Answering the Libertarian argument for drug legalization

[Clampy]

Everyone always screams "what about the children " and CPA takes kids away from parents simply because they smoke weed. What's more damaging to the child. Their parents smoke not around the kids or they get abused in foster care ?

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/...in-Foster-Care

[swamp snorkler]

What happened to MG?

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by swamp snorkler

What happened to MG?

I do hope that he has not chosen to stop participating in this thread because of a feeling that he may have an unpopular opinion. I welcome a differing opinion because it ensures solid fact based discussion, and just like in the discussion earlier this month about triple tail.. it can end up with a scenario where people form a common purpose and support each other. In that discussion i did not support the original message of "don't support the CCA because they are a bunch of tools (because it didn't take into account all the good they had and continue to do) But i did end up supporting the letter calling for more study, Because it was a amazingly prudent request to make.

People do not easily change there opinions, and I have no doubt that MG most likely still disagrees with legalization and everything that's been discussed here. I do hope that he is looking for supporting studies / cases to refute whats been said here.

I don't know if anyone here is familiar with the 10th man rule, It's something that was purported to have started in Israel. It was considered to be the reaction that the jewish people took to deal with the atrocities that had been taken against them (no one would have believed that the holocaust could occur etc etc etc) The rule states that in any meeting of 10 men who are discussing how to act / react in a situation. It's the 10th mans duty is to disagree, No matter how impossible the situation must be to create for him to justify him disagreeing. HE MUST DISAGREE. AT LEAST ONE PERSON MUST PLAY DEVIL's ADVOCATE.

Therefore the committee of 10 comes out with a stronger more realistic law which can cover all eventualities because that 10th man forced them to deal with the unrealistic.

Even if MG continues this discussion as only a 10th man, we must respect his opinion and offer valid arguments, and not wild emotion, to come up with the best possible solutions.

[Clampy]

I heard he ordered some weed from university of Mississippi and and bunch of lab rats. . Nothing but love MG.

[SULPHITE]

We've got the strongest frickin' military in the world that can search a out a 6' plus ******head in some god forsaken sand land yet we can't use them to destroy drug cartels...

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by SULPHITE

We've got the strongest frickin' military in the world that can search a out a 6' plus ******head in some god forsaken sand land yet we can't use them to destroy drug cartels...

who the hell wants to destroy drug cartels? look at all the scandals that have shown that we are supplying them with their weapons. Follow the money, govn feels that it cannot stop the drug war right now, because so many are riding on its coattails in order to earn money.

[Clampy]

Originally Posted by AceArcher

who the hell wants to destroy drug cartels? look at all the scandals that have shown that we are supplying them with their weapons. Follow the money, govn feels that it cannot stop the drug war right now, because so many are riding on its coattails in order to earn money.

In think if we legalized weed we wouldn't lose those jobs. Just move them to meth/ synthetic drug enforcement.

It is the senseless enforcement of the prohibition of a flower that has made cops the enemy of otherwise law abiding citizens.

[MathGeek]

"Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery, instead be filled with the Spirit” - Ephesians 5:18

Whether one accepts the Bible as the Word of God or merely a compilation of human wisdom, one will notice the common theme that alcohol needs to be used in moderation. Jesus himself is shown turning water into wine, and the Apostle Paul recommends Timothy use a little wine because of frequent illnesses. Alcohol use in moderation could be wise and reasonable; alcohol use in excess (getting drunk) was forbidden, because it opened the door to greater evil.

The issue with recreational drugs is similar. Very few drugs are completely illegal, but rather they are highly regulated to minimize the potential for use in excess that would likely be detrimental to individuals, their families, and larger segments of society. One cannot paint accurately with a broad brush, because each drug is different and has different potential for legitimate uses, different risk factors for overuse, and differing propensities for the misuse by an individual to negatively impact those around him.

My view is that recreational and performance enhancing drugs (including medical drugs that have the potential for recreational and performance enhancing use) is that the degree of regulation should take into consideration the propensity for each drug to lead to greater evil and due consideration should be given to the different spheres of evil to which each drug presents an opening including: sexual immorality, unsafe driving, bad decision making, physical addiction, psychological addiction, criminal behaviors, health risks, the occult, inability to meet one's financial obligations.

