Replies

In post #19 dustind says, "If your actions do not harm anyone else, 'go for it'".

But you say that if I speed or if I drive while intoxicated I can be arrested and have my liberty taken away. Granted, if I harm someone while speeding or while intoxicated, I should be punished.

But if I'm not harming anybody, why should I be arrested?

And if we can write laws which cover behavior that is potentially harmful, the why can't we write laws against drug use?

--- you say that if I speed or if I drive while intoxicated I can be arrested and have my liberty taken away.

Granted, if I harm someone while speeding or while intoxicated, I should be punished.
But if I'm not harming anybody, why should I be arrested?

And if we can write laws which cover behavior that is potentially harmful, the why can't we write laws against drug use?
33 -rp-

How many times can you be told, rp?

DUI on a public hiway is a threat to everyone on or near the road.

Getting stoned or intoxicated in private threatens few.
We can handle that risk, rather than violate individual liberty & privacy.
And, -- rather than face the known evils of prohibitions.

Give up your idiocy about trying to regulate the private conduct of your peers.. Why do people think that they need to control others? ---

---- "The utterly insufferable arrogance of power, and the need for it, is an absolute fact of the human condition. -- Nothing can be done about it. - Just as the poor shall always be with us, so shall we have these infinitely shrewd imbeciles who live to lay down their version of 'the law' to others."

"But you say that if I speed or if I drive while intoxicated I can be arrested and have my liberty taken away. Granted, if I harm someone while speeding or while intoxicated, I should be punished.
But if I'm not harming anybody, why should I be arrested?

And if we can write laws which cover behavior that is potentially harmful, the why can't we write laws against drug use?"

The difference lies in the property that is being used. If I put a race track on my private property, I can drive as fast as I want, around and around. I can do it while I'm drunk, too. Public property, such as roads and highways, belongs to all of us, so we come to an agreement on rules for what is acceptable behavior on it. Nobody has a right to walk onto my private property while I am driving wildly around my race track, drunk as a skunk, popping wheelies, to order me to stop what I'm doing or face arrest. But, to intervene if I were behaving in such a way on public property is the right thing to do, because I would be violating the laws that we have agreed to.

And if we can write laws which cover behavior that is potentially harmful, the why can't we write laws against drug use?

This is the thinking that gets us gun control.

And if we can write laws which cover behavior that is potentially harmful, the why can't we write laws against drug use?

Isn't what the Democrats always say when they want to ban guns ? "How do we know you won't shoot someone by accident?"