I was not strictly promoting prohibitive penalization, for one. My comment tried to clarify whether intoxication was res publique or purely private. The fallac

I was not strictly promoting prohibitive penalization, for one. My comment tried to clarify whether intoxication was res publique or purely private. The fallacies in your conclusion are: > freedoms of everyone > faults of a few Whether intoxication leads to freedom is debatable. Secondly, casualties from alcohol abuse are hardly "a few". You say people susceptible to the detrimental effects, perhaps from a preexisting tendency for lack of inhibition and aptitude are responsible. Whereas they are literally irresponsible. Further, your comment in response to my question could be understood to uphold the right to a buzz over thousands of deaths a year.