who, even if they don't use something - are willing to look at evidence about usage and not immediately align with authoritarian thinking - authoritarian thinking is a personality trait of conservatism.
And more liberals have probably experimented in the past who don't turn around and become hypocrites once they're older. (Tho some do, of course - depending upon the political winds)
I'm an outlier at the moment - because I think all drugs should be legal and regulated. This is a harm reduction approach to the problem (b/c, yes, it can be a problem for a minority of people) who use illegal substances.
Rather than incarceration, I prefer medical treatment for people using harmful substances such as heroin or meth.
You know what's really tragic about meth use? So much of it is attributed to low-income people who are working two jobs, etc. - so, what's the problem at the bottom of such meth use? To me - it's that someone has to work two jobs to merely get by.
Some low income people in rural areas turn to producing meth to sell to other low income people with two jobs. It reminds me of Moore's documentary, Roger and Me, that noted when the factories closed in Flint, the town was often divided b/t those who got jobs in prisons and those who got arrested for one thing or another.
That's the drug war model.
in fact, the drug war redistributes populations from urban to rural areas (even tho felons lose the right to vote). This, however, increases population numbers in rural areas, while taking votes away from liberal areas. And, even tho there is no difference between groups for mj use - it's African-Americans and Latinos who are arrested at far greater rates than whites doing exactly the same thing.
iow, the drug war is racist to its core.
that was also its foundation.
= new reply since forum marked as read