Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

spiegel.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 376 posts

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#91

Post by [deleted] »

jfmfhhdkdkd wrote: post #77
Synaesthesia wrote: post #41

The drug problem was studied years ago by the RAND corporation and the US Military - a pure cost-benefit analysis. They found that treatment and education are the most cost effective way to deal with the drug problem, and that prohibition was the most costly and ineffective means of dealing with it. Therefore the government understands that the war on drugs is likely to be unsuccessful, and we have to ask ourselves,…

And yet, there are plenty of Asian countries (Singapore, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, etc) where drug laws are much stricter than the US's, there are very few drug addicts, and there is very little crime.

[deleted]

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#92

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

puranjay wrote: post #66
Synaesthesia wrote: post #41

The drug problem was studied years ago by the RAND corporation and the US Military - a pure cost-benefit analysis. They found that treatment and education are the most cost effective way to deal with the drug problem, and that prohibition was the most costly and ineffective means of dealing with it. Therefore the government understands that the war on drugs is likely to be unsuccessful, and we have to ask ourselves,…

I always wonder what would happen to drug use if it was widely and easily available. Would usage drop because it wouldn't be "rebellious" to get drugs? That was at least the motivation for a lot of younger drug users I know. In my country (India), there is a region in the Himalayas - Kasaul - where marijuana grows in the wild. It is so easily accessible that you can literally pluck some on a walk through the forest.…

Personally speaking (although I'm hardly one of the "younger drug users" you refer to), I would continue to consume more or less the same quantity of drugs that I do now. I would possibly increase my intake very slightly, but not significantly. The significant differences would be that I would probably pay less, I would be consuming safer, regulated substances, and I wouldn't constantly be in fear of being sent to prison for a personal lifestyle choice.

Unless the penalties drastically increase, or I am convinced that what I am doing is morally wrong, I shall probably continue to take my drug of choice for the foreseeable future.

From what I've heard, the marijuana that grows in the wild tends to be of a far lower quality than that which is cultivated.

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#93

Post by furyg3 »

puranjay wrote: post #66
Synaesthesia wrote: post #41

The drug problem was studied years ago by the RAND corporation and the US Military - a pure cost-benefit analysis. They found that treatment and education are the most cost effective way to deal with the drug problem, and that prohibition was the most costly and ineffective means of dealing with it. Therefore the government understands that the war on drugs is likely to be unsuccessful, and we have to ask ourselves,…

I always wonder what would happen to drug use if it was widely and easily available. Would usage drop because it wouldn't be "rebellious" to get drugs? That was at least the motivation for a lot of younger drug users I know. In my country (India), there is a region in the Himalayas - Kasaul - where marijuana grows in the wild. It is so easily accessible that you can literally pluck some on a walk through the forest.…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annual_cannabis_use_by_country

In the Netherlands, where marijuana is effectively legal†, the percentage of the population aged 15-64 which has used the drug at least once in the past year was 5.4 (2005). In the US the data was from 2009 (pre-legalization in Oregon and Colorado), and was 13.7%

Anecdata: I've lived in both places, weed just isn't as cool in NL as it is in the US.

† Use of marijuana in NL is totally decriminalized and it is easily purchasable by anyone over 18.

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#94

Post by dermotbrennan »

tomp wrote: post #68
tim333 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly all countries have some ban so I doubt full legalization is the answer. I think if you approach it to minimise harm you'd probably have varying policies depending on the drug and the situation. For example cannabis, maybe legalize and tax like cigarettes. Stuff like Heroin and Meth don't legalize private sales but let drug counsellors hand it out to addicts to kill the illegal market, prevent them being harmed…

> Stuff like Heroin and Meth don't legalize private sales but let drug counsellors hand it out to addicts to kill the illegal market, prevent them being harmed by contaminated drugs and stop them breaking and nicking stuff. That's the worst of both worlds. What will happen is a lot of people will become "addicts", get the drug (legally), then sell it to drug dealers to cash out. Criminals will keep their profits high…

You could insist that addicts use the government-provided drugs in a clinic. Don't just hand it to them.

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#95

Post by gerbilly »

smegel wrote: post #2

It really is a difficult problem. Sweden legalized heroin in the 60s and it was a disaster. On the other hand, enforcement only has a moderate impact, but comes at a huge financial and social cost. And while I don't support it, the only country with a measure of success seems to be Singapore, where you just hang anyone who has more than single dose in their possession. Maybe the grim reality is hanging a few hundred…

>the only country with a measure of success seems to be Singapore

I'm sure they also hang people for chewing gum in Singapore, or whip them or whatever, doesn't mean that we should imitate them.

Who wants to live in a society where people are treated like that?

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#96

Post by jfmfhhdkdkd »

jdietrich wrote: post #86
puranjay wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wonder what would happen to drug use if it was widely and easily available. Would usage drop because it wouldn't be "rebellious" to get drugs? That was at least the motivation for a lot of younger drug users I know. In my country (India), there is a region in the Himalayas - Kasaul - where marijuana grows in the wild. It is so easily accessible that you can literally pluck some on a walk through the forest.…

Portugal decriminalised personal possession of drugs 15 years ago, which has given us some useful evidence. HIV infection rates and drug-related deaths have reduced significantly, and the prison population has reduced by over 50%. The proportion of people who have ever used drugs has increased slightly, but there has been a reduction in the number of regular drug users. We don't really know what would happen in a lai…

But Japan and Hong Kong and many others still have far lower drug use and crime rates despite their very tough laws on drug use, when compared to Portugal.

