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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (254845)	6/18/2008 9:09:51 AM
From: alanrs	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 793799

Good arguments, and I don't have good answers. One would hope that the large variety of other activities that absorb human beings would continue to have a draw. In the end, I believe this is fighting an element of human nature and I generally believe that is counter productive. Drugs are not that much fun so as to lead to a zombie populace, although with the onslaught of perfectly legal anti-depressants, who knows? My belief, and it is my belief only, is that some people who otherwise would not have, will. My further belief is that the damage done by the 'war on drugs' far exceeds this down side, and that a small portion of the money saved could be set aside to provide a wide variety of abuse facilities. Got to put all those unemployed drug warriors to work somewhere. ARS

To: skinowski who wrote (254845)	6/18/2008 1:47:40 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793799

Do we want to see people walk around with little apparatuses implanted in the "pleasure centers" of their brains, permanently high? What right do WE have to stop people from doing as they please, as long as they don't harm others? And don't give me that old "they hurt society" argument. I know this is an position that I can't win in our present day society. So I don't push it. It is interesting that Stossel has become so frustrated by the subject that he has gone to the total Libertarian position. I operate off the Axiom that "A moral action is one that does not interfere with anyone else's property." I reject the other Axiom, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," because it allows action by busybodies. That's the problem with the drug laws, etc. Most of us want to be "busybodies" about things that other people do. And assume the "there ought to be a law" position.