the car in the
10200 block (of Ensley Lane), the person that had been at the house.
Then we searched the house and found some drugs."
The major added: "I don't want to make it more dramatic than it is."
(Agreed here)
"I'm sure it was a very small amount of marijuana, something like that," he said.
Today's Leawood police activity report lists two arrests in connection with the incident.
The report also lists a disturbance - A woman business manager who asked police to stand by as she fired an employee.
« Oprah says it isn't so: No false memoir | Main | KU Jayhawk sculpture: RIP »
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Leawood father turns in son for pot
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b1b869e200d8342dbef453ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Leawood father turns in son for pot:


I initially thought that the father was being ridiculous when he called, but I agree that we really don't have enough information to make a judgement. The Leawood police's response makes me think though, that the father severely overreacted. They didn't seem too concerned about it so I doubt it was a significant problem. That said, I really have no clue about it so I won't make any judgements.
And to those who are labeling people who smoke pot as "living in their parent's basement, eating twinkies," please stop judging people. Unless you have some experience or first-hand knowledge about marijuana, don't make judgements and accusations about others. Remember, our last president admitted to smoking marijuana and our current president used cocaine, a far more dangerous drug. Yet neither man was held back by thing they did when they were younger. But what would've happened if their fathers turned them in to police? I can guarantee you that if that happened, neither would've reached the presidency. And while maybe that would've been a good thing, the world as we know would be completely different if this had occurred. In the least, for sure this young man will not be able to hold THAT position. And that is just a little bit sad...
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 11:57 AM
No, I think the Leawood police's response means they are used to a whole different method of policing these situations than this father proposed to them, which means he made them enforce the law regardless of the neighborhood. A crime is a crime.
Posted by: puredotte | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 12:21 PM
It may or may not be our position to judge the father's actions in calling the police, but I can't possibly believe that this man, standing in front of his doorway, speaking to a Channel 5 news camera, while holding the door closed so his family couldn't come out and boasting about his actions was in any way acting in his son's best interest. He claimed to want to "protect his son's privacy," yet plastered his own face and home in front of the greater metropolitan area with smugness and smiles. If this is a demonstration of his dutiful fatherly thought process, then I must question his other parenting skills and decisions, including ... calling the police on his own child.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 12:32 PM
OK - OK - OK
So some of you people scored a little better than others on the spelling bee. Get over yourselves who cares anyway and for a little food for thought. Take a look at this.
cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!
Posted by: maggie | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 01:03 PM
One of the MANY differences between you and I deacon john, is that I realized the error of my ways and changed my behavior. If you were really a deacon or some sort of man of the cloth as you claim to be, you would have recognized this. I have asked for and been forgiven by my god. You are a joke, a characature. Deal with that!
Posted by: BR | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 01:10 PM
I'm white. I don't believe all black people thug out to 50 cent and shoot people over crack in their spare time like the media tells me so -- why do you guys think that people who enjoy a little weed from time to time all are unproductive stoners from the movies like "Half Baked". Bottom line is that a lot more people than you think enjoy weed -- a *lot*, and they won't tell you, because those of you who have never done it and have no right to talk with any authority on it simply judge people and call them 'scum' and other things of that nature. You don't know dick -- you only know what others have told you who didn't know dick. All of the folks I know that smoke weed are all very productive, make *well* above the average income in the area, are very respected amongst their co workers as smart folks, have a LOT of responsibility in their daily lives, have their money in order, and vote. AMAZING. Oh, and the majority of them voted for BUSH too -- quit trying to make this a political left thing -- it's not. It's a matter of being able to look at the facts and come to an educated understanding of them. There's a difference between causation and correlation people -- just because some folks drink booze and smoke weed at their local GANG or KKK meeting, doesn't mean that weed and booze causes GANGS or cross burning.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 01:16 PM
BT, why are you coming down on the Leawood Police Department? It is their job to dispatch to these calls that come into their city. And no, they don't need two cars to back up every car stop, I know you are trying to be funny but you're just a jackass.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 01:20 PM
Why dad did you call the police
I was only trying to score a piece
I wasn't hurting any one.
You might have well just used a gun.
My life is over now for sure
For what you done there is no cure.
Now when the family drives down the street.
Everyone will duck down in the seat.
There is no good for what you did.
Heck everyone was once a kid
I am going away for a while.
Maybe now you can smile
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 01:53 PM
I must say, I am proud of the father and don't think of him as an COWARD at all.
I am the wife of a meth addict who is currently incarcerated and awaiting sentencing. The best deal on the table that the PA will give him is 6 years, for posession!
