Posted on 01/10/2008 11:24:27 PM PST by BurbankKarl
How about, as humans we all have a choice, the choice to smoke, snort, pop a pill, drink alcohol or stick a needle in our arm.
Now if you can find the person that held Bowman down and stuck a needle in his arm against his will you may have a case.
Yes, it started that way for him — after he became addicted there was little “choice” involved.
Which is part of the reason we have laws against the use of certain drugs (especially highly addictive drugs, and especially for recreational purposes) and against the people who, for profit, persuade others to engage in illegal acts of use.
If the drugs that killed him (as undoubtedly we will discover) were illegal, or he was using prescription drugs illegally acquired, then under the laws of the society we belong to (yes even you) someone besides him is likely culpable. And rightfully should be dealt with under the law.
Looks like the liberal-tarian experiment in the Netherlands may soon be coming to an end...
“Local politicians across the Netherlands have concluded that by legalizing prostitution in 2000, they opened up their cities to international crime organizations trafficking in women, children and hard drugs. The authorities want to wipe out the crime and are also weary of boozy weekend trippers ogling prostitutes and buying illegal drugs on the streets....”
[caption] “PARTY OVER? Amsterdam’s coffeehouses, where marijuana is sold with official sanction, have been a target of recent curbs. “I’ve been in this business 15 years, and we have never felt so much pressure,” one coffeehouse manager says.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-dutch4jan04,1,1872179.story
Moreover, I am not a nanny state sycophant and do not want the government to tell me what I can put in my body if I wish.
That’s a classic “Shatner-morph”. ;)
I hate to break it to you but, the Drug War in this nation has failed.
What is your solution?
Man - that’s an oldie....
RIP, Chris.
Fine -- but if what you're doing is illegal, you deserve prison just like the rest of them.
Don't you think it's a bad idea for Americans to fork over millions in cash contributions to the scum of the earth, who murder their rivals and police, corrupt their governments, rig elections, buy judges, assassinate journalists, launder money, and destroy families?
Oh wait, never mind, as long as you GET YOURS you don't care what happens to the rest of society -- you are an island, you have no responsibilities to anything but your own perverse narcissism -- screw everyone else!
That's right; just like all the coke heads I know.
Wait a minute. You mean after 20 years of the WOD there are still people with easy access to drugs? How can this be!?
Being overweight and a coke addict is a deadly combination.
What is your solution?
The "War on Drugs" is a misnomer, much like the "War on Terror".
There is no "war", there are no defined geographic lines, there is no DMZ, there are no definitive, conclusive measures of victory or defeat. It's an ongoing process, trying to rid society of the scourge of drug abuse. In that sense this "War on Drugs" is a social war. Progress must be measured by how well we thwart the will of those who would engage in self-destructive drug practices, even as there are new recruits to self-destructive drug abuse (thanks to the enablers, a group you belong to). Aside from those who are deterred from illicit drug use, there are also those who either die or are rehabilitated.
Likewise the War on Terror really isn't a war, with opposing armies, or with each side able to use metrics to say one side is winning and one side is losing. One side won't suddenly surrender, there is no peace process, no armistice, no signed documents of capitulation, no flag representing one side or the other.
In both these "wars" there are gains and setbacks; the progress toward "victory" ebbs and flows. We don't have victory in sight because we can't define victory, though we can define progress. We can't isolate the enemy in a lasting way, and we can't completely prevent recurrence -- new enemy soldiers appear spontaneously in the War on Terror, as does the supply of illicit drugs and users in the War on Drugs. That's the way is has been and always will be, for the forseeable future.
Another perpetual war is the "War on Poverty" -- used rhetorically by both advocates of big and small government to either justify more spending or decry the usefulness of any programs to alleviate poverty.
Trust me, I understand the impact of drugs on people and a society. I have know people who used drugs and ended up killing themselves and I was born in Colombia. As a child, I was driven to school by an armed guard.
However, it is the weak among us who allow themselves to succumb to addiction and the government has no place protecting weak from themselves.
In your case think of what intervention saves you. You pay taxes, whether you feel taxes are justified or not. It's cheaper for society (the people who choose, support, and provide mandates to members of the government) to help most people get back on their feet -- fewer criminals victimizing us (getting money for drugs), prisons less populated (saves taxpayer money), fewer disfunctional parents (can take care of their own kids if they are rehabilitated). Less costs to society, less cost to you, since you pay taxes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.