[Osborn F. Enready]

Great Reply FAL

Vostracker said:
Derby and Osbourn: your statements concerning legalization are the same arguments made by the addicts, dealers and social users I came into contact with.

Much like I have heard LEO's claim they are protecting rights when arresting someone who harms nobody for having small amounts of drugs.
All it shows is that individuals rationalize differently, based on different values and logic sets, coupled with life experience.

Point?

Vostracker said:
It is their way of rationalizing and legitimizing their use of the drugs.

Obviously. I own my body. If I obtain something to put in it of mutual conscent, without infringing on the rights of others, I have the right to consume it.

Vostracker said:
In reference to the quotes and LEO claiming legaization. Ive heard them before from libertarian individuals with a financial agenda. Its a moot point IMHO.

I'm not doubting the honesty of your OPINION, I am doubting the intellectual honesty of the facts you base it on.

Vostracker said:
Let me ask you these question. Would you be comfortable with a child molester living next door or in your neighborhood?

It wouldn't bother me a bit, as if I had children I would be a responsible parent and teach my kids how to act/react in those types of situations.
I would certainly take care to observe as much as possible, but I would certainly not be in a state of fear.

Vostracker said:
If not, Why?

I have a right to protect myself, and my loved ones.

Vostracker said:
They prey on our children.

So does public education, bi-partisan politicians, ad agencies, and grandmas who like to pinch cheeks. Should we lock them all up too? According to WHOSE guidelines?

Vostracker said:
Would you want a drug addict, dealer and/or user next door?

If they are responsible citizens, I have no problem with drug use, period. Addicts are not responsible, as a rule. There are millions of responsible users, and you have probably worked alongside a few and never known.

Vostracker said:
The dealer preys on our children.

The market preys on our children, because it is FORCED outside the legal market by prohibition. The legal market recognizes adult and child differences, and regulates ads and marketing, sales and responsibility as such.
The black market has no "valid age for entry" and provides HUGE financial gains for those who risk it, due to NATURE of the black market.

Vostracker said:
That is there next customer. Heck, they give out freebies to the kids at school.

While this does happen, what makes you think the laws of prohibition make it better as opposed to worse?

Vostracker said:
The addict and/or user may look "cool" and your child will want to try what the user is using.

My child is MY responsibility. Blaming others for my childs bad choices is false BS, since I am the parent instilled the responsibility of educating that child on making the proper choices. This is people who refuse to admit they are bad parents who blame drugs, alchohol, guns and rock music for the ills of society.

Silly.

Vostracker said:
What about a meth lab next door? The very possibility of it exploding or catching fire from the chemicals are high let alone the hazardous waste there tossing out.

As I said, Legalization would include zoning laws, wouldn't it?
Do you like having a nuclear plant next door?
A Garbage Dump?
A Missile Silo?
A Prison? (which the drug was has put in more peoples backyards than anything, due to the constantly growing incarceration of non-violent, non-rights violators being imprisoned for volume or consumption.)

Your logic is beyond me, or blatantly flawed, unless you care to elaborate further.