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

Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 318 posts

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#191

Post by ImTalking »

twblalock wrote: post #64
evincarofautumn wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m an alcoholic. I’ve cut back on my use significantly, and I’m currently in a period of abstinence. Because alcohol is legal and socially accepted, it’s entirely my responsibility to manage my behaviour and keep my use to non-problematic levels. Not everyone has the social support to make that happen. I think legalisation would be beneficial, as you say, because the criminal justice system does not serve addicts. H…

Why should your drug use, or anyone else's, create obligations for other people to support you, treat you, and help you overcome addiction? The libertarian case for legalizing drugs falls apart if society has to take responsibility for providing support systems as a reaction to the actions of individual drug users. Frankly, most people would rather continue to ban drugs than pay for treatment for people who abuse the…

I don't understand this separation of individualised vices. What's the difference when society allows you to eat 10 large pizzas a night, become diabetic and obese, and the State will treat the diabetes? What's the difference when society allows you to smoke 5 packs of cigs a day, get lung cancer, and the State will treat that cancer? What's the difference when society allows you to drink 5 bottles of bourbon a night, kill your liver, and the State will attempt to find you another liver?

And please remember: alcohol is a drug. A very very bad drug.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#192

Post by throwaway21816 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #66
creshal wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> overprescription of opioids because they're cheap It's a bit scary how eager doctors are to prescribe them. "Hey doc, I'm in pain" – "Here's a bottle of painkillers, NEXT" Bitch, I don't want painkillers, I want you to figure out why my body is hurting when it's not supposed to. It's surprisingly frustrating to talk doctors into looking for the cause instead of treating the symptom. Thankfully, the metamizole they…

> I don't want painkillers, I want you to figure out why my body is hurting when it's not supposed to. It's surprisingly frustrating to talk doctors into looking for the cause instead of treating the symptom. To be fair, this is related to the symptom you're asking them about. Pain often occurs with no apparent cause. As an extreme example, it is normal for amputees to experience the sensation of a "phantom hand" whe…

>Phantom Hand

New Metal Gear game?

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#193

Post by antognini »

herge wrote: post #146
leeleelee wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another interesting thing about the war on drugs is that during prohibition, the constitution was amended for the government to legally be able stop the sale of alcohol. On the other hand, for other "hard" drugs, there is nothing in the constitution that supports the criminalization of drugs. Unless I am missing something. Completely aside from that fact, I do agree that it should be treated as a public health issue.…

There's nothing in the U.S. constitution about airplanes either, and yet the FAA still exists. However, the U.S. constitution does talk at length about both congress who can write laws (like the laws banning hard drugs), and the judicial branch who can overturn laws that contravene the constitution. The 18th amendment was added to the constitution not by some legislative need, but to make a politicized statement wher…

> The 18th amendment was added to the constitution not by some legislative need, but to make a politicized statement where another amendment to the constitution would be required to overturn it (the 21st in this case).

That's not really the case. At the time of the 18th amendment's adoption the prevailing legal interpretation of the Commerce Clause was that Congress lacked the power to regulate intrastate trade. So Congress could have prohibited the sale of alcohol across state lines, but could not prohibit the sale of alcohol within the boundaries of a state, and certainly could not have prohibited its production. It wasn't until 1942, in a reaction to Roosevelt's court packing scheme, when the Supreme Court reversed its interpretation and ruled that Congress does have the power to regulate intrastate economic activity (i.e., the production of a good that is not necessarily sold), giving us the modern legal interpretation of the Commerce Clause.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#194

Post by robryan »

bronz wrote: post #177
krschultz wrote: post #15

I've never taken an illegal drug in my life. I've smoked a cigarette about 5 times. I drank in college but lately I've cut that out of my life as well. I had a security clearance with drug testing requirements for a while and now I just don't like the feeling of a hangover from alcohol or the risk of ingesting random plants/chemicals made by shady people. In short: I'm the most vanilla, square, anti-drug person you c…

Some drugs must be outlawed. Asking why heroin or cocaine need to be illegal is like asking why gambling has to be illegal. If you allow people to use addictive drugs or gamble freely then they will destroy themselves. Or huge numbers of people will, anyway.

Making them illegal hasn't stopped anyone.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#195

Post by ashwinaj »

This is why you need a counter balance to monopolistic tendencies of the free market. Be it in the form of regulations or making companies liable for their greedy actions.

It has been proven time and time again that systematically removing "common sense" [0] regulations only harms society in the long run.

