Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin are all convicted and sent to prison. Upon their release one year later, the inmates have formed a constitutional republic who send elected representatives to parley with the warden bi monthly. Open trade between cell blocks has led to an increased standard of living, and Terry "Hollow Point" Hernandez from D-Block has introduced a bill to the prison legislature regarding the extension of chow time. It is expected to pass with enthusiastic bi-partisan support.
Sadly, 10 years later, the prison is full of stifling regulations on trade and free food without the ability to produce your own; thus keeping you reliant on the prison. Lesson learned: Government is like a prison.
And getting drunk is illegal in much of the country. The difference between alcohol is that you can easily drink without getting drunk but it is a lot harder to smoke without getting baked.
Jesse Ward not really it depends where you are, who you are with and what you are drinking it's usually not easy to drink and be sober when you are with friends
Alcohol wasn't always legal, it's the only drug to been legally made illegal by the constitution instead of other drugs that usurp the constitution and just have federal law make it illegal.
I can not possibly imagine why someone would think that they have moral authority over what others put inside their bodies. Or why someone would think that some people are immune from the responsibilities of those actions.
Lol. I feel you. The legal driving limit has no bearings on drug consumption. And I doubt many parents would let their children consume liquor at the age of 13 but those who would are undeterred by federal mandates. What is your next critique on my ideology.
I did cocaine for 3 years and I thought it increases my perception too,It was like miracle pill for me, but then I nearly died and I still feel the consequences after 3 years off.Sometimes I'm dreaming cocaine and even dreams looks like making me high ... Knowledge comes with experience,STAY AWAY KIDS FROM COKE ! ...
All cocaine does is make you want more cocaine. Just don't do it. High over rated, paranoia and nervous wreck is what you become.. who doesn't love THAT
Chopin used Opium to treat the symptoms of his tuberculosis. It may also be of note that he died at 39. It's not absurd to consider that the use of opium may have contributed to him dying at a young age. I know that it would make the video more dull, but you might want to distinguish why certain people used the drugs, because at times these drugs were used as medicine, not just "to have a good time." Just to be intellectually honest.
The thing is... Substances that we consider drugs today in the colloquial sense were not the same things that were considered drugs back then. If many of these people, like Chopin, had the alternative medicine that we have today, then they may not have turned to opium, hence using them for medical purposes and having them prescribed would not help the argument. If people used Opium today, I highly doubt that it would be to treat tuberculosis. Also I am aware that he gave several reasons in a broad sense. I was referring to why each individual in the list used the drug, like (health/recreation/etc.)
@Evan opium makes you feel great though which many of the modern day equivalents do not. And that can have a profound impact on your willingness to try to fight an illness rather than succumb to it.
substance use has no place in the hands of a government. no one should be able to dictate what i put in my own body. for every bad aspect of drugs, there's a great one. plus prohibition enables all gangs
I don't care what drugs you take as long as you are not physically or financial harming the people around you or the society in which you live. If you can show that doing drugs only affects you financial and physically then go for it , as long as my tax dollars are not being used to keep you alive, as long as my tax dollars are not being used to pay for your drugs,food, shelter, clothing,medical care, then it is your choice, use any drugs you want and if you destroy your life or kill yourself in the process then you've no one to blame but yourself!!!! but if I have to pay for your bad choices then it should be made criminal! So by the same logic Health care should not be in the hands of the government, and hospitals "should be" allowed to deny you care or put you in debtors prison work camp till you pay off your hospitalization bill!
Social Conservatives and Libertarians have a vary similar view on drugs. A Social Conservative will look at drugs and say "I think drugs are immoral so that means we should ban them" and a Libertarian will look at drugs and say "I think drugs should be legal so that means they must be moral and how dare you criticize them". While I'm stuck in the middle arguing with Social Conservatives saying yes I agree they are bad but don't ban them while I'm also arguing with Libertarians saying yes we should make them legal but that does not make them morally okay.
Oh shit I I've tried all kinds of drugs (weed, hydros, alcohol, speed, Xanax, lsd, shrooms, nitrous, nicotine, caffeine, and ectasy) guess it's time unenlist from the army and go shoot up a school cause the drugs are what's bad not the individual taking them.
Jeff Navarro - Because we value freedom. Therefore, government should regulate as little as possible. People should be free, unless their action directly impedes on the freedom of others. Drug use itself does not directly effect others.
NJ Eddie I appreciate your reply and although I (sort of) identify as Libertarian, really my question was for Jesse Ward. I still feel it's illogical and misrepresents Libertarianism to say Libs think drugs should be legal and are therefore moral...he only said what he disagrees with, not what he himself thinks.
My father repeatedly told me that he and my mother didn't like The Beatles because "they were just a bunch of druggies." But he loves the Rolling Stones and The Who, and my mom loves John Denver. Inconsistent.
I’m for personal responsibility and letting people decide for themselves (legalization). This video however seems to promote drug use which I can’t get on board with.
@@URProductions Although his intent is your statement, his actual statement is more accurate. Drug use has only been on the rise post 60s, it was on the downward from the late 1800s to the 1950s, alcohol consumption even declined in the 10 years after prohibition ended. The actual answer is fixing the loosening moral standards, not more useless legislation.
It just says "Jail Time" for Mary Jane... Yeah, because unlike the harder drugs on this list you can spend a lifetime behind bars for a weed if you live in a certain state and be paid to grow it if you live in another. Dumbest policy ever.