I still recall when an eighth grade teacher recited the poem, “Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker” regarding the ability of each to yield the desired payoff. Cannabis in various forms can be quicker still, and I bet that in addition to the volumes of scientific literature associating cannabis use with high risk sexual behavior among teens, most readers also have some personal and anecdotal experience with the propensity for young men on the make plying their targets with cannabis and other recreational drugs with the main aim of sexual gratification. The ad campaign, “Get high, get stupid, get AIDS” may sound like a trite soundbite, but there is a lot of solid science and well considered wisdom behind the six word summary. There are some conflicting studies regarding whether legal outlets increase teen drug use, but one Colorado study found that 3/4of teen users attributed the source of their pot to medical marijuana outlets.

Both Biblical and secular military wisdom emphasize self-control. Both academic and athletic performance emphasize self-control gained through mastery of the discipl[SIZE=2]ine[/SIZE] rather than fraudulent short cuts through either performance enhancing drugs or other cheating. Most are disappointed when they learn that a sports hero (or one of their own children) has achieved success through cheating, and most support the testing and other regulatory efforts of academic, military, and athletic governing bodies to maintain the integrity of their activities and institutions.

Good citizens should be just as concerned with self-control as academic, military, and athletic institutions. Most readers should be enthusiastic supporters of the right to keep and bear arms, and would agree with the sentiment that, “Gun control is being able to hit your target.” Most like the joke that a good “one gun a month” law should require heads of households to buy at least one gun a month. Just as the military could not foresee Pearl Harbor coming on December 7, 1941, and the intelligence community could not foresee the attacks of September 11, 2001, the shepherd of a family cannot foresee the time when the wolf will be at the door.

I would hate to be hallucinating under the influence of marijuana or have my fine motor control impaired by some other recreational drug at the moment my family needs my complete and functioning faculties to fend off the wolf at the door. Personally, I don't even drink one or two drinks while boating, fishing, or playing the role of a single parent (traveling with my children or wife out of town.) There are just too many possible combinations of mechanical failures, meteorological challenges, unforeseen emergencies, risks brought about by wild animals or evil people for me to be impaired while caring for my children. And, without doubt, nearly every recreational drug represents some degree of impairment when dealing with unexpected emergencies.

I am no fan of the nanny state or the manner in which the war on drugs has motivated and “justified” constitutional infringements, asset forfeitures, and the growth of government powers. As a man of faith, however, I realize, that the governmental powers do not bear the sword for nothing, and that government restraint of evil is valid if exercised within Constitutional boundaries. In the Federalist Papers, our founding fathers pointed out that one benefit of the federal system was that different states would be at liberty to implement different laws governing their citizens. Bold adoption of new laws by one state could serve as an experiment whose consequences could be carefully weighed by other states when considering whether to follow suit.

By adopting libertarian ideals on drug use without adopting commensurate libertarian freedoms for insurers, employers, educational institutions, or even parents, California, Colorado, and Washington are headed for moral and educational disaster, and the eventual financial disaster that is sure to follow. Drug law and policy in a given state is more a question of wisdom than a fundamental matter of righteousness. I hope and pray that my beloved home state of Louisiana takes a good, long (decades long) look and gives careful consideration to the outcome of these states' policies before imitating them.

Do you see the US as headed toward many more decades of peace and prosperity that will insulate ill prepared heads of households and allow continued prosperity regardless of whether the general population displays self-control or debauchery? Or do you see a future where Louisiana will need to demonstrate a level of self-control that separates it from the folly of California and the Northeast? Marijuana laws have barely been enforced in New Orleans for decades, is this your desire for the rest of the state?

Since the characteristics and risks of each drug are multidimensional, I find it overly simplistic to characterize drugs as “hard” or “soft” or to simply say a given drug is “better” or “worse” than alcohol or tobacco. Nicotine is more addictive than cannabis, but cannabis is more likely to lead to bad decision making (especially bad sexual decisions) and loss of fine motor control. Long term alcohol use may present more medical risks than cannabis, but cannabis is much more challenging for inexperienced users to use in moderation (avoid getting “high” or “stoned” with likely hallucinations and risk of poor decision making). I sure hope providing cannabis to children without parental consent remains a felony in Louisiana and in the other states we'll need on our side when push comes to shove.

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

"Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery, instead be filled with the Spirit” - Ephesians 5:18

Whether one accepts the Bible as the Word of God or merely a compilation of human wisdom, one will notice the common theme that alcohol needs to be used in moderation. Jesus himself is shown turning water into wine, and the Apostle Paul recommends Timothy use a little wine because of frequent illnesses. Alcohol use in moderation could be wise and reasonable; alcohol use in excess (getting drunk) was forbidden, because it opened the door to greater evil.