[0] Please don't start a mundane discussion about what "common sense" means.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#196

Post by antognini »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #139
leeleelee wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another interesting thing about the war on drugs is that during prohibition, the constitution was amended for the government to legally be able stop the sale of alcohol. On the other hand, for other "hard" drugs, there is nothing in the constitution that supports the criminalization of drugs. Unless I am missing something. Completely aside from that fact, I do agree that it should be treated as a public health issue.…

That doesn't really change much. The constitution is the law of the land, so if it says nothing about drug use while a federal law bans a set of drugs from sale and use, then that's the law, unless it contradicts the constitution, and in that case, it's up to the Supreme Court to decide.

Well, not quite. The Constitution is set up to delimit the powers of the federal government. As the 10th amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." So if a particular law exceeds the power granted to Congress by the Constitution, it is unconstitutional. It's not that the Constitution prohibits Congress from doing certain things and everything else is by default allowed. The Constitution allows Congress to do certain things and everything else is by default not allowed.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#197

Post by kazinator »

twblalock wrote: post #64
evincarofautumn wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m an alcoholic. I’ve cut back on my use significantly, and I’m currently in a period of abstinence. Because alcohol is legal and socially accepted, it’s entirely my responsibility to manage my behaviour and keep my use to non-problematic levels. Not everyone has the social support to make that happen. I think legalisation would be beneficial, as you say, because the criminal justice system does not serve addicts. H…

Why should your drug use, or anyone else's, create obligations for other people to support you, treat you, and help you overcome addiction? The libertarian case for legalizing drugs falls apart if society has to take responsibility for providing support systems as a reaction to the actions of individual drug users. Frankly, most people would rather continue to ban drugs than pay for treatment for people who abuse the…

The libertarian case usually includes a chapter on removing those support systems, minimal taxation and governments that only defend the borders and enforce criminal and civil law.

> Frankly, most people would rather continue to ban drugs than pay for treatment for people who abuse them.

But what happens is that they get both. They ban drugs and pay for treatment. And they pay for the consequences of the criminal activity behind drugs. The property crime and violence and all that.

The consequences of drugs get so out of hand because of the legal status. People who use illegal drugs have to hide and so they don't get the help early enough, if at all. They also have to interacts with criminals, and are exposed to additional risks, like not knowing what the heck they are actually putting in their bodies.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#198

Post by cbd1984 »

md224 wrote: post #78
twblalock wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should your drug use, or anyone else's, create obligations for other people to support you, treat you, and help you overcome addiction? The libertarian case for legalizing drugs falls apart if society has to take responsibility for providing support systems as a reaction to the actions of individual drug users. Frankly, most people would rather continue to ban drugs than pay for treatment for people who abuse the…

Libertarians like free markets, right? Has anyone tried applying free market principles to drug use? Perhaps if all drugs were legal, people would be able to find less harmful drugs instead of being forced to abuse what's currently legal, and medical costs would go down. I remember reading an anecdote about a guy who stopped drinking by taking occasional painkillers. It scratched the same itch, so he didn't feel the…

> Libertarians like free markets, right? Has anyone tried applying free market principles to drug use?

In a completely free market, there are no labeling laws, and no way to enforce purity until after someone has died or been harmed by a bad product and has an estate or next-of-kin capable of suing the producer. And that, of course, assumes the producer is both still in business and is going to be dissuaded from making bad product just because it lost one lawsuit, which might only amount to less than one percent of its total income.

I'd rather avoid that.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#199

Post by j2bax »

rubicon33 wrote: post #108
justsaysmthng wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because your addiction is also your wife's problem, your parent's problem, your company's problem. Addiction affects more than just the addict. And addicts are in need of help - while it is easy to think that "they like being high, it's their choice", in fact the addicts hate their habit more than anything, yet they can't stop using without external help. Would you help a person with a broken leg ? Why ? Well, that's…

If they broke their leg while doing something that endangered not only themself, but their family, their friends, and society on a whole, I might not jump at an opportunity to help them.

Personally I don't consider myself such a good judge. If someone's in need, I like to think I will help them in whatever capacity I can. Many things lead to people making bad decisions, and they aren't all internal 1-sided factors.

Re: Painkillers now kill more Americans than any illegal drug

#200

Post by moheeb »

drug3737 wrote: post #99
SilasX wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For context, it's not just the people running private prisons, but also public prison guard unions: http://ordinary-gentlemen.com/timkowal/2011/06/the-role-of-t...

The vast majority of drug offenders in prison are drug dealers, not drug users. It's extremely rare for drug users to be imprisoned. It boggles my mind that this propaganda is kept being pushed.

It used to be my job to pull data for a large state's prison population. I can tell you unequivocally that it is NOT rare for drug users to be imprisoned. In fact I can say with certainty that most of the people attending prison use drugs.
Post reply on HN