"It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder." - Frederic Bastiat
The "There Oughta be a law" attitude seems to stem partially from the growing belief that morality is determined through the democratic process. Even many religious people, who believe their moral codes originate from some Supreme Being, are seduced by the notion that they need to democratically impose some of their religious beliefs on others in order to improve society (Prohibition is perhaps the most obvious example). When people believe that the difference between right and wrong is the difference between 51% and the 49% of voters, then moral conduct becomes the result of a power grab rather than as the outcome of everyday, voluntary human action.
The liberals of the 18th and 19th centuries recognized this dilemma, and offered the "do no harm" principle as a guideline for lawmaking. "Do no harm" is the baseline moral code that everyone, including government, must follow in order for people to live in a free and prosperous society. This does not mean that it should be taken as the only moral guideline. People should always strive to become better than they were yesterday by living meaningful, moral lives. However, there are several levels of moral conduct which people may wish to observe, and being subjective, they should remain voluntary. Not everyone is ready to live some "higher" law, and when these laws are imposed, they often hurt those they were intended to help.
This link is about what the Bible calls the wisdom of God. As opposed to the wisdom of the world which James 2 describes as: earthly, sensual and devilish.
Agree or disagree with the viewpoints, it's very eyeopening. Not trying to Bible thump but this blew my mind. He takes questions in second half and talks about wisdom of God regarding many subjects.
I voted to decriminalize marijuana in my city. Then pot-smokers started hanging out at children's playgrounds to get high. Families are selling condos and moving because of weed smell in the building. Maybe I should have voted differently...
"Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime." This is the famous quote by Lavrenty Beria, Stalin's head of internal security. Users have the option to "Just say No" I practiced psychiatry in an age where we didn't have a large choice of pills to hand out. The victims were the users and the kids recruited to support the dealers.
The two most-often abused drugs were tobacco and alcohol, I was still a heavy smoker at the time, not unusual for doctors in Europe. Interestingly, the number of users at that time was relatively low. What I observed led me to believe that we, society, created the drug problem. We could have simply decriminalized the hemp-derived feel-good chemicals, and that would have solved the problem. They were a gateway drug only because the only place to acquire them was the same place that sold heroin.
I prescribed controlled substances where appropriate, including peyote and edible hashish. There are medical uses for nearly every prohibited drug. I am convinced that there is no legitimate medical use outside the Emergency Room for Fentanyl. I once was taken to an ER in excruciating belly pain that had kicked my blood pressure up to 260/130; the nurse practitioner who saw me administered a microdose of Fentanyl which fixed everything immediately. I knew then that I couldn't ever take another dose because it would probably addict me instantly.
Practicing physicians I know locally prescribe all sorts of medications freely. At last, Ketamine has been made into a drug that can be used to manage pain from incurable conditions. We have failed to hold accountable those who commit crimes to pay for their addictions. That is the real tragedy of the War on Drugs.
Feb 8, 2022·edited Feb 8, 2022Liked by SimulationCommander
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
-- Ayn Rand
As example, I offer Ottawa. Suddenly it is illegal to bring in food or fuel, and for truckers to honk their horns.
It has been said that, "All laws are death threats." People will argue and say, "But the penalty is only a fine, or only a jail sentence; we no longer kill people for breaking laws. Ok, what happens when you don't pay your fine? Armed men will eventually come for you, and if you resist them vigorously enough, they will kill you.
The fact that all laws are ultimately death threats should be taken into consideration when contemplating whether that law "ought to be". Is a death threat morally justified to achieve whatever aim that law has?
It's not really a drug war. It's a war on some drugs. What amazes me is that many of the same people who think it is okay for a person to do what they want with their own body when it comes to abortion, think it is perfectly fine to imprison someone for putting a drug into their own body.
The war on some drugs has made the situation worse not better. So when something doesn't work just do more of it and if that still doesn't work then more and more. How has that worked out?
Then the drug warriors say -- well it's all about protecting kids. Meanwhile children are prescribed many types of psychchiatric drugs pushed by big pharma. Kids who are receive public health insurance are prescribed at a higher rate than the general population. Kids in foster care are prescribed at an even higher rate. Apparently the treatment for having been abused and/or neglected is being medicated as if the problem was biological and something is inherently wrong with the child. And lets not forget than many of the children on these drugs are taking multiple types. Some are prescribed off label with trials never done on children. This is all somehow okay.
The hypocrisy around the war on some drugs is astounding. There is a drug/drug war industrial complex. The last either side wants are for those banned drugs being legally available to adults.
