Dear talk_politics members: I render unto you a question:

[atasharuku.livejournal.com]

How would you describe your ideal government and its laws and policies?

(Sorry, mods, for making a short post consisting of nothing but a question. I was hoping it could facilitate some interesting and hopefully wank-free discussion ^_^)

Comments

[atasharuku.livejournal.com]

Seriously, though - I agree on every point of your comment, save for the legalization of all drugs (I'd like to see weed legalized, but that's it). Well, you know what they say - great minds think alike! ;)

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

I could accept keeping some drugs legal, provided some rational criteria — rather than just "it freaks out the suits". For example, "anything worse than the the worst currently legal (alcohol) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_(mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence).svg)" i.e. methadone, barbiturates, cocaine, and heroin. (Table 3 on page Ev 114 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_07_06_drugsreport.pdf) has a linear ranking of the average score on all three criteria groups.) Age restrictions using tobacco and alcohol as guides (anything up through tobacco with the same age restriction as tobacco — 18ish depending on jurisdiction IIRC — and anything from there up through alcohol with the same age restriction as alcohol — 21) would also make sense.

I do agree that pot legalization is a priority, as it's just plain over-prosecuted and used as a political weapon.

[atasharuku.livejournal.com]

I think the principal criteria should be the health risk presented by the use of the drug and how much of the drug is required to cause significant impairment. I agree that laws shouldn't be made based on the opinions of philistines. ;)