I just read a shocking article in the paper about a newly available intoxicant. It starts on the front page and continues for almost the entirety of page A8. That’s a lot of words for our local rag. Here are a few quotes so you can understand why so many people are concerned:
The clerk at the… shop called it a “slow night” Thursday but a steady stream of customer filed in to purchase [it]…. During one hour, 16 people purchased [it].
and
One of the customers Thursday night was Jeff Jacobs, a 50-year-old former Chrysler worker from Afton.
and
[Tom Neer, St. Charles County Sheriff,] said some people report it gives them a high, while others say it makes them dizzy or gives them a headache. “I have a concern about the product if it is determined that it can alter a person’s senses,” Neer said. “You get someone using it behind the wheel and it impairs their driving. Certainly, I’m concerned about it.”
Sounds like alcohol, no?
The article continues:
State Rep. Ward Frans, R-151st District, sponsored a bill that would place [it] on the state’s list of controlled substances. Possession would become a felony, Franz said.
Well it sure can’t be alcohol if the state is about to outlaw it.
But what’s going on here? Someone comes up with a new intoxicant and our government’s response is to make it illegal. The effects sound just like alcohol, which is legal. Is our government protecting us from a dangerous drug or from the need to take personal responsibility for what we put into our bodies? Is our government shielding us from the responsibility for our actions, regardless of what we put into our bodies?
What are the criteria for deciding to create another law? When was the last time that anyone, anywhere examined those criteria and held a frank discussion on whether or not our society is well served by them?
