[cloudmountain]

I don’t like dirtbags, either. But not all people who enjoy a smoke now and then are dirtbags. It’s a question of self-responsibility, and we probably would agree that a significant percentage of people are lacking in that regard. Where we disagree is on whether every one else should be restricted because of that. It’s which side you take of the “one bad apple spoils the barrel” problem.

"Enjoying a smoke now and then...." is still illegal when the "smoke" is dope. It sure is a matter of self responsibility when people buy illegal drugs for a "once in a while" smoke or whatever.

There was a huge push to legalize pot, but it never happened, MOSTLY because every doctor worth his salt declared unequivocally that pot is a "gateway" drug. You know what that means. Addicts start somewhere and pot is the perfect gateway...mind is mildly blown, giggles are endured and drug friends/dealers are established. There really is no half way to it.

Either it's legal or it's not; there is no such thing as "quasi-legal" or "sort of legal." Also I don't understand your analogy: It’s which side you take of the “one bad apple spoils the barrel” problem.
By the way, one bad, rotten apple DOES spoil the entire barrel, albeit slowly. Fruit rots. People's brains and bodies rot with drugs. Every doctor will tell you that too.

As for restricting "everyone else," that's moot since not "everybody" takes illegal drugs...or WANTS to.

Thanks for your civil argument. That is what I do like about the FR.

[Pearls Before Swine]

Legality is a funny issue. Some things that most would consider “right” are illegal; somethings that most would consider “wrong” are legal.

For example, during Prohibition, all alcohol consumption was illegal, but a large segment of society ignored the law and consumed. Today, you can go from one state to another, and crossing the state line subjects you to all sorts of restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. Some of these laws —witness recent arrests of innocent people who were transporting sealed firearms via established airline rules — strike many on FR as absurd. But it’s the law.

So, I wouldn’t use legality as an absolute in a discussion, although you are free to use it as a guide to your own conduct. Myself, I tend to go along with the principle that pretty much anything that doesn’t harm others should be allowed. You’ll probably argue along the lines of we have to prevent people from harming themselves in ways that they don’t understand, so we’ll never convince each other.

As to civility... why not?