The issue with recreational drugs is similar. Very few drugs are completely illegal, but rather they are highly regulated to minimize the potential for use in excess that would likely be detrimental to individuals, their families, and larger segments of society. One cannot paint accurately with a broad brush, because each drug is different and has different potential for legitimate uses, different risk factors for overuse, and differing propensities for the misuse by an individual to negatively impact those around him.

My view is that recreational and performance enhancing drugs (including medical drugs that have the potential for recreational and performance enhancing use) is that the degree of regulation should take into consideration the propensity for each drug to lead to greater evil and due consideration should be given to the different spheres of evil to which each drug presents an opening including: sexual immorality, unsafe driving, bad decision making, physical addiction, psychological addiction, criminal behaviors, health risks, the occult, inability to meet one's financial obligations.

I still recall when an eighth grade teacher recited the poem, “Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker” regarding the ability of each to yield the desired payoff. Cannabis in various forms can be quicker still, and I bet that in addition to the volumes of scientific literature associating cannabis use with high risk sexual behavior among teens, most readers also have some personal and anecdotal experience with the propensity for young men on the make plying their targets with cannabis and other recreational drugs with the main aim of sexual gratification. The ad campaign, “Get high, get stupid, get AIDS” may sound like a trite soundbite, but there is a lot of solid science and well considered wisdom behind the six word summary. There are some conflicting studies regarding whether legal outlets increase teen drug use, but one Colorado study found that 3/4of teen users attributed the source of their pot to medical marijuana outlets.

Both Biblical and secular military wisdom emphasize self-control. Both academic and athletic performance emphasize self-control gained through mastery of the discipl[SIZE=2]ine[/SIZE] rather than fraudulent short cuts through either performance enhancing drugs or other cheating. Most are disappointed when they learn that a sports hero (or one of their own children) has achieved success through cheating, and most support the testing and other regulatory efforts of academic, military, and athletic governing bodies to maintain the integrity of their activities and institutions.

Good citizens should be just as concerned with self-control as academic, military, and athletic institutions. Most readers should be enthusiastic supporters of the right to keep and bear arms, and would agree with the sentiment that, “Gun control is being able to hit your target.” Most like the joke that a good “one gun a month” law should require heads of households to buy at least one gun a month. Just as the military could not foresee Pearl Harbor coming on December 7, 1941, and the intelligence community could not foresee the attacks of September 11, 2001, the shepherd of a family cannot foresee the time when the wolf will be at the door.

I would hate to be hallucinating under the influence of marijuana or have my fine motor control impaired by some other recreational drug at the moment my family needs my complete and functioning faculties to fend off the wolf at the door. Personally, I don't even drink one or two drinks while boating, fishing, or playing the role of a single parent (traveling with my children or wife out of town.) There are just too many possible combinations of mechanical failures, meteorological challenges, unforeseen emergencies, risks brought about by wild animals or evil people for me to be impaired while caring for my children. And, without doubt, nearly every recreational drug represents some degree of impairment when dealing with unexpected emergencies.

I am no fan of the nanny state or the manner in which the war on drugs has motivated and “justified” constitutional infringements, asset forfeitures, and the growth of government powers. As a man of faith, however, I realize, that the governmental powers do not bear the sword for nothing, and that government restraint of evil is valid if exercised within Constitutional boundaries. In the Federalist Papers, our founding fathers pointed out that one benefit of the federal system was that different states would be at liberty to implement different laws governing their citizens. Bold adoption of new laws by one state could serve as an experiment whose consequences could be carefully weighed by other states when considering whether to follow suit.

By adopting libertarian ideals on drug use without adopting commensurate libertarian freedoms for insurers, employers, educational institutions, or even parents, California, Colorado, and Washington are headed for moral and educational disaster, and the eventual financial disaster that is sure to follow. Drug law and policy in a given state is more a question of wisdom than a fundamental matter of righteousness. I hope and pray that my beloved home state of Louisiana takes a good, long (decades long) look and gives careful consideration to the outcome of these states' policies before imitating them.

