Interpret the following quote:

"you can't declare a war on drugs without declaring a war on people."

Since the people are the consumers of these drugs and the ones who choose their political power, you must contest the issue of drugs with them first before actually taking action on the matter of drugs itself. If you declare a war on drugs first without declaring a war on the people, the people have every right to be infuriated and rebel against you as it seems as though you would be threatening an aspect of their individual right: liberty. In this case, the power of liberty assures the people that they have complete freedom to possess and do as they please with drugs without any limitations. By the constitution, the people have every right to go against an individual of power who threatens their individual rights. If you do not provide any reasoning to the people as to why you're declaring a war on the drugs, they will perceive it as a threat to their individual right and an abusive execution of power.

the first part of the statute of limitations is the standard deadline, which gives victims of medical malpractice a certain number of years -- usually anywhere from two to six years, depending on the state -- after the malpractice occurred within which to file a lawsuit.

answer:

yes, obviously. that violates r@pe and p*dophilia laws, which are some pretty serious laws if you ask me. and that is just nasty!

explanation: