You are missing part of the equation. Libertarians would say - government can not and should not control people, so let them take drugs - but let them suffer the consequences too without taxpayers getting involved or creating a nanny state to deal with it. Before long, society (and the family) will take over, as it should (and as it once did) to shun drug use, to stigmatize it, to penalize it, and to let civil society (churches, etc...) deal with those who do. There were few controls on Marijuana in the 1920's - why did our parents and grandparents know no one who ever smoked it then?
“You are missing part of the equation. Libertarians would say - government can not and should not control people, so let them take drugs - but let them suffer the consequences too without taxpayers getting involved or creating a nanny state to deal with it. Before long, society (and the family) will take over, as it should (and as it once did) to shun drug use, to stigmatize it, to penalize it, and to let civil society (churches, etc...) deal with those who do. There were few controls on Marijuana in the 1920’s - why did our parents and grandparents know no one who ever smoked it then?”
So the libtardian world only works once every social program is removed? What is your plan to make that happen?
Can you run on that platform and win? Is there a plan that goes farther than smoking lots of dope and...?
Got it, how does this sound:
Libertarians would say - government can not and should not control people, so let themtake drugsrape children - but let them suffer the consequences too without taxpayers getting involved or creating a nanny state to deal with it. Before long, society (and the family) will take over, as it should (and as it once did) to shundrug usechild rape, to stigmatize it, to penalize it [HOW WITHOUT GOVERNMENT'S INVOLVEMENT?], and to let civil society (churches, etc...) deal with those who do.
There were few controls on Marijuana in the 1920's - why did our parents and grandparents know no one who ever smoked it then?
Libertarians LOVE to use fact that marijuana was legal in the early 20th century as a "gotcha." They overlook (perhaps purposely) the fact that laudanum, morphine and other opiates were also legally available without a prescription and abuse/addiction of these drugs was rampant. Funny how libertarians always seem to focus just on marijuana or Prohibition and ignore this.
Funny, for a party w/ relatively few members in office, the (L) sure do a lot of ‘damage’. Now I can empathize with the ‘ape/dummy’ Bush :).
Sorry, but you should (if you haven’t) started to note that (C) are just as happy as the Left to use gov’t to CONTROL through ‘the Law’.
Not much will you read “Not that the States DON’T have a Right to do X, Y, or Z; whereas the Fed has NONE...”. More likely, you’d get “There outta be a LAW...”
Outside of abortion, which this (L) DOES oppose [not that the (C) would acknowledge as much]), the (C) love to lose the battle on the, for lack of a better word, minutia. EG: Instead of realizing the partnership in limiting gov’t and returning to PERSONAL responsibility (*cough* drug use *cough*), they’d just as readily slap you across the face than shake your hand over their own idea of what (L) encompasses; when I have yet to hear exactly what (C) is ‘conserving’ (the 80’s, the 60’s, the 20’s....)
Note the ‘issues’ of today that go away when the Constitution is FOLLOWED: No ‘safety net’ = low/no abortion, no illegal immigration, intact families, etc. Nope, the two-headed beast is just as happy chopping the heads off the hydra instead of going for the heart
We can be like Mexico! MORE drugs! More drug cartels! THAT'S the ticket!