Do you see the US as headed toward many more decades of peace and prosperity that will insulate ill prepared heads of households and allow continued prosperity regardless of whether the general population displays self-control or debauchery? Or do you see a future where Louisiana will need to demonstrate a level of self-control that separates it from the folly of California and the Northeast? Marijuana laws have barely been enforced in New Orleans for decades, is this your desire for the rest of the state?

Since the characteristics and risks of each drug are multidimensional, I find it overly simplistic to characterize drugs as “hard” or “soft” or to simply say a given drug is “better” or “worse” than alcohol or tobacco. Nicotine is more addictive than cannabis, but cannabis is more likely to lead to bad decision making (especially bad sexual decisions) and loss of fine motor control. Long term alcohol use may present more medical risks than cannabis, but cannabis is much more challenging for inexperienced users to use in moderation (avoid getting “high” or “stoned” with likely hallucinations and risk of poor decision making). I sure hope providing cannabis to children without parental consent remains a felony in Louisiana and in the other states we'll need on our side when push comes to shove.

I am not going to tackle this from a point by point basis, every concern you have listed above is easily researched and debunked with a quick google search.

I am going to choose to answer the question as if you are indeed playing devil's advocate, additionally i am going to endeavor to keep it quite short and sweet.

You say in the above that you make sure to not imbide alcohol in situations where there may be a chance that your skills will be needed in their full capacity.

If "Soft" (alcohol, nicotine, marijuana (by any of its various forms), & mushrooms) are legalized. And for some odd reason, you decide that you would like to partake of them.

Are you likely to do so at a time which will put your children / family at risk. Or are you likely to do so at the same times that you enjoy an occasional adult beverage?

The average american who chooses to partake will most likely make the exact same choice that any reasonable person would make in that situation.

The sky is not likely fall, The Zombie Apocalypse isn't going to occur, People are not going to all turn into meth freaks, the end of days will not be upon us...... The only thing that's bound to happen is a bunch of people sitting around scratching there heads saying "why the hell didn't we do this sooner".

I sincerely hope that happens much sooner rather than later. We really really need to focus our talents on things that actually matter in today's world.

[Clampy]

The statement about "Hallucinating" on weed shows you really have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Marijuana.

[Montauk17]

Originally Posted by Clampy

The statement about "Hallucinating" on weed shows you really have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Marijuana.

Must have been some of dat cripdacronnakillalight....weed ain't no drug there is only 3 side effects happy,hungry,and sleepy. But if you take too many advil that will be your last headache.

[Duck Butter]

5 pages on WEED!

The question is 'how would legalization affect you?'

Will not affect me one bit

Louisiana is the very last state that would legalize the stuff anyways, well maybe Texas

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

5 pages on WEED!

The question is 'how would legalization affect you?'

Will not affect me one bit

Louisiana is the very last state that would legalize the stuff anyways, well maybe Texas

As a parent, the legalization of cannabis would make it more challenging to raise drug-free children.

As a teacher, more widely available cannabis would make teaching college Calculus and Physics much more challenging. Working at an institution with random drug testing of students would be a definite advantage. Maintaining a level of learning while drug use is on the rise can easily become a bricks without straw situation.

As a citizen, I am concerned about the continued dumbing down of American education, which I see as accelerating rapidly if drug use increases among high school and college students. I do not envision drug users being better informed voters, better able to apply Constitutional principles to practical questions, or more likely to be givers rather than takers. I also do not foresee more intelligent or thoughtful jury decisions.

As a driver, I am concerned that drug legalization will increase the risks of chemically challenged drivers on the road.

As a consumer of medical insurance, I am concerned that drug legalization will drive up my costs.

As a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, I am concerned that drug legalization will lead to more careless use of firearms by gun owners who are using drugs, and that these incidents will be manipulated to infringe on the rights of drug-free gun owners.

As a former DoD civilian, I am concerned that drug legalization will hinder the recruitment and retention of a drug free fighting force.

As an angler, I do not think the legalization of drugs for oil field and chemical industry workers will reduce the chances of oil spills and other environmental disasters.

As a law abiding resident, I am concerned that drug legalization will hinder the recruitment and retention of drug free law enforcement officers.

The expanded use of recreational and performance enhancing drugs during my lifetime has not been a blessing to my country. As a father, I do not see how legalizing drugs for recreational and performance enhancing uses will leave a better country for my children or my grandchildren.

God bless Louisiana.

God bless Texas.

May they pry our drug laws out of our cold, dead fingers.

[Duck Butter]

[quote=MathGeek;618331]As a parent, the legalization of cannabis would make it more challenging to raise drug-free children.

As a teacher, more widely available cannabis would make teaching college Calculus and Physics much more challenging. Working at an institution with random drug testing of students would be a definite advantage. Maintaining a level of learning while drug use is on the rise can easily become a bricks without straw situation.

PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) is one of the biggest scientific discoveries in our lifetime. It made DNA fingerprinting a very simple process. It completely revolutionized science, and it gave us shows like CSI We can go in with a strand of hair or whatever and in a few hours you can find out all kinds of things about a person by this very process. The whole process was founded by a fellow who was wait for it wait for it - tripping on LSD Thats a whole different egg to crack there, but my physics and mathematics profs in college had to be potheads

As a citizen, I am concerned about the continued dumbing down of American education, which I see as accelerating rapidly if drug use increases among high school and college students. I do not envision drug users being better informed voters, better able to apply Constitutional principles to practical questions, or more likely to be givers rather than takers. I also do not foresee more intelligent or thoughtful jury decisions.

Pot has nothing to do with this, its the ease of getting information and the loss of actually wanting to learn, now everything is right there for us in the palm of our hand. As someone once said 'we have every bit of information right there in the palm of our hand, yet all day we just want to look at funny pics of cats'

As a driver, I am concerned that drug legalization will increase the risks of chemically challenged drivers on the road.

"Man that guy was so stoned, he drove off the road and wrecked his car" - said no one ever
Alcohol is a drug and WAY much more dangerous than pot

As a consumer of medical insurance, I am concerned that drug legalization will drive up my costs.

There could be an argument there about McDonalds also. Fat people are driving it up as well

As a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, I am concerned that drug legalization will lead to more careless use of firearms by gun owners who are using drugs, and that these incidents will be manipulated to infringe on the rights of drug-free gun owners.

Nothing is going to happen to your 2nd amendment. We just saw this with that ammo and gun craze.

As a former DoD civilian, I am concerned that drug legalization will hinder the recruitment and retention of a drug free fighting force.

As an Afghanistan vet, I will tell you that there are plenty of drug users in the US Army

As an angler, I do not think the legalization of drugs for oil field and chemical industry workers will

reduce the chances of oil spills and other environmental disasters.

Oilfield can make their own rules, you can't drink alcohol on an oil rig even though its LEGAL. I would also venture to say there are MANY drug users in the oilfield Methheads

As a law abiding resident, I am concerned that drug legalization will hinder the recruitment and retention of drug free law enforcement officers.

Just because something is legal, doesn't mean people will do it. There are many people who don't drink even though its legal, there are many people who don't smoke cigarettes even though its legal

The expanded use of recreational and performance enhancing drugs during my lifetime has not been a blessing to my country. As a father, I do not see how legalizing drugs for recreational and performance enhancing uses will leave a better country for my children or my grandchildren.

Its not going to be a blessing, but to me there are way bigger fish to fry than worry about this, and Louisiana will be the very last one to do this IF in fact it does happen. I don't foresee it happening in this decade though, so why are we even discussing this



I successfully multi-quoted yay me!

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

As a parent, the legalization of cannabis would make it more challenging to raise drug-free children.

As a teacher, more widely available cannabis would make teaching college Calculus and Physics much more challenging. Working at an institution with random drug testing of students would be a definite advantage. Maintaining a level of learning while drug use is on the rise can easily become a bricks without straw situation.

As a citizen, I am concerned about the continued dumbing down of American education, which I see as accelerating rapidly if drug use increases among high school and college students. I do not envision drug users being better informed voters, better able to apply Constitutional principles to practical questions, or more likely to be givers rather than takers. I also do not foresee more intelligent or thoughtful jury decisions.

As a driver, I am concerned that drug legalization will increase the risks of chemically challenged drivers on the road.

As a consumer of medical insurance, I am concerned that drug legalization will drive up my costs.

As a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, I am concerned that drug legalization will lead to more careless use of firearms by gun owners who are using drugs, and that these incidents will be manipulated to infringe on the rights of drug-free gun owners.

As a former DoD civilian, I am concerned that drug legalization will hinder the recruitment and retention of a drug free fighting force.

As an angler, I do not think the legalization of drugs for oil field and chemical industry workers will reduce the chances of oil spills and other environmental disasters.