I am the one that turned my husband in to the police because he was close to death. I often visit my husband in Cameron and I wish that I hadn't done it, but I quickly come to terms with the alternative: visiting his gravesite and wishing that I had.
What I have a hard time with is that I trusted the System as a last resort to get my husband help and now they want to throw him away for 6 years with no treatment.
Good for you dad.
Posted by: Wife of an addict | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 02:02 PM
Buaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
Non-pot-smokers standing in judgement of the pot-proponents...
I say bring back Prohibition and see how the "I have a glass of wine with dinner", and the "I have a scotch after work", and the "I only drink socially" crowd feels when they are being told/sold how horrible alcohol is for them, that alcohol is a gateway drug (for it is the real, absolute and first, isn't it?), that its the source of crimes and poor decisions and yada yada yada...
Stupid.
If the Dad had overheard his son attempting to acquire a 6-pack, would pop have involved the police? Ater all, both are illegal for his son to possess...
Anyway, this is all stupid.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 02:17 PM
I see nothing in the article about a pot. Certainly a pot of marijuana would be more than just a small amount?
Posted by: Michael McGrew | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 02:56 PM
Awe it was just a little pot, like if you turn a thimble upside down. That size. Who turned your computer on for you anyways?
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 03:03 PM
Did you work on the case?
Posted by: Michael McGrew | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 03:19 PM
How can you possibly compare meth addicts to pot smokers? That's like comparing murderers to shoplifters. Rediculous.
Posted by: Brian | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 03:53 PM
what about the fact that this young man broke the law and we are supposed to teach them to obey the law and if you don't you pay the consequences? He broke the law, so he pays. simple as that
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 04:04 PM
its funny how all of you who are against pot can't come up with one fact that supports your claims. Stop legislating morality to us.
Posted by: Micah | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 04:31 PM
Brother, if I wanted to take the time to educate you with facts we could be here all night, but like with most liberal hippies, you wouldnt be willing to listen anyway, so why bother? and in response to the father who smokes pot and has a great daughter, I wonder if in few years when she is a teenager(if not already) and she starts smoking pot(wich obviously her dad is ok with) and becomes part of the 90% of people who pay serious dues behind smoking dope or other drug use, he will be such a huge fan of getting high or maybe it will take a pot smoking boyfriend to cheat on her or break her heart, or maybe some people will never see the light? Oh well, more of life for me to enjoy I guess.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 05:18 PM
just to let u all no, im not takin any sides in this, but i am a friend of this mans son. and this was one of the MANY times he had been caught with pot, the only difference this time was the father, well actually the step mom called the cops, the father just took the rap, the father new wat was happening in advance
Posted by: ladel | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 05:50 PM
wierd, someone who actually knows the situation reports that this kid had been caught several times. Guess that doesn't matter in "pot is the least dangerous, most rightous thing on the planet, pass the ben and jerry's" land
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 06:43 PM
BT-I am open-minded. To sanity.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 06:45 PM
Do I think that the boy should be smoking marijuana? No. Do I think that marijuana should be legal? Yes. The truth is, marijuana in the hands of RESPONSIBLE ADULTS is not more harmful than booze or tobacco. Have I smoked marijuana? Yes, and I'll probably do it again. I am 25, and currently enrolled in college making straight A's and working a 40 hour a week job, as well as managing a household. I have never missed work or class because of my smoking habits, I have never driven under the influence, and I have never ignored a problem just so I could smoke.
At 21 you can gamble, we sell guns, liqour,and tobacco to IRRESPONSIBLE everyday. Just because there are people who happen to think that marijuana is a bad thing doesn't make it wrong, many believe guns, tobacco, and gambling are the downfall of society.
I believe marijuana should be legalized and have the same rules as liqour and tobacco. There is nothing setting it apart from these things other than public opinion.
Now, as far as the man turning his son in, IF the boy was out of control by all means, if that is the ONLY way out, use it. Its better than going to Jenni Jones and sending them off to bootcamp.However, I don't think that turning your son in will solve the problem, only make the child resent you more and sneak around to do what they want behind your back. Obviously there isn't enough information here to say if the son was out of control, but I think the dad did what he thought was best, regardless of what you think he did was right or wrong, unless he was purposefully trying to get his son in trouble out of spite, he did what he feels is best for his son, and you can't fault a parent for trying to do the right thing.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 06:59 PM
Good job dad. You just made sure that your son cannot get college scholarships or student loans. Federal law prohibits anyone with a drug conviction (mj included) from receiving federally backed student loans. Hope you're willing to pay for his college. No?? Well then congrats on making sure he'll flip burgers.
