Of course it could be more like this:Some risks are more insiduous than others
Comparing overt risks with hidden risks is invalid
People tend to overlook these risks due to being dimwitted
It is the duty of government to protect us from these risks, like a stern but kindly father
It's not the business of scientists to forcibly deny us things we like and treat us like retards.
In which case that would suck.
(,
Mon 2 Nov 2009, 12:04,
archived)
Comparing overt risks with hidden risks is invalid
People tend to overlook these risks due to being dimwitted
It is the duty of government to protect us from these risks, like a stern but kindly father
It's not the business of scientists to forcibly deny us things we like and treat us like retards.
In which case that would suck.
Or maybe evenit's that every subsequent government will have to obey the advisory council on the misuse of drugs to the letter, after this incident, and Nutt wants to make it completely independent of government, which means that it would tell us exactly what to do and we couldn't get rid of it by voting.
(,
Mon 2 Nov 2009, 12:14,
archived)