OK, so we differ on the solution. It has always been up to the government of every nation to determine the correct path for that nation. Not everyone agrees with the path, and whether or not it works is as often a point of view as a statistical fact.
I see that the whole point of the argument for legalizing marijuana (except for medical purposes) is "I want to do it, it hurts nobody else." But I think you're wrong - it cannot do you any good, and could affect somebody else. Nothing good comes from its use, and it is just another addictive substance. Smoking (tobacco) and alcohol are the same way. Both of them affect my quality of life due to the effects of DUI and the cost of government help with idiots who now have cancer from smoking for 40 years and then demand Medicare to treat them until they die. What's more, tobacco smokers insist on smoking everywhere that's it's not restricted and then I end up inhaling their second-hand unfiltered smoke if I happen to be nearby(such as in a restaurant or a grocery store (yes, I said grocery store) here in the South), thereby affecting my health. There is no good recreational use for marijuana based on the "I want to do it" argument. Do I want to outlaw tobacco and alcohol? Definitely tobacco. I use alcohol sometimes, and now only in a safe manner. But I have abused it, driven home drunk, and endangered myself and others in the process. It's definitely wrong, and I've never had an occasion to use alcohol in a manner where it did something useful. Why are not the drugs we have enough to satisfy us? Why aren't alcohol and tobacco enough to kill us in the manner we need? Why must marijuana also be added to the mix? Matthew Small Web Developer American City Business Journals 704-973-1045 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 10:23 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Medical Marijuana Poll > Matthew wrote: > However, I'm not for a completely free and unfettered society > where anything goes - that's an anarchy and I don't think anyone wants to If your point about anarchy is that it could inhibit your liberties - dead hookers on your lawn, for example - then I agree completely. Where we disagree is in the solution - you seem to be advocating that some arbitrary group of law makers should decided what's good and bad and then enact laws to force others to meet their arbitrary standard. I would take a position that says things you can do in the privacy of your home, that don't inhibit another's freedom, should be legal. However - some of these freedoms can pose a public hazard if unchecked so they need to be regulated. For example, unregulated prostitution can spread disease and unregulated drugs can spread crime and violence. Each of these "crimes of morality" has a regulation solution but will never work is making them illegal. For example, what percentage of kids under 21 haven't gotten hammered? Is the arbitrary standard there working? No. So don't have one, but wisely regulate as they do in Europe and Asia. And, of course, the most efficient way to discover the best solution is to remove these issues from the federal level and let the states experiment. Once a solution is found we all benefit. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how to get a fax number that sends and receives faxes using your current email address http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=64 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:160069 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