I love Penn Jillette, so your headline is wrong. But wait, let me get this straight: Heaton is not a fan of Ayn Rand? Heaton's credibility just took an enormous hit. You don't have to agree with Rand on everything, but her rational defense of capitalism is brilliant and ultimately invaluable. It's that rational defense that turned me from democrat/borderline commie to libertarian. I'm not alone. A host on ReasonTV is NOT a fan of Ayn Rand. Let that sink in. Now when I see "Heaton" come up on the subscription feed, I'll be less likely to tune in. Good to know.
Rand was a philosopher who tried her hands at writing - but her books are frankly boring and preachy. It's easy to not be a fan. You can like high-fantasy and think that Game of Thrones had a shit ending. Likewise rand was an interesting voice in the dialectic, but her writing sucked.
I'm Libertarian for a while now and I never been a fan of Ayn Rand. While her Defense of Capitalism is a rational one, she has the credentials of someone like Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. If your defense of an Economic System is based on a fictional book written by a philosopher (either Rand or Marx) somethin' is wrong. That's why I rather go with Ludwig Von Mises, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek or even Murray Rothbard.
A libertarian who is not an Ayn Rand fan? THAT is shocking. Also, you guys left out William Wilberforce, British abolitionist, who used opium. He was also probably addicted, but not so severely he couldn't function.
WInston Churchill was a heavy drinker and a terrible role model. And drinking coca leaves is nothing like sniffing the stuff. Drugs should be legal for practical and self-ownership reasons, but that doesn't mean they aren't shitty.
As a libertarian I don’t care what you do but I do have a problem when the government enables drug use with taxpayer money. Make your own choices but then live with the consequences.
I am a classic Libertarian and today's Libertarian Party has abandoned its roots. Now they all seem to be big government hedonists. They want no limits on their behavior, but want the government around to pay for the consequences.
John Barley she didn't say Libertarians ripped her off -- she said they distorted the intent of her message. Also, she didn't want anyone taking away votes from Nixon.
Most of the founding fathers had slaves. They would serve long term sentences if they were caught doing that today. God forbid that we should we rethink anti-slavery laws because famous people had slaves. Besides most of the cases you mention were Doctor prescribed and administered in best medical means possible for their time (which no one has a problem with).
The only drugs I "use" regularly are caffeine in the form of 6 - 7 Diet Pepsis a week and a daily dose of Levothyroxine, as prescribed by my doctor. I don't use pot, have never smoked, and don't care if I ever drink another wine cooler ever again, but I don't give a dead possum fart if you do other drugs (currently legal or not)…as long as you're a legal adult (and, yes, I think that it should be okay to drink at 18, eventhough I didn't until I was 27 and pretty much stopped before 30) and don't hurt anyone in the process of using or hurt them to get the drugs. Taxpayer money needs to be put to better uses than punishing people for choosing oblivion. The only part of the "War of Drugs" that I support is punishing those who provide to minors. Also, by keeping them illegal, you romanticize their use, making them more likely to WANT to try them.
How do you propose to stop dealers selling drugs to kids under 18 who you admit do not j have the capacity to make an informed choice about whether to use or not?
@@ChristopherNFP Why would a dealer want to sell to kids? They don't have jobs. They do have guardians. They're less likely to keep drug use under the radar, which is an increased risk of exposure to the dealer. They're much more likely to die of an overdose, and tracking down the dealer in the event of a child overdose death is very likely, no one tracks down the source of most overdose deaths. There's just too many bad consequences. Legalize everything, and then at least the drugs out there won't be biker meth from a trailer park, or heroin smuggled in someones butt.
Yeah, but most of the drugs mentioned where practically new and where clearly ingredients in medicines. When they discovered the addictive qualities of these drugs they mostly removed them from the ingredients. That's like suggesting that the Coca-Cola Bottling Company would be thrown in jail today for having Coca-Leaves in their soda pop despite the fact that they removed in nearly 100 years ago. This is why the hole Heroine epidemic is such a problem since some much of today's medicine uses heroine derivatives.
People wouldn't buy heroin from shady black market dealers, if they could buy opiates from shady pharma companies that have better quality standards, for safety.
Libertarians need to learn how to support the legalization of drugs. I firmly believe that anybody should be able to do whatever they want to their body as long as it doesn't impact anybody else. Government has no right to tell people what they do with their bodies. That said I despise the use of drugs and I would never consider it. For as long as the Libertarian party treats drugs like they do, they will be seen as crazy people.
Unless it's one of the millions of drugs peddled by "licensed pharma and doctors" right? Stick with paragraph 1, it's okay and likely wise that you don't use them, but if you think promoting liberty is just crazy, then you are off the mark.
My point is they paint recreational drugs as positive when they should paint all drugs as people's right to choose. I would never choose to do recreational drugs (nor do I take any other "drug" in my life other than Advil lol), but I still believe in people's freedom to do whatever they want.
You cant legalize drugs while the Welfare State is in place. If drugs are legal and there is no penalty of law, the consequences of such behavior will be paid by the taxpayer and socially.
You know 'Reason' is named like that because of Ayn Rand, right? "Free minds and free markets" is also what she wrote! Read The Fountainhead, or Atlas Shrugged!
I was perscribed phentanol and morphine (both opiates) to keep from going into shock after a drunk driver plowed into me while going 100+ miles per hour. Can I be added to your list of lovable people that "did drugs"? I also would like to be included in your fight against authoritarian rules against substance abuse.
My greatest fear is being seen drunk or under the influence by anybody in the town I live in... and my advice learn to enjoy sobriety... and yes I drink Foster's I averaged about two a day which is pretty much but the abstinence cleans out toxins
Book with too much words means author gave too little work of rewriting it, rather than too much work writing. If Rand did speeds it was super cruel to use that energy to bloat her books x5 size of what was needed.
in 2006 I was given the choice of being prescribed barbiturates for the rest of my life, or brain surgery. After the brain surgery, I was prescribed opiates. #I'm a drug user too! This argument for legalizing all drugs is ridiculous.