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 07:07 PM
None of us should judge whether or not what the father did was right or wrong. It's situational. No one knows what happened to lead up to it. There may have been some history, but it could also be that the father just lost control. It is sad that parental counseling could not have prevented/stopped this. I know that when I was a kid, my dad told me that he wouldn't hesitate to call the police if I did something like that, and I thought he was well justified.
As for those of you who argue that the parents run a broken household--you are being a bit presumptuous. Most people are a part of a broken household one way or another. I consider any household with a divorced parent broken, and that covers at least half of American households right there.
And regarding morality legislation, it has its pros and cons. America is a country based on freedom of religion, and there is conflict between the morals of one religion versus another, so in this case, it is difficult to legislate morality. But in the heart of this idea lies the premise that there are no absolutes, and this is a very dangerous and, more importantly, ridiculous, proposition.
First of all, logically speaking, it is impossible to be absolutely sure that there are no absolutes. When someone says that there are no absolutes, you can simply respond, "Are you absolutely sure?" Secondly, I challenge anyone to find a society with no moral code. When you find it, live there for a few years and tell me if you like it. I hope you know that you can't count on human nature to just always do the right thing. This is a fallen world and we are fallen people. If morality is not legislated, is it okay to steal? Is it okay to kill? These are morals, and I'm certainly glad that they are backed by law.
Morality will always be legislated. Vote for someone who draws the line where you like it. Until then, if you don't believe in morals, read Abolition of Man by C.S. Lewis.
Posted by: Chris | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 09:54 PM
nice post, Chris
Posted by: | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 11:02 PM
Well now. When this man son is being raped in prison by several men, what will he be thinking about. This father gives the Nazis a good name.
Posted by: Cal | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 04:43 AM
Pot users can be lazy and fat. So are alchohol users. So are people that don't use either alcohol or pot. Comparing to alcohol, pot users are amazingly productive and haven't killed thousands of people with 'stoned driving'.
Posted by: | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 07:26 AM
ON A LIGHTER NOTE, IF YOU PAN DOWN THE ARTICAL A LITTLE AND YOU SEE THAT A WOMAN HAD TO HAVE HELP FROM THE POLICE TO FIRE A WORKER. I HAVE HEARD THAT IT WAS THE BALL WASHER ON THE 7TH TEE AT HALBROOK GOLF COURSE. I GUESS HE WASNT WASHING THE BALLS VERY GOOD.
Posted by: BIGE | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 09:28 AM
WHY ARE PEOPLE TALKING LIKE THIS KID IS GOING TO JAIL? REPORT SAID IT WAS A SMALL AMOUNT WHICH MEANS THERE IS NO JAIL TIME. AND BESIDES THAT, IT HAPPENED TO A LEAWOOD RESIDENT. WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN TO A BLACK MAN FROM KCMO BEING ARRESTED IN LEAWOOD FOR THE SAME THING. HE WOULD STILL BE IN THE TANK. BUT THEN AGAIN, HE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE HIS OWN FILE CABINET IN THE KCMO POLICE STATION.
Posted by: BIGE | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 09:36 AM
1. There have been numerous studies that show a strong tie between marijuana use and harder drugs. Marijuana is the the drug to get people started on the road to hard core drugs. Anyone that has ever dealt with users of hard drugs can tell you users almost always started with marijuana and moved on to bigger drugs. The hard users didn't just start using meth or crack or LSD.
2. I am guessing that this young man is under the age of eighteen so it is very unlikely that he will be sent to prison. He may go to juvenile detention, but for a first offense, that is unlikely. Therefore, it is unlikely that hew will be "raped in prison by several men."
3. Personal experience about marijuana users "not" committing crimes. My father was robbed and beaten, not once but twice, by users who need cash for their marijuana fixes. So do not go about spitting out you worthless arguments about marijuana users being saints that don't drive under the influence or commit crimes get the facts. As an aside to those comparing alcohol and pot, when was the last time you remember anyone being attacked for beer money. I know I have never read an account of that happening, does not mean it has not happened, just have not read of it happening.
Posted by: | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 09:59 AM
As far as marijuana being a gateway drug, just because a study shows there is a correlation does not mean that marijuana causes it, it could mean that some people who smoke it are more likely to try other drugs, it could mean that the geographic area the study was preformed in had something to do with it, age, economic times, social class, even sex can influence this. Honestly, any research class will tell you this. While there is a correlation, that doesn't mean that smoking will make you do other drugs, I would venture to say that its not the marijuana that causes people to do harder drugs, its the experimentation mentality.
Posted by: | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 11:46 AM
People WAKE UP do you want the kid to get shot in a drug deal or busted on a harsher charge. How else do you think hard headed kids learn. I am sure he knows his son and has tried many atemps to do somthing and opening his eyes is probably the best was in his mind. I commend him its takes some to turn your son in. He will know better in the long run. Come on ya all hes a johnson county kid he normally gets his way not this time.
Posted by: | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 11:46 AM
I'm sorry about what happened to your father, but there are no such thing as marijuana "fixes." The addictive properties of marijuana are almost non-existent. Smoking it does not cause a person to have an unabating desire to do anything so they can have the feeling again. Marijuana is less addicting that nicotine, caffiene, and alcohol. Shoot, its even less addicting than Benadryll. The reason for this lack of addictive properties is that Marijuana does not affect dopamine receptors on the brain. Now, this is just an argument that marijuana is not very PHYSICALLY addicting. It can still be very psychologically addicting. A person can become addicted to the feeling of calm and happiness that smoking pot provides. But this type of addiction rarely, if ever, produces the "need for a fix" associated with the need to commit a crime for it. It is easily ignored because a person lacks the physical cravings for the drug. Also, this psychological addiction is similar to the feeling that runners/bikers get from performing their particular exercise. You can become psychologically addicted to ANYTHING, marijuana included. Withdrawal symptoms from stopping use is also less than what it would be when using caffiene. Im not arguing for pot to be legalized, only that posters should not write rambling criticisms of pot without properly researching or knowing the topic first.
Posted by: | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 11:50 AM
CONGRATS TO THE FATHER WHO LOVES HIS CHILD. THE FATHER TALKED WITH THE SON ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF DRUGS AND HAD HIM SIGN A CONTRACT. LIKE ALL CONTRACTS THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES IF BROKEN. THE SON KNEW BUT PUSHED THE BOUNDRIES. HE GAMBLED AND NOW IS PAYIING THE PRICE. THIS MAY BE THE BEST LESSON OF HIS LIFE NOT TO GET INVOLVED IN DRUGS. I AM SURE THE FATHER IS SUFFERING JUST AS MUCH, LAW OR NO LAW, FOR HIS SON LYING TO HIM. ONLY TIME WILL TELL.
Posted by: | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 02:11 PM
I can tell you that my sister (who is now 51 yrs old) has been smoking "pot" for 35 years , and, she says she can't get out of bed without it. I suppose it can be physically addictive? But then, you have to look at the people who say "I can't get out of bed without my coffee." So, in a way, I guess we all have our "demons" to deal with. I really don't blame the dad for calling the police, but, I think a good long trip to the woodshed might have settled this without the police stepping in? I'm not sure if this measure had been taken before, or if the boy is bigger than the dad, but it sounds like a teenager needing a good "talking to." I would hate to see my son in this situation, and most of us don't really know what our kids are doing when we are not there. So I guess we have to make the judgement call if and when it happens to us.. I'm not pointing any fingers.
Posted by: blondie2hot7 | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 02:35 PM
I CANNOT beleive this. a father turns in his son. what about talking to the son. what about turning in the pusher. have the arrest in the driveway. this is HORRIBLE. the Nazis turned families into snitches. save your son, but do not have him arrested. Goodness sakes. how will you live with turning in your son?>>
Posted by: henry Watson | Saturday, January 14, 2006 at 03:09 PM
F#ck the johnson county juv. system. the kids have no rights in the court. it is really horrible what they do to these kids. and this dad should be beaten really, what a puss
Posted by: Kyle | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 01:14 AM
obviously, a juvenille offender
Posted by: | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 03:33 AM
What is wrong with our society nowadays? No one want's to take responsibility for his/her actions,but that same person want's
someone, other than themselves, to be responsible for their actions and outcome.
True,sometime's the parent(s) may be to much a "dictator" and not a parent;but,also
sometimes a parent(s) may be way to lenient.
A parent is supposed to be a role model to their children.Not only in being an example of morality(right/wrong) for "everyone" (and your kids),to see,but also showing yourself to everyone else,(you have to have common sense and know how to use it!)
At the same time kids,teens:quit going for instant gratification(fun)without first thinking about "who" will get hurt in your
action(s),whether it is yourself or someone
else!
Parent(s),make guidelines/rules for your kids to adhere to,and above all"Back-up with action what you say with words" to your kids!Don't be a tyrant nor a dictactor.
Kids,teens-you are still on a major learning curve, contrary to your own beliefs
and opinions to becoming a adult.Respond before you react!Even though I know it is difficult being a young person,knowing it all,knowing your right and "EVERYONE" else is wrong!Use common sense!Think,before you act ! And above all-know that ANY actions you do,or participate in;YOU alone ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN ACTIONS! This applies both to adults as well as the younger generation!
