Slashdot Mirror
Voters Vote Yes, County Says No
Khyber writes in with a story from Montana, where residents of Missoula County voted in a referendum intended to advise county law-enforcement types to treat marijuana offenses as low-profile. The referendum would not have changed any laws, but was advisory only. After voters approved it, county commissioners overturned it by a 2-to-1 vote. They were swayed by the argument of the county attorney, who had a "gut feeling" that Missoula's electorate had misinterpreted the ballot language. The move has resulted in a flood of disaffection among voters, especially young voters. "Is there even a point to voting any more if the will of the people can so easily be subverted by two people?" one voter posted on a comment blog.
You guys have got no sense at all. When we complain about American imperialism, you say well our culture dominates the world get used to it (you mean McDonald's haha), call us leftists and then complain when you find out you aren't even the American empire you're just serfs in the control of the few. When something nerdy gets posted to Slashdot and someone like me replies with analysis and information we don't get modded up unless it's a banal one-liner. So what the hell. Bollocks to you all. We'd like to help you on this issue but you gave us Nixon and now GW Bush. Have fun.
I think that the notion of "Stuff that Matters" is "Stuff that Matters to Nerds," not "politics of some small town."
It's hardly surprising that in the decades since, the laws concerning cannabis are just as tortured and contradictory, especially when considered against the background of yet another new study that suggest alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous
Regardless of Dr. Nutt's findings (note my ability to refrain from making jokes!), the problem I have with illegal (and legal) drugs is NOT primarily what it does to the user. While I think that a society of addicts is ultimately doomed, my primary concern are the victims of drug abusers.
We already have to deal with intoxicated people operating cars, planes, and other potentially lethal machinery. How much worse would things be if now, in addition to those, you've got people high on ecstasy or marijuana? What about heroin? Would bystander deaths double? Triple? Some of the effects of these drugs make alcohol pale in comparison.
People like to explain that the "war on drugs" is failing and how eventually the government will have no choice but to legalize these substances. They even go on to say how great it would be for everyone because then the government will be able to collect taxes in the same manner they do with tobacco. Last time I checked, not very many people grow tobacco in their backyards and make cigarettes in their basements. Why does anyone think dealers give the government a cut of their lucrative business?
Pretending for a moment that anyone would pay these "drug taxes", I wonder what percentage of these new taxes would go to pay for the welfare of addicts? 300% at the very least I would assume, but very likely more. Society already has to pay for addicts, how many would we be paying for if these substances become easily and legally available?
Logic has no place in pro-drug arguments, because there is nothing logical about (ab)using these drugs in the first place. I don't suggest to have answers, but I don't care what you use to justify your reasoning, in any case, the only question legalizing illegal drugs answers is "how can we destroy our society?"
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
Personally I would say any SMART geek would avoid drugs like the plague. Why would ANY geek want to use drugs? We use our minds and our intelligence is important to us, using drugs manipulates out minds in unnatural ways and disables our intelligence for a while.
I guess it's just stoners looking to be anything but wastes of space.
I like muppets.