As a law abiding resident, I am concerned that drug legalization will hinder the recruitment and retention of drug free law enforcement officers.

The expanded use of recreational and performance enhancing drugs during my lifetime has not been a blessing to my country. As a father, I do not see how legalizing drugs for recreational and performance enhancing uses will leave a better country for my children or my grandchildren.

God bless Louisiana.

God bless Texas.

May they pry our drug laws out of our cold, dead fingers.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh.... where to start...

What will be affected by the legalization of weed. Well for one thing i know that your sense of paranoia is not going to affected by legalization, you already have that covered. As a matter of fact one of the purported side effects of OVERINDULGENCE in weed is a heightened level of paranoia.... Maybe your right MG... we really do need to keep you away from that stuff.

Because you... becoming any more paranoid, and conjecturing any more "chicken little sky is falling" fallacies.... man, now that's a scary thought!

[Clampy]

If it is a moral issue with you then fine but you CAN NOT legislate morality.

If you wanna get biblical.

Genesis 1:29 - And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which [is] upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which [is] the fruit of a tree yielding seed;

That 3/4 kids get pot from a dispensary nonsense.
That's a sales pitch. " hey man I got that medical bud ". Then kid answers survey yeah I have smoked dispensary weed.

New Orleans ?!? Really. The city ruined by alcohol fueled violence and you blame that on pot.

And a felony. Really ? 2 parents get busted for a ounce and kids get shipped off to foster care and forever traumatized .

What about the children indeed.

[Clampy]

Respectfully sir but by that logic people should be locked up for just possessing a beer. How come you approach everything from science until the science is not in your favor.

[AceArcher]

Originally Posted by Clampy

Respectfully sir but by that logic people should be locked up for just possessing a beer. How come you approach everything from science until the science is not in your favor.

MG may well be approaching this from a 10th man arguement standpoint.

He may simply being playing the devil's advocate. Or he may be a staunch believer of everything he has stated.

He is however absolutely and totally allowed to have an his own opinion.

Same as you or I.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Clampy

Respectfully sir but by that logic people should be locked up for just possessing a beer. How come you approach everything from science until the science is not in your favor.

Not at all. I would not support mandatory imprisonment for misdemeanor cannabis violations. Implying that I would is an example of the strawman fallacy, as is the suggestion that I would favor taking children away from parents for nothing more than a single misdemeanor drug charge.

Implying that I approach everything from science until the science is not in my favor is another strawman fallacy, as well as apparently hypocritical. You are the one dismissing out of hand the scientific impact of the study showing 3/4 of the youths with weed in Colorado report getting that marijuana through MMJ channels. You are the one dismissing and failing to give any answer to the scientific fact that cannabis is a very common contributing factor to risky sexual behavior among teenagers. I have acknowledged the scientific finding that alcohol has more longer term health risks than cannabis, but you have ignored the possibility of hallucinating on cannabis as well as the loss of motor control and greater challenges for inexperienced users to use in moderation and avoid getting "high" or "stoned."

Originally Posted by AceArcher

I am not going to tackle this from a point by point basis, every concern you have listed above is easily researched and debunked with a quick google search.

I call your bluff. If you can easily research and debunk "every concern" with a quick google search, then these three should be no problem:

1. Cannabis use is associated with risky sexual behavior in teens.

2. Cannabis use impairs motor control.

3. Nearly every recreational drug represents some degree of impairment when dealing with unexpected emergencies.

You say in the above that you make sure to not imbide alcohol in situations where there may be a chance that your skills will be needed in their full capacity.

If "Soft" (alcohol, nicotine, marijuana (by any of its various forms), & mushrooms) are legalized. And for some odd reason, you decide that you would like to partake of them.

Are you likely to do so at a time which will put your children / family at risk. Or are you likely to do so at the same times that you enjoy an occasional adult beverage?

A designated driver is a good idea, no? If the soldiers are enjoying a few on a weekend, there should still be a few standing guard at the base who are sober, no? My idea is the same. An adult in a situation needs to be capable of addressing emergency situations, especially when caring for children, whether that emergency situation is a tornado, an allergic reaction, a lost child, a bear raiding the garbage, or gang bangers breaking into the home. If I'm the only adult, then I'm the designated guardian.

[Goooh]

Originally Posted by Clampy

Respectfully sir but by that logic people should be locked up for just possessing a beer. How come you approach everything from science until the science is not in your favor.

+1