Poster Child for Legalization? Chattanooga Shooter had multiple addictions

[TheGreatGatsby]

I guess his sister must have drug problems too, if that's what we're gonna be blaming this on.....No? Yea, these bitches are indoctrinated to believe that these actions are not only not regrettable but in the service of their made up god.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Wrong. My son developed anxiety issue from pot and not until 23. In spite of my warnings, he was influenced by the incessant pro-pot propaganda of the ignorant and obstinate of the neocon, out-of-date 1960's mindset and culture.

Your son is by no means typical or representative of the vast majority of persons who derive pleasure from and who benefit in some biological or psychological way from ingesting marijuana. So if your son manifested a problem after using marijuana it is both likely and probable that there was (is) something biologically or psychologically wrong with him to begin with.

There is no medicine, regardless of how simple or complex, which will not impose certain side effects on certain individuals. There are individuals who can die from a bee sting, or from eating peanuts, or from eating food prepared with MonoSodiumGlutemate, and more. And there are individuals who can experience a number of negative side effects from using marijuana. But no one has ever died or been made seriously ill from using marijuana. No one!

Fortunately the percentage of individuals who are susceptible to side effects from the above substances is miniscule. But in the example of marijuana the Reefer Madness fanatics will routinely seize upon any such occurrence to demonize the "devil weed" and insist that anyone who uses marijuana will suffer some mental or physical affliction.

If your mind is made up there is nothing I can say that will alter your belief where marijuana is concerned. But the Reefer Madness era is over. The public is becoming aware of the lies they've been fed for decades and little by little this grossly and wrongfully persecuted natural plant is being recognized for its beneficial properties. And when it's finally legalized, and the general public learns how to use it properly, they will look back on the recent past the way we now look back on the Dark Ages and the era of Puritanical ignorance.

Yeah, and people with shellfish allergies should just go into anaphylactic shock as that's just too bad for them. Tough shit. Let's make sure we tell people there are no such risks and let's force-feed shellfish into those who are allergic -- in public -- because we don't care. It's just their shellfish madness.
You need to learn to become more progressive and more liberal and get out of your closeminded, old school bigoted mindset.

 

[emilynghiem]

Wrong. My son developed anxiety issue from pot and not until 23. In spite of my warnings, he was influenced by the incessant pro-pot propaganda of the ignorant and obstinate of the neocon, out-of-date 1960's mindset and culture.

Your son is by no means typical or representative of the vast majority of persons who derive pleasure from and who benefit in some biological or psychological way from ingesting marijuana. So if your son manifested a problem after using marijuana it is both likely and probable that there was (is) something biologically or psychologically wrong with him to begin with.

There is no medicine, regardless of how simple or complex, which will not impose certain side effects on certain individuals. There are individuals who can die from a bee sting, or from eating peanuts, or from eating food prepared with MonoSodiumGlutemate, and more. And there are individuals who can experience a number of negative side effects from using marijuana. But no one has ever died or been made seriously ill from using marijuana. No one!

Fortunately the percentage of individuals who are susceptible to side effects from the above substances is miniscule. But in the example of marijuana the Reefer Madness fanatics will routinely seize upon any such occurrence to demonize the "devil weed" and insist that anyone who uses marijuana will suffer some mental or physical affliction.

If your mind is made up there is nothing I can say that will alter your belief where marijuana is concerned. But the Reefer Madness era is over. The public is becoming aware of the lies they've been fed for decades and little by little this grossly and wrongfully persecuted natural plant is being recognized for its beneficial properties. And when it's finally legalized, and the general public learns how to use it properly, they will look back on the recent past the way we now look back on the Dark Ages and the era of Puritanical ignorance.

Dear MikeK
I find it most telling when people like you get SO defensive about marijuana use
you have to denigrate and INSULT the people who simply do not recommend it.

You ASSUME it is "Puritannical ignorance."

Sorry MikeK but out of respect for natural laws of spiritual health and balance,
even the BUDDHISTS have been teaching NOT to INTOXICATE oneself,
but to respect and keep one's mind CLEAR and not in a manipulated state.

Are you saying the Buddhists such as the Dalai Lama who recommend
NOT getting drunk or getting high as a form of intoxication are "ignorant"???

I think you protest too much.

You are not only rationalizing to justify your opinion, but you
are overcompensating by INSULTING any opposition to make you feel you must be right
because others must be wrong.

I would seriously recommend that you CHECK yourself.

