I was at a party with some friends of mine two days ago and something occured to me…
People have too much freedom.
See they started smoking pot, now at first I thought, “what if we get caught?”.
So I looked around… no cops, no sirens, no neighbors that would even care.
I mean, download a porn video and you can see the dude is banging her at his house, some fancy house up in the hollywood hills f eks.
They might be sniffing cocaine or shooting heroine for chr. sake.
My point is, walk around during the day and think about what you could do right then and there without anybody knowing.
You could kill someone, rape someone, do drugs, make bombs… Whatever.
This is what makes all the problems in the world, people can’t control their freedom.
Now if someone made a government, and had the resources to do surveillance on it’s citizens(and the men to apprehend whoever), would crime cease to exist?
I know I have a good point, I just don’t know exactly how to discuss it.
The OP contains a mishmash of purportedly bad things which people have “too much freedom” to do, from things that are legal–downloading porn videos–to things that ought to be legal–doing drugs–to things that are rightfully illegal, and which we have agencies designed to prevent–raping and killing and making bombs.
Even in totalitarian societies, there is still crime. More to the point, the governments of such societies invariably commit far worse “crimes” in the name of keeping order than any ordinary criminal can accomplish. And I don’t want to live in a society where everyone is under surveillance all the time, even if it would end all crime. You can always cure a headache by cutting off the patient’s head.
I think we have too little freedom. I think it’s because with freedom comes responsibility, and as a society we tend to try to blame others for our failures and want to avoid our responsibilities by letting the government take care of them. In addition, we’re all convinced that we’re right and everyone else is wrong. “My religion says that abortion is a sin! Since I’m right and everyone else is wrong, it’s up to me and people who think like me to force those idiots to comply!” “They didn’t tell me that I’m not supposed to use the electric mixer in the bathtub! I nearly died! I’m gonna get those irresponsible electric mixer-making bastards!” “There ought to be a law!”
I will go along with the idea that there is too little freedom. There are a lot of senseless laws on the books. Some people don’t want those who disagree with them to be able to exercise what freedom we have.
The crime rate would fall and prison populations would go down if there were no laws to protect us from ourselves. For example, I believe that the use of marijuana should be legalized. Not only would it be no one’s business, but legalizing it would take the criminal element out of its distribution.
Further, if even addictive drugs were legalized, they would be cheap and people would not be as likely to steal to support a habit. We wouldn’t have to have as many people in law enforcement. The benefits would go on it ever widening circles.
I’m not oblivious to the downside of having more freedom, but all in all, I think we would be better off.
Laws against rape and murder protect society. That should be the main purpose of government – not to protect us from ourselves.
This has been very closely approximated in countries such as North Korea, Saddham-era Iraq, and the USSR (in the 30s. 40s and 50s). And people in those countries do not (or did not) have too much freedom. In the US, the framers of the constiution wisely set up a gov’t where freedom was valued, not feared.
By that I mean that standards of purity etc., would have to be set and maintained, which adds to the price of the drug. Then you can be damn sure that the government would slap a heavy tax on the drug, (and rightly so.) While we might not need to have as many people in law enforcement, we would need a lot more medical personnel for the huge numbers of new OD’s that would occur.
Keep dreaming, 'cause it will never happen in the United States.
but in anarchy, the so-called freedom starts to infringe on the rights of others, therefore it can no longer be refered to as true freedom. If you view freedom as a scale that stops when said freedom interferes with the freedom of others(a valid concept in my opinion), then you cannot have too much freedom.*
In every place it has been implemented(Holland, Oregan in the 70s), marijuana decriminalization has not led to an increase in marijuana use. I see no reason why that would not apply to harder drugs as well.
No, what makes all the problems in the world is that people think that everyone else in the world should follow their idea of right and wrong.
You feel that smoking pot is wrong. Your friends apparantly don’t. Are they hurting anyone? No. Are they infringing on anyone elses freedom? No. So what do you care whether they smoke pot or not? Why should you expect your morality to be enforced on others beyond what has generally been accepted by society?
There have been no polls taken that show that anything even close to a majority of the American public “accept” pot smoking as something that isn’t illegal. Quite the contrary.
Sorry, you don’t have a good point…but you are right, you don’t know how to discuss it.
Freedom, both personal and legal, comes with a price. The price is, some people are going to abuse their freedom and take advantage of it. What are you going to do about it?
There’s nothing you can do, short of assigning one police officer for every one citizen.
And who watches the police officiers?
Who watches the guys who are watching the police officiers?
How much will all of this cost? What are the consequences for America in the long term?
Let’s see, which is more addictive, heroin or marijuana?
Answer: Heroin
Cocaine or marijuana?
Answer: Cocaine
Crystal Meth or marijuana?
Answer: Crystal meth
I would much prefer to live in a world where it is illegal for anyone to purchase PCP, then to live in a world where such a practice was legal and then have to deal with people high on PCP who were out driving.
I’m going to agree with the people who say we have too little freedom. And the people who says we do have too much are some of the scariest sonsabitches out there, like Bush and Ashcroft and Fleischer. Blecch.
You’ve demonstrated little in this post except a lack of understanding of the principles of anarchism. Maybe you should read a little bit about it before making such unsubstantiated generalizations.
There was a thread in MPSIMS last week that linked to an article about an incident of “road rage”. A disabled man habitually drove below the posted speed limit. An aggressive man deliberately rammed his vehicle from behind. When they stopped and the disabled man got out of the car, the other man beat him to death. In addition to being mentally unstable, the attacker was high on PCP.
My point was, when you hear people talk about whatever they’re going to do, like doing drugs(which as a matter of fact does affect others than themselves), I can’t help but feel like we’re too little controlled.
Although, I don’t want to be more controlled, I like the freedom I have right now.
Anyway about drugs, seen the movie Traffic? It sort of displays how tons of people are involved in the cocaine importing and using.
Legalizing any kind of drug seems to me pointless, as it’s not controlled enough now to even handle 20% of the people who use it anyway.
“Everyone” can get drugs easily, is what people tell me.
Much less marijuana, which is like green grass, you can go and pick it from a huge plane that only grows bigger.
My original point was, I think about all the child molestors, the murderers and the criminal people who kind of live in their own world.
Imagine them sitting in their apartment, then going out, then abducting some girl, kill her and bury her out in the woods where noone finds her.
Who would ever know where she went or who did it to her?
It’s like, people can do whatever the fuck they want and it’s hard to stop them. That’s the basic point that kinda scares me.
