A consensual crime is a crime with no victim. That, in itself, is a contradiction. How can you have a crime if there is no victim?
             I am sick and tired of the American government trying to play baby sitter. They have systematically imposed on almost every right the Bill of Rights has given us. Take the first amendment for example: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ". If smoking marijuana is part of your religion and it's something you believe in, for whatever reason you might have, why should you not be allowed to do that? Would the Catholics like it if the government told them they couldn't take the Eucharist anymore? The government has no purpose in telling religious groups they can't smoke weed. They have no business telling anyone they can't smoke weed, let alone the people that do it as a part of their religion. If I think smoking weed is morally okay, and I don't endanger non-consenting others while I'm high, or getting high, why shouldn't I be allowed to do that?
             Or how about the second amendment, the right to bear arms, they're working to take that one away now too. If the government makes guns illegal, they only take them away from the people who are law-abiding citizens; the criminals can still get guns, but nobody else will have one to defend themselves. If I feel that it is necessary for my protection and the protection of my family to have a gun, or if I only shoot it for fun, what right does the government have to tell me I can't have one. As long as I'm properly trained and educated on the use of firearms I should be allowed to have them. But if I am trained, the penalties should be doubled, even tripled, for the illegal use of a gun. The second amendment is not outdated, it's just under-regulated, and people are not punished enough for the illegal use of ha
             ...