Posted by: Wayne | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 09:39 AM
The son signed a no drug use contract with his parents. No means no. This is about the son's character and integrity. Maybe smoking pot kept those aspects from forming or made them disappear.
Who knows what other drugs he might use.
Posted by: | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 09:44 AM
Am I the only one who has noticed this, or is it apparent to everyone-those responding to this story who are in favor of legalizing marijuana and who obviously use it frequently CANNOT SPELL!!
Hello!! Research aside, the results speak, or in this case, SPELL for themselves...
Read it and weep, folks...
Posted by: nancyrhe | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 10:05 AM
I am a pot smoking two-time spelling bee champion.
Posted by: | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 11:03 AM
Well, aren't you proud of yourself.
I still can't believe this HAPPENED in L-fckingwood - or that money was not thrown to keep it quiet.
Ah, JC, the land of the Dr. Green's.
Posted by: J | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 11:56 AM
You never know what's going on in a family unless you live in their home. Other circumstances might be involved, with this incident being the last straw. How many of us call the cops to our house at the drop of a hat? I doubt if any parent does that just for kicks, and suspect there may be other issues at play here that may have nothing to do with the kid using marijuana. Had other drugs been involved? Was there other negative behavior that the parents blamed on drug use, or on their son hanging out with the kids providing the drugs? Was the kid doing what he pleased and telling his folks they couldn't do anything about it? Had the family tried counseling, and did the kid reject it? Or had they made other agreements that were broken? Without knowing the whole story, I am unable to turn this into Reefer Madness or judge the parents for their decision.
Posted by: Patty | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 12:14 PM
Legalize Marijuana! Ive been to the Netherlands and it truly showed me what freedom was.
Posted by: Dave | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 02:34 PM
I'm forty and smoke pot, often after a long day at my highly paid, high-profile job. I live in Chicago in a fabulous condo with skyline and lake views and a 24-hour doorman. I work out regularly, eat sushi, meditate and spend a lot of money on art. I prefer Prada over tie dye. In Chicago, I believe you are given a ticket for pot rather than being hauled into jail. Oh, I can also spell and somehow through my pot-filled high school days retained the knowledge that periods and commas belong inside of quotation "marks." I'm also a proud liberal, and last I heard, we were the open minded ones. Do the reactionaries who have posted here call us liberals thinking they are slinging an insult? Isn't your bandwagon less government? As such, shouldn’t government get its nose out of people’s business and their right to smoke pot? To those of you tierd of this type of hollow, hypocritical right wing rant, read the book What's the Matter with Kansas? It touches heavily on your neck of the woods and the out of touch “anti-hippie” rhetoric I’ve read here today. Sorry I got off subject. My parents simply flushed my pot, threw my bongs in the trash compactor and never once called the police. We are today best of friends. My dad drinks; I smoke pot.
Posted by: dk | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 02:58 PM
I am going to use an analogy/example here and it is what it is, so nobody go getting pissed off at me this is just an example. Here goes: alot of the pro dope crowd on this blog remind me of the far-left anti-war crowd in that some of the stuff those types of anti-war crowd almost make you want to wish that they or someone they care about would be attacked by terrorists so then maybe, just maybe they would get it. Same goes for the pro dope crew, I guess some of these people will just have to have there life ruined or the life of someone they love ruined to realize that doing drugs is not the way to go regardless of how much money you have or how much sushi you can eat.
Posted by: | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 03:54 PM
Let's calmly take your analogy/example one step further then. If the far-left anti-war crowd is pro-dope, then the far-right pro-war crowd embraces alcoholism. George W. Bush received a DUI arrest in 1976 at age 30, and Dick Cheney receiving two DUI arrests in 1962 and 1963, at ages 21 and 22 respectively. So the lesson for the pro-dope crowd is that doing drugs is not the way to go, but if you drink way too much and decide to operate a vehicle, you can grow up to be president and/or vice-president. Hey, it is what it is, so please don't get mad at this example either!
Posted by: Patty | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 05:22 PM
I never said the anti-war far left people are pro dope, I just said some people on this blog that are pro dope remind me of those people. And I dont think drunk driving is cool either.
Posted by: | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 05:27 PM
What a whimp,The goverment protects us from ourselves entirely to much.Now you want them to parent your kids too. I really don't see how the other countries in the world survive without a goverment like ours to look after them....We are the least free of all the free world
Posted by: | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 05:27 PM
and I never get mad at debates over the internet, this is really just good entertainment that you can participate in.
Posted by: | Sunday, January 15, 2006 at 05:28 PM