tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32869165.post116542922890346773..comments2024-03-08T07:09:46.527-07:00Comments on Pro Libertate: The Pointlessness of Prohibition, part II: The Prohibitionist PhariseesWilliam N. Grigghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14368220509514750246noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32869165.post-1165446085292348742006-12-06T16:01:00.000-07:002006-12-06T16:01:00.000-07:00Will, DD,The war on drugs is a fools errand in my ...Will, DD,<BR/><BR/>The war on drugs is a fools errand in my book too. Caffeine, Nicotine and Alcohol are all failry potent and habit-forming psychoactive substances and are all legal...for the time being. The State knows that any effort to ban these substances would result in a problem bigger than all outdoors for the State. They tried it with alcohol and that backfired. They are trying it by slow measure with Nicotine, however the result will be the same as the prohibition on alcohol was, in my estimation.<BR/><BR/>The only reason the aforementioned substances haven't been banned is twofold. The first being that they are popular with the masses. The second being that they generate a fair amount of taxes/slop at the troughs of the various statehouses and at the Capitol in D.C.<BR/><BR/>As far as I am concerned, it is hypocritical to prohibit some substances and give others a free pass. It should be an all or nothing proposition. Unfortunately, the commoner has bought into the lie that the State is the cure-all for all of society's ills and as such the commoner has abrogated the most fundamental responsibilities regarding self-control and as such, has given Big Brother an excuse to step in and take control.<BR/><BR/>It just occurred to me that maybe the State's objection to decriminalizing most psychoactive, addictive substances is that the State realizes that they have less contol over the addict as compared to the average citizen. The recidivism rate among drug offenders is such because in spite of the State's best efforts to make the trafficking, posession and use of controlled substances as painful as possible, the users of said substances will hearken to the siren song of "The Rush" over the State's regulation and control most every time. Maybe it is because the State hates the competition. <BR/><BR/>Of course we can all sit here day after day and whine about this. The question I have is what can we do about it?Captain Kirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05111692386028869573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32869165.post-1165437288811534322006-12-06T13:34:00.000-07:002006-12-06T13:34:00.000-07:00I hear ya Will ;). I'm a Type I diabetic and have ...I hear ya Will ;). I'm a Type I diabetic and have been for 16 years. Thankfully, Virginia doesn't require prescriptions for either insulin or syringes, which of course can be used to administer all kinds of chemicals and intoxicants. One just has to sign a log at the pharmacy for the syringes.<BR/><BR/>But, as you mentioned, that's probably logged somewhere to possibly provide a probable cause <I>post hoc ergo propter hoc</I> argument for a future takedown. Who knows?<BR/><BR/>One thing I want to make clear though concerning the "War on Drugs" or whatever folk want to call it. And that is that in my mind, it's <I>just as evil and wrong</I> for government to be mandating and encouraging any drug use as it is evil and wrong for it to be banning and discouraging it's use.<BR/><BR/>After all, whose to say that government couldn't also use the force vector it wields to mandate certain forms of drug use as well as making illegal other forms of drug use. Gee, as my cranium released its flatulence, I suddenly realized that's already happening with Ritalin, an amphetamine-like drug.<BR/><BR/>It's most annoying having to listen to the anti-"War on Drug" fanatics, who only have issues with government banning their favorite narcotic but are silent on the reverse side of that argument.dixiedoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09845646940134894119noreply@blogger.com