Michael, whom I believe leads the field in 2011 Ethics Alarms Comments of the Day, just weighed in with an epic comment to Neill Franklin’s Comment of the Day from the lively distracted driving/marijuana post. It restores some balance to what has been largely an Ethics Alarms vs. NORML mugging: I knew there had to be someone out there who agrees with me on the governments ethical obligation to keep drugs from further infecting American society. Here is Michael’s Comment of the Day on both Neill’s COTD and Distracted Driving, Pot, and “The Great Debate”:
“I was just a little horrified by Mr. Franklin’s comment, especially considering the source. I live in a neighborhood rife with drugs and the effects to me are evident. The effects that I see are different from those Mr. Franklin seems to care about, however. I see the wasted lives and wasted generations. If you look at the children around here, you see a generation that grew up without parents, without guidance, and without hope. They have never known adults who worked or who cared about their kids. They only know adults who are on drugs. These adults don’t play with their kids, don’t teach them. They don’t provide food, clothing, or reliable shelter and they subject their children to every form of abuse. These kids have no hope because they haven’t seen anyone like them live any other way. To escape this nightmare existence, they too turn to drugs and the cycle continues. I can’t understand how someone can advocate validating this behavior by legalizing drugs. I understand the self-serving legalization argument of the idle college student drug user and the people who somehow have lucked into good paying jobs that are easy enough to do while high, but I don’t respect them.
“I really don’t understand Mr. Franklin’s arguments. I don’t understand what he wants to do with drug legalization. Unlike alcohol, people don’t do drugs for the taste, or to go with their food, or to be social. They do drugs to get high. If every time someone touched alcohol they got completely drunk, alcohol would be illegal too. The ills of drugs aren’t mainly because of the illegal nature of it, it is because of the nature of the drugs. I assume Mr. Franklin is expecting the state to give everyone unlimited amounts of free drugs (so he won’t have to deal with them burglarizing houses and robbing people for drugs). This will keep him and his colleagues from having to deal with drugs because they will now be ‘legal’. He will then blissfully ignore the spousal and child abuse that will inevitably result. How caring.
“I have proposed a drug legalization scheme that lays bare all of the hype and obfuscation. In this scheme, people can apply for ‘drug licenses’. These licenses will allow them to possess and purchase user-level amounts of any drugs anywhere any time. In addition, excess drugs from drug seizures will be provided to holders of valid drug licenses at no charge. To apply, the following conditions must be met and adhered to:
(1) The applicant must have put up all existing children up for permanent adoption. (I think we can all agree that children shouldn’’t be around this)
(2) The applicant will be permanently sterilized (the state will provide free sterilization upon request)
(3) The applicant will surrender their driver’s license. Any holder of a drug license found driving a car will forfeit their drug license and face a prison sentence (these people are going to be high a lot and should not be driving).
(4) The applicant will surrender all state and federal welfare and social services benefits (free healthcare, welfare, food stamps, social security, etc). Society should not have to subsidize this behavior.
(5) Any holder of a drug license caught trying to steal property may be killed by the property owner.
“Most drug-legalization advocates are appalled by this (not serious) proposal because of what drug users must give up to get the license. I think many drug users would give all this up willingly for the ability to get free drugs legally. If people could see what drug-users are really like, and if they were no longer allowed to abuse their children, it would go a long way to turning drug-users into the societal pariahs they need to be.
“Go ahead and flame me. I have no respect for the drug legalization crowd. Drugs are illegal because of what they can do to people. Look at Timothy Leary. Look at episodes of “The Surreal Life”. After you look at that, watch “Idiocracy”. Is that what you really want?
“I already know the argument “but drug users aren’t like that”. The argument is bull. The argument is based on people that have someone else taking care of their needs (college students), celebrities with enough money and freedom to do what they want seemingly without serious consequences, the dabblers, and a handful of high-functioning addicts who somehow can keep their jobs (I do know some of these and I am always shocked that they keep their jobs). No, most drug users are “like that.” You know it, I know it, stop playing make-believe.”