"It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder." - Frederic Bastiat
The "There Oughta be a law" attitude seems to stem partially from the growing belief that morality is determined through the democratic process. Even many religious people, who believe their moral codes originate from some Supreme Being, are seduced by the notion that they need to democratically impose some of their religious beliefs on others in order to improve society (Prohibition is perhaps the most obvious example). When people believe that the difference between right and wrong is the difference between 51% and the 49% of voters, then moral conduct becomes the result of a power grab rather than as the outcome of everyday, voluntary human action.
The liberals of the 18th and 19th centuries recognized this dilemma, and offered the "do no harm" principle as a guideline for lawmaking. "Do no harm" is the baseline moral code that everyone, including government, must follow in order for people to live in a free and prosperous society. This does not mean that it should be taken as the only moral guideline. People should always strive to become better than they were yesterday by living meaningful, moral lives. However, there are several levels of moral conduct which people may wish to observe, and being subjective, they should remain voluntary. Not everyone is ready to live some "higher" law, and when these laws are imposed, they often hurt those they were intended to help.
This link is about what the Bible calls the wisdom of God. As opposed to the wisdom of the world which James 2 describes as: earthly, sensual and devilish.
Agree or disagree with the viewpoints, it's very eyeopening. Not trying to Bible thump but this blew my mind. He takes questions in second half and talks about wisdom of God regarding many subjects.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ6a18QSzUU&t=2958s
I voted to decriminalize marijuana in my city. Then pot-smokers started hanging out at children's playgrounds to get high. Families are selling condos and moving because of weed smell in the building. Maybe I should have voted differently...
"Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime." This is the famous quote by Lavrenty Beria, Stalin's head of internal security. Users have the option to "Just say No" I practiced psychiatry in an age where we didn't have a large choice of pills to hand out. The victims were the users and the kids recruited to support the dealers.
The two most-often abused drugs were tobacco and alcohol, I was still a heavy smoker at the time, not unusual for doctors in Europe. Interestingly, the number of users at that time was relatively low. What I observed led me to believe that we, society, created the drug problem. We could have simply decriminalized the hemp-derived feel-good chemicals, and that would have solved the problem. They were a gateway drug only because the only place to acquire them was the same place that sold heroin.
I prescribed controlled substances where appropriate, including peyote and edible hashish. There are medical uses for nearly every prohibited drug. I am convinced that there is no legitimate medical use outside the Emergency Room for Fentanyl. I once was taken to an ER in excruciating belly pain that had kicked my blood pressure up to 260/130; the nurse practitioner who saw me administered a microdose of Fentanyl which fixed everything immediately. I knew then that I couldn't ever take another dose because it would probably addict me instantly.
Practicing physicians I know locally prescribe all sorts of medications freely. At last, Ketamine has been made into a drug that can be used to manage pain from incurable conditions. We have failed to hold accountable those who commit crimes to pay for their addictions. That is the real tragedy of the War on Drugs.
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
-- Ayn Rand
As example, I offer Ottawa. Suddenly it is illegal to bring in food or fuel, and for truckers to honk their horns.
It has been said that, "All laws are death threats." People will argue and say, "But the penalty is only a fine, or only a jail sentence; we no longer kill people for breaking laws. Ok, what happens when you don't pay your fine? Armed men will eventually come for you, and if you resist them vigorously enough, they will kill you.
The fact that all laws are ultimately death threats should be taken into consideration when contemplating whether that law "ought to be". Is a death threat morally justified to achieve whatever aim that law has?
It's not really a drug war. It's a war on some drugs. What amazes me is that many of the same people who think it is okay for a person to do what they want with their own body when it comes to abortion, think it is perfectly fine to imprison someone for putting a drug into their own body.
The war on some drugs has made the situation worse not better. So when something doesn't work just do more of it and if that still doesn't work then more and more. How has that worked out?
Then the drug warriors say -- well it's all about protecting kids. Meanwhile children are prescribed many types of psychchiatric drugs pushed by big pharma. Kids who are receive public health insurance are prescribed at a higher rate than the general population. Kids in foster care are prescribed at an even higher rate. Apparently the treatment for having been abused and/or neglected is being medicated as if the problem was biological and something is inherently wrong with the child. And lets not forget than many of the children on these drugs are taking multiple types. Some are prescribed off label with trials never done on children. This is all somehow okay.
The hypocrisy around the war on some drugs is astounding. There is a drug/drug war industrial complex. The last either side wants are for those banned drugs being legally available to adults.