4 ms·
> The person who possesses, uses, or trades contraband offends only the state So are we pretending things that like DUI manslaughter, second-hand cancer, theft
by ythl 10y ago
> The person who possesses, uses, or trades contraband offends only the state
So are we pretending things that like DUI manslaughter, second-hand cancer, theft/robbery to pay for more drugs, etc. are unrelated crimes?
- logfromblammo 10y agoAre we pretending that post hoc, ergo propter hoc is not a fallacy? If a crime has multiple contributing factors, that does not necessarily make any of those factors a crime in itself. One might as well say that because murder with a firearm is a crime, that possession of bullets should also be considered criminal. It is perfectly reasonable to say that crimes may be related to non-crimes. But in our system, the crime should be defined by objective criteria, or elements, such that a judge and jury can determine whether they exist or not based on evidence and testimony. And while is it possible to define a crime without a victim's complaint as an element, my own opinion is that such laws should be relatively rare, or severely limited in their application and scope.
- dragonwriter 10y agoUnrelated to what? I mean, the last is obviously fairly directly exacerbated by drug prohibition, so its certainly "related" to prohibition, but I don't see how that helps your apparent pro-prohibition position...
- Malician 10y agoIf I drive drunk, I put others at unavoidable risk. I don't smoke weed. If I do smoke weed, in what way am I causing comparable harm to others? How is it reasonable to threaten me with criminal penalties? Is that good for society!?