Hacker News Reader

Comment by quotemstr | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

The classic defense used by cigarette companies historically. We are just rolling up some naturally growing leaves, leaves can't be addictive. Users are responsible for diseases and addiction. We don't target minors.

> People are responsible for their choices

Yes, but also often are not actively in control of them.

People are also in control of whether or not they gamble their last dollar instead of buying some food, or whether or not they put that needle into their veins.

History has shown human nature can be dangerously out of control and people will happily destroy their own lives given the opportunity.

Therefore society tries to protect those vulnerable people with legislation.

So when does it stop? Would you support the state intervening in other situations in which people make choices of which you disapprove? Which choices would you, in your magnanimity, allow them to make?

>Which peer choices would you, in your magnanimity, allow them to make?

Thats why we have voting and a legal system which builds upon previous laws. You and I do not need to decide where the line in the sand is drawn, the majority of the population does that via the political and legal framework society has created.

> Would you support the state intervening in other situations in which people make choices of which you disapprove?

Do you think "murder should be legal" is a popular position?

> It's not possible to be "addicted" to words…

Never met a narcicist?

The state of being a narcissist, in itself, is not something that creates civil or criminal exposure. Nor is being a braggart.

Do you think it’s better to treat a symptom of a disease or treat its root cause?

You've moved the goalpost so far the sport changed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com