So, drug dealers are not guilty because they were born poor after all and they couldn't help becoming drug dealers? it was all circumstance, right? They're the real victim here. The real criminals are the potheads! But isn't liberal thought now that drug addicts are helpless victims of circumstance who have a disease? Oh the circles you could go in!
Yup, the problem is that anyone and everyone can be construed as being a victim in some or other way. Those who didn't grow up poor grew up too rich and spoiled, and that's not their fault either! Which of these various victims get the sympathy is pretty much a flavour-of-the-month kind of thing.
I say: All drugs should be legal and it's my fucking business if I kill myself doing them.
Yup - what other people choose to inhale/inject is simply none of my business. Anyway, as both Prohibition and the "war on drugs" have shown very clearly, the draconian laws make things worse rather than better.
Let whores be whores and let Johns be Johns, and instead try to effectively police RAPISTS and HUMAN TRAFFICKERS! And NONE of this prevents helping destitute women who need help. Imagine that, you don't need a law to help people!
And, quite incredibly, we are in agreement again. :-)
I am all in favour of creating institutions that help those who want to get out to do so. Then it is really a free choice.
I distrust people who want to ban driving after even a single drop of alcohol, because there are some hopeless drunks driving after drinking bottles full. You're not cracking down on the real problem, the real problem was always illegal. You're just taking harmless shit and making that illegal too.
My brother is a lawyer, which of course makes me an expert on this issue. He made two points:
1. Going over to friends for a braai and having two beers, and then driving home, is normal behaviour. When you crack down on any alcohol in the blood whatever, all you achieve is to criminalize normal behaviour. You instantly create a whole new class of criminals, and in the process also erode respect for the law in general.
2. A substantial part of his job happens to be motor vehicle accidents. He tells me he has dealt with hundreds of such cases, Thus far, not a single one
involved alcohol. Even speeding is a rare cause of accidents. The main cause is quite simply people who lose concentration and don't look where they are going. The law makers are barking up the wrong tree.
Another thing that is of importance here is the ever-present danger of bureaucracies acquiring a kind of life of their own, after which their main purpose becomes their own self-perpetuation. When that happens, expect laws and/or policies that will make the problem worse rather than better. After all, if the problem is ever solved, it obviates the need for the bureaucracy.
And thus we see greens advocating policies that worsen the problem of endangered species, and law makers and social activists that follow and/or advocate policies that will worsen crime and social/economic inequality. Here in South Africa the government has done everything in its power to prevent job creation, so that the voting sheeple will be forever dependent on government handouts. In America, where there is a private prison industry, this is a particularly big problem: they now have the world's largest and still growing population of prisoners, mainly thanks to the fact that prison and law enforcement lobbies ensure that ever more and more things are crimes.
One more point is society's general stupidity. Some problem raises its head. Society clamours for "something to be done." The problem is actually kind of intractable, but politicians and bureaucrats have jobs to keep, so they go after soft targets that are easy to catch (dope smokers, small-time dealers, users as opposed to manufacturers of child porn, etc). They then proudly display their arrest and conviction stats as proof that they are "doing something." In the meantime, the laws/policies actually make things worse, so society clamours for even harsher measures, so law enforcement goes after more soft targets. Rinse and repeat, and before long you live in a police state, like the Americans are apparently already doing. Land of the free indeed.
Nanny states almost inevitably follow the same route; the line between the nanny state and the police state is a thin and fuzzy one.
We can thank our lucky stars for our incompetent government - they can and do make idiotic laws, but thank heavens are too incompetent to enforce any of it! :-)