My son is clean now, you're correct I do wish I had done things differently. I do and have taken responsibility for what I have done, he has also, you've never heard me blame anyone for my past indiscretions and won't. How's that for a line?
what kind did he do
meth
my sister was a junkie, not sure everything she did
Yet you use your junkie son as a reason why you think cannabis should be banned.... because you think the government should protect people from too much freedom, that it will be better for society that way. Maybe the problem is you haven't really thought this through at all. Or maybe it's just over your head altogether.
Not too cool is it, I said my son was clean now, I guess not truly, he still smokes dope but that is clean compared to the past. Thanks for asking
it is what it is, my sister died from complications of her drug use.
Didn't say cannabis, If you go back and look I said I was ok with that.
Prohibition didn't stop people from drinking
I'm sorry for your and your family's loss, thankfully my son is still here. Peace
I think it is really choice that one would argue that he is so into liberty and freedom, yet would endorse the legalization of something that undeniably has led to the slavery of tens of millions to addictive substances, and call that freedom. That line of thinking is not persuasive to me.
Where your argument breaks down is there is no clear link between legality and usage rates. Some studies have shown decreased rates of marijuana usage after legalization, some have shown small upticks in college students. I don't believe the deciding factor for people using drugs is legality. Prohibition is not clearly affecting usage rates. It is creating a myriad of other issues like the gang violence associated with the black market and mass incarceration of otherwise law abiding productive citizens. We've been trying a violent war on drugs and it hasn't worked. Time to try a different, public health centered approach.
Your answer had absolutely nothing to do with my post. The topic of my post had to do with drive in attacking, in his mind, my disdain for freedom and liberty. I countered his argument and included a quote from John Locke to support my position. You then respond to that post with an attempt to change the argument. That post stands on it's own, you can't change it and obviously can't counter it. As I've been told be told, I haven't thought it out. I'll try better.
DIDO is messing with you. I'm responding to your old argument about prohibition helping society by curbing usage. I don't believe there's evidence to support that assertion.
You should have used one of those posts then. I'm willing to try and find some agreement, but in the end it doesn't matter. We don't make policy. Again, I don't know if you missed it but I can go for legalization of pot. And no I do not smoke it anymore so this is not a self serving position.
I'm too lazy to scroll back through the thread, sorry. I think the benefit of legalization is government regulation of supply. That goes for all recreational drugs for me. Improved quality control would make responsible use much safer.
SO HE WAS GAY?
It's yet to be determined how he identified at the time.
