Gov Perry pushing decriminalization of marijuana

[HillRider]

Its always been a mystery to me. I know why the gubbermint lets alcohol be legal. People will do it anyway and its a way to suppress discontent in the masses. Yes. Some use it appropriately and put no ones life in danger.

Just super weird to me that bars have parking lots.

What % of people leaving a bar driving are over the legal limit you think?

Id think that cops could just watch people walk (stumble) out of bars and then pull them over for suspicion of DUI.

I bring this up as the libertarian "freedom" argument ends when it affects others. People driving home drunk from bars tonight will affect others.

So why do bars have parking lots?

-Without Life there can be no Liberty-

We are truly fucked if we are having to have this conversation now. I didn't figure you to be so wrong on this point, and it is this nanny state mindset that is symptomatic of mainline conservatives. Libertarian simply means to believe that freedom and personal choice is paramount, and that government should be as small as possible and out of the way. You are talking about government taking preventative measures through the use of force, in banning substances etc., before someone has even made a choice to harm someone else. This is feakin' nanny state, gungrabber logic! Ban guns because someone could possibly use them to do harm. Government is only responsible with punitive measures, and that is a power invested in them by the people. All this other protectionist, preventative crap is ridiculous.

 

[London]

Bars have parking lots because they are businesses. That's what they need for employees and customers to park in

Cops have been known to case them. This is sometimes defeated by having a sober "Designated drunk" walk out of the bar acting shitfaced, for the purpose of intentionally getting himself pulled over while the real drunks drive home.

Not all people driving home are drunk; in fact state law makes it illegal for a bartender to serve alcohol to a drunk person. This is avoided by bar-hopping- get cut off at one joint, walk across the street to another.

Take parking lots out of bars and it's going to be less than five minutes before people figure out they can just park down the street.

 

[itchin]

We are truly $#@!ed if we are having to have this conversation now. I didn't figure you to be so wrong on this point, and it is this nanny state mindset that is symptomatic of mainline conservatives. Libertarian simply means to believe that freedom and personal choice is paramount, and that government should be as small as possible and out of the way. You are talking about government taking preventative measures through the use of force, in banning substances etc., before someone has even made a choice to harm someone else. This is feakin' nanny state, gungrabber logic! Ban guns because someone could possibly use them to do harm. Government is only responsible with punitive measures, and that is a power invested in them by the people. All this other protectionist, preventative crap is ridiculous.

Thanks for posting this.

 

[M. Sage]

Media portrays libertarians like that? Libertarians portray themselves as such.

Without Life there can be no Liberty.

LOL, I'm a pot head and a loser? Since when did that happen!?

 

[breakingcontact]

LOL, I'm a pot head and a loser? Since when did that happen!?

When did i say that?

Many of the libertarians i know in real life portray themselves as people who dont respect and reject any authority over them and believe in some fantasy where we live in civilized society but without any restrictions.

-Without Life there can be no Liberty-

 

[M. Sage]

When did i say that?

Well, I was assuming that since I'm a libertarian (or something at least similar enough that I usually identify as one) that you were including me as one of your losers and potheads. In its full context...

There is a reason the media portrays libertarians as pot heads and losers. It's the same reason it portrays gun rights groups as extremists.

Media portrays libertarians like that? Libertarians portray themselves as such.

Without Life there can be no Liberty.

Many of the libertarians i know in real life portray themselves as people who dont respect and reject any authority over them and believe in some fantasy where we live in civilized society but without any restrictions.

-Without Life there can be no Liberty-

Huh, what? Either you know libertarians who are bad at explaining things or you aren't actually listening.

Do I disrespect and reject a lot of authority? Hell yes. Because it's illegitimate authority. Because it's authority based in immoral philosophies and used in immoral ways. Because authority that's derived only from violence is not true authority, it's criminality.

Non-aggression is the basis for libertarian and similar philosophy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle

 

[breakingcontact]

I know a fair amount about various political theories including libertarianism.

I too reject some authority, just less than you i suppose.

My faith influences my politics and that divides me from a lot of libertarianism. However some of the more seemingly socialistic portions or my belief are about people freely choosing to do communal things, freely giving to others, not the gov taking and doing that for them.

This reminds me i found a really detailed political quiz online. Ill start a thread on that.

-Without Life there can be no Liberty-

 

[HillRider]

Well, I was assuming that since I'm a libertarian (or something at least similar enough that I usually identify as one) that you were including me as one of your losers and potheads. In its full context...







Huh, what? Either you know libertarians who are bad at explaining things or you aren't actually listening.

