I don’t care if you want to smoke pot. I think the existing rules that allow small quantities and provide for medical access are great. But the latest leap to regulate and tax under the banner of legalization is not a great idea. It will create a whole world of new troubles we may find too late are worse than what we had.
In other states, enforcement has taken on a newer, more expensive, and more oppressive form. There are serious long-term concerns about mental health. The threat to second amendment rights is real. And the biggest problem of all is human nature.
For the latter, I like to refer to an excellent article by Dr. Anthony Daniels (Theodore Dalrymple) titled ‘Don’t Legalize Drugs. I’ve done that nearly a half-dozen times already.
I confess that I had to go back and search all the quotes I have pulled from that one article on the topic. I didn’t want to duplicate past effort. But it’s not a challenge to find new pull quotes. The piece is packed with them.
It might be argued that the freedom to choose among a variety of intoxicating substances is a much more important freedom and that millions of people have derived innocent fun from taking stimulants and narcotics. But the consumption of drugs has the effect of reducing men’s freedom by circumscribing the range of their interests. It impairs their ability to pursue more important human aims, such as raising a family and fulfilling civic obligations. Very often it impairs their ability to pursue gainful employment and promotes parasitism. Moreover, far from being expanders of consciousness, most drugs severely limit it. One of the most striking characteristics of drug takers is their intense and tedious self-absorption; and their journeys into inner space are generally forays into inner vacuums. Drug taking is a lazy man’s way of pursuing happiness and wisdom, and the shortcut turns out to be the deadest of dead ends. We lose remarkably little by not being permitted to take drugs.
This is Not Decriminalization it is Regulation
I feel obligated to add (probably for the umpteenth time) that Democrats are not supporting this to give you more liberty. I’m quite sure they see it as a path to less.
Republicans are ignoring a wide range of potential problems that should constrain their support or at least temper it. But I believe in a Democrat majority legislature where they expect few victories for liberty they are willing to ignore any problems to try and claim this as one of them.
I do expect it will pass and will probably find its way into law -maybe through a veto override. That does not mean we should not stand in opposition to this latest prescription.
As noted above I am fine with the rules as they stand. Expanding them just to say you’ve done it is a mistake. It will enlarge the state, and not uncoincidentally, perhaps in no less than a few years, facilitate a further expansion to address the side-effects.
The end results, in my opinion, will be less freedom, not more.
There is nothing pro-liberty about that.