NJ college places ban on boozy energy drinks

Oct 19, 2010 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Atlanta Journal-Constitution

After students at northern New Jersey's Ramapo College were hospitalized last month after drinking Four Loko, the college president ordered that it and similar drinks be banned - and he's encouraging other colleges and the state to follow suit.

Comments
1 - 15 of 15 Comments Last updated Oct 20, 2010

“Your mother is in a sex coma”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Oct 19, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

A hyper girl with alcohol in her system will leave you with vomit crotch. Try it, you’ll like it…

“President DOWNGRADE..Ha Ha Ha!”

Since: Sep 09

Casselberry, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Oct 19, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

If you chug 4 of those "5 Hour Energy" Drinks, will your body reject it too? What about if you take 50 aspirin to get rid of a headache faster? Is it the product or the incorrect use of the product?

“President DOWNGRADE..Ha Ha Ha!”

Since: Sep 09

Casselberry, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Oct 19, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I read last week that a guy chugged a bottle of Vodka in about 5 minutes time. He died. Ban Vodka right?
Wartime

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Oct 19, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Why isn't this stuff banned on capitol hill?

Since: Aug 10

Atlanta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Oct 19, 2010
 
the Messiah wrote:
If you chug 4 of those "5 Hour Energy" Drinks, will your body reject it too? What about if you take 50 aspirin to get rid of a headache faster? Is it the product or the incorrect use of the product?
The only reason we have so many laws is because we have so many stupid, irresponsible people. If they can't take care of themselves, unfortunately the rest of us have to step in and do it for them.

Since: Jan 07

Scranton, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Oct 19, 2010
 
The temperance movement was well underway, even in the 1880's. A local priest, who was pastor of a church populated with primarily Irish immigrants, was disturbed, not that they drank, but that they often drank their entire paychecks, leaving their wives and children with no funds for the coming two weeks. He is quoted as saying "You cannot legislate morality." His answer to the problem was to provide alternative activities directed toward the families and especially men and boys. The outgrowth of his efforts was a baseball team, called "The Minooka Blues," that sent Steve O'Neill, Chick Shorten, a Yankee who was the first player to steal home in a World Series game, and Mike McNally, who was famously pictured shaking hands with the King Of England after a pick-up game there while he and other US troops were awaiting passage home.

The priest, Fr. Loughran, was correct then, and his words remain valid today. Authorities can ban anything and everything they want. However, whether people choose to accept their prohibitions is another thing entirely. Smokers have become the new lepers but people still smoke.Many of them don't admit to it, and while claiming to have "quit," simply bum cigarets from everyone else. Because the taxes are prohibitive, they find alternative means to acquire the insttruments of the vice of their choice.

The First Lady is on an anti-obesity kick with the accompanying ban on fatty foods in schools. I personally witnessed kids who chose to forego the school lunch to buy pizza and hoagies across the street from the school and eat them on the way home. When the hot weather came, they were lined up for a block to buy ice cream from the truck parked in an empty field nearby.

Bans and prohibitions usually don't work. If someone wants to use or consume something, he will find a way to do it. All of history is full of authority figures banning religions, which were still practiced in secret, certain games and sports, which were still played with reliable lookouts, marriages between people of different races which were still performed, to name just a few.

Essentially, people will do as they wish, no matter what some demmigod decides is best for them. If they harm themselves through excess or bad choices, it is their responsibility, no one else's.
LOL

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Oct 19, 2010
 

Judged:

1

obama looooves to speak to these dumbazzed college students......

“If it ain't broke don't fix it”

Since: Jul 09

Arcadia, LA.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Oct 19, 2010
 
Nothing good can come from over-consuming a product that contains both a depressant (alcohol) and caffeine.
Cranky Old Man

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Oct 19, 2010
 
I think Obama should have to submit to regular drug tests.

Since: Aug 10

Atlanta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Oct 19, 2010
 
No Child Left wrote:
Bans and prohibitions usually don't work. If someone wants to use or consume something, he will find a way to do it. All of history is full of authority figures banning religions, which were still practiced in secret, certain games and sports, which were still played with reliable lookouts, marriages between people of different races which were still performed, to name just a few.
Essentially, people will do as they wish, no matter what some demmigod decides is best for them. If they harm themselves through excess or bad choices, it is their responsibility, no one else's.
While I agree with you on the front end, what do we do on the back end when we have a country full of alcoholics, addicts and self-abusers. God knows we have more than our fair share of them now. They are unproductive at the least, dangerous at the most. Do we dare open the floodgates to social behavior and allow everyone to do as he or she pleases with no rules or regulations to guide, at least, the semi-responsible among us? Where do we draw the line on bad behavior and what is acceptable and what isn't?

Do we dig deeper in the human psche to find out why so many people feel the need to be wasted? Do we feed them all the drugs and alcohol they want and let them become criminals in other ways? Do we allow them to abuse substances but provide them with rehabilitation? What's the answer? Irresponsibility, unfortunately is EVERYONE's problem. The young girl who OD's on the alcholic energy drink? She just cost somebody in the healthcare industry money - either her parent's medical insurance or the hospital she'll be unable to pay if she's uninsured.

If similar incidences like this happened infrequently, we could shrug it off; but they happen all the time every single day. And they are costly in various ways.

It's just not a cut and dried issue.
Sorority Girl

Springville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Oct 19, 2010
 
The problem is that these drinks make kids way too horny.

Since: Jan 07

Scranton, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Oct 19, 2010
 
"tidy catz"]<quoted text>
While I agree with you on the front end, what do we do on the back end when we have a country full of alcoholics, addicts and self-abusers. God knows we have more than our fair share of them now. They are unproductive at the least, dangerous at the most.

And I agree with you in many respects. However, the bottom line a matter of individual choice and then taking personal responsibility for that choice. You are thinking in terms of being part of the "collective" which is an aspect of Obama's ideology. This, unfortunately, smacks of communism, based upon my understanding of the principles practiced in the Soviet Union, and I want no part of it.

I don't think there are many people who want to be alcoholics or drug addicts. Ultimately, if they do not die of complications from their addictions, they will commit suicide. There tends to be a genetic component to the tendency toward substance abuse. There are also environmental influences that increase the chances of a person becoming an alcoholic or drug user if he is exposed to these behaviors in his formative years.

Prohibition was a dismal failure because it was imposed upon society by law and did not reflect the wishes of the people at large. As a family history researcher, I often read old newspapers. In one case, the nephew of a magistrate was running a speakeasy next door to his office. In another case, all of the local bigwigs spent their Saturday nights at a popular restaurant which was well known for having a main line to alcoholic contraband. The owner was always tipped off when the "reveooers" would be around and kept her stash in a subcellar under her garage.

Fr. Loughran was absolutely right. It is impossible to legislate morality. His gentle way of providing meaningful activity was very beneficial to his small parish, especially when the ballplayers made their ways into the majors. This is not to say that Minooka became a "dry" town, because it didn't. Not every alcoholic miner gave up the sauce. However, the situation improved dramatically from what it was.

Regardless of reactionary bans from the top, how one lives his life is ultimately a matter of personal choice. If a particular vice is seen as essential, the practitioner will find a way to satisfy it. If it is not worth the trouble, the practitioner will give it up. He must have a reason that makes sense to him and no law or ban or prohibition is going to change his mindset.In the cases of alcoholics and drug users, they often do not recognize that they have problems. Whether they do or not, they also don't see their vices as having anything to do with anyone but themselves.

There are laws and there are laws. Not all are good, either for individuals or for the "collective" since their purpose is to control the population. I do not think the "Patriot Act" with its warrantless eavesdropping was a good law. I think the health care bill does little about health care but sticks its long nose into many things that have nothing to do with health care. Since no one was paying attention to Prohibition, it was repealed. I do not believe in anarchy, but I do believe in the freedom to choose, taking personal responsibility for one's actions, and a willingness to accept the consequences of one's actions, whether they are beneficial or detrimental.

Since: Aug 10

Atlanta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Oct 20, 2010
 
No Child Left wrote:
"tidy catz"]<quoted text>
There are laws and there are laws. Not all are good, either for individuals or for the "collective" since their purpose is to control the population. I do not think the "Patriot Act" with its warrantless eavesdropping was a good law. I think the health care bill does little about health care but sticks its long nose into many things that have nothing to do with health care. Since no one was paying attention to Prohibition, it was repealed. I do not believe in anarchy, but I do believe in the freedom to choose, taking personal responsibility for one's actions, and a willingness to accept the consequences of one's actions, whether they are beneficial or detrimental.
Interestly, 9 years ago Portugal decriminalized all drugs. Their rate of drug use has not gone up and their crime rate has gone down. They instead have state of the art rehab that they offer to anyone who needs it. They consider substance abuse a matter of public health.

To me THIS strikes a common sense balance. Like you said, prohibition doesn't work. So let's stop this senseless war on drugs. At the same time we can't give in to utter chaos; there has to be a safety net in place. The money we have spent over the years chasing drug dealers and arresting drug users would have been better spent on projects to help addicts and to promote healthy lifestyles.