If you are so sure you are right, you would not mind researching
the effects on the mind and health, and consider both sides.

Maybe you are the one who is so closeminded that you
assume others are that way.

My goodness, and you wonder why the advocates for
legalization give the movement such a bad reputation
as being self-serving and only wanting to justify pot use.

This is why.

I am for decriminalization, but believe we need to have
some kind of localized system of health and safety standards
by which it can be prohibited to abuse alcohol or other drugs
in the case of ADDICTION or mental imbalance that becomes a danger.

Make the "Abuse or Addiction" the target of prevention and correction,
and that covers any and all drugs or chemicals. So it's not so much
trying to ban this drug or that drug, but recognizing a hazard to
health and safety to enable addiction and abuse, of any kind.

MikeK what do you think of THAT idea?
What if the target issue was the "abuse or addiction" as the problem,
instead of arguing which substance is more or less a risk than another?

 

[emilynghiem]

I guess his sister must have drug problems too, if that's what we're gonna be blaming this on.....No? Yea, these bitches are indoctrinated to believe that these actions are not only not regrettable but in the service of their made up god.

Dear TheGreatGatsby There is only one God, though called by different names and terms.
The difference is whether people take a positive or negative approach to God's will:
* retributive justice, or restorative justice
* good will, or ill will
* love of truth, or fear of the unknown
* abundance mentality, or scarcity mentality
* forgiveness and inclusion, or unforgiveness and coercion

I find the key, that makes all the difference,
is forgiveness. If people cannot forgive something or someone
in their past, they will project it forward and cause a vicious cycle of retribution and ill will.

This cycle can only be broken by forgiveness and letting go,
so that positive insights, energy, relations and direction can move toward solutions, corrections and prevention
of whatever caused problems in the first place.

The faith in forgiveness transforming and healing everything in its path
is what it means to have faith in God's grace.

Some Muslims have this naturally, others do not.
Some Christians and some Buddhists live naturally by grace, and others are stuck in negativity.

It isn't the denomination that makes someone closer to God or universal truth,
it is the degree of forgiveness, awareness and acceptance
vs. the degree of unforgiveness, wilful ignorance, and rejection/division caused by ill will towards others
that determines how closely you are following God's will or good will, which is very fine line where
all paths converge and agree in truth, versus following the negative path of destruction that is broader
because it is easier for everyone to think they are right while others are wrong.
It is more refined to find where everyone can agree on what is true and right, and stick with those points instead.

 

[emilynghiem]

There is no medicine, regardless of how simple or complex, which will not impose certain side effects on certain individuals.

^ Yes and no, MikeK ^

Spiritual Healing that works consistently with science and medicine
has absolutely NO ILL EFFECTS, it is completely natural, voluntary, and free.

So there is something better than marijuana, but it isn't necessarily a medication or substance.
It is the process by which the natural healing is restored to the mind and body and relations with others.
.

Spiritual Healing works by identifying the cause of spiritual, mental or physical blocks to healing,
and focusing on forgiveness and healing
in removing the root cause and any attached negative memories, perceptions or emotions.

So this process of forgiveness and healing
removes or reduces the blockage, increases the natural healing energy and flow of life,
and facilitates healing by enhancing the natural process the mind and body already follow.

It is 100% natural, safe effective and free.

The only danger I have heard is mixing positive healing prayer
with any kind of negative "occult" dark energy (e.g., demonic or cult worship),
where the conflict between positive life-giving energy versus death and dark energy
can clash and cause disruption or backlash, and in extreme reactions can become deadly.

.

 

[MikeK]

^ Yes and no, MikeK ^

Spiritual Healing that works consistently with science and medicine
has absolutely NO ILL EFFECTS, it is completely natural, voluntary, and free.

So there is something better than marijuana, but it isn't necessarily a medication or substance.
It is the process by which the natural healing is restored to the mind and body and relations with others.
.

Spiritual Healing works by identifying the cause of spiritual, mental or physical blocks to healing,
and focusing on forgiveness and healing
in removing the root cause and any attached negative memories, perceptions or emotions.

So this process of forgiveness and healing
removes or reduces the blockage, increases the natural healing energy and flow of life,
and facilitates healing by enhancing the natural process the mind and body already follow.

It is 100% natural, safe effective and free.

The only danger I have heard is mixing positive healing prayer
with any kind of negative "occult" dark energy (e.g., demonic or cult worship),
where the conflict between positive life-giving energy versus death and dark energy
can clash and cause disruption or backlash, and in extreme reactions can become deadly.