@@freethebirds3578 because you should have the freedom to put what you want into your body also not to mention the cia itself sold rugs look it up they admitted to it. Plus even as an aside drugs creates gangs selling illegal stuff rather than legal places and those gangs create more crime.
school counselor : We Are A drug free school any one bringing drugs on School grounds will be punished severely Me: I have coffee school counselor : *GUARDS SEIZE HIM*
If you could engage the point that most drug offenders in prison are not, in fact, non-violent, but are the product of plea deals, that would be very helpful. It's often a CounterPoint in discussions.
Nick Harrell i didn't knew, this is relevant to this being a bad example,thanks, if it is true. Yet this is shitty reason tv video. It does make a weak point that famous worthwhile people in some cases, not the one of the trash of the human being edison, did drugs and could have been arrested yet it does not make use of the shit load of arguments for drug legalization. And it the kind of video someone could have done while tripping balls. Look this people did drugs ,you like them. Let talk drugs. It is no diferent from hey this people got shot you don't wanna get shot let's talk guns.
Mr. Heaton why do you dislike Ayn Rand? Her work provides liberty and capitalism the moral bedrock and winning arguments needed to win the war of ideas. Also her ideas are ultimately the refinement of enlightenment reasoning... Which is the foundation of the American Republic. What of this do you take umbrage with?
Arguments this stupid, (and I say this as someone who is in favor of legalizing everything,) might cause me to one day cancel my Reason subscription. Next time you want to talk about who did drugs in an effort to extol their possible virtues or to soften the conventional societal stance against them, please don't use those legally prescribed by a physician as part of that argument. Yes Winston Churchill used Amphetamines, but he did so on the instructions of his doctor, who had legal authority to give those instructions. There are legitimate medical uses for drugs today, including Opium, Cocaine, Amphetamines, and the like. All of these substances are being prescribed today, and this does not make the people using these substances, the prescribing doctors, nor the pharmacy filling the scripts, part of the drug culture.
The U.S. government has a patent on cannabidiol (CBD, drug in marijuana) as a neuroprotectant, which they filed around 2001, which means they were doing the science for it in the 90's.
Jesus Tapdancing Christ, why does your doctor keep telling you to take omega-3 fatty acids? Because they are converted in the body to endocannabinoids, similar to the cannabinoids from plants, they act on the same receptors stimulating the immune system.
Gee. Someone at "Reason" who is "not a fan" of Ayn Rand. Shocker. After all, why would anyone want to be "a fan" of someone who believed that: 1. There is an objective reality. 2. People should be rational. 3. People should be concerned with what is in their actual self-interest. 4. People own their lives and property. 5. People should be in control of and decide how their own lives and property are used. 6. The initiation of violence against peaceful and innocent individuals is universally wrong. 7. Only voluntary interactions among peaceful individuals are proper. 8. Art should uplift rather than degrade the human spirit. Far better, I guess, to be "a fan" of Ayn Rand's detractors, who - if they reject Objectivism - must believe that: 1. There is no "reality." “Reality” is whatever one wants it to be. Saying one is "out of touch with reality" is a positive statement. 2. People should be irrational/illogical. 3. People should be concerned with whatever is destructive to their self-interest. 4. No one owns his own life; all people are and should be slaves. 5. No one has a right to own property; anyone for any reason can take whatever they want from someone. 6. People should recognize that anyone other than themselves should be in control of and decide how their lives and property are used; anyone can, for any reason, take whatever they want from other people and dictate to them how they should live their lives. 7. Initiating/using coercion and violence against innocent and peaceful others is the basis of all proper social interactions. Might makes right, determines what is right. 8. Only involuntary actions are proper; forcing others to do or not do what they want is the essence of how people should be treated. 9. Art should be degrading to the human spirit and treat people as worthless scum. I would be disappointed at a contributor at "Reason" who would make such a statement, but then, I might as well be disappointed in my cat because he can't quote Shakespeare.
An excellent summary of what I appreciate about Ayn Rand's philosophy. (I actually saved this list!) I'm not sure what people don't like about her, but I'd like to know.
Thanks. Glad you liked the list. Maybe some folks who don't like Rand dislike the fact that if they accepted her basic ideas, they could no longer continue believing the anti-rights, immoral ideas they hold so dear...
Your problem and the problem with unprincipled people in general is the ability to NOT think in terms of principles. They simply blank out reality and ignore any actual principles that would contradict their self-created fantasy worlds in which they desire to believe the untenable so they can continue to violate the rights of others, engage in immoral behavior, and maintain their self-righteous, destructive behavior of being bullies, cowards, and thieves. Freedom is all or nothing. Once the rope is around your neck, it doesn't matter how long the rope is or how loosely tired. You are no longer free. Only slavery comes in degrees. Initiating coercion against peaceful others is ALWAYS wrong. Coercion against those initiators - statists/collectivists - is always moral, though not mandatory. Reality, reason, logic, the Law of Identity are absolutes. Only would-be tyrants and thugs seek to maintain their false self-image of "grayness" so they can continue in the delusion that they are "decent" human beings worthy of the respect of others. They are not.
"According to the libertarian NAP it is completely legal that parents intentionally starve their own children…" Congrats! You have earned the FI Award of the day.
not so fast: in his memoir, ‘permanent midnight’ jerry stahl makes it clear...indeed one of the central observations of the book that he when he was a writer on alf he was using heroin and usually high during his the show...so file alf under heroin
You guys should really start branding these. (e.g. MOSTLY WEEKLY S1:E3). For an example, look at Super Deluxe's video page and the most recent Tingles and Stoned Mode. Lets the subscriber know it's that series.
