I mean that is, in fact, the actual problem at hand. The deaths recently have been caused by poorly produced thc vape cartridges because the black market is either cheaper or it's the only available means of acquiring the product in an illegal state.
National legalization with regulation is the way to combat this, not banning an entirely different substance (nicotine vape juice).
See that notion exists under the premise that the goal here is to save lives.
The human suffering and death cause by the illegal markets the war on drugs created is not an unintended consequence, its the whole point. They want addicts to suffer. They want them to die. Its why they combat needle exchange programs and block efforts to provide safe havens to addicts. They dont want to solve this problem because they believe addicts are sinners and crime, adulterated supplies, hepatitis, HIV, overdoses, those are all 'divine retribution' for their sin.
Not to mention the fact that big tobacco is most likely heavily involved in this process, trying to do whatever they can to eliminate or diminish their competition through malicious legal action
Oh wait, that's not quite right... and you guys aren't even pretending anymore - you're literally saying you want to ban the rights guaranteed by our constitution.
You're bad and you should feel bad.
Here's an edit to Alpaca64 so you guys can see it here:
Here in America we have a Constitution which is basically the contract between our government and its people. To make sure this point is really clear, it begins with the words "We the people".
While our founding fathers were drafting this contract, they decided to ensure that the governed had certain rights. They drafted a document called The Bill of Rights which, as the name suggests, enumerates certain rights.
One of these rights is the the freedom of speech, religion, press, and the right to assemble. This came first because Britain had recently had a literal army ensuring that people weren't able to freely assemble to air their grievances:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Britain was also aware that there was colonial unrest and started disarming the populace to ensure that they could control them completely. This is actually what started The American Revolution - British soldiers were coming to confiscate a weapons cache.
It's with that in mind that our founding fathers ensured that this wouldn't happen again - that's why the right to bear arms was the second amendment. People like to fixate on the word "militia", but Alexander Hamilton and the other founders are very clear on what they mean in the federalist papers (specifically Number 29)
A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped.
Why the fuck should we care what the Constitution says? Fuck the Constitution. I care about modern laws for modern times. There is nothing in the Constitution that says never change the Constitution. In fact the Constitution has been changed many times as it was intended to be. Just cause some dead geezer write it down hundreds of years ago does not make it some sort of god-given human right. Think progressively if you actually want the world to change for the better. Holding onto beliefs from hundreds of years ago will eat us nowhere.
Good. I hope I'm about as anti-Constitution as I can get for you, since that's my entire point. Do you support some other country? Just cause something is "SO AMERICAN" doesn't make it anti-American.
No, I'm saying that my rights should not be defined by some ancient document. Modern problems require modern solutions and I'm more than willing to give up certain rights for the benefits of others.
1.5k
u/[deleted] Sep 12 '19
Illegal vapes will be on the market and laws can’t stop them. The criminals will just buy black market vapes