.

I have no problem with your recommendation, nor would I endeavor to discourage anyone from following it.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I guess his sister must have drug problems too, if that's what we're gonna be blaming this on.....No? Yea, these bitches are indoctrinated to believe that these actions are not only not regrettable but in the service of their made up god.

Dear TheGreatGatsby There is only one God, though called by different names and terms.
The difference is whether people take a positive or negative approach to God's will:
* retributive justice, or restorative justice
* good will, or ill will
* love of truth, or fear of the unknown
* abundance mentality, or scarcity mentality
* forgiveness and inclusion, or unforgiveness and coercion

I find the key, that makes all the difference,
is forgiveness. If people cannot forgive something or someone
in their past, they will project it forward and cause a vicious cycle of retribution and ill will.

This cycle can only be broken by forgiveness and letting go,
so that positive insights, energy, relations and direction can move toward solutions, corrections and prevention
of whatever caused problems in the first place.

The faith in forgiveness transforming and healing everything in its path
is what it means to have faith in God's grace.

Some Muslims have this naturally, others do not.
Some Christians and some Buddhists live naturally by grace, and others are stuck in negativity.

It isn't the denomination that makes someone closer to God or universal truth,
it is the degree of forgiveness, awareness and acceptance
vs. the degree of unforgiveness, wilful ignorance, and rejection/division caused by ill will towards others
that determines how closely you are following God's will or good will, which is very fine line where
all paths converge and agree in truth, versus following the negative path of destruction that is broader
because it is easier for everyone to think they are right while others are wrong.
It is more refined to find where everyone can agree on what is true and right, and stick with those points instead.

I agree with your God is love premise. But I don't agree with your conclusions about denominations. If the plant be bad then how can the fruit then also be good? Islam might be a chicken and the egg question to you; is it evil people who join or does it make them evil; but the reality is it's a bad plant that produces bad fruits.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

 

[emilynghiem]

I guess his sister must have drug problems too, if that's what we're gonna be blaming this on.....No? Yea, these bitches are indoctrinated to believe that these actions are not only not regrettable but in the service of their made up god.

Dear TheGreatGatsby There is only one God, though called by different names and terms.
The difference is whether people take a positive or negative approach to God's will:
* retributive justice, or restorative justice
* good will, or ill will
* love of truth, or fear of the unknown
* abundance mentality, or scarcity mentality
* forgiveness and inclusion, or unforgiveness and coercion

I find the key, that makes all the difference,
is forgiveness. If people cannot forgive something or someone
in their past, they will project it forward and cause a vicious cycle of retribution and ill will.

This cycle can only be broken by forgiveness and letting go,
so that positive insights, energy, relations and direction can move toward solutions, corrections and prevention
of whatever caused problems in the first place.

The faith in forgiveness transforming and healing everything in its path
is what it means to have faith in God's grace.

Some Muslims have this naturally, others do not.
Some Christians and some Buddhists live naturally by grace, and others are stuck in negativity.

It isn't the denomination that makes someone closer to God or universal truth,
it is the degree of forgiveness, awareness and acceptance
vs. the degree of unforgiveness, wilful ignorance, and rejection/division caused by ill will towards others
that determines how closely you are following God's will or good will, which is very fine line where
all paths converge and agree in truth, versus following the negative path of destruction that is broader
because it is easier for everyone to think they are right while others are wrong.
It is more refined to find where everyone can agree on what is true and right, and stick with those points instead.

I agree with your God is love premise. But I don't agree with your conclusions about denominations. If the plant be bad then how can the fruit then also be good? Islam might be a chicken and the egg question to you; is it evil people who join or does it make them evil; but the reality is it's a bad plant that produces bad fruits.

Hi TheGreatGatsby
Are you looking at all of the Muslim followers through the same lens?
If you see SOME bad and then assume "ALL are bad," that isn't fair to the ones
who are consistent with Christian teachings as well. There are many who are not against
Christ so it isn't fair to judge "ALL apples as bad" just because you happen to see a bunch of bad apples!

There are Jewish-Christians or Messianic Jews who are NOT in conflict with Christianity
but consider themselves Christian, a Baptist denomination, but retain their Jewish cultural ways and spiritual laws. So it isn't fair to judge "all Jews the same way" if some are able to reconcile and work with all other religions and some are not. (See also Bernie Glassman Zen Peacemaker who teaches all-inclusive approaches to building spiritual and community relations on a sustainable basis.)

