Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Smokin' Joe
Why not reduce the burden on the system by banning alcohol?

Reduction of that burden would be nice.

So do you support banning alcohol?

Alcohol has been legal for the entire lifespan of a majority of Americans, Marijuana has not.

So? There was a time when slavery had been legal for the entire lifespan of a majority of Americans; was that a good reason to maintain that policy?

I am not arguing the WOD or prohibition [...] Why, with knowledge and forethought, increase that load by legalizing another substance which would have to be regulated, tested for, etc.?

You contradict yourself.

There are those who will argue that the DUI industry is already one which has surpassed mere traffic safety and become a cash cow for certain sectors, namely law enforcement, local courts, and the evaluation, treatment, and rehab industry. There are others who will argue that it has become an excuse to set up checkpoints and violate the 4th amendent rights of Americans en masse. Why add another reason?

Those are good arguments for reining in the DUI industry, not for further violating the rights of adults by banning all use of certain substances.

253 posted on 04/15/2006 12:15:10 PM PDT by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies ]


To: Know your rights
Those are good arguments for reining in the DUI industry, not for further violating the rights of adults by banning all use of certain substances.

I am not arguing for banning anything which is not already banned. As for testing, there would be a reasonable limit imposed on how much one could have in their system before being considered too impaired to drive. Unless you contend no such limit exists, whereupon I would disagree. Therefore some means of quantitatively determining whether that limit had been surpassed would be necessary to enforce that limit, otherwise the determination would fall solely at the discretion of the arresting officer, a situation which would not be agreeable to anyone with a sense of 'due process'. Thus you assertion of contradiction does not hold.

I am only asserting that if, and I repeat IF marijuana were legalized here in the US, I would expect an increase in automobile fatalities due to impaired driving, from either marijuana use before getting behind the wheel, or the combination of marijuana and alcohol.

I am not defending the use of alcohol (which I do not use), nor marijuana ( which I also do not use), nor am I condeming that useage.

The article asserted that marijuana use had no significant effect on the ability of the user to operate a motor vehicle while under the influence.

My observations of marijuana users I have known would indicate the article is wrong.

As for So? There was a time when slavery had been legal for the entire lifespan of a majority of Americans; was that a good reason to maintain that policy? , WTF does slavery have to do with operating a motor vehicle?

This is not a discussion of new restrictions on something, it is a discussion of the prudence of loosening the restrictions on something and the effects on highway safety.

Like all laws, the ones in place will only keep the law abiding in check, but that alone keeps a lot of drunks off of the road.

My assertion is that if the poster of the article (who is Canadian) wants this, push for it at home, let the studies of the effects be done, and we can evaluate that data before considering any such action here.

254 posted on 04/15/2006 8:36:10 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson