Should we enact a new level of law enforcement to prevent such behavior?
The whole debate boils down to if the people are responsible for a limited government, or should the government be responsible for everyones actions?
Pot use is just as stupid as pouring drain cleaner in ones nostrils. I don't give a damn if someone chooses to, when the alternative is a police state. Those who make their living working for the police state will disagree, but what the hell, it's a heck of a gravy train.
Not really, that is an overgeneralizing...
1. Regulation of trade. Marijuana is not a native plant species to the Western Hemisphere and is still imported or smuggled into the country. It is called Indian hemp because it came from India (and other parts of Asia), not because of indigenous Americans who were inadvertently mislabeled as “Indians.”
2. Regulation of interstate commerce. Marijuana does not stay in one state. People tend to move it around for sales, use and cultivation.
3. Adults supply minors with the substance in opposition to the wishes of their parents.
This is the sole issue of importance if you are really a “libertarian,” and/or “limited government” (these two are not the same) advocacy.If you want law enforcement to protect you from people, like myself, who will act to preserve the integrity of their familial relationships and not call 911, then you must also respect that we have rights as well to demand our private actions in response are also lawful.
To me, no law matters after one of my beloved ones are corrupted or molested in any fashion (physically or mentally).
Aside from the three above legal issues, the so-called “libertarians” want to have their cake and eat it too. They want no government interference in their private lives, but will run like the cowards they are to government bureaucracy when I want to eliminate their interference in my private life.
Although I am one onerous son-of-a-bitch about it, why should that be a crime or a “sin” if nothing is held to be sacred?