Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Hydroponics, anyone? Interesting raid on home of "growers"
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2157608" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>Please understand that I'm not busting your chops here, but yes, it's still slightly flawed. The laws you mention regulate what a person is doing that may impact the safety of others. The laws on PSE impact what a person may ingest for themselves, not others. That is a natural right. Gun rights are an enumerated right as you recognized. Now I say "slightly", because you can draw a direct correlation between meth use and the safety of the public at large. Meth labs are a public health hazard. Statistical analysis proves that people on meth are disproportionately more likely to harm others than non-meth users. </p><p></p><p>So long as it's not impacting an enumerated right (which comes with equally offsetting negatives), and we're doing it to save the public at large and not specifically the user themselves, I'm OK with it. That's how I can accept the legalization of pot, but not much more dangerous drugs like meth. IMO, the line just isn't all that blurry. YMMV <img src="/images/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2157608, member: 1132"] Please understand that I'm not busting your chops here, but yes, it's still slightly flawed. The laws you mention regulate what a person is doing that may impact the safety of others. The laws on PSE impact what a person may ingest for themselves, not others. That is a natural right. Gun rights are an enumerated right as you recognized. Now I say "slightly", because you can draw a direct correlation between meth use and the safety of the public at large. Meth labs are a public health hazard. Statistical analysis proves that people on meth are disproportionately more likely to harm others than non-meth users. So long as it's not impacting an enumerated right (which comes with equally offsetting negatives), and we're doing it to save the public at large and not specifically the user themselves, I'm OK with it. That's how I can accept the legalization of pot, but not much more dangerous drugs like meth. IMO, the line just isn't all that blurry. YMMV :) [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Hydroponics, anyone? Interesting raid on home of "growers"
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom