Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!
Drugs are bad mmkay? Though small amounts (smaller than what this dopehead wants) should be legalized, like for cases of terminal illnesses and restricted "recreational" uses. Any thefts commited while drugged should be severly agravated (that includes DUI and DWI).
The article seems to take an almost amused position on Chretien's comments. I wonder what kind of coverage there would have been if he had said, "I'm going to go out with enough money in my pocket to pay a fine, and drive my car 100 mph down main street."
Shouldn't our leaders be dissuading us from ANY illegal activity?
There are a LOT of things that are bad. My propensity for sugar and my overspending are horrible, but does that mean we should set up a huge government bureaucracy and a police state to enforce the "morality?" Especially since cigarettes (the true "gateway drug, by the way) and alcohol are legal and ubiquitus? Especially since our entire economy and society is based on "sins" like materialism and sexual immorality (seen any advertising lately)
The police state (1/4 of the African American community involved with the justice system-much of this drug related=police state to me) and the billions of dollars spent in the United States on drug control has an arguably far worse impact than the (admittedly bad) impacts from people engaging in the age old pursuit of "getting high." I myself don't indulge, so this not some pothead looking for a legal high (I have enough problems with addictive behavior to ever really try "drugs") I say medicalize it, make crimes under the influence subject to enhanced punishment, and stop pretending the nanny state can really control something people have been doing for tens of thousands of years (or 4,000 years if you are a strict Creationist).