Proponents of the ban order, often use the argument that personal freedom to use certain substances, although they may harm the decision-maker must override restrictions designed to protect the citizens if same. In this way sees the ban as an intolerable imposition that reduces the freedom of choice of individuals. But this argument is fallacious, since drug addicts are not able to decide freely due to their addiction. The ban, far from cutting freedoms, seeks to prevent that slavery to undergo drug users.
A very important argument to not be taken into account. First things first. From the outset, the argument of enslaving addiction should have been questioned in the first chapter, where I pointed out that, firstly, not all illegal drugs, addictive, and, secondly, that the problems caused by addiction to opiates are, for the most apart, due to side effects of the ban. In the same way that physical dependence on alcohol in a large number of non-problematic because of the ease with which they can get alcohol, the availability of opiates in addicts get their in removing negative images that are associated heroin users today: robbery, AIDS, adulteration, overdose.
But what is discussed at the bottom of this issue is the concept of freedom. It discusses how to establish that someone 'is not master of his acts' in order to impose our will by force of law. This argument which, in other forms, I have already spoken in other chapters, tells us that drug users are people deprived of will and intellect, which should help even if they want. Savater comments: "Freedom is not something that is only good for the wise exercise impassive, perfectly informed and self-control and maturity enviable. Putting these requirements to freedom is an idealism that ultimately leads only to deny freedom, just as Franco believed that the English were not 'ripe' for democracy. No: the freedom of ordinary people exercise, stubborn, passionate, naive, selfish, immature ... pupa people we can get to it. Is characteristic of freedom that can be misused, and misused once you can not erase what happened simply repenting, not blaming the neighbor or 'the system'. "
Finally, it is paradoxical that many of those who defend this thesis are both party to penalize consumption and imprison users, without seeming to matter then that his crime was committed because they had supposedly will stolen by Drugs.
0 comments:
Post a Comment