The person who acts negatively is the negative force. Dependence doesn't MAKE anyone do anything.Chemical dependence is a pro-active negative force in the family.
For instance, My father's chemical dependence on both caffeine and nicotine is not a "negative force" in the family.
Our society does not typically make crimes out of actions that could indirectly harm families (e.g. drinking, adultery, making bad investments, being unemployed, etc). Furthermore, the DEA and criminal sentences for drug crimes harm plenty of families too, so it's not even clear that drug use harms families more than the war on drugs itself does.Originally Posted by Jerry
Last edited by Kandahar; 10-14-09 at 05:03 PM.
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
If a firearm is lawfully used as directed by the manufacturer, either an animal dies for dinner or a criminal is stopped.
If meth were lawfully used as directed by the manufacturer, the user would become chemically addicted and (as with almost any other legal addiction) begin neglecting responsibilities with the sole drive and purpose of acquiring their next fix. Children and family would be forgotten (sometimes even sold), the user would not be able to hold down a job or pay bills.
Firearms do not do that.
Yes, chemical addiction does drive people to crime.
Firearms do not.
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_addiction]Drug addiction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Caffeine and nicotine simply do not compare to meth.