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

151–160 of 376 posts

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

#151

Post by saiya-jin »

atemerev wrote: post #67

Here's what we have in Switzerland: http://www.premiereligne.ch/quai9/ (basically, a drug user's paradise: a "consumption space" injection rooms, clean drugs available, medical attention and reanimation in case of overdose, therapy programs and support programs with the intention to help people quit drugs without stigmatizing them and pushing them to it). It is immensely successful. Drug crime becoming nonexistent he…

Wait, you are talking maybe about heroin addicts beyond saving. But if you just want to buy some weed, you definitely must go to shady characters standing on corners of dark streets in the night, and buy overpriced at-best-mediocre-quality stuff from there (I am not racist or anything, but 100% of them in Geneva are black - that's 5 years of experience). Police guys are constantly patrolling these areas (often with dogs), dealers are super suspicious that you are an undercover cop etc.

if you get caught with tiny amount (Nah, this country is definitely not a paradise, just there are worse places.

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

#152

Post by adrusi »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #124
shawabawa3 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've taken in too much drug war propaganda. Heroin, if unadulterated, is incredibly safe. There are virtually no long-term health effects, and most overdoses/deaths are caused by it being unknown quality or cut with dangerous substances.[1] The only reason it's dangerous is prohibition [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#Adverse_effects

So heroin isn't clinically addictive and one can't overdose on it?

Heroin isn't significantly more addictive than cigarettes.

You can also easily overdose from nicotine, its just that this is mitigated by the relatively slow delivery mechanism, which makes it so that you get terribly sick before you could consume lethal quantities.

If we can come up with an effective delivery method then heroin would be no more dangerous than cigarettes (sort of, you still can't, for example, drive on heroin, but also it doesn't destroy your body long term).

Perhaps heroin could be adultrated with a chemical that causes nausea when consumed in an amount proportional to a dangerous level of heroin. This would help heroin users build the same negative associations with high doses that cigarette smokers do, and could make them unable to consume more.

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

#153

Post by Kenji »

atemerev wrote: post #67

Here's what we have in Switzerland: http://www.premiereligne.ch/quai9/ (basically, a drug user's paradise: a "consumption space" injection rooms, clean drugs available, medical attention and reanimation in case of overdose, therapy programs and support programs with the intention to help people quit drugs without stigmatizing them and pushing them to it). It is immensely successful. Drug crime becoming nonexistent he…

Drug use being legal is an intermediary step, but pointless if possession and trade of drugs is illegal. Since you aways have to obtain and possess drugs in order to comsume them, drugs are still illegal. I don't even know based on what law this organization can administer clean drugs. But yes, Switzerland is doing a better job at fighting drug crime than a lot of other countries.

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

#154

Post by pjc50 »

jfmfhhdkdkd wrote: post #90
jfmfhhdkdkd wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I really find it absurd that stating facts is downvoted here on HN because it doesn't fit the hivemind. Singapore and Indonesia execute drug offenders and despite what I am told should happen in this thread, there is very little crime despite their crazier "War on Drugs". When compared to a country like Portugal, Singapore and Indonesia have far lower crime and drug use.

Singapore is a police state. Execution is illegal in Portugal as it's a human rights violation. They're very different places.

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

#155

Post by tomp »

callinyouin wrote: post #148
tomp wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who don't want to go through the hassle, or don't want to be associated with the stigma of, getting the drugs legally.

Hassle? Stigma? Hardcore drug addicts will do anything to get their fix. I have known heroin addicts, for example (one was a friend who sadly got sucked into that world). When you're zonked out on heroin most of the time, the way society perceives you is of very, very little consequence.

> Hardcore drug addicts

As another commenter mentioned, I'd imagine a lot of drug trade (maybe not in heroin, but definitely in cocaine) is not hardcore drug addicts, but occasional (or even regular) users who live (relatively) normal lives.

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

#156

Post by tremon »

zamalek wrote: post #48
wfunction wrote: post #11

Is there evidence to show that legalizing drugs (I don't mean e.g. tobacco here; I mean the far more dangerous ones) won't significantly increase their consumption? I ask because, unless there is, I'm afraid I do not understand why it would be rational to do so...

> won't significantly increase their consumption It could. That's not the point. The main point that Annan is making is that there should be a health system in place for addicts, instead of a penitentiary system (where addictions typically become worse). The past 50 year study/failed experiment known as "The War On Drugs" has shown us that there is nothing you can do to stop people from taking drugs. The war on drugs…

This is simply not possible if you are getting your fix from a regulated supply chain.

Well, it would still be possible (see e.g. last year's horse meat scandal in Britain), but the entire supply chain would be known and could be prosecuted.

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

#157

Post by drumdance »

jfmfhhdkdkd wrote: post #96
jdietrich wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They also have very homogenous populations with a strong, shared sense of cultural identity.

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

#158

Post by rayiner »

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,…

The government persists with the drug war because Americans have a moral opposition to drug use: http://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2014/study-public-fe.... When I was a kid in the 1990's, 70-80% of polled adults wanted to make even marijuana illegal. For drugs aside from marijuana, that's still the case.

Your alternate theories about money and control directly contradict the history of prohibition. Did you know that at the time alcohol prohibition was instituted, fully 1/3 of the federal budget came from liquor taxes? Alcohol producers were incredibly powerful, yet their product was banned because of moral panic. To a significant degree, women's' suffrage happened when it did so they could vote for prohibition.

There is a great PBS series on this: http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition. It's a story of a grass-roots national movement of Americans, many of them heretofore politically marginalized, rising up against money and power to effect change.

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

#159

Post by jernfrost »

One thing I am surprised by is that it is almost never mentioned how China became drug free after Britain made China into the biggest dope user through the Opium wars.

They virtually got rid of opium usage in a relatively short time, and they did it without any sort of war on drugs approach.

They certainly fought the drug usage but they did not imprison or blame drug users. Rather than told abusers they were victims who needed help. They were given education to cope with addiction, jobs etc. Even drug dealers were, except the worst ones who were imprisoned.

It might have helped the narrative that they could blame Britain as the evil doer.

While not the same as legalization it does have some resemblance to the Portuguese approach where the focus is on helping people taken for abuse rather than punishing or imprisoning.

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

#160

Post by drumdance »

saiya-jin wrote: post #137
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 pr…

same for me, but I hate smoking. if things would be legal, I would much MUCH prefer different, non harmful way to consume it (food, of vaporizing some pure extract in e-cigarette style). usual vaporizers are only somewhere in the middle, plus more inconvenient. I don't care so much about pricing, amsterdam levels would be OK for me. I consume so little that I would be OK even with higher pricing. But I could actually…

Re: more drug choices -- that's exactly what's happening here in Colorado. There's a huge variety of choice. And at the dispensaries the staff generally very knowledgable, so it's almost like buying wine.
Post reply on HN