it's nice and simple to say "drug use doesn't have victims", but it's TOO simple. So then you start No True Scotsman-ing the edge cases: "well, neglecting children BECAUSE of drugs isn't the same thing as drugs", etc.
Too facile, and adding epicycles. Now add another one "...and if you let your kid's teeth rot out bc you don't help her brush because you're on meth..." and "...and if you don't feed them because..." and...https://twitter.com/Melhyphen/status/948998820310011906 …
-
-
Show this thread
-
This is a perfect example of the epicycles / No True Scotsman I was talking about:https://twitter.com/onefiftyfivemm/status/949003438540521472 …
Show this thread -
How about this? Drugs are maybe OK for some people, and are very bad for other people, with large negative externalities. We shouldn't prohibit drugs not because "they're victimless", but because prohibition creates even MORE victims. (and also gov doesn't have the authority)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Neglect is already a crime. Prohibition based on it's correlation with neglect is an epicycle.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.