Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (5270)	11/30/2006 8:56:10 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10087

Re: "I notice you presented the link as giving a clean bill of health to use of weed and it doesn't." See, now you are being just downright contrary, as that's just plain false. I most certainly did not present the link that way! In fact in introducing it I used my own words to note those problems for children, and included in the quote itself enough of the whole coin, as it were (i.e. everything you noted, in essence), so that no one should be suggesting I gave a slanted representation! Geesh... Re: "Sure, but that's a poor argument for weed." In reference to alcohol vs weed, I beg to differ. The argument that weed is simply not known to be nearly as harmful as alcohol is well known and accepted (if reluctantly by some diehards of the status quo community), and plainly dictates that a sane society which insists upon the regulation of some drugs (if this isn't an oxymoron indeed!) ought sooner outlaw alcohol than marijuana. Any objective standard for this sort of judgement simply does require examining the relative effects of the drugs in question. That said, I fully understand that we all should honestly agree that legalizing two bad things instead of just one, doesn't make a good thing(even if the second is less harmful than the first). True enough this is, and we should all be able to add 2 negatives, proving it. However - personal freedoms being important (like, yes, hooray hooray, even the freedom to partake in alcohol, along with the responsibility to take stiff punishment if we, say, kill someone while driving drunk) - we have something of weight to throw at the equation (something substantial, which already explains the legal status of alcohol itself). Freedom (with it's attendant responsibilities by definition, actually) works an "invisible hand" sort of white magic, and marijuana ought not have been removed from the realm of legal personal choice. Prohibition created gangsters way back when. Today prohibition of marijuana, etc., is again very similarly making our streets unsafe while needlessly driving kids into learning and spreading cutthroat philosophies from a cutthroat business, all for the good money available, little more. Our society suffers greatly from an often nasty underground drug business which couldn't even profitably exist but for the "insane" lack of legal personal choice in these matters. Yes, Freedom Works, Dan B.