Posted on 08/27/2003 7:52:58 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:05:51 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
So punish that---don't punish non-dependent users of alcohol or other drugs.
You can't punish the mentally incompetent--it doesn't help.
How does punishing non-dependent users, who are violating no rights, help anyone?
False. According to research cited by the Institute of Medicine (part of the National Academy of Sciences, which was created by the federal government to be an adviser on scientific and technological matters), of all those who have ever used marijuana 9% of them became dependent; for alcohol the corresponding figure is a substantially higher 15%, and for tobacco 32%.
Do you use marijuana?
No.
Yes, like alcohol and tobacco.
and you admit that when you say your words openly, without qualifying them as you do here, that you are spreading a LIE to at least SOME people
No more a lie than saying "peanuts are good food" although some people are allergic to them.
the sum of all the anecdotes is overwhelmingly against the conclusion you draw.
The sum of all anecdotes YOU'VE heard, perhaps.
Drug users in mental institutions, committing crimes to pay for their habit, lowlifes who can't earn anything or learn anything.
Sounds like many alcoholics.
Science is imperfect and scientists are biased.
Whereas you are perfect and unbiased?
Law need not be based on science alone, or at all.
It's a sounder basis than anecdote.
You are asking me to accept complete legalization of marijuana, because it's "harmless".
Please show where I said marijuana is harmless, or retract your statement.
Everyone can live without marijuana.
Everyone can live without alcohol and tobacco.
I don't care what people do in their own homes,
So if people grow their own it's OK with you.
but when you insert it into my society it is infringing on my rights.
Nonsense---what "right" is infringed?
You think a substance becomes more addictive if it's legalized?
Would you, if someone offered it?
No.
If they are willing to try it once although it's illegal, why would its legal status affect their willingness to try it more than once?
Then why would they keep trying it? Sounds like nonsense to me. Do you have any evidence for your claim?
I have not said that ANYTHING is harmless.
Using the state is using force. Changing society is a brutal thing.
Criminalizing marijuana use is a brutal thing.
No, I don't want to change our social compact with regard to alcohol or tobacco because a lot of people would be harmed by this.
How? In ways that nobody is hurt by marijuana criminalization?
And I don't want to legalize the sale of marijuana because that would be legalizing a fraud.
How is it any more a fraud than the more addictive drugs alcohol and tobacco?
Why do you think alcohol taxes are so high?
Because politicians are greedy.
How high will the marijuana taxes be if they're legalized? And what state activities would those taxes fund?
I don't know. Why does it matter?
Saying marijuana is "less harmful than tobacco" is pretty much saying it's harmless.
Rubbish. Is English your first language?
My right not to see others commit immorality. It's right there in Mill.
You have no such right.
Also my right not to smell marijuana smoke.
I support bans on public use.
My right not to be bombarded with deceptive advertising messages.
You have no such right. You are currently bombarded with alcohol and tobacco avertising.
My right not to have the fraud committed by others destroy members of my family.
Unless you're referring to your children (for whom all drugs should remain illegal), you have no such right.
You seem as fond as the liberals of making up "rights" that let you push others around.
It's a sounder basis than anecdote.
Do you have scientific proof of that?
Who do you think is impressed by such foolish word games?
I'll give you three guesses.
Because you say so.
Because they enjoy coughing.
Because they enjoy smelling like smoke.
Did I get it? If not, what's the answer.
Of course I do. Am I going to Google to find published references? No. You can do that if you want. I'm completely satisfied in the veracity of the claim.
And I am perfectly satisified that nobody whose mind isn't already made up is impressed by your unsupported and silly claims. So there we are.
Unanimity of evidence
... is not determined by what YOU'VE heard.
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.