Replies

I asked you a question. You answer my question with another question. I tell you that I'll answer your question after you answer mine. Are you dodging an answer to the question because you know that the federal War on Drugs is unconstitutional? You can find absolutely no basis for it in the document, but you don't really care, do you? Like the Supreme Court justices that found a right to abortion in one of the penumbras, you are more than happy to twist and abuse the document until it is no longer recognizable.

Twisted and abused, lying there in the street, you will pick up the document again when it serves your purposes, but only in rare circumstances. When you do, you will crow about how the liberals are destroying it (which they are), while ignoring the fact that drug warriors are damaging it as well, and giving socialists an excuse to impose ObamaCare on us.

Fine, I'll answer your silly question, despite the fact that you refuse to answer mine. No, I don't think that self-destructive people have the right to endanger the public. You have to be able to articulate a harm that they are posing to the general public, however, and that harm has to be direct. Murder imposes a direct harm to society. Armed robbery is directly harmful to society. Drug use is not directly harmful to society. Many use drugs (including alcohol) responsibly. Some, unfortunately, do not. I don't believe in collective punishment -- that is to say, punishing the many innocent people for the mistakes of a few irresponsible folk.

If drug users step out of line, like getting behind the wheel of a car or injuring someone, they should be severely punished. If they steal someone's property, they should be severely punished. What they should not be punished for is engaging in a behavior, that while you might find irresponsible, is not harming anyone else. It does not harm you if someone drinks alcohol in their home after a long day at work. It does not harm you if someone smokes a marijuana cigarette in their home after a long day at work. I do not use drugs other than legal alcohol, but I find the damage from the war on drugs to be so reprehensible that I feel compelled to speak up about it.

I have noticed that in some of your other posts to me, you harp on the fact that I am young. While it's true that I'm young, you shouldn't infer that I don't know what I'm talking about. I've had exposure to the perils of drug and alcohol abuse. One of my dear friends died from alcohol abuse in college. I was home for vacation, and he was at his fraternity. He died from alcohol poisoning, because apparently he thought it was a good idea to pound 20 drinks in 2 hours. So I do know what I'm talking about, and do you know what else I know?

I know that it is people from my generation (late 20s) who will be running this country in the next 15-20 years. We are already seeing the effects that young people can have on the political process, both good and bad. A positive effect is that people my age aren’t as beholden to the War on Drugs as the baby boomers like yourself are. We see where it has failed and are willing to make improvements. Proposition 19 to legalize marijuana almost passed in California last November. It failed by a margin of 46.5%-53.5%. Exit polls showed, however, that more than 60% of voters under the age of 30 voted for the proposition. It doesn’t take a math whiz to realize that in 15 years time, propositions similar to proposition 19 will pass in many states. Marijuana will be legal in many states, and we will take a more sensible approach in dealing with the hard drug as well.