- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Oregon just re-criminalized drug possession and use
Posted on 4/5/24 at 9:31 am to tsmi136
Posted on 4/5/24 at 9:31 am to tsmi136
It is my opinion that the issue here wasn’t the lack of enforcement of drug prohibition but the lack of enforcing all of the other laws that vagrant druggies were committing like burglary, vandalism, trespassing, assault, battery, public urination, armed robbery, etc. If they actually enforced basic laws to keep violent vagrants off the streets, then the drug use wouldn’t be as big of an issue.
Think of it this way: imagine a car is speeding. A car that is going 20 mph over the speed limit may or may not actually be endangering other drivers. If they’re driving on an empty stretch of interstate in broad daylight while driving in a straight line, they’re driving safely. If they’re weaving in and out of traffic, changing lanes without signaling, tailgating, running stop signs and red lights, or overrunning their headlights so they can’t stop before seeing potential obstacles in front of them, they’re probably a much bigger danger.
Speeding is illegal in both contexts, but is it the actually dangerous behavior in and of itself? While drug use is not good for society, what is really bad is when people rob, assault, and destroy innocent people and property. If one can do drugs in a way that only harms themselves, I don’t see an issue with it. However, the second they start weaving between cars, changing lanes without signaling, tailgating, running stop signs/traffic signals, and overrunning their headlights, they need to be taken off the goddamn road.
Think of it this way: imagine a car is speeding. A car that is going 20 mph over the speed limit may or may not actually be endangering other drivers. If they’re driving on an empty stretch of interstate in broad daylight while driving in a straight line, they’re driving safely. If they’re weaving in and out of traffic, changing lanes without signaling, tailgating, running stop signs and red lights, or overrunning their headlights so they can’t stop before seeing potential obstacles in front of them, they’re probably a much bigger danger.
Speeding is illegal in both contexts, but is it the actually dangerous behavior in and of itself? While drug use is not good for society, what is really bad is when people rob, assault, and destroy innocent people and property. If one can do drugs in a way that only harms themselves, I don’t see an issue with it. However, the second they start weaving between cars, changing lanes without signaling, tailgating, running stop signs/traffic signals, and overrunning their headlights, they need to be taken off the goddamn road.
This post was edited on 4/5/24 at 9:37 am
Posted on 4/5/24 at 9:47 am to kingbob
quote:
It is my opinion that the issue here wasn’t the lack of enforcement of drug prohibition but the lack of enforcing all of the other laws that vagrant druggies were committing like burglary, vandalism, trespassing, assault, battery, public urination, armed robbery, etc. If they actually enforced basic laws to keep violent vagrants off the streets, then the drug use wouldn’t be as big of an issue.
This is also an important part.
Protecting property rights (and maintaining public property in a similar fashion) is a hallmark of libertarianism.
This is why liberals are terrible at implementing these policies. They go too far and then chaos ensues, b/c they're bad at understanding humans will adapt to policy changes and they have no concept of how to go about preventing this.
Posted on 4/5/24 at 10:03 am to kingbob
quote:
but the lack of enforcing all of the other laws that vagrant druggies were committing like burglary, vandalism, trespassing, assault, battery, public urination, armed robbery, etc. If they actually enforced basic laws to keep violent vagrants off the streets, then the drug use wouldn’t be as big of an issue.
This is the classic chicken or the egg argument.
If they weren’t on hard drugs, would some of the other crimes not be prevented also? They are committing crimes to buy more drugs?
Realistically a better enforcement of all of them would be preferred.
I’m not opposed to drugs at all, but the fact is a high percentage of hard drug users will turn into addicts and dregs on society. So if you allow them, it’s going to follow.
Posted on 4/5/24 at 11:27 am to kingbob
quote:
It is my opinion that the issue here wasn’t the lack of enforcement of drug prohibition but the lack of enforcing all of the other laws that vagrant druggies were committing like burglary, vandalism, trespassing, assault, battery, public urination, armed robbery, etc. If they actually enforced basic laws to keep violent vagrants off the streets, then the drug use wouldn’t be as big of an issue.
bingo.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News