Why don't some libertarians understand that some of the personal freedoms...

[Billy000]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

 

[PratchettFan]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

You think having the largest percentage of our population behind bars of all other nations is a better way to go about it? I think not. Prohibition does not work and has never worked. You should be able to fry your own brain if that is your pleasure.

That is not to say we don't need government. In any game you need rules and an umpire.

 

[Billy000]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

You think having the largest percentage of our population behind bars of all other nations is a better way to go about it? I think not. Prohibition does not work and has never worked. You should be able to fry your own brain if that is your pleasure.

That is not to say we don't need government. In any game you need rules and an umpire.

So by your logic, just because prohibition isn't as effective as it should be, that means we shouldn't have it all? An attempt must be made to protect society.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

Sure Comrade.. sure thing...

 

[Billy000]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

Sure Comrade.. sure thing...

Come on really? Why does everything have to be so black and white?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

The War on Drugs negatively affects people who could, we can't actually say that they would, otherwise make a strong contribution to society. They're fired from their jobs just for using drugs regardless of whether it actually affects their job performance, they're arrested and fined ridiculous sums of money, or, worse, imprisoned for lengthy periods of time (Bear in mind that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, thanks in part to drug laws), or killed because they're forced to associate with seedy elements in an attempt to purchase or sell drugs or are unable to receive the medical care that they require. Not to mention the resources wasted by governments and law enforcement in trying to fight this war. All the while not making so much as a dent in the percentage of people using drugs.

So which is worse for society? Accepting that people own their own bodies and, as such, have a right to do to themselves whatever they want, or everything outlined above?

 

[PratchettFan]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

You think having the largest percentage of our population behind bars of all other nations is a better way to go about it? I think not. Prohibition does not work and has never worked. You should be able to fry your own brain if that is your pleasure.

That is not to say we don't need government. In any game you need rules and an umpire.

So by your logic, just because prohibition isn't as effective as it should be, that means we shouldn't have it all? An attempt must be made to protect society.

Yes. That is exactly my logic. And since history fairly well demonstrates that prohibition does not protect society, only creates criminals out of people who otherwise would not have been criminals, I fail to see the logic of your position.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

The introduction, the second and the third paragraphs are among the most ignorant, anti-American drivel ever written in the English language.

While your last paragraph makes sense. Being right 25% of the time on the big issues of the day isn't going to lead you to a good place.

 

[Avorysuds]

Holy crap the OP is politically illiterate.

BTW, seeing as we don't have "our way," who do I thank for all the massive corporate corruption and politician buying, all the pollution allowed to happen, all the bail-outs, all the drugs people do and die from? Do I get to blame Billy? will that dumbass take responsibility for failed regulation and failed policies?

 

[JWBooth]

Welcome back Thanatoast.......

 

[Billy000]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

The War on Drugs negatively affects people who could, we can't actually say that they would, otherwise make a strong contribution to society. They're fired from their jobs just for using drugs regardless of whether it actually affects their job performance, they're arrested and fined ridiculous sums of money, or, worse, imprisoned for lengthy periods of time (Bear in mind that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, thanks in part to drug laws), or killed because they're forced to associate with seedy elements in an attempt to purchase or sell drugs or are unable to receive the medical care that they require. Not to mention the resources wasted by governments and law enforcement in trying to fight this war. All the while not making so much as a dent in the percentage of people using drugs.

So which is worse for society? Accepting that people own their own bodies and, as such, have a right to do to themselves whatever they want, or everything outlined above?

The topic of unfair punishment to using drugs is a separate issue. I am not disputing the complaints you have about them. The issue I am focusing on is the dangers of legalizing drugs. What punishment fits the crime is not what i am preaching.

Again, the issue of people being able to do whatever they want is not that simple. If it was that simple, I would be all for it. There is a greater cost to letting people do whatever the hell they want.

 

[Billy000]

You think having the largest percentage of our population behind bars of all other nations is a better way to go about it? I think not. Prohibition does not work and has never worked. You should be able to fry your own brain if that is your pleasure.

That is not to say we don't need government. In any game you need rules and an umpire.

So by your logic, just because prohibition isn't as effective as it should be, that means we shouldn't have it all? An attempt must be made to protect society.

Yes. That is exactly my logic. And since history fairly well demonstrates that prohibition does not protect society, only creates criminals out of people who otherwise would not have been criminals, I fail to see the logic of your position.

My logic is that legalizing drugs would be greatly harmful to society. The fact that prohibition in this country is flawed in its execution does not mean the philosophy of it is wrong.

 

[Avorysuds]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

The War on Drugs negatively affects people who could, we can't actually say that they would, otherwise make a strong contribution to society. They're fired from their jobs just for using drugs regardless of whether it actually affects their job performance, they're arrested and fined ridiculous sums of money, or, worse, imprisoned for lengthy periods of time (Bear in mind that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, thanks in part to drug laws), or killed because they're forced to associate with seedy elements in an attempt to purchase or sell drugs or are unable to receive the medical care that they require. Not to mention the resources wasted by governments and law enforcement in trying to fight this war. All the while not making so much as a dent in the percentage of people using drugs.

So which is worse for society? Accepting that people own their own bodies and, as such, have a right to do to themselves whatever they want, or everything outlined above?

