To add on to this, it wouldn’t be nearly as violent a trade as it is if we had some sane drug laws.
I’m not saying we should just sell crack at Walmart. However, if you give already existing addicts a prescription to a clean, state provided supply they’ll have no reason to go to dealers.
The illicit drug trade will fucking collapse. There’s no way you can sustain that business without addicts.
I’m not saying we should just sell crack at Walmart. However, if you give already existing addicts a prescription to a clean, state provided supply they’ll have no reason to go to dealers.
Did you read the part of the article where they say gun exclusions might only hold up where there is a threat of violence?
The reason he bought a gun was because a drug dealer pointed one at him, continuing to engage with dealers, while armed, is a risk of violence.
This is why we don’t allow addicts to have guns.
Threat of violence and in response to a risk of violence are potentially two different things.
Also, I’m not pro guns. But buying a gun for protection is a huge reason why people support gun ownership.
To add on to this, it wouldn’t be nearly as violent a trade as it is if we had some sane drug laws.
I’m not saying we should just sell crack at Walmart. However, if you give already existing addicts a prescription to a clean, state provided supply they’ll have no reason to go to dealers.
The illicit drug trade will fucking collapse. There’s no way you can sustain that business without addicts.
Agreed.