Posted on 08/01/2002 5:16:08 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
Edited on 05/07/2004 8:00:51 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
There, see how nicer things are when no one goes around hanging labels on people?
You haven't covered anything. You're already paying for prison time, some of which is punishment for genuinly bad behavior. You have to show that societal havoc will increase dramatically if pot is legalized, and that it will be more costly than the drug war which, itself, is wreaking societal havoc in many ways. Show your stuff.
Here goes. I honestly believe (cannot prove, since legalization hasn't happened) that the same costs associated with alcohol will ramp up for pot usage. Car accidents that kill people and wreck property, people missing days at work or doing sloppy unacceptable work, higher insurance premiums, unfairly born by those who don't imbibe, people who become addicted and spend money they don't have or shouldn't spend, and so on. Heck, even litter and crap everywhere. New government agencies come to life to tax and regulate the product. Horrors!
There's something else. Every human action alters reality. Otherwise, what would be the point? A night's sleep, a good meal, an unexpected smile, a small gift. All can profoundly alter a person's outlook. So it's not alteration of reality that bothers you but only a particular type; the drug experience in general and marijuana in particular. Yet your posts show you have very little understanding of it. Rather you're motivated by fear. Fear that drugs will unloose the demons and destroy your world. In that way you seem remarkably close to Anslinger.
I've been stoned, I've been drunk, I've been drunk and stoned at the same time. I've been so stoned I was having visual hallucinations. I speak from that, and from the kind of world I want.
Hey, you all, I have to fly, the pizza's here. It was a blast!
And headsonpike, you stay cute, you little rascal!
Scourge
Let's stick to the secular. From what does a legislature derive its powers to legislate?
That's the modern statist's way of being real.
... the idea of maintaining a Constitutionally limited Republic ...
That's a part of the reality from which the modern statist escapes.
I was probably less clear than I could have been, so let me clarify my question.
In your understanding of the Constitution, is the Federal government delegated the power to outlaw the domestic cultivation, sale, and use of MJ?
If yes, point out to me the part which does so.
If no, then do you favor the repeal of such Federal laws?
You use the words of the tyrannt, of having to restrict liberty for my "better" interests. Do you really think you need to make my decsions for fear I'll make a mistake? If so, you've already made a far larger mistake: you've ceded your liberty, and you are willing to cede mine.
I'd really like to se your definition of liberty.
Maybe they'll wake up when the hangover kicks in their front door.
True. And the pity is he honestly believes tyranny is liberty.
My approach as well because attempting to legislate away personal choice causes way, way more problems than drug use ever would. Education, persuasion, appeal to reason work. Telling people, "Because I say so," usually has exactly the opposite result of what was intended.
You left out board games.
So you've been drunk and stoned. I know lots of drunks who have not the slightest idea of fine wines or their place in an elegant life.
Enjoy your pizza. I'm sure I'll be hearing from you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.