The stigma around drugs is completely irrational. When used responsibly, drugs can improve your life and make it more enjoyable, which is pretty much the goal of life. Obviously pursuing meaning and moral justice is important, but at the end of the day it’s all about you and others living the most fulfilling and enjoyable lives that you can.
Leave meaning and morality to controlling your own life. We all agree in that. It's why I have to live with your meaning or your morality when there's no victim complaining.
Drug culture is a lot wiser then mainstream culture portrays them to be. Sure you have junkies, and so forth but even some of them are not as bad as they are portrayed.
Glorifying drug use while not mentioning the harm and horror stories of drug use/abuse? Both types of drug use are real, and so a well-reasoned treatise of the issue should include both facets. Be well-reasoned. Be honest, which means tell the WHOLE story. Otherwise you're just another political propagandist who thinks they know best and so is trying to deceive people into supporting their point of view.
Humans used lead a food flavoring for thousands of years. The Romans were very fond of "Sugar of Lead", including several emperors. That must mean it is a good idea, right? Perhaps restaurants should start serving it for consenting adults.
tbh, the only people that, upon finding out they did drugs, receive more admiration from me than before are the founding fathers. The fact that the US population is doing drugs more than in the past seems bad.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
"Don't believe me? ...Well **** you, here's a list!"
Hahaha awesome.
Andrew Heaton is the greatest man to exist today. His podcast is fantastic (The Political Orphanage)
Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin are all convicted and sent to prison. Upon their release one year later, the inmates have formed a constitutional republic who send elected representatives to parley with the warden bi monthly. Open trade between cell blocks has led to an increased standard of living, and Terry "Hollow Point" Hernandez from D-Block has introduced a bill to the prison legislature regarding the extension of chow time. It is expected to pass with enthusiastic bi-partisan support.
Sadly, 10 years later, the prison is full of stifling regulations on trade and free food without the ability to produce your own; thus keeping you reliant on the prison. Lesson learned: Government is like a prison.
Lets not forget alcohol is a drug as well. It may be legal but it is also one, if not the most dangerous.
If "the most dangerous" = the one that causes the highest number of deaths, then alcohol is definitely the most dangerous drug.
And getting drunk is illegal in much of the country. The difference between alcohol is that you can easily drink without getting drunk but it is a lot harder to smoke without getting baked.
Jesse Ward not really it depends where you are, who you are with and what you are drinking it's usually not easy to drink and be sober when you are with friends
Alcohol wasn't always legal, it's the only drug to been legally made illegal by the constitution instead of other drugs that usurp the constitution and just have federal law make it illegal.
More people die at the hands of Caffeine, than marijuana.
"Steve Jobs, ....... founder of some fruit company"
loving it!!!
I can not possibly imagine why someone would think that they have moral authority over what others put inside their bodies. Or why someone would think that some people are immune from the responsibilities of those actions.
Lol. I feel you. The legal driving limit has no bearings on drug consumption. And I doubt many parents would let their children consume liquor at the age of 13 but those who would are undeterred by federal mandates. What is your next critique on my ideology.
I simply believe that the majority of federal mandates are unethical and difficult to enforce including legal drinking age and driving age.
Mo Goff oh then why are there rules that you must not do this and that
+Saul Spanco Do you not realize that you're literally virtue signalling to try to shame someone for standing up for their rights?
I simply believe that the only unethical actions are ones that break promises, hurt people, or take their things.
The beatles. All the drugs! Lol
Not Pete Best, though.
Ironically, the only drug that ever really caused them problems was Harrison's eventual lung problems from tobacco use.
@A L Yeah, they had to scrape him off the ceiling before those sessions.
All you need is drugs. Drugs are all you need.
I mean..me too
I did cocaine for 3 years and I thought it increases my perception too,It was like miracle pill for me, but then I nearly died and I still feel the consequences after 3 years off.Sometimes I'm dreaming cocaine and even dreams looks like making me high ... Knowledge comes with experience,STAY AWAY KIDS FROM COKE ! ...
I like Coke, a Cola that is.
I like coke. It burns really well, good for forging. A nice cold coke is nice after a day of forging.
FBI OPEN UP
Moderation is a virtue
All cocaine does is make you want more cocaine. Just don't do it. High over rated, paranoia and nervous wreck is what you become.. who doesn't love THAT
Chopin used Opium to treat the symptoms of his tuberculosis. It may also be of note that he died at 39. It's not absurd to consider that the use of opium may have contributed to him dying at a young age.
I know that it would make the video more dull, but you might want to distinguish why certain people used the drugs, because at times these drugs were used as medicine, not just "to have a good time." Just to be intellectually honest.
if you're looking for intellectual honesty, look elsewhere.
He gave several reasons why these people used drugs. Did you not pay attention?
The thing is... Substances that we consider drugs today in the colloquial sense were not the same things that were considered drugs back then. If many of these people, like Chopin, had the alternative medicine that we have today, then they may not have turned to opium, hence using them for medical purposes and having them prescribed would not help the argument. If people used Opium today, I highly doubt that it would be to treat tuberculosis.
Also I am aware that he gave several reasons in a broad sense. I was referring to why each individual in the list used the drug, like (health/recreation/etc.)
Chopin had tuberculosis but it was opium that caused him to die young?
@Evan opium makes you feel great though which many of the modern day equivalents do not. And that can have a profound impact on your willingness to try to fight an illness rather than succumb to it.
