I'm going to have to disagree with you; being willing to trade one freedom for another is how we got in this mess in the first place.
So much for Green the Vote. Recreational MJ will not be on the ballot.
- Thread starter SlugSlinger
- Start Date
Well I don't consider using mind altering substances as freedom. Not being able to walk into walmart and buy a crew served weapon is much more a denial of my enumerated rights than the inability to partake of chemical substances. Guess I'm one of those folks does not have trouble relaxing or unwinding without changing my brain chemistry
It goes directly to the right to self-determination, and the war on drugs is also a huge infringement on the Fourth Amendment (among others).
I never much liked ballet anyway...
Last edited:
^^I have to agree with this for the most part. I certainly enjoyed alcohol during the college years, but after graduating, starting a career, raising a family, etc. I also had no reason for continuing that approach to enjoyment. However, I totally understand and support others who do enjoy things that I don't. In a perfect society, we would have no need for regulating alcohol, drugs, firearms, and on and on. However, since so many in our society have little self control, we must have some form of regulation. The debate is in what and how much regulation is necessary.
So to put this in a firearms analogy, we are regulating the chit out of pellet guns and are classifying in the same manner we would a FA Firearm. Meanwhile, pellet guns are being dealt all over the street and we have an aging demographic that is crying about people shooting their eye out.
There are so many instances where we have done just that. And none of those regulations have keep people from becoming alcoholics, abusing opioids or someone getting their eye shot out from time to time. I have NEVER advocated lawlessness in the streets, when it has come to abortion, pot or any other thing "polite" society puts boundaries on. But putting boundaries on behaviors is completely different that banning behaviors.
The Moral Majority has been just as handy at mucking things up as the bunch advocating anarchy. If I had my way religion would lose it's preferential treatment, tax-wise and there would be a constitutional amendment that laws could not be passed based on religious beliefs (abortion and the Christians trying to dictate to others and Sharia law and Muslims trying to do the same are just 2 examples of religious people trying to hoist to THEIR voluntary servitude onto others).
This is actually pretty good for the folks who already smoke now. They don't have to be worried about their favorite bud going up in price because of taxes now.
Last edited:
Similar threads
