Might not be a bad idea.
Posted on 03/26/2009 10:13:28 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
The problem is that the law doesn't differentiate between those who use occasionally and those who abuse (and leaves aside the whole question of whether drug abuse by itself is a public health issue or a law enforcement issue).
The laws regarding alcohol do make such a differentiation. If you are drunk in public (or even just possessing alcohol in public), most locales can arrest you. If you drive while impaired, if you furnish it to minors, both things that are arrestable.
But the notion that teh state should be passing legislation, or not, based on making us all the best we can be is creepy at its core, especially considering who's in power currently.
Wow, thats some old dylan, right?
I don’t want to have to deal or try to converse with someone that is somewhere off in space.
Might not be a bad idea.
I am not going to comment on the merits of the argument, but the statement above seems dubious at best.
Just curious, would you be okay with legalizing other drugs?
Give the issue back to the doctors, where it belongs.
Look at all the statists on freerepublic.
The UT is actually a pretty good paper.
Those “youthful” victims don’t look so youthful!
Ah, were this the worst evil on American streets. (Where are the bobbies in this picture dragging the publick sousers to the gaol?)
Sounds like any democrat to me. What's the diff?
They are currently using the drug war to revoke the Second Amendment.
I’m married to one and her opinion along with her colleagues is that given the availability of a plethora of other pharmaceutical drugs; marijuana isn’t necessary.
Uh.. what’s wrong with the laws on the books for DUI? It’s already illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol, marijuana, perscription drugs, etc.
Honestly, I am quite ambivalent about that.
Philosophically, I think, for the Federal Government at least, the prohibition of drugs is an inadvisable expansion of government power. The true efficacy of the WOD and the negative influences it has had on the practice of law enforcement are serious questions that should be addressed.
That being said, it would be disingenuous not to acknowledge that harder drugs do present greater possibility for abuse and that they DO contribute to great human misery through their abuse.
I'm not sure the numbers of people who do cocaine, meth, heroin, etc will change by more than a few percentage points if they were legalized, but I don't know that I would want to make that bet.
What I do believe pretty strongly is that marijuana, while most certainly not harmless, is relatively benign as far as intoxicants go. In an era of shrinking resources, I would be happier if government focused it resources on the drugs that are people are misusing to far more deleterious effect.
I would also like to see most of the silly hyperbole removed from this debate.
Can't have that.
The Liberal-terrorists need to give up on the lie that it will generate billions in taxes. It wont.
Excellent reply and well thought-out.
Not saying that I agree with everything but it is nice to have an intelligent conversation with a fellow Freeper.
BTW - I love the picture of the shooting Jesus! :)
Cheers,
Mike
Prohibition was more successful than we like to think. It did cut the level of drunkedness and —mtw—really reduced drug use. THAT didn’t come back until the ‘50s because of the stigma. Paradoxically drinking madea comeback because the gansterism made is respectable again among the middle-classes who had caused prohibition in the firstplace. Let is not forget that prohibition was a PROGRESSIVE reform.
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.