11-04-2015, 04:29 PM
(11-04-2015, 04:10 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I mean, if you're really of the mindset that anything that alters one's thinking or decision making should be illegal then there needs to be firm line drawn of no tolerance for any mind altering substance. A person whose position of such should be 100% in favor of alcohol prohibition. It doesn't seem fair to try to make the argument that one drug or substance leads to another, thus question where a line needs to be drawn, while accepting current alcohol regulations and laws.
And don't even get me started on legalized pharmacuticals, which seems incredibly hypocritical. If we're really that worried about people progressing to harder drugss, ie .controlled substances, shouldn't we be more worried about prescribed drugs than marijuana?
Not to many stoners are hurting anyone, at least not as a result of the drug. So if it helps them enjoy life more, unwind, cheer up, sleep, relax, then who really cares? Honestly, what does hurt you, or anyone? If you don't want to do it, more power to you. But why the concern for others?
And as long as you we're asking where the line is drawn, I can ask the reverse. When we can tell others what they can and cannot do,l when it harms no one else, where does that stop? What's next, making McDonalds illegal? Should we prohibit the sale of sugary foods and drinks? Afterall, they can be bad for you and some people abuse them. Alcohol, cigarettes, sugar, fried foods, etc. Where do we draw the line of what we we can and can't tell others not to do, for their own good? Do we need to start to mandate a certain amount of exercise? Should the government regulate the amount of sleep? Where does it stop?
- You have strong points in the first two paragraphs.
- The 3rd: Remember that guy who ate the face off of that homeless dude in Miami a few years ago? Only thing in his system: WEED!
^ It COULD be the catalyst to the zombie apocalypse. Get your samurai swords ready!
- The concern for others is not so much as towards each individual, but more so towards the progression of society. "We" will only be as strong as the individuals that make up "Us". To introduce things into society as a norm that does not strengthen, weakens. To me, ANOTHER legal drug is potentially weakening.
- Good questions on the last part. But none of those are in the same category as weed.
Why have any laws at all then, right? After all, we're all just animals out here and we made up these laws and societal norms ourselves. maybe we don't need any laws. Or even money for that matter? Question: If someone kills someone, is that a victim-less crime since they aren't around any more? The victim is technically gone now, so what do they care?
Ok, so with a lot of the above I'm kidding. I was serious, though, when i ask where does a line get drawn on what should be an illegal substance?