Like you I believe in the freedom to choose, but responsibility and consequence are harsh mistresses and there's not a person among us who has never faced difficulty or needed help. I don't believe in allowing people to suffer simply because they made a bad choice. God made extremely few perfect people. In the long run I would be in favor of promoting programs that take unproductive people and help them become productive as opposed to letting them wallow in the gutter, live on welfare or end up in prison.

Since: Jan 07

Scranton, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Oct 20, 2010
 
"tidy catz"]<quoted text>
Interestly, 9 years ago Portugal decriminalized all drugs. Their rate of drug use has not gone up and their crime rate has gone down. They instead have state of the art rehab that they offer to anyone who needs it. They consider substance abuse a matter of public health.
To me THIS strikes a common sense balance.

I agree with all that you have said. I come from an ethnic group which seems to have a disproportionate rate of alcoholism. I do not drink, myself, but have tremendous sympathy for those caught in the throes of addiction. I have personally witnessed people who were brilliant, talented and blessed destroy themselves because of alcohol or drug dependency.

Substance abuse is definitely linked to genetic and environmental influences. If treated as a health issue, there is hope for some addicts. Unfortunately, as I said,some do not feel that they have a "problem" and as long as they can function, despite their issues, they will not seek help. Coercing people into seeking help does not usually work. They will stay clean for awhile, and then fall back into old habits. If they truly want to abandon their drug of choice, they are likely, like the long ago parishioners of Fr. Loughran, to find alternate interests that do not include the substances they must avoid.

Once again, it is a matter of personal choice. This country is full of people who have successfully beaten "the crature", as the Irish used to say. It was because they saw good reason to do so. Unfortunately, there are also those who cannot envision life without their drugs of choice, and ultimately, the consequences of their choices lead to self-destruction.

Since: Aug 10

Atlanta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Oct 20, 2010
 
No Child Left wrote:
"tidy catz"]<quoted text>
Interestly, 9 years ago Portugal decriminalized all drugs. Their rate of drug use has not gone up and their crime rate has gone down. They instead have state of the art rehab that they offer to anyone who needs it. They consider substance abuse a matter of public health.
To me THIS strikes a common sense balance.
I agree with all that you have said. I come from an ethnic group which seems to have a disproportionate rate of alcoholism. I do not drink, myself, but have tremendous sympathy for those caught in the throes of addiction. I have personally witnessed people who were brilliant, talented and blessed destroy themselves because of alcohol or drug dependency.
Substance abuse is definitely linked to genetic and environmental influences. If treated as a health issue, there is hope for some addicts. Unfortunately, as I said,some do not feel that they have a "problem" and as long as they can function, despite their issues, they will not seek help. Coercing people into seeking help does not usually work. They will stay clean for awhile, and then fall back into old habits. If they truly want to abandon their drug of choice, they are likely, like the long ago parishioners of Fr. Loughran, to find alternate interests that do not include the substances they must avoid.
Once again, it is a matter of personal choice. This country is full of people who have successfully beaten "the crature", as the Irish used to say. It was because they saw good reason to do so. Unfortunately, there are also those who cannot envision life without their drugs of choice, and ultimately, the consequences of their choices lead to self-destruction.
I understand about the responsibility and I agree with that, but I didn't say "coerce" people into treatment. The thing with Portugal, as with some other countries, is that treatment is readily available. Here in the US treatment is very difficult to come by. Good treatment is very expensive - something afforded mostly to the rich.

While some health insurance covers substance abuse it's a minimal, at best. Two or three weeks tops, but most times it's a week or less of inpatient.

Your last sentence says we should just give up on those who choose to give up on themselves. Were productive rehab more readily available how many might choose it over hospitalization (which costs of us) or crime and jail (which costs us all) or domestic violence (which costs us all) or accidents and illness (which cost us all), or children sent into foster care (which costs us all). Substance abuse is a huge financial burden on all our social systems. While we can't force anyone into rehab, the idea that it be openly available and that it be productive enough to actually do some good I think would be beneficial to us all. Do to nothing may be just as expensive (or maybe more) as trying to do something.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Ramapo College Discussions

Search the Ramapo College Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Monkey ears (Oct '09) Jul '13 - Cherokee - 2
Congratulations Gov Chris Christie! (Mar '10) Mar '10 abc 1
don't go to ramapo (Feb '10) Feb '10 Alyssa L 2
Patrick Sesulka and Brittany Larkin (Dec '09) Dec '09 Tears in my eyes 1
libra (Oct '09) Oct '09 Libra 1
Leo (Oct '09) Oct '09 Leo 1
Possible swine flu cases at Montclair State ris... (Oct '09) Oct '09 David Martin 1
•••
•••