Addendum
Posted elsewhere:
As I debate and plan this on various places I've troll... uh, posted my solution to, alcohol would definitely be included.
There would be separate endorsements for different drugs, and each would require education and a test about the drug, much like a driver's exam. (Probably no "behind the wheel," though. Heh.)
posted by SicTim at 2:24 PM
3 Comments:
I'm pretty sure I'd want the "behind the wheel" test, too. Make sure someone can use a drug without being an asshole before letting them use it in public.
But that smacks of too much government control for me. Maybe a free punch in the face of the asshole in the Texas mode of "he just needed killin'."
8:13 AM
Dave,
One of the most surprising things to me about my proposal is that it has been worse received by Libertarians than by any other single group.
I've responded several times that yes, it would add a new layer of government beauracracy. But it would also strip away several layers in return.
I know that my Libertarian friends simply want all drugs legalized, period, and that there's no need for this licensing procedure.
I respect, and actually admire, that as a social philosophy. But I'm trying to find something people philosophically opposed to legalized drugs can work with, too.
8:46 AM
You just need to point out that it would replace the DEA.
Most of the libertarians I know have a thing for absolutism. This is a compromise of the sort that they hate, which is exactly why we don't see libertarian politics being taken seriously.
I like the licensing idea, though. My big problem (as with other licenses) is that I'd like a way to decide someone's unfit to get high (or drive). But I'd be a benign dictator. No. Really.
9:10 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home