Category: Civil Liberties

I completely sympathize with Megan McArdle over the process for getting Sudafed. Is there a constituency that’s really pushing this kind of law? Or is this how far our political class as sunk in terms of how they view their fellow citizens?

If you click through the link she supplies to Overlawyered here:

For a while now, lawyers in Minnesota, Oklahoma and elsewhere have been suing companies that make over-the-counter cold remedies containing ephedrine and pseudoephedrine on the grounds that they were aware some buyers were using the drugs as raw material for illegal methamphetamine labs. Now such litigation appears to be gaining momentum in Arkansas, where many county governments have signed up to sue Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and other companies. “If successful, it could open up litigation against manufacturers of other produce used in making meth, such as drain cleaners and acetone.”

Those of us in the gun blogosphere are all too familiar with this tactic, since it was also used on gun manufacturers.

… when they pry it from my cold dead hands.  Well, I actually have a smaller LCD model that’s more energy efficient, but if I did have a plasma TV, well, you know…. cold dead hands.

Chris has a very excellent post on 12 step programs:

That said, if someone is given a sobriety order (which I think is very rarely justified, but that’s another argument entirely) and they violate it; back in jail they go. I have no problem with that. That is a behavioral remedy, and requiring people modify their behavior to avoid harming those around them (presuming that is the true purpose, rather than the belief that substance abuse is immoral) is a fundamental part of civilized society.

The remedies of our justice system MUST only be behavioral; once law dictates conscience, we are nothing but slaves. One must hope that through behavioral remedies we can aid people in coming to a less harmful thought pattern and lifestyle, but we cannot force them to think or feel as we wish.

So, I have no problem with a court ordered de-tox, or court ordered and enforced sobriety (including returning them to prison as a penalty) under appropriate circumstances; and if someone VOLUNTARILY wishes to enter treatment to prevent that from happening, I’m all for it. Ordering someone into therapy though, is both ineffective, and a violation of the fundamental human right of freedom of conscience.

I couldn’t agree more.   Read the whole thing.

For your own good you see.   From Les Jones.  Everyone has their line in the sand, and this kind of crap that John Edwards is talking about is getting dangerously close to mine.  Go to the doctor, or we’ll send in the SWAT team to drag you there?

It it comes to that, I’m going to start a secession movement.

… the federal and various state governments really need to put a stop to crap like this.

… another example of how we shouldn’t worry too much about losing our civil liberties because of the war on terror, because we’ve already lost them fighting the war on drugs.  Also, the ACLU draws a lot of people’s ire from time to time, including mine, but they do good work a lot of the time.  This is one of those times.

If someone were to say that, you might think that they were a paranoid psychotic.  Well, it turns out they wouldn’t be.

She plans to start a survey for drugs in the wastewater of at least 40 Oregon communities.

The science behind the testing is simple. Nearly every drug — legal and illicit — that people take leaves the body. That waste goes into toilets and then into wastewater treatment plants.

“Wastewater facilities are wonderful places to understand what humans consume and excrete,” Field said.

I’ll bet guys are lining up to take her on a date!  When people are storing urine and feces in jars in their basement, because they really are out to get you, things certainly will have taken a turn for the surreal.

Hat tip to Joe and Bruce Schneier

I didn’t see this until today, but Chris Bryne reminds us it’s the 15 year anniversary of an important event, and tells the story.

The Senate said no to the smoking ban the house passed a few weeks ago.  Ed Rendell and the Democrats want it badly, the Republican controlled senate wants a weaker one.  There is some hope for Keystone State smokers:

The House ban required a stricter, more limited list of exceptions than legislation recently approved by the Senate.

Senate legislation allowed smoking at a quarter of casino gambling floors, bars where food is less than one-fifth of the gross sales, addiction treatment centers, nursing homes and other adult-care centers.

The hope is they won’t be able to work out a deal.  I’m not so optimistic.   Daine Phillips, of the American Cancer Society says:

“I believe nonsmokers have their rights, too,” Beranek said. “It’s a stinky, filthy, expensive habit.”

Nonsmokers have a right to go somewhere else that caters to their preferences.  They have a right to persuade property owners to ban smoking on their property.   Ms. Phillips, I am not, nor have I ever been a smoker, but crapping on people’s freedoms and liberties of free association and property rights, is a filthy expensive habit, that you really ought to break yourself of.

My mother died of Breast Cancer when I was twenty.   But I shall not give another dime to ACS as long as they keep pushing for these smoking bans.  Freedom is more important.