Well, you've hit upon something
I find interesting about the whole debate. Drug users from all walks of life claim it is recreational, just a bit of fun, and yet risk this legal threat that could ruin careers and families from a prosecution. Apparently, this 'bit of relaxation' is worth the risk of a jail term. I don't buy that.
Driving at 100 mph on my local street would be great fun, and I reckon I, and my car, could handle it. But I can't do it. It is illegal. So I don't.
The fact so many people are willing to break the drugs laws on something they could 'take or leave, it's just fun' suggests it is more than that. It is a dependency masking real issues that they ought to address.
(
TheSundaeLunch I'm a fucking shrub, alright?, Mon 27 Jul 2015, 20:25,
Share,
Reply)
I don't think you can equate doing 100 in a 30 zone with sitting at home with a joint.
If you were in the car with a joint that would be something, but there are already laws about that.
(
jonbob loves you, Mon 27 Jul 2015, 21:25,
Share,
Reply)
Both are breaking the law
Why would you feel justified to do one but not the other? Both are fun. Both are potentionaly life changing to you and others around you.
My only guess is that one is a need, the other a thrill.
(
TheSundaeLunch I'm a fucking shrub, alright?, Mon 27 Jul 2015, 21:50,
Share,
Reply)
Why? Easy.
Because one has the potential to directly harm others and the other doesn't.
Life changing? Try life ending.
(
jonbob loves you, Mon 27 Jul 2015, 22:26,
Share,
Reply)
Have you been with a mother
too stoned to look after her children? I call that direct harm.
(
TheSundaeLunch I'm a fucking shrub, alright?, Tue 28 Jul 2015, 0:42,
Share,
Reply)