drowhawk
.44 mag
Post #23: "As long as I, as a payer of taxes, need to be forced to care for these personal choices, I against your notion of full personal choices."Your analogies and examples make no sense at all.
I try to engage in real conversations with you, I do think you are capable.
Sorry
I, the payer of taxers, am forced to care for these personal choices (mass shootings), therefore I am against full personal choices.
Drugs are not the only thing someone can do in order to create a burden on society. You can commit a mass shooting, rob a bank, rape an innocent person, scam people, etc... There are plenty of things as a result of "personal choice" that create a burden on society. Where do you draw the line? At what point are we obligated to actually make data-driven decisions instead of emotionally-driven ones?