This thread is inspired by another: view original post
so guns should be allowed but drugs shouldn't?
please someone, explain the logic behind this because they seem like basically the same arguments to me.
Note: 'drugs' means all drugs, not just weed.
EDIT: i am NOT saying drugs and guns are the same, but that the arguments people use to ban one can easily be used against the other.
[u]arguments for banning either guns or drugs:[/u]
they can be dangerous to inexperienced users
they can harm or kill you and others
[u]arguments for not banning guns or drugs:[/u]
using them is a fun activity and when used properly and safely pose little risk to the user (note: in the case of drugs 'used properly and safely' does not include getting addicted)
a person has a right to the freedom to own and/or use them so long as they are not putting others in any harm or otherwise infringing their rights.
why should we treat them differently?
-
17 Replies in this Sub-ThreadDrugs aren't used in protecting yourself from the criminal element, wildlife, or a tyrannical government.
-
Edited by M37h3w3: 4/25/2013 1:18:20 AMNo. You don't. There's a difference between what freedoms you think you have and what freedoms you do.
-
Freedom is defined as the ability to do with your own body whatever you so choose provided you harm no one else. So I absolutely have the right to do any drub I want, even though the only one I choose to use is cannabis even over caffeine.
-
-