Do I disrespect and reject a lot of authority? Hell yes. Because it's illegitimate authority. Because it's authority based in immoral philosophies and used in immoral ways. Because authority that's derived only from violence is not true authority, it's criminality.

Non-aggression is the basis for libertarian and similar philosophy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle

I think this is the point that BC is missing. As an American, and under the Constitution and Texas Constitution, who is your authority? We the People are the source of legitimacy with all forms of government under a constitutional republic. Our authority, in general terms, is the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, not a group of tyrants. These ideas, and the ideas of limited government, are libertarian in nature, otherwise historically known as liberalism (the Democrats destroyed this term). A libertarian or a constitutionalist is not calling for lawlessness, but the destruction of laws that infringe on individual liberty and are the result of do-gooder phonies. Romans 13 does not apply here, we are not bound by fealty to an "authority." If our laws, police, and representatives are in open rebellion against the Constitution, it is our duty to overthrow them.

 

[breakingcontact]

I think this is the point that BC is missing. As an American, and under the Constitution and Texas Constitution, who is your authority? We the People are the source of legitimacy with all forms of government under a constitutional republic. Our authority, in general terms, is the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, not a group of tyrants. These ideas, and the ideas of limited government, are libertarian in nature, otherwise historically known as liberalism (the Democrats destroyed this term). A libertarian or a constitutionalist is not calling for lawlessness, but the destruction of laws that infringe on individual liberty and are the result of do-gooder phonies. Romans 13 does not apply here, we are not bound by fealty to an "authority." If our laws, police, and representatives are in open rebellion against the Constitution, it is our duty to overthrow them.

Thanks. But I'm not missing anything. You libertarians are certainly far more correct than the RINOs in the GOP. I want MORE libertarians in the GOP and more libertarian influences in government. I'm just not as solidly lined up with libertarian beliefs as you all, which is fine with me.

This reminds me AGAIN, to post that detailed online political quiz, look for it in a few!

 

[Mreed911]

So, given the current connotation of Republican, Conservative and Libertarian, what would the name of a new party supporting a hybrid of these positions be?

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

In my Utopia parties would not exist, lol.

Don't get me wrong, I support a lot do things the government tries and fails to do (like feeding the poor).

I just find that stealing from someone to pay off your constituency (in the name of feeding the poor) violates my beliefs. Also, the government will never fill the needs of its people as well as a neighbor can help a neighbor. It's attempts at social welfare always become corrupt and wasteful over time. Always. And Republicans have been just as guilty of this.

Sometimes the intent is good but the tool is wrong. You wouldn't fix a car with a chainsaw. Same applies here.

Governments primary purpose should be to protect individual rights and freedom. That why I am ProLife - because a baby is a person w/ rights.

In order for there to be true competition and commerce, fraud has to be controlled and information fully provided before making a decision. That's why I support labeling items instead of outlawing them. I'm all for labeling and enforcing laws against fraud. Adults get to make decisions and live with the consequences.

Legalize pot but require labeling of its health implications and potency in both edible and smoked forms. Slap a consumption tax on it, especially if that means reducing or eliminating property tax.

We're not anarchists, there's a difference.

 

[karlac]

In my Utopia parties would not exist, lol.

Don't get me wrong, I support a lot do things the government tries and fails to do (like feeding the poor).

I just find that stealing from someone to pay off your constituency (in the name of feeding the poor) violates my beliefs. Also, the government will never fill the needs of its people as well as a neighbor can help a neighbor. It's attempts at social welfare always become corrupt and wasteful over time. Always. And Republicans have been just as guilty of this.

Sometimes the intent is good but the tool is wrong. You wouldn't fix a car with a chainsaw. Same applies here.

Governments primary purpose should be to protect individual rights and freedom. That why I am ProLife - because a baby is a person w/ rights.

In order for there to be true competition and commerce, fraud has to be controlled and information fully provided before making a decision. That's why I support labeling items instead of outlawing them. I'm all for labeling and enforcing laws against fraud. Adults get to make decisions and live with the consequences.

Legalize pot but require labeling of its health implications and potency in both edible and smoked forms. Slap a consumption tax on it, especially if that means reducing or eliminating property tax.

We're not anarchists, there's a difference.

Like your style!

In a nutshell, those who seek to impose their 'concern for the welfare of others' on the governed (altruistically or otherwise), almost always do so without taking into consideration the unintended consequences of their actions.

Look no further than modern day Detroit, Chicago, et al for impeachable proof.