Debates
03 Mar 06
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by AThousandYoungAccording to the political philosophy of the Framers, you have rights because of your very nature, they do not need to granted to you in any document. Drug laws are violations of basic fundamental rights in my view, particulary your right to self-autonomy over your own body.
It's not in the Constitution; is it legally binding? Do people have this right? Does illegal drug use constitute expressing this right and should it therefore be considered legal?
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIf you want to smoke a "J" or grow a few plants for personal use in the privacy of your own home, I personally have no problems with it. Wanna shoot heroin in your own home, it's your health. But when you start selling to kids or build a meth lab that is considerd an environmental hazard, then I want you locked down for years. The problem with making meth is you involve all people around you. You can't even walk into a meth factory without bio-hazard suits; the ground water is tainted for God knows how long from the dumping of everything from draino, bleach, toluene, lighterfluid etc. used in making it. Crack is another "demon". It makes you break into your neighbors house for his VCR....I've never heard of pot doing that to anyone....or alcohol for that matter; however, I have heard that alcohol contributes to 25,000 traffic fatalities annually in the US. Pick your poison....just be careful.
It's not in the Constitution; is it legally binding? Do people have this right? Does illegal drug use constitute expressing this right and should it therefore be considered legal?