Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hypocrite
Well first, I'm not in need of a constitutional primer as im actually in the midst of finishing my first year of law school. (insert whatever witty joke about lawyers you have here). What you seem to be ignoring is that the regulation of these drugs isnt just to protect the safety of those who would take them, its to protect other innocent people in society who can be effected by them. I hardley think regulation of unhealthy foods or exersice is analagous at all becaue those things do not harm others. Unlike drug addicts who turn to crime, neglect their childern, etc. but someone as "intelligent" as you would obviously see that flaw in your reasoning. ( i tried to say earlier i wasnt attempting to offend or call anyone a moron i just worded my argument wrong, but since you insist i guess we will go there).
Additionally since your so concerned about government interference in our private lifes isn't it the least bit disconcerting to you that you are backing an idea that would allow the government to make BILLIONS of dollars by selling its own people poison? doesn't the government sell us enough shit, as it is without allowing them to profit from this too? yes lets just sit back, legalize it up and let people do as they will, while the government gets even more filthy rich by exploiting human zombies. Good solution. I recognize the criminal aspect of the drug trade leads to alot of crime and the like but legalization doesnt seem like a rational solution to me. Like you said treatment and education are EXTREMELY important.
|
Your argument has a number of flaws.
Healthy eating and exercise are directly related to the general concept of "health" - your health is of utmost concern to me. Unhealthy people spread disease and raise insurance premiums.
Having established that, our government already makes a killing from ALCOHOL and TOBACCO, two very addictive and destructive substances. I fail to see how the current model of "regulation" for those two substances is different than the black market. Realistically, alcohol and tobacco are not regulated. I can buy enough booze to drink two horses to death and the lady at the liquor store won't say boo.
Hrm, comments about our government selling poison always flash the words "REAGAN - NICARAGUA - CRACK" in my mind. I wonder why...
Would you rather continue with the current plan of "spend $30+ billion a year and get nowhere?" Would our government making some extra $$$ and using those funds on treatment and education be a bad thing?
This concept of drugs being "poison" is tied to two factors: abuse and black market distribution. Both of these are health problems and should be treated as such. Alcohol abuse is a problem - when are we going to start raiding trailer parks and arresting the mulleted NASCAR crowd? I don't know for a fact, but I would put a sizeable wager on the idea that many of the deadbeat parents in this country are alcoholics, not potheads, cokeheads, methheads, or Deadheads.
I agree that treatment and education are of critical importance. It is unfortunate that we don't practice either of these in our society. Incarceration is always favored over treatment and drug education is a joke. "Drugs are bad, mmm'kay?" is the best anti-drug message I've heard in years and it was on fucking South Park.
If one were extremely cynical (I tend to be), one could say that the practice of the government becoming filthy rich by exploting human zombies is called "politics". Treating drug abuse as a political issue, as opposed to a health issue, is exploitation at its worst.
Thanks for reading. Criticisms are always welcome.