People who think that cannabis should not be legal in New Hampshire are fond of quoting the governor of Virginia’s statement justifying his veto of a legalization bill in his state.
But here’s the thing about that statement: Nowhere in it does he address the question of where the government supposedly gets the power to tell people what substances they can’t ingest. The whole American system, from top to bottom, is based on the idea that governments can only exercise powers that are delegated to them.
Do you know of any individual who could go to his neighbor as an individual and insist that he stop ingesting any plant, whether that’s marijuana, chamomile, or lettuce? I don’t.
If individuals don’t have a power, how can they delegate that power?
Suppose we change the topic of the governor’s statement from pot to guns:
The proposed legalization of retail firearms in the Commonwealth endangers Virginians’ health and safety. States following this path have seen adverse effects on children’s and adolescent’s health and safety, increased gang activity and violent crime, significant deterioration in mental health, … and significant costs associated with retail firearms that far exceed tax revenue. It also does not eliminate the illegal black-market sale of firearms, nor guarantee product safety. Addressing the inconsistencies in enforcement and regulation in Virginia’s current laws does not justify expanding access to firearms, following the failed paths of other states, and endangering Virginians’ health and safety.
If you oppose legal cannabis, are you still on board with that reasoning? Or do you just pretend it’s valid when you agree with his conclusions? Because if the reasoning is valid for restricting access to pot, then it’s also valid for restricting RKBA, speech, religion, privacy, property, and every other ‘right’ that you might think you have.
The argument he’s making boils down to this: If some people exercise a right in ways that cause harm, then we are justified in taking that right away from everyone.
Do you support that premise? Because if you think about it carefully, it’s equivalent to this: There are no rights, only permissions.
