[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: common sense (fwd)

Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 11:33:24 -0700
> From: Dale Thorn <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: common sense
> HipCrime wrote:
> > And rather than "dispensing drugs in clinics," why not simply
> > scrap the drug laws entirely?  People have a *right* to do as
> > they please with their bodies.
> > Let's hear it for common sense.  It's the first decent posting I've
> > seen to this list.
> > -- HTTP://www.HIPCRIME.com
> A question for you: In the Civil Rights era (1960's mostly), we dealt 
> with the question of whether people had the "right" to not only choose 
> their neighbors, but whether they could extend that logic, so once they 
> move in, whether they could "enforce" the status quo by preventing other 
> people from moving in if those other people didn't "fit in" somehow.
> If drugs and/or other items of Vice are liberalized, there will be a 
> tremendous marketing opportunity created, and new stores and new 
> departments within existing stores will pop up everywhere offering the 
> newly-liberalized goods and services. So my question is, since there are 
> "dry" areas in the country now, where the citizens can vote to exclude 
> alcohol sales, for example, will drugs, prostitution, gambling, etc. 
> fall within the purvey of citizen democracy as in the "dry" county 
> example, or will there be new problems with this analogy, and will any 
> of those new problems relate to the Civil Rights issues I mentioned 
> previously?

History already has examples of such incidences. Alaska, California, and
other states have tried various levels of legalization. To date I believe
that all such experiments have ended because of federal pressure on the
uncooperative states.

The Indians 'right by treaty' to operate gambling casino's is another good
example of a contemporary situation.

                                                    Jim Choate