Honestly did anyone doubt that Freud was high on something when he came up with his theories?
4 sure !
I don't know why other people shit on you all the time. You are the only ones who stick to libertarian principles no matter who is in office.
substance use has no place in the hands of a government. no one should be able to dictate what i put in my own body.
for every bad aspect of drugs, there's a great one. plus prohibition enables all gangs
I don't care what drugs you take as long as you are not physically or financial harming the people around you or the society in which you live. If you can show that doing drugs only affects you financial and physically then go for it , as long as my tax dollars are not being used to keep you alive, as long as my tax dollars are not being used to pay for your drugs,food, shelter, clothing,medical care, then it is your choice, use any drugs you want and if you destroy your life or kill yourself in the process then you've no one to blame but yourself!!!! but if I have to pay for your bad choices then it should be made criminal! So by the same logic Health care should not be in the hands of the government, and hospitals "should be" allowed to deny you care or put you in debtors prison work camp till you pay off your hospitalization bill!
@@ABGAN100 yes
Thank god you did this video. It's been several hours since Reason has produced something about pot.
The most shocking part about this is the not liking Ayn Rand portion
Social Conservatives and Libertarians have a vary similar view on drugs. A Social Conservative will look at drugs and say "I think drugs are immoral so that means we should ban them" and a Libertarian will look at drugs and say "I think drugs should be legal so that means they must be moral and how dare you criticize them". While I'm stuck in the middle arguing with Social Conservatives saying yes I agree they are bad but don't ban them while I'm also arguing with Libertarians saying yes we should make them legal but that does not make them morally okay.
Most underrated comment here.
Oh shit I I've tried all kinds of drugs (weed, hydros, alcohol, speed, Xanax, lsd, shrooms, nitrous, nicotine, caffeine, and ectasy) guess it's time unenlist from the army and go shoot up a school cause the drugs are what's bad not the individual taking them.
On what basis do you think drugs should be legal? I believe you have a distorted view of Libertarianism.
Jeff Navarro - Because we value freedom. Therefore, government should regulate as little as possible. People should be free, unless their action directly impedes on the freedom of others. Drug use itself does not directly effect others.
NJ Eddie I appreciate your reply and although I (sort of) identify as Libertarian, really my question was for Jesse Ward. I still feel it's illogical and misrepresents Libertarianism to say Libs think drugs should be legal and are therefore moral...he only said what he disagrees with, not what he himself thinks.
My father repeatedly told me that he and my mother didn't like The Beatles because "they were just a bunch of druggies." But he loves the Rolling Stones and The Who, and my mom loves John Denver. Inconsistent.
ALL DRUGS SHOULD BE DECRIMINALIZED!!!
MGTOW Psyche that doesn’t go far enough!
All drugs should be MANDATORY!
You are going against the NAP!
MGTOW Psyche ok, maybe you’re right.
But all drugs should be STRONGLY RECOMMENDED, at least!
@@michaelgusovsky What the fuck?
Somebody wants to be popular.
Drugs are stupid. They mess with you and your ability to work. I wouldn't hire anyone I know did drugs.
I should clarify: Not talking about some stupid decision in college. Like, actually currently taking drugs, even if only on occasion.
I’m for personal responsibility and letting people decide for themselves (legalization). This video however seems to promote drug use which I can’t get on board with.
I agree, they seem to be Making a hasty generalization based on people who are likely outliers.
Didn't Eddison have a colossal number patents because he slightly modified those of others?
Braxant poor Tesla...
He was more or less one of thise dickbag bankers, just that he traded in ideas.
Modifying and improving already existing items is how progress is made. Very few inventions are completely original ideas.
slightly modified or STEALING
While I recognize that drugs are really bad for people,and society as a whole, I also understand that the war on drugs is a loosing battle.
*losing
@@URProductions Although his intent is your statement, his actual statement is more accurate. Drug use has only been on the rise post 60s, it was on the downward from the late 1800s to the 1950s, alcohol consumption even declined in the 10 years after prohibition ended. The actual answer is fixing the loosening moral standards, not more useless legislation.
It just says "Jail Time" for Mary Jane... Yeah, because unlike the harder drugs on this list you can spend a lifetime behind bars for a weed if you live in a certain state and be paid to grow it if you live in another. Dumbest policy ever.
I love Penn Jillette, so your headline is wrong. But wait, let me get this straight: Heaton is not a fan of Ayn Rand? Heaton's credibility just took an enormous hit. You don't have to agree with Rand on everything, but her rational defense of capitalism is brilliant and ultimately invaluable. It's that rational defense that turned me from democrat/borderline commie to libertarian. I'm not alone. A host on ReasonTV is NOT a fan of Ayn Rand. Let that sink in. Now when I see "Heaton" come up on the subscription feed, I'll be less likely to tune in. Good to know.
Rand was a philosopher who tried her hands at writing - but her books are frankly boring and preachy. It's easy to not be a fan. You can like high-fantasy and think that Game of Thrones had a shit ending. Likewise rand was an interesting voice in the dialectic, but her writing sucked.
I'm Libertarian for a while now and I never been a fan of Ayn Rand. While her Defense of Capitalism is a rational one, she has the credentials of someone like Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.
If your defense of an Economic System is based on a fictional book written by a philosopher (either Rand or Marx) somethin' is wrong. That's why I rather go with Ludwig Von Mises, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek or even Murray Rothbard.
@@lonestarasshole584 besides even her philosophy is kinda crap. Just like Marx's.
Drugs are bad. Doesn't mean that we should have the war on drugs, but that doesn't mean that they're good.
A libertarian who is not an Ayn Rand fan? THAT is shocking.
