>
On an abstract political level, I think people ought to control their own destiny. Government prohibition of a weed has proven difficult.
The problem, as we’ve seen with a number of issues in the past few decades, is that “permission” soon morphs into “promotion.” Can professional organizations continue to ban pot use among member if the government tacitly endorses it through legalization? It is thus deemed a “right” that no professional organization can violate.
>
The issue you posit boils down to one thing: BIG govt.
BIG govt, w/o the ability to take a ‘hands-off’ approach, it *must* have one hand in the till (ala tax-man); all on the fallacy of ‘paying’ for their illegal, unconstitutional Socialist program(s) galore.
Yes. If we got rid of the Welfare State and forced people to be responsible for themselves, the number of people messing with drugs and risking personal disaster would greatly decrease. As long as Big Govt and the taxpayers are available to rescue people, some people will choose to maximize their fun — because, hey, what’s the worst that could happen??