Posted on 07/02/2015 3:54:03 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Excellent point! While it's safe to say the meth didn't improve his thinking process, it's rank emotionalism to say his crime is an "indictment" of meth, or drugs in general.
Not eliminated but reduced to no more than the level of alcohol crime.
and if you can't afford them, the government will give you your daily fix dose of medicine free of charge.
I'm against that (as is every libertarian I know of).
And since all the stress involved in procuring drugs will be eliminated, the possibility of the self-medicated going nuts and killing people for the joy of it will be a thing of the past.
"Stress" is the opposite of "joy." But I think you're right that lowering legally-imposed stress will reduce violence. As for "self-medicated going nuts and killing people for the joy of it": I know of no case where someone known to have no propensity for violence for the joy of it acquired that propensity under the influence of any drug; it seems that people with a propensity for antisocial behavior are disproportionately likely to use legal and illegal drugs.
Of course they'd be regulated, as pot is in the states that have legalized it and as the drug alcohol is in every state.
drugs are at the root of many a crime; they are not victimless.
If someone commits a crime while underslept, do we conclude that sleeping too little is "not victimless"?
I knew that. I guess you missed the sarcasm...
As opposed to not breathing because the male sex anatomy is in your mouth, like yours?
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.