On Liberty

Let's see how that works in Australia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xh4oHK8Dgck

Here is my question...if you folks that are so opposed to gun laws because they can not be enforced...why not the same logic on drug laws? Is it because blacks are the dealers of drugs and whites the dealer of guns? th Originally Posted by WTF

I guess I didn't make it clear. I am equally opposed to drug laws. I believe that society should not coerce others into doing anything, whether or not it is for their own good. I draw the line at actions that harm others.

Should someone be allowed to own a gun, yes, protect their life, family and property, yes, go into a theater and kill at random, no.

Should someone be allowed to use drugs, yes, even to the point where it may kill them, steel from others to buy drugs, no, force others to take drugs, no.

Just because something may be bad for you doesn't mean that we need a government, benevolent in intention or not, to protect us from ourselves.

I have spoken with staunch conservatives, liberals, republicans and democrats alike. I have heard all of them concede the point that violence associated with victimless crimes like drugs and prostitution are a direct result of criminalization of a non violent act, that really can not be logically construed to harm anyone other than the participant.

Then in the next breath they talk about how we need to stop it because it is morally wrong, against gods wishes, they don't know what they are doing to themselves, children may be drawn into that life etc. Many of the responses are valid points, but what I find many unwilling to accept, is how is that their business.

Humans have the capacity to analyze their surroundings and choose the path that works best for them. If a loved one feels you are on the wrong path they can choose to use love to steer you right. No one should have the right to coerce an action unless it is to prevent harm to a THIRD party.