BiglawOrBust wrote: Geetar Man wrote: BiglawOrBust wrote:
Geetar Man wrote:Speaking of fallacies, you're making a fallacy of composition; just because something might be true of one part of something doesn't make it true about the whole.
Geetar Man wrote: Putting someone in prison for using crack/meth or whatever is a good idea because those types of people are often the people who steal, kill, and what not.
So punishing someone because they merely have a higher tendency to commit a more serious crime is not also a "fallacy of composition"?
No. They're being punished for using/selling/manufacturing drugs.
Your reasoning is circular. Obviously they're being punished for drug use, but why
is that punishment justified? Because they have a higher tendency to commit certain crimes?
Particularly the government has motivation to prevent drug use because of public health concerns both directly and indirectly. This is with the assumption that the government's main concern is for the well-being of the public. Although, I believe that drug use laws are based on subjective principles. Drug prohibition is still a relatively new thing. People have been using them for hundreds of years. Basically, the punishment can be justified in some ways and unjustified in others.
In an ideal world, there wouldn't be any drug laws; people would be able to do whatever drugs they want and whatever they want to their bodies. However, in the world we live in, some people are affected negatively, either directly or indirectly, and that ladies and gentleman is a good reason, in my opinion, assuming society exists as it does today, for why some drug laws are justified.
As for pot, I just don't see the harm. Smoking something, i.e., burning plant matter and inhaling it, is bad for one's body. But the lethality of marijuana is so low (little?) that I think there can be more benefit to gain (economically) from legalization. The only problem I have with that is that we will be feeding the government more money when they begin to tax and regulate it. I know that I sure don't trust the government with money. Shit, we have 115 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities. Why do I want to give the government more money?
Anyway, to get back on topic. I never said the laws are justified because the drug users have a higher tendency to commit crimes. I merely was TRYING to say that it's a GOOD IDEA (not justified) because MOST people, not all, who are involved in drugs bring more evil than good. The fact of the matter is that the people who are doing evil are really fucking it up for the people who would use drugs in their own homes and not cause any trouble, such as most pot smokers.
Idk, man. I'm not a fucking lawyer, ethicist or moralist. I just think that the hard drug (cocaine, crack, heroine, meth, etc...) laws are somewhat legit. As for marijuana laws, that's a whole 'nother ball game. I think drugs that are mostly non-lethal should be decriminalized.
VOTE FOR RON PAUL 2012!!!