There are also Buddhist-Christians who are not the same as other Buddhists.

I even know Atheists I consider Neighbors in Christ, even though they don't believe in a Personifed
God or Christ. Many people I know are still called to Conscience as Gentiles under Natural laws,
committed to follow and live by the spirit of Restorative Justice but do not personify this as a personal Jesus.

It is still the same calling whether you recognize the name as "Christ Jesus" or the meaning
as "Restorative Justice" in secular practical terms.

Many of the Muslims I have met are more like the Secular Gentiles under Natural laws
who follow the spirit of Christ that way, living by peace and justice NATURALLY.

The Jehovah's Witnesses I have met also come across more like Secular Gentiles
who understand Jesus and the Bible from a more naturalistic angle.

Even if they remain "secular" with their practice, similar to the "secular gentiles".
this is still a valid path in Christianity.

The Gentiles are STILL under natural laws that Jesus or Justice "fulfills." .

As long as we agree to forgive and receive one another as equals,
we can still work together in the spirit of truth, connected by conscience (ie "through Christ.")

The believers under Scriptural laws and authority
and the secular gentiles under Natural laws and civil authority,
are still under the same laws of Justice which Jesus symbolizes .

Even if my atheist and secular friends do not personify these universal concepts and principles as
a "personal God" or "personal Christ," we are still talking about the same process humans go through.

Thank you for your msgs

 

[whitehall]

The ultimate in irony is the president visiting (fellow?) drug addicts at a federal prison and calling for lighter sentences for drug addicts at almost the exact moment a drug addict is murdering U.S. Marines on U.S. soil a couple of days after a (non-violent?) drug kingpin escapes from a Mexican prison Don't count on the liberal media to note the irony or the reluctance of the president to lower the Flags in the U.S. capital until forced into it by political pressure after he made his point of insulting the Military once more..

 

[emilynghiem]

The ultimate in irony is the president visiting (fellow?) drug addicts at a federal prison and calling for lighter sentences for drug addicts at almost the exact moment a drug addict is murdering U.S. Marines on U.S. soil a couple of days after a (non-violent?) drug kingpin escapes from a Mexican prison Don't count on the liberal media to note the irony or the reluctance of the president to lower the Flags in the U.S. capital until forced into it by political pressure after he made his point of insulting the Military once more..

Nor do I get how we are supposed to work toward accountability and responsibility for "universal health care" costs, while at the same time "experimenting" with legalization! How are states supposed to monitor the effects of legislation when these are at cross purposes. Why invite more drug use, and then expect the public taxpayer to pay costs of health care, medical treatment, and therapy?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I did illegal drugs for many, many years and suffered no health problems and payed for it all by my own labor....As has millions others...

Well I'll be. That explains your issues !

 

[G.T.]

More of emily being a dishonest phont. I.e., its wednesday

 

[G.T.]

The ultimate in irony is the president visiting (fellow?) drug addicts at a federal prison and calling for lighter sentences for drug addicts at almost the exact moment a drug addict is murdering U.S. Marines on U.S. soil a couple of days after a (non-violent?) drug kingpin escapes from a Mexican prison Don't count on the liberal media to note the irony or the reluctance of the president to lower the Flags in the U.S. capital until forced into it by political pressure after he made his point of insulting the Military once more..

Nor do I get how we are supposed to work toward accountability and responsibility for "universal health care" costs, while at the same time "experimenting" with legalization! How are states supposed to monitor the effects of legislation when these are at cross purposes. Why invite more drug use, and then expect the public taxpayer to pay costs of health care, medical treatment, and therapy?

Because, dumbass, making "negative health effects" the standard for keeping something illegal means we have to illegalize 100's of things before we even IMAGINE marijuana should be illegal for this reason.


Its a retarded and impossible standard. Try thinking past your tripe and the truth may molly whop you, some day.

 

[emilynghiem]

I did illegal drugs for many, many years and suffered no health problems and payed for it all by my own labor....As has millions others...

Dear Moonglow
social responsibility is not just paying for your own costs
but the consequences you incur to others by your influence and actions.

for example, there is a former City Council member Michael Berry who
loves to rant over the radio that people should have the right to drive and drink,
to enjoy a beer or whatever while driving. He honestly believes it is up to the
people to make and police that choice, and doesn't believe it is the place of govt.