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#97

Post by tim333 »

tomp wrote: post #68
tim333 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly all countries have some ban so I doubt full legalization is the answer. I think if you approach it to minimise harm you'd probably have varying policies depending on the drug and the situation. For example cannabis, maybe legalize and tax like cigarettes. Stuff like Heroin and Meth don't legalize private sales but let drug counsellors hand it out to addicts to kill the illegal market, prevent them being harmed…

> Stuff like Heroin and Meth don't legalize private sales but let drug counsellors hand it out to addicts to kill the illegal market, prevent them being harmed by contaminated drugs and stop them breaking and nicking stuff. That's the worst of both worlds. What will happen is a lot of people will become "addicts", get the drug (legally), then sell it to drug dealers to cash out. Criminals will keep their profits high…

It's been tried a few times in reality with Heroin and seems to work ok. Sometimes they make the addicts use it in front to the counsellor to ensure they are not taking it to sell on.

http://health.spectator.co.uk/the-case-for-prescription-hero...

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#98

Post by skyhatch1 »

We were taught both sides of the story in our "drug diversion impact on public health" classes. Decriminalisation opens opportunities up to reduce harm to the public through reduced drug-related crimes, safer injecting (of the hard stuff) and less blood-borne viruses spreading. Australia has its own version of decriminalization known as the "harm minimisation policy". While all drug-related activities are illegal there, the judicial and healthcare systems are not so black and white about enforcing the laws.

Nonetheless, the other hand always wants its share. In the case of Australia, harm minimisation has reduced drug-related crimes, but the prevalence of drug use in the general population continues to rise, especially with regard to pills and amphetamines. Blood borne viruses are also on the rise, despite the ubiquity of safe injecting rooms in every major city and availability of "sharps kits" in every retail pharmacy.

Interestingly, the conservative party temporarily swayed from this stance and implemented a "tough on drugs" policy for part of the 90s[1]. It was dubbed to the wider public as a "harm prevention" measure i.e. protecting those yet to experiment with drugs and the wider community that didn't use illicit drugs regularly. There was a significant reduction in every measure: drug use, drug crime and spread of blood-borne viruses. This policy did not cut safe injecting and drug use services, but increased police activity and ephemeral "say no to drugs" cut-through education programs. The policy was reversed in the early 2000s.

[1] https://www.unodc.org/documents/ungass2016/Contributions/Civ...

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#99

Post by jdietrich »

ghshephard wrote: post #14
smegel wrote: post #2

It really is a difficult problem. Sweden legalized heroin in the 60s and it was a disaster. On the other hand, enforcement only has a moderate impact, but comes at a huge financial and social cost. And while I don't support it, the only country with a measure of success seems to be Singapore, where you just hang anyone who has more than single dose in their possession. Maybe the grim reality is hanging a few hundred…

Singapore is somewhat unique in that it's a country with very restricted freedoms, which have been given up in exchange for security/safety. It's extraordinarily rule-bound, and, in many ways, is the antithesis of the United States, in which freedoms reign. In such a structured, government controlled and monitored society, all sorts of rules can be laid down, and enforced through strict punishment. I wouldn't try and…

>really destructive ones, like Alcohol and Nicotine

Alcohol is inherently harmful, but nicotine itself is a relatively safe drug; The harms associated with nicotine are overwhelmingly caused by the delivery mechanism of smoking.

We have alternative delivery mechanisms for nicotine that are drastically safer than tobacco smoking. E-cigarettes are most prominent, with around 95% lower harm than smoking[1], but snus is also a relatively low-harm product[2].

This principle is very important to the broader drug debate. We must be careful to separate the innate harms caused by a drug and harms that can be managed through good harm reduction policy.

[1]https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-le... [2]http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/4/349.long

Re: Kofi Annan on Why It's Time to Legalize Drugs

#100

Post by purpled_haze »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #41

The drug problem was studied years ago by the RAND corporation and the US Military - a pure cost-benefit analysis. They found that treatment and education are the most cost effective way to deal with the drug problem, and that prohibition was the most costly and ineffective means of dealing with it. Therefore the government understands that the war on drugs is likely to be unsuccessful, and we have to ask ourselves,…

> Tobacco and Alcohol companies would likely suffer as a result of drug legalisation, like cannabis.

To state this in another way- think of all of the Budweiser/Bud Light sponsorships and commercials and replace that Bud with the other kind of bud. That's about the scale and usage to expect, at the very least, if cannabis were to be completely legal everywhere alcohol is.

And all of the abuse, drunk driving, etc? Increase that somewhat. They won't be able to control all of it with treatment and education any more than they have with alcohol. Also, imagine the level of drinking at work even in the 1940's and 50's after alcohol prohibition was lifted.

Aside from cannabis, think of all of the other drugs that could be abused. Yes, drug violence, etc. will go down, but there is a tradeoff.

Post reply on HN