|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:33 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:01 pm
|
|
|
|
bluecherry Do you really think the right answer is to make all bad and/or majority perceived "bad" options illegal so that people are not aloud to make them? We're supposed to have freedom of choice. This includes freedom to make bad (or "bad") choices, so long as we do not violate other's rights. Clearly, even if they are not legally "aloud" to do drugs, people still do and will. Even with a clear message of "it's bad and we won't let you do it!" people do any way. It's just like abstinence only education if I can make a comparison for a moment. People can be told always "No! Don't do it!" but they still will any way and now in a way that's more likely to be risky because they are not well educated on the full facts of the subject. Even if you don't approve of something it is then safer to just tell people "ok, I don't want you to do it, but for those of you that will any way, here's why I don't want you to and if you still will, here's the best way to not go and get yourself into a complete mess, still bad though I find it." In other words, don't do anything about it because the use of narcotics is unavoidable and probably impossible to stop. Like terrorism and the like, right? However, this isn't something that you should just keel over on because, "Well shoot, people will do drugs no matter what, so we might as well just let them f*** themselves up, because we're not supposed to try and prevent or or do anything about it."
People are provided with reasons for not to do drugs, it's not like they don't have the education. The Government says it's illegal, so hat's how it has to be. The Government cares about the well-being of its citizens, and drugs do not help the well-being. To show that drugs are a bad choice, they must be made illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:09 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:05 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:06 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:45 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 2:24 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:44 pm
|
|
|
|
The point is freedom of choice. Driving is dangerous. Walking the streets is dangerous. Skydiving, mountaineering, football, smoking, drinking alcohol, using commercial cleaning products, being depressed, home maintenance/ remodeling, and manufacturing jobs are all dangerous. I'd go so far as to say you would be hard pressed to name an activity that isn't in some way risky. It's all based on mediating risk with reward. What one person finds too risky for the reward that is recieved from it, another person may find completely reasonable. Some people go skydiving, others smoke pot or drink alcohol. There are some things that are quite dangerous that many of us do routinely without actually thinking about how much danger we are in thanks to social norms making people complacent and jaded. Driving for example, is one of the most dangerous activities one can indulge in (A total of 42,636 people lost their lives in motor vehicle crashes in 2004 [in the US]. Another 2.8 million people were injured. [Reference: 2004 Annual Report]) and yet nobody thinks about the statistics as they step into their cars. Why do you think the government is in the right to legislate what risks you may take? Where do you draw the line? Imagine what the world would be like if only the most neccesary risks were legal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 6:24 pm
|
|
|
|
Squicks The point is freedom of choice. Driving is dangerous. Walking the streets is dangerous. Skydiving, mountaineering, football, smoking, drinking alcohol, using commercial cleaning products, being depressed, home maintenance/ remodeling, and manufacturing jobs are all dangerous. I'd go so far as to say you would be hard pressed to name an activity that isn't in some way risky. It's all based on mediating risk with reward. What one person finds too risky for the reward that is recieved from it, another person may find completely reasonable. Some people go skydiving, others smoke pot or drink alcohol. There are some things that are quite dangerous that many of us do routinely without actually thinking about how much danger we are in thanks to social norms making people complacent and jaded. Driving for example, is one of the most dangerous activities one can indulge in (A total of 42,636 people lost their lives in motor vehicle crashes in 2004 [in the US]. Another 2.8 million people were injured. [Reference: 2004 Annual Report]) and yet nobody thinks about the statistics as they step into their cars. Why do you think the government is in the right to legislate what risks you may take? Where do you draw the line? Imagine what the world would be like if only the most neccesary risks were legal. Driving can be as dangerous as can many other things, but using such drugs can lead to even more dangerous choices. From what I've seen, while deaths due to overdose aren't as large as other deaths, they are going up. Legalize it and it's sure to increase exponentially. I already said that choosing to do drugs makes one a bad citizen, and bad citizens should be punished. I really don't just "some" people will do them, I think far more people will do drugs simply because they are now legal, when normally if they were still illegal. People should not be allowed to make whatever choice they want; that is why we have government. And if the government says something is illegal, then that's how it has to be. I really don't see any benefit to legalizing drugs, so they should stay illegal.
I'm not much for "what if" questions, because they aren't what is. The government isn't going to make driving illegal due to the fact that it's an efficient method of transportation. That's blowing things out of proportion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|