|
EDUCATION, NOT LEGISLATION |
|
I believe wholly that the government
should educate, not legislate. Too often it seems as if the government
just rush in and ban things the moment one tiny thing goes wrong
with it, regardless of the consequences of this action. No one
really stops to think what is happening, how the decisions may
affect people on all levels, not just the superficial renderings
of a vague thought. The government end up jumping on a bandwagon
fuelled by uninformed public opinion and scare-mongering by the
Press. I believe in the right to choose, the right to be able to do something if one wishes, as long as the action has no detrimental affects on another. The government should offer realistic facts, ideas and consequences to the people, but ultimately the choice should be up to the individual. In the case of drug taking, an all out ban has been proven not to work. The drugs will be found, grown, imported or bought somehow, regardless of illegalities. The illegalisation and subsequent enforcing of the law is a massive strain on the state, and all to no good effect. If people wish to take certain chemicals into their body, then that is totally up to themselves to do so; it's their body and they can do what they like to it or with it. All the governments job should be is to ensure the takers do not infringe the rights of others whilst under the influence, and to try to educate the users. This should take the form of what the particular drug can do to you and how it may effect you long term, along with the proper instructions on how to take a drug, if you must, safely. Another big mistake has been the illegalisation of handguns in the country. Now all those who legally enjoyed the sport of shooting cannot. What justification was there for this blanket ban? None, all the government did was to bow to pressure from a small but very vocal minority who wished to see all guns banned forever. The naivety of those people who lobbied on behalf of the ban astounds me. All they achieved was to anger people and to remove another source of pleasure from the lives of many. This will not stop any killings from taking place. The people who had to hand in their guns did so quietly and peacefully. No one of those affected would ever have considered using their gun in a violent manner, their honesty and lawfulness was proven by their dignified return of their now illegal weapons. Others, ones that may consider violence, will not be scared to defy the law and thus will hold onto their guns. Only the lawful people will be punished by this decision. Guns will also be openly available to those who wish to use them illegally regardless of the considered legal status of them. The black market would supply or hire a gun to someone for use as easily or quickly as one could buy one from a shop. The main problem in cases of extreme violence is the mental state of the victim, not the weapon involved. All the lobbyists state the Dunblane massacre as their fuel in the fight against the evil of guns. The gun is not evil, but is solely the choice weapon of a deranged or psychotic individual. The gun cannot be blamed if someone wishes to use it for murder, rather than sport. There have been cases of maddening violence in schools in which the perpetrator used a fire extinguisher and a lighter as a makeshift flame-thrower. As much, if not more, damage could be done with this method as with a gun. But the fire extinguisher cannot be blamed for the attack, only the attacker. When will people learn to think about issues rationally, instead of just jumping into ban things before fully realising the consequences of the action? Affirmative action is good in some instances, but it should be directed in search of freedom and enlightenment, not in the prohibition of things misunderstood. |