11–20 of 135 posts
I always wonder why nobody has made an argument that drug laws are unconstitutional since the 9th amendment states clearly that rights don't need to be enumerated, and there's abundant evidence of people making their own drug decisions prior to the existence of the USA.
What’s the basis of the argument for prohibition if someone isn’t hurting others?
I always wonder why nobody has made an argument that drug laws are unconstitutional since the 9th amendment states clearly that rights don't need to be enumerated, and there's abundant evidence of people making their own drug decisions prior to the existence of the USA.
What’s the basis of the argument for prohibition if someone isn’t hurting others?
I always wonder why nobody has made an argument that drug laws are unconstitutional since the 9th amendment states clearly that rights don't need to be enumerated, and there's abundant evidence of people making their own drug decisions prior to the existence of the USA.
To oversimplify, that's why prohibition 1.0 had to be done via constitutional amendment; but since then, we had the Wickard v. Filburn ruling, which made virtually everything regulatable under the Commerce Clause with its extremely broad interpretation of the phrase "interstate commerce". In Wickard v. Filburn, a farmer grew grain on his farm. He did not sell this grain, whether across state lines or otherwise; he me…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To oversimplify, that's why prohibition 1.0 had to be done via constitutional amendment; but since then, we had the Wickard v. Filburn ruling, which made virtually everything regulatable under the Commerce Clause with its extremely broad interpretation of the phrase "interstate commerce". In Wickard v. Filburn, a farmer grew grain on his farm. He did not sell this grain, whether across state lines or otherwise; he me…
Such an absurd ruling, but none of the current supremes have the stones to overturn it
I always wonder why nobody has made an argument that drug laws are unconstitutional since the 9th amendment states clearly that rights don't need to be enumerated, and there's abundant evidence of people making their own drug decisions prior to the existence of the USA.
What’s the basis of the argument for prohibition if someone isn’t hurting others?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s the basis of the argument for prohibition if someone isn’t hurting others?
Imagine opioid pills were OTC. For a lot of people, they will initially be instant feel-good happy pills, even though people know there will be disastrous repercussions to taking them indefinitely. How many people go through bouts of severe depression? Won't some percentage of them, in moments of weakness, decide to try the opioid pills, feel good, and get sucked in? Shouldn't we as a society, try to curb humanity's…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s the basis of the argument for prohibition if someone isn’t hurting others?
With the welfare state that exists, a common argument is that people that destroy their bodies or brains are a burden on "society".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s the basis of the argument for prohibition if someone isn’t hurting others?
"This thing is inherently too risky/dangerous to use ... like firing a gun off into the air"
Firing a gun into the air is ill-advised and illegal because such bullets have a tendency to randomly impact and maim or murder bystanders within the radius of a couple of miles.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/02/15/firi...
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2011/03/can-falling-bull...