The topic of unfair punishment to using drugs is a separate issue. I am not disputing the complaints you have about them. The issue I am focusing on is the dangers of legalizing drugs. What punishment fits the crime is not what i am preaching.

The issue is the dangers of making drugs illegal and then having power hungry idiots like you take no accountability when the punishments don't fit the crime. I mean, it's only peoples lives you have destroyed, no big deal, right?

 

[Billy000]

The War on Drugs negatively affects people who could, we can't actually say that they would, otherwise make a strong contribution to society. They're fired from their jobs just for using drugs regardless of whether it actually affects their job performance, they're arrested and fined ridiculous sums of money, or, worse, imprisoned for lengthy periods of time (Bear in mind that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, thanks in part to drug laws), or killed because they're forced to associate with seedy elements in an attempt to purchase or sell drugs or are unable to receive the medical care that they require. Not to mention the resources wasted by governments and law enforcement in trying to fight this war. All the while not making so much as a dent in the percentage of people using drugs.

So which is worse for society? Accepting that people own their own bodies and, as such, have a right to do to themselves whatever they want, or everything outlined above?

The topic of unfair punishment to using drugs is a separate issue. I am not disputing the complaints you have about them. The issue I am focusing on is the dangers of legalizing drugs. What punishment fits the crime is not what i am preaching.

The issue is the dangers of making drugs illegal and then having power hungry idiots like you take no accountability when the punishments don't fit the crime. I mean, it's only peoples lives you have destroyed, no big deal, right?

Power hungry idiot? I really don't think you are giving this issue much thought

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

The War on Drugs negatively affects people who could, we can't actually say that they would, otherwise make a strong contribution to society. They're fired from their jobs just for using drugs regardless of whether it actually affects their job performance, they're arrested and fined ridiculous sums of money, or, worse, imprisoned for lengthy periods of time (Bear in mind that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, thanks in part to drug laws), or killed because they're forced to associate with seedy elements in an attempt to purchase or sell drugs or are unable to receive the medical care that they require. Not to mention the resources wasted by governments and law enforcement in trying to fight this war. All the while not making so much as a dent in the percentage of people using drugs.

So which is worse for society? Accepting that people own their own bodies and, as such, have a right to do to themselves whatever they want, or everything outlined above?

The topic of unfair punishment to using drugs is a separate issue. I am not disputing the complaints you have about them. The issue I am focusing on is the dangers of legalizing drugs. What punishment fits the crime is not what i am preaching.

Again, the issue of people being able to do whatever they want is not that simple. If it was that simple, I would be all for it. There is a greater cost to letting people do whatever the hell they want.

Not really a separate issue at all. If drugs are illegal then there must be some punishment for doing them, and if the punishment isn't harsh then there's no reason to make them illegal in the first place. Of course, people who want to do drugs will do them whether they're illegal or not, and, therefore, the only relevant costs are those imposed by prohibition as I outlined in the post you quoted.

 

[Skull Pilot]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

All actions and their consequences are individual in nature. if a person does drugs then there is no harm to anyone else. BTW wasting billions of dollars a year and countless lives on the failed war on drugs hasn't done crap to lessen drug use. A fraction of that money made available for rehab programs would do more good. It's worked in Portugal.

It matters not what a person does as long as in the doing he does not violate the rights of anyone else.

Last time I checked "society" had no enumerated rights.

And where do you sheep get the ideas that libertarian means corporations run amok?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

So by your logic, just because prohibition isn't as effective as it should be, that means we shouldn't have it all? An attempt must be made to protect society.

The government wasn't created to protect us from ourselves. Stop allowing them that power.

 

[BlindBoo]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

The negative effect of the current draconian incarceration/interdiction drug policies on society is worse than the effects of the drug use they are meant to curb.

No quality control.
Violent turf wars.
Outrageous price mark ups.

Not to worry the Corporate Masters (opps can I still use that word now.....) will never allow the citizens that much freedom, again. Maybe, just maybe the Buds will be legalize in more and more states.

 

[bripat9643]

...that they want, would be harmful to society.

Take legalizing all drugs for instance. It would be fine if the logic was as simple as people should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies. It's not. It would negatively affect people who would not be taking them. Society as a whole would suffer.

People who would otherwise be making a strong contribution to society, would be ruined by addiction. Families would be destroyed. People would lose their jobs because they couldn't perform. It would be a drain on the economy. The cost on our healthcare system would be staggering.

You know what's an even scarier thought? Corporate America having unchecked power. Imagine what corporations would do for the sake of profit. Self regulation is slow moving and ineffective. Corporations need to be limited by laws and regulations. We NEED administrations like the FDA, EPA, TSA, and FAA, etc.

In the first place, with libertarians, the welfare of the herd takes 2nd place to personal freedoms.

In the 2nd place, it wouldn't be detrimental to society. You just ignore all the negative effects of the drug war, like having 2 million people in prison.

 

[ba1614]

If someone commits a crime to feed their addiction, or being stupid while high, then hold them accountable. Otherwise I believe it's none of anyone elses business what they do to themselves.
The best employee I have will enjoy an 8ball on occasion, but come Monday he's ready to work his ass off for as many hours as I ask him to, and he's been with me 15yrs.

If we must spend money on this "war on drugs", lets put some of those millions(Billions?) towards figuring out how to treat addiction and mental health, which would help with many of our societal problems.