Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tl00021)

Bart:
>        If you get rid of traffic laws, careful drivers will be at much at risk
>as dangerous drivers.

Either way, more people will die.  Besides, being careful has nothing to do
with being more dexterious.

>So now, I WILL go into my position on the laws
>against drugs: If drugs are legal, the primary victims of drugs would be
>the drug-users themselves. If they were not legal, the primary victims
>would be non-drug users.

I beg to differ.  Drug abusers will be too far gone to care about how much
they're suffering.  They will have little on their mind besides the
preoccupation with maintaining the "normal" drug state.  The true sufferers
will be those around them who are sober enough to realize they're
suffering.  Look at how spouses of drug abusers have suffered from abuse
and neglect.  Look at how children of drug abusers have suffered from abuse
and neglect.  Look at how parents of drug abusers have suffered from having
to enable their children because of parental love.  Look at victims of
crimes from desperate drug abusers who no longer have a clear sense of
right and wrong.  Have you ever looked into a drug abuser's eyes?  What I
saw was that THEY DON'T CARE.  They can't care.

>        And, by the way, I believe that alcohol is one of the worst drugs
>around, and the worst are the semi-legal amphetamines and barbituates.

With prevalence of alcoholism and intoxicated driving, I would have to
agree.  In a way, it's unfair for the law to make it okay to be drunk as a
skunk (while you're not driving), but not okay to smoke pot.  For the law
to be fair, should it eliminate all mind-altering drugs?  Should it draw
the line on the potency of the drug?  However, the potency is also
dependent on the quantity.  Should it draw the line on the quantity?  But
how are you going to control that?  Or should all drugs be legal?  Should
it be legal and regulated?  How would that change things?  We could never
know for sure.

Thoa :o)