154
YES PLEASE (hexbear.net)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by Tachanka@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] WhatDoYouMeanPodcast@hexbear.net 4 points 7 months ago

I would argue that the prohibition of vices is ineffective. There are plenty of drugs without upside including alcohol. No history of prohibition was ever anything but a giant waste of money that created organized crime. Gambling is so simple that you'd get casinos popping up everywhere. There's also a secret, sinister third one about sex.

Would society be better off without it? Sure. Would the prevalence increase with legality? Sure (maybe because I think it was just for senators or something?). Would I be torn up if Missouri decided it was a dumb idea? No. My point? It would be funny if it happened - doubly so if it was just for congresspeople.

[-] wopazoo@hexbear.net 3 points 7 months ago

I would argue that the prohibition of dueling has been highly effectively, given how the practice is virtually extinct today.

The prohibition of dueling in particular is highly effective because dueling is no longer seen as an aristocratic practice but rather as a barbarity of the past. Today, nobody gains any honor from winning a duel. When William Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in their duel 200 years ago, it ended his political career, because by then dueling had already lost its prestige.

this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2024
154 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13462 readers
1029 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS