[Kevin Curry]

At last we have an admission that this has nothing to do with personal responsibility (libertarianism, ostensibly).

You just want to shift the focus of efforts from doper punishing to doper-coddling because you are convinced fewer people would be adversely affected.

Doper-punishing and doper-coddling are both enormously expensive enterprises. The taxpayer eats those costs either way. The only common element is doper irresponsibility in forcing the rest of us to clean up and deal with their self-indulgent messes.

It's a numbers game that ends in state action no matter how it is played.

[uncbob]

You still haven't answered the question
Do you use liquid drugs

Come now it isn't a really difficult question

I'll give you my answer
I don't use liquid leaf or powder
Can you say the same Drug warrior

[WyldKard]

At last we have an admission that this has nothing to do with personal responsibility (libertarianism, ostensibly).

Um..it helps if you quote stuff, Kevin. That way, I don't have to try to read your appaulingly small mind. However, I'm going to guess you are talking about the question regarding State vs. Federal prohibition.

Pretty much disregarding all the crap you posted, are you essentially saying that States rights are a crock, and must be ignored?

I don't approve of Prohibition, but I could live with State level prohibition, as it is CONSTITUTIONAL. Unlike Federal Prohibition.