Also, you guys left out William Wilberforce, British abolitionist, who used opium. He was also probably addicted, but not so severely he couldn't function.
WInston Churchill was a heavy drinker and a terrible role model. And drinking coca leaves is nothing like sniffing the stuff. Drugs should be legal for practical and self-ownership reasons, but that doesn't mean they aren't shitty.
It depends on the drug and how it effects the person using it. There are other factors like dosage and drug interactions.
Yes, my mom and dad take drugs and i love them, even though they're always wrestling with each other all the time
As a libertarian I don’t care what you do but I do have a problem when the government enables drug use with taxpayer money. Make your own choices but then live with the consequences.
I am a classic Libertarian and today's Libertarian Party has abandoned its roots. Now they all seem to be big government hedonists. They want no limits on their behavior, but want the government around to pay for the consequences.
What? Why does a Libertarian hate Ayn Rand?
Isaiah R. She was a pos.
John Barley she didn't say Libertarians ripped her off -- she said they distorted the intent of her message. Also, she didn't want anyone taking away votes from Nixon.
Hating on Rand is the "in" thing for Libertarians to do at the moment. She was far from perfect, but she had some truly incredible things to say.
She was more of an anarchist than a libertarian.
Fucking bonkers, that's why
I doubt this guy has ever had to watch as an immediate relative destroys their life with meth.
It's a good thing no body can do meth now that it's illegal, huh?
@@URProductions never said that dude. But it's real easy to say these things when you've never seen the extent of the damage these hard drugs will do.
I needed this today. I tip my hat to you. Thank you.
Most of the founding fathers had slaves. They would serve long term sentences if they were caught doing that today. God forbid that we should we rethink anti-slavery laws because famous people had slaves.
Besides most of the cases you mention were Doctor prescribed and administered in best medical means possible for their time (which no one has a problem with).
SaintSC05, that "whoosh" noise you heard was Will's point going over your head.
Imagine him instead of Colbert. Imagine something to watch on the actual TV.
The only drugs I "use" regularly are caffeine in the form of 6 - 7 Diet Pepsis a week and a daily dose of Levothyroxine, as prescribed by my doctor. I don't use pot, have never smoked, and don't care if I ever drink another wine cooler ever again, but I don't give a dead possum fart if you do other drugs (currently legal or not)…as long as you're a legal adult (and, yes, I think that it should be okay to drink at 18, eventhough I didn't until I was 27 and pretty much stopped before 30) and don't hurt anyone in the process of using or hurt them to get the drugs. Taxpayer money needs to be put to better uses than punishing people for choosing oblivion. The only part of the "War of Drugs" that I support is punishing those who provide to minors. Also, by keeping them illegal, you romanticize their use, making them more likely to WANT to try them.
How do you propose to stop dealers selling drugs to kids under 18 who you admit do not j have the capacity to make an informed choice about whether to use or not?
@@ChristopherNFP Why would a dealer want to sell to kids? They don't have jobs. They do have guardians. They're less likely to keep drug use under the radar, which is an increased risk of exposure to the dealer. They're much more likely to die of an overdose, and tracking down the dealer in the event of a child overdose death is very likely, no one tracks down the source of most overdose deaths. There's just too many bad consequences. Legalize everything, and then at least the drugs out there won't be biker meth from a trailer park, or heroin smuggled in someones butt.
Yeah, but most of the drugs mentioned where practically new and where clearly ingredients in medicines. When they discovered the addictive qualities of these drugs they mostly removed them from the ingredients. That's like suggesting that the Coca-Cola Bottling Company would be thrown in jail today for having Coca-Leaves in their soda pop despite the fact that they removed in nearly 100 years ago. This is why the hole Heroine epidemic is such a problem since some much of today's medicine uses heroine derivatives.
People wouldn't buy heroin from shady black market dealers, if they could buy opiates from shady pharma companies that have better quality standards, for safety.
We celebrate people not for drug use or slave ownership but for certain acomplishments
I love this guy's sense of humor!!
The Beatles: All of them
Queen: I WANT IT ALL, I WANT IT NOW!
Libertarians need to learn how to support the legalization of drugs. I firmly believe that anybody should be able to do whatever they want to their body as long as it doesn't impact anybody else. Government has no right to tell people what they do with their bodies.
That said I despise the use of drugs and I would never consider it. For as long as the Libertarian party treats drugs like they do, they will be seen as crazy people.
*^ THIS*
Unless it's one of the millions of drugs peddled by "licensed pharma and doctors" right? Stick with paragraph 1, it's okay and likely wise that you don't use them, but if you think promoting liberty is just crazy, then you are off the mark.
My point is they paint recreational drugs as positive when they should paint all drugs as people's right to choose.
I would never choose to do recreational drugs (nor do I take any other "drug" in my life other than Advil lol), but I still believe in people's freedom to do whatever they want.
You cant legalize drugs while the Welfare State is in place. If drugs are legal and there is no penalty of law, the consequences of such behavior will be paid by the taxpayer and socially.
Blake your full of it- the war on drugs does more damage to society than the drugs themselves.
I work in a dispensary and most of the patients are women and older men .Cannabis is awesome .The head keebler elf should smoke some .
You know 'Reason' is named like that because of Ayn Rand, right? "Free minds and free markets" is also what she wrote! Read The Fountainhead, or Atlas Shrugged!
I was perscribed phentanol and morphine (both opiates) to keep from going into shock after a drunk driver plowed into me while going 100+ miles per hour. Can I be added to your list of lovable people that "did drugs"? I also would like to be included in your fight against authoritarian rules against substance abuse.
My greatest fear is being seen drunk or under the influence by anybody in the town I live in... and my advice learn to enjoy sobriety... and yes I drink Foster's I averaged about two a day which is pretty much but the abstinence cleans out toxins
You forgot FDR.
These videos are delightful
You guys do realize that you are basically making the "all the cool kids are doing it" argument, right?
Hitler also did amphetamines, but he did it under a doctor's care. Like a law abiding citizen.
Book with too much words means author gave too little work of rewriting it, rather than too much work writing.
If Rand did speeds it was super cruel to use that energy to bloat her books x5 size of what was needed.
Big deal, opium was used as medication(diarrhea, pain, etc)in America even in the 1950's without any prescription.
in 2006 I was given the choice of being prescribed barbiturates for the rest of my life, or brain surgery. After the brain surgery, I was prescribed opiates. #I'm a drug user too!
This argument for legalizing all drugs is ridiculous.
@@freethebirds3578 all drugs should be legalized
@@josephcoolest1839 Why?
@@freethebirds3578 because you should have the freedom to put what you want into your body also not to mention the cia itself sold rugs look it up they admitted to it. Plus even as an aside drugs creates gangs selling illegal stuff rather than legal places and those gangs create more crime.
school counselor : We Are A drug free school any one bringing drugs on School grounds will be punished severely
Me: I have coffee
school counselor : *GUARDS SEIZE HIM*
Churchill one was weak. It was dr prescribed. By that logic, I would have to claim I'm a drug-user, too.
You are a drug user.
Your body doesn’t know the legal status of a drug.
As long as you're not endangering anyone, smoke, snort, drink, inject, ingest, or absorb whatever you want.
What's your point that everybody did drugs? That doesn't make it wise!
If you could engage the point that most drug offenders in prison are not, in fact, non-violent, but are the product of plea deals, that would be very helpful. It's often a CounterPoint in discussions.
The jefferson one is a bad example it was part of a medicine he did not do drugs recreationally
Are you saying a libertarian video is failing to give all the facts in order to advance their agenda? You heretic! ;)
He also smoked marijuana though
Nick Harrell i didn't knew, this is relevant to this being a bad example,thanks, if it is true. Yet this is shitty reason tv video. It does make a weak point that famous worthwhile people in some cases, not the one of the trash of the human being edison, did drugs and could have been arrested yet it does not make use of the shit load of arguments for drug legalization. And it the kind of video someone could have done while tripping balls. Look this people did drugs ,you like them. Let talk drugs. It is no diferent from hey this people got shot you don't wanna get shot let's talk guns.
You are using the internet recreationally. Therefore that justifies kidnapping you.
Go fuck yourself.
5:18 Richard Feynman is my favorite human.
Mr. Heaton why do you dislike Ayn Rand?
Her work provides liberty and capitalism the moral bedrock and winning arguments needed to win the war of ideas.
Also her ideas are ultimately the refinement of enlightenment reasoning... Which is the foundation of the American Republic.
What of this do you take umbrage with?
I'm not sure, but I get the idea he was at least partly trolling with that
What?
Work at a restaurant and you'll find almost everyone who works there smoked pot lmfaoo
Fun fact about sigmund Freud:
Freud believed cocaine to be cure for many ailments and would often give it as a gift
Gotta love the last line, "Reefer Madness" destroyed more lives than mary jane ever did.
Everyone of these episodes is amazing lol
From whence does the GOV get the authority to control what adults choose to ingest?
Arguments this stupid, (and I say this as someone who is in favor of legalizing everything,) might cause me to one day cancel my Reason subscription. Next time you want to talk about who did drugs in an effort to extol their possible virtues or to soften the conventional societal stance against them, please don't use those legally prescribed by a physician as part of that argument. Yes Winston Churchill used Amphetamines, but he did so on the instructions of his doctor, who had legal authority to give those instructions. There are legitimate medical uses for drugs today, including Opium, Cocaine, Amphetamines, and the like. All of these substances are being prescribed today, and this does not make the people using these substances, the prescribing doctors, nor the pharmacy filling the scripts, part of the drug culture.
For a channel called Reason TV you sure make assumptions: I don´t love any of them and Carl Sagan goes on my bugger off list!
At the end, those people didn't do weed. They did crack.
The U.S. government has a patent on cannabidiol (CBD, drug in marijuana) as a neuroprotectant, which they filed around 2001, which means they were doing the science for it in the 90's.
Jesus Tapdancing Christ, why does your doctor keep telling you to take omega-3 fatty acids? Because they are converted in the body to endocannabinoids, similar to the cannabinoids from plants, they act on the same receptors stimulating the immune system.
Honestly not surprised any of these people do drugs
"Which drugs should be legal?"
Me: Yes
Gee. Someone at "Reason" who is "not a fan" of Ayn Rand. Shocker.
After all, why would anyone want to be "a fan" of someone who believed that:
1. There is an objective reality.
2. People should be rational.
3. People should be concerned with what is in their actual self-interest.
4. People own their lives and property.
5. People should be in control of and decide how their own lives and property are used.
6. The initiation of violence against peaceful and innocent individuals is universally wrong.
7. Only voluntary interactions among peaceful individuals are proper.
8. Art should uplift rather than degrade the human spirit.
Far better, I guess, to be "a fan" of Ayn Rand's detractors, who - if they reject Objectivism - must believe that:
1. There is no "reality." “Reality” is whatever one wants it to be. Saying one is "out of touch with reality" is a positive statement.
