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

To: supercat
Alcohol already occupies that middle ground. I can buy beer, wine, and spirits, and as long as I don't drive drunk, or show up intoxicated (and obnoxious) in public, I'm within my rights. If I decide that I have a problem with my drinking (or crimes against the citizenry lead a judge to tell me the same information) I can seek treatment and recovery.

Sounds to me like Bill Buckley was advocating the application of science rather than pure ideology to our government's handling of the drug situation.

28 posted on 03/01/2008 11:32:42 AM PST by hunter112 (The 'straight talk express' gets the straight finger express from me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: hunter112
Alcohol already occupies that middle ground. I can buy beer, wine, and spirits, and as long as I don't drive drunk, or show up intoxicated (and obnoxious) in public, I'm within my rights.

Some cities have laws against consumption of alcoholic beverages on public rights-of-way, regardless of whether the person consuming them acts intoxicated. Whether or not such laws are a good idea, I see nothing inherently wrong with them.

More generally, I see nothing wrong with laws that forbid people from doing certain things in places where they may be observed by others who are not specifically looking for them. There should be different tiers of punishment based upon whether the behavior's visibility was a result of deliberate action, recklessness, negligence, or bad luck. Exposure due to bad luck shouldn't be punished, but may be logged; excessive "bad luck" could point to negligence or worse.

30 posted on 03/01/2008 11:51:05 AM PST by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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