Now, if he goes around promoting drinking and driving, and his listeners
have a higher rate of doing that, thinking it is justified because they heard a Conservative
libertarian independent type argue and defend it using political or constitutional arguments,
what if one of his followers has a wreck driving drunk and causes damage, injury or death?

Wouldn't you say there is INDIRECT influence and responsibility
for encouraging drunk driving? it is still up to the driver legally to take responsibility;
but socially isn't some of the burden on the people like Berry pushing the
idea that people have the right to drink and drive.

 

[Moonglow]

I did illegal drugs for many, many years and suffered no health problems and payed for it all by my own labor....As has millions others...

Dear Moonglow
social responsibility is not just paying for your own costs
but the consequences you incur to others by your influence and actions.

for example, there is a former City Council member Michael Berry who
loves to rant over the radio that people should have the right to drive and drink,
to enjoy a beer or whatever while driving. He honestly believes it is up to the
people to make and police that choice, and doesn't believe it is the place of govt.

Now, if he goes around promoting drinking and driving, and his listeners
have a higher rate of doing that, thinking it is justified because they heard a Conservative
libertarian independent type argue and defend it using political or constitutional arguments,
what if one of his followers has a wreck driving drunk and causes damage, injury or death?

Wouldn't you say there is INDIRECT influence and responsibility
for encouraging drunk driving? it is still up to the driver legally to take responsibility;
but socially isn't some of the burden on the people like Berry pushing the
idea that people have the right to drink and drive.

It's not a good idea, yet if you do, you yourself must bare the burden...yet the majority of folks that use are not addicts..just like with alcohol, religion, sex, food or any other substance humans abuse,,,MJ use by teens is dropping in legalized areas....One you take away the stigma of the user and the substance, the thrill dies out.........

 

[emilynghiem]

The ultimate in irony is the president visiting (fellow?) drug addicts at a federal prison and calling for lighter sentences for drug addicts at almost the exact moment a drug addict is murdering U.S. Marines on U.S. soil a couple of days after a (non-violent?) drug kingpin escapes from a Mexican prison Don't count on the liberal media to note the irony or the reluctance of the president to lower the Flags in the U.S. capital until forced into it by political pressure after he made his point of insulting the Military once more..

Nor do I get how we are supposed to work toward accountability and responsibility for "universal health care" costs, while at the same time "experimenting" with legalization! How are states supposed to monitor the effects of legislation when these are at cross purposes. Why invite more drug use, and then expect the public taxpayer to pay costs of health care, medical treatment, and therapy?

Because, dumbass, making "negative health effects" the standard for keeping something illegal means we have to illegalize 100's of things before we even IMAGINE marijuana should be illegal for this reason.


Its a retarded and impossible standard. Try thinking past your tripe and the truth may molly whop you, some day.

Dear G.T.
1. First of all WHERE did I say anything dishonest? What are you talking about?
2. Secondly I actually support decriminalization. I believe in setting up some other level of law
besides just civil or criminal, that can handle policing abuses and addictions without criminalizing
and penalizing people.

So you are jumping to conclusions and assuming things.

This is a very deep discussion, and you cannot possibly read my mind and know
all the background and the future solutions I propose to address this ethically
where it is entirely by people's consent how laws are to be applied and enforced,
and there is neither criminalization nor legalization forced on people, but there is CONSENSUS on policy.

Please explain where I said anything dishonest, and I am happy to correct
whatever got miscommunicated there! Thanks G.T.

 

[G.T.]

The ultimate in irony is the president visiting (fellow?) drug addicts at a federal prison and calling for lighter sentences for drug addicts at almost the exact moment a drug addict is murdering U.S. Marines on U.S. soil a couple of days after a (non-violent?) drug kingpin escapes from a Mexican prison Don't count on the liberal media to note the irony or the reluctance of the president to lower the Flags in the U.S. capital until forced into it by political pressure after he made his point of insulting the Military once more..

Nor do I get how we are supposed to work toward accountability and responsibility for "universal health care" costs, while at the same time "experimenting" with legalization! How are states supposed to monitor the effects of legislation when these are at cross purposes. Why invite more drug use, and then expect the public taxpayer to pay costs of health care, medical treatment, and therapy?

Because, dumbass, making "negative health effects" the standard for keeping something illegal means we have to illegalize 100's of things before we even IMAGINE marijuana should be illegal for this reason.


Its a retarded and impossible standard. Try thinking past your tripe and the truth may molly whop you, some day.

