Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FreeTally
There are no "fumes" from heroine and hash is not even a widely used drug.

Nope, you're wrong. I've seen it smoked. And hash is a close variant of weed. And it would be more widely used if there were non limits on drug use.

See, there are TWO PEOPLE involved in your scenario. See where you have gone wrong?

Wrong again. When one uses drugs, others are affected unwillingly. But, you know, I wouldn't be against enclosed isolated places where the drug users could do it to their heart's content. JUST NOT AMONG UNWILLING MEMBERS OF SOCIETY!

82 posted on 12/04/2001 7:04:20 AM PST by eleni121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]


To: eleni121
Wrong again.

I am wrong that it takes two people to constitute sexual abuse, but only one to ingest "drugs"? Ok. You are right.

When one uses drugs, others are affected unwillingly.

No one is unwillingly affected. You willingly put up with a spouse, child, family member or friend who abuses drugs. You let others abuse affect you. People have OPTIONS, and they are not always easy.

But, you know, I wouldn't be against enclosed isolated places where the drug users could do it to their heart's content. JUST NOT AMONG UNWILLING MEMBERS OF SOCIETY!

When are people forced to be around drug use? You have CHOICES!! If you are being held down and forced to inhale something, that is a crime. Your scenario sounds a whole lot like the way alcohol is treated. You know, it is illegal to be PUBLICALLY DRUNK!?!?

Secondly, regarding your argument, you are again dictating legality of the possession of an object based upon only your desires.

And again, you started by making a silly, illogical argument comparing "child abuse" and "voluntary drugs use". You are not getting any further with, "let me dictate where possession is legal".

88 posted on 12/04/2001 7:13:13 AM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

To: eleni121
I wouldn't be against enclosed isolated places where the drug users could do it to their heart's content. JUST NOT AMONG UNWILLING MEMBERS OF SOCIETY!

you mean like the privacy of their own home ?

interesting idea

97 posted on 12/04/2001 7:30:28 AM PST by THEUPMAN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

To: eleni121
JUST NOT AMONG UNWILLING MEMBERS OF SOCIETY!

You mean somewhere like the privacy of one's own home.

101 posted on 12/04/2001 7:40:54 AM PST by AUgrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

To: eleni121
But, you know, I wouldn't be against enclosed isolated places where the drug users could do it to their heart's content. JUST NOT AMONG UNWILLING MEMBERS OF SOCIETY!

Such as their homes?

108 posted on 12/04/2001 8:06:14 AM PST by consultant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

To: eleni121
But, you know, I wouldn't be against enclosed isolated places where the drug users could do it to their heart's content.

There is such a place. I call it my house. If only the neighbors knew...

Why don't we set up our drug laws as a mitigating factor, like we do with guns? Like commit a felony with a gun get extra time or whatever, do something like that with drugs. That way you leave peacefull people alone.

266 posted on 12/04/2001 1:33:57 PM PST by NC_Libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

To: eleni121
Wrong again. When one uses drugs, others are affected unwillingly. But, you know, I wouldn't be against enclosed isolated places where the drug users could do it to their heart's content. JUST NOT AMONG UNWILLING MEMBERS OF SOCIETY!

Can I assume you also feel alcohol and tobacco users should be isolated? how about caffiene addicts?
342 posted on 12/05/2001 6:41:13 AM PST by LazarusX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson