To: alanrs who wrote (740924 ) 2/20/2021 1:02:03 PM From: skinowski 5 RecommendationsRecommended By alanrs Bruce L lightshipsailor Maple MAGA pheilman_
Respond to of 793928 I still maintain that there is nothing constitutional about the drug laws, no clause that says your "rights" are revoked if someone declares they're pretty sure it's for your own good. Agree. Part of it is due to the state growing and invading. They “took on” the responsibility for healthcare - and suddenly, since we the taxpayers - through our elective representatives - are paying X, Y and Z’s hospital bills, we have the right to legislate their behavior. Drugs, seat belts, helmets. (Oh, and ever since the gov became serious about messing with healthcare, the costs are in a ever expanding bubble). The next thing you know, it becomes a huge growth industry with thousands of “good” paying jobs - law enforcement, prisons, etc. People used psychoactive substances forever. And the world never came to a screeching stop because of that. Drug laws are a relatively very new phenomenon. It certainly is a complicated subject. I’ve seen many, many addicted individuals, and can’t recall meeting one who would be happy that their life turned out the way it did. This guy in the article is - I suspect - a person who is unusually good at managing his use. Then, there is the issue of “progress” — Heroin is losing competition against various Fentanyls - some of which are so powerful they can kill a person no matter how careful one is. I recall a conversation with man of about 55, a “middle management” person in the drug industry. He was a user, and wanted treatment because he overdosed a couple of times, and realized that he seldom really knew what’s in any given product, and no longer had control over what he was using.