Dear G.T.
1. First of all WHERE did I say anything dishonest? What are you talking about?
2. Secondly I actually support decriminalization. I believe in setting up some other level of law
besides just civil or criminal, that can handle policing abuses and addictions without criminalizing
and penalizing people.

So you are jumping to conclusions and assuming things.

This is a very deep discussion, and you cannot possibly read my mind and know
all the background and the future solutions I propose to address this ethically
where it is entirely by people's consent how laws are to be applied and enforced,
and there is neither criminalization nor legalization forced on people, but there is CONSENSUS on policy.

Please explain where I said anything dishonest, and I am happy to correct
whatever got miscommunicated there! Thanks G.T.

I believe you are an evil and cynical human being of the worst kind, you hide your bigotted and illogical views behind positive human attributes and I see througg it and it disgusts me.

 

[Moonglow]

The ultimate in irony is the president visiting (fellow?) drug addicts at a federal prison and calling for lighter sentences for drug addicts at almost the exact moment a drug addict is murdering U.S. Marines on U.S. soil a couple of days after a (non-violent?) drug kingpin escapes from a Mexican prison Don't count on the liberal media to note the irony or the reluctance of the president to lower the Flags in the U.S. capital until forced into it by political pressure after he made his point of insulting the Military once more..

Nor do I get how we are supposed to work toward accountability and responsibility for "universal health care" costs, while at the same time "experimenting" with legalization! How are states supposed to monitor the effects of legislation when these are at cross purposes. Why invite more drug use, and then expect the public taxpayer to pay costs of health care, medical treatment, and therapy?

Because, dumbass, making "negative health effects" the standard for keeping something illegal means we have to illegalize 100's of things before we even IMAGINE marijuana should be illegal for this reason.


Its a retarded and impossible standard. Try thinking past your tripe and the truth may molly whop you, some day.

Dear G.T.
1. First of all WHERE did I say anything dishonest? What are you talking about?
2. Secondly I actually support decriminalization. I believe in setting up some other level of law
besides just civil or criminal, that can handle policing abuses and addictions without criminalizing
and penalizing people.

So you are jumping to conclusions and assuming things.

This is a very deep discussion, and you cannot possibly read my mind and know
all the background and the future solutions I propose to address this ethically
where it is entirely by people's consent how laws are to be applied and enforced,
and there is neither criminalization nor legalization forced on people, but there is CONSENSUS on policy.

Please explain where I said anything dishonest, and I am happy to correct
whatever got miscommunicated there! Thanks G.T.

The programs they are implementing now are better than what they used in the past to treat addictions.....They are learning that the user is not a lost soul that can't be saved and each person has a different method for dealing with the abuse...Education and killing the stigma is part of the program...

 

[emilynghiem]

I did illegal drugs for many, many years and suffered no health problems and payed for it all by my own labor....As has millions others...

Dear Moonglow
social responsibility is not just paying for your own costs
but the consequences you incur to others by your influence and actions.

for example, there is a former City Council member Michael Berry who
loves to rant over the radio that people should have the right to drive and drink,
to enjoy a beer or whatever while driving. He honestly believes it is up to the
people to make and police that choice, and doesn't believe it is the place of govt.

Now, if he goes around promoting drinking and driving, and his listeners
have a higher rate of doing that, thinking it is justified because they heard a Conservative
libertarian independent type argue and defend it using political or constitutional arguments,
what if one of his followers has a wreck driving drunk and causes damage, injury or death?

Wouldn't you say there is INDIRECT influence and responsibility
for encouraging drunk driving? it is still up to the driver legally to take responsibility;
but socially isn't some of the burden on the people like Berry pushing the
idea that people have the right to drink and drive.

It's not a good idea, yet if you do, you yourself must bare the burden...

Dear Moonglow
What about people who aren't fully legally competent and able to take that responsibility.

If pushing for legalization of drug or pushing for lenient laws on drunk driving
"opens the door" for UNSTABLE people to abuse drugs and end up harming others,
isn't that part of the equation?

People argue about this for
* gun rights vs. gun control
* abortion rights and responsibility
* immigration and corporate laws -- if you give amnesty to violators
or grant personhood to corporations where this is "too easily abused by CRIMINALS"
what if they aren't the type that can carry out responsibility.

if you allow criminally ill people to get a hold of guns or drugs,
where this harms others, isn't some of that on the people who
failed to write and enforce safer regulations that could prevent this?