2. People should be irrational/illogical.
3. People should be concerned with whatever is destructive to their self-interest.
4. No one owns his own life; all people are and should be slaves.
5. No one has a right to own property; anyone for any reason can take whatever they want from someone.
6. People should recognize that anyone other than themselves should be in control of and decide how their lives and property are used; anyone can, for any reason, take whatever they want from other people and dictate to them how they should live their lives.
7. Initiating/using coercion and violence against innocent and peaceful others is the basis of all proper social interactions. Might makes right, determines what is right.
8. Only involuntary actions are proper; forcing others to do or not do what they want is the essence of how people should be treated.
9. Art should be degrading to the human spirit and treat people as worthless scum.
I would be disappointed at a contributor at "Reason" who would make such a statement, but then, I might as well be disappointed in my cat because he can't quote Shakespeare.
An excellent summary of what I appreciate about Ayn Rand's philosophy. (I actually saved this list!)
I'm not sure what people don't like about her, but I'd like to know.
Thanks. Glad you liked the list.
Maybe some folks who don't like Rand dislike the fact that if they accepted her basic ideas, they could no longer continue believing the anti-rights, immoral ideas they hold so dear...
Your problem and the problem with unprincipled people in general is the ability to NOT think in terms of principles. They simply blank out reality and ignore any actual principles that would contradict their self-created fantasy worlds in which they desire to believe the untenable so they can continue to violate the rights of others, engage in immoral behavior, and maintain their self-righteous, destructive behavior of being bullies, cowards, and thieves.
Freedom is all or nothing. Once the rope is around your neck, it doesn't matter how long the rope is or how loosely tired. You are no longer free. Only slavery comes in degrees. Initiating coercion against peaceful others is ALWAYS wrong. Coercion against those initiators - statists/collectivists - is always moral, though not mandatory.
Reality, reason, logic, the Law of Identity are absolutes. Only would-be tyrants and thugs seek to maintain their false self-image of "grayness" so they can continue in the delusion that they are "decent" human beings worthy of the respect of others.
They are not.
Wesen In society today, most of the things on list 2 are trumpeted almost word for word on a daily basis.
"According to the libertarian NAP it is completely legal that parents intentionally starve their own children…"
Congrats! You have earned the FI Award of the day.
Are these the minimum prison sentence terms for *Federal* or *State* crimes?
Um, as a boomer, I have been smoking herb since I was 14!! The lady who turned me on worked for PDAP
What the hell does Heaton have against Rand?
I have the samething against her.
Objectivism can be very hit or miss, also she was an ass.
@@rangav248 it's only hit or miss if you intermittently want to face reality.
@@blakejameson1114 I'm not saying there isn't anything good there, Spiderman and The Incredibles proved that. But.......
I mean the size of her books is a crime by itself. But also she thought that magical smart men were the only people that mattered.
not so fast: in his memoir, ‘permanent midnight’ jerry stahl makes it clear...indeed one of the central observations of the book that he when he was a writer on alf he was using heroin and usually high during his the show...so file alf under heroin
You guys should really start branding these. (e.g. MOSTLY WEEKLY S1:E3). For an example, look at Super Deluxe's video page and the most recent Tingles and Stoned Mode. Lets the subscriber know it's that series.
The stigma around drugs is completely irrational. When used responsibly, drugs can improve your life and make it more enjoyable, which is pretty much the goal of life. Obviously pursuing meaning and moral justice is important, but at the end of the day it’s all about you and others living the most fulfilling and enjoyable lives that you can.
Leave meaning and morality to controlling your own life. We all agree in that. It's why I have to live with your meaning or your morality when there's no victim complaining.
Kyle Varma fuck your second hand smoke
A "drug ADDICT" knows WAY more than those that are not, or have never, been "a drug addict" and. You. Personally. KNOW This!
Even Jesus drank a little wine
"I'm out of control" lmao!
I don't think being prescribed something should count.
"Cocaine's a hell of a drug" Rick James
"Here's a quick list of every president who did drugs." uhh...THAT WE KNOW OF
When weed gives you more years in prison than meth
Love the Alf callback, loved the show.
damn you just called out my whole family
Amphetamines were legal in 70s&80s
Drug culture is a lot wiser then mainstream culture portrays them to be. Sure you have junkies, and so forth but even some of them are not as bad as they are portrayed.
Statist Drinking Game: Every time a libertarian mentions drugs take a drink of your government-approved alcohol of choice.
Try not to die.
Drug destroys your life. People in this video people are very very rare exceptions
My grandma Janelle doesn't know who Alf is.
ALF didn't do drugs, but he did have an addiction to eating cats.
Nothing can change my admiration towards Alf.
Most ww1 soldiers used amphetamines...it was standard issue to combat fatigue and depression
Glorifying drug use while not mentioning the harm and horror stories of drug use/abuse? Both types of drug use are real, and so a well-reasoned treatise of the issue should include both facets. Be well-reasoned. Be honest, which means tell the WHOLE story. Otherwise you're just another political propagandist who thinks they know best and so is trying to deceive people into supporting their point of view.
Humans used lead a food flavoring for thousands of years. The Romans were very fond of "Sugar of Lead", including several emperors. That must mean it is a good idea, right? Perhaps restaurants should start serving it for consenting adults.
tbh, the only people that, upon finding out they did drugs, receive more admiration from me than before are the founding fathers. The fact that the US population is doing drugs more than in the past seems bad.
Even if my own father did drugs, I still would not do them.
Drug use, abuse, and addiction are a medical issue, not a criminal act. Criminalizing a medical issue IS a criminal act.
Everyone I love did drugs but I do drugs because no one loves me
This is why I can't be a full-fledged libertarian. I do agree laws need to be fixed, regarding jail time for drug use.
Only 20% that ain't real mayonnaise.
What’s the point?