31–40 of 134 posts
When I saw the chart I thought, what's wrong with Estonia?
All the Nordics have large problems with drug addiction. They are also tracking them quite well so don't compare them to let's say Romania or Bulgaria where tracking is next to non-existent.
Portugal's performance in perspective: Only three people for every million die of a drug overdose in Portugal, which puts one of the eurozone's poorest countries in a different league than rich international powerhouse Germany (17.6 per million) and in a different universe than social democratic utopia Sweden (69.7 per million). There's a fascinating documentary called American Addict on what nearly happened before t…
Not that there aren't extenuating circumstances, not that it's a "terrible crime", but, it is a vice in which people for the most part, at least initially, have some choice.
Again, I'm in favor of most everything you suggest, particularly decriminalization (which just makes sense). Still, in my view people need to take a little more personal responsibility. There are always excuses if we look for them.
The best way to encourage people to take a little more responsibility? Probably most of what you suggest as well as giving people healthy environments and opportunity and something to be optimistic about.
But traditionally shaming works a little as well. As unpleasant as this may sound. We appear to have come to a spot we think people shouldn't be shamed for anything. Well, except for being a racist or using PHP maybe. Shame was an effective social control for a long time and if we are going to do away with it we need to find a replacement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think regardless of the details of legality, it is strong anecdotal evidence that dollars spent on treatment reduce OD deaths more than dollars spent on enforcement. It adds to a strong body of research that already points in that direction
Yes, it appears to affirm that law enforcement is not the best bang for the buck. There has been plenty of work indicating that like you mentioned. That wasn't a "bold risk". That is separate from saying that changing the legality of it impacts the usage though. There is not reason to take the result beyond what it indicates.
Taking Sweden as control, for example, they spend loads on health services and treatment; but without decriminalisation, their numbers are still terrible.
The critical part missing from portugals policy is that drugs must be legal to buy and sell (via controlled channels). Decriminalizing use helps, but legalizing sales take out the crime and ensures the health of users through clean product.
https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/o...
You could perhaps consider it as a Darwin award...sell heroin to anyone who wants it, and then if they become addicted and overdose, at least it clears the gene pool of people who are too dumb to use it responsibly. /s
Note, that is not my viewpoint, but I wonder if that's what some of the proponents of legalization are thinking. Obviously heroin has a huge effect on the brain and personality, and it's very difficult to get off it once you're addicted. So there is some rationale to the idea that keeping heroin illegal is helping prevent people from getting involved with it in the first place.
Right now it's (arguably) mostly thrill-seekers or people self-medicating psychological problems or chronic pain (which in itself has a large psychological aspect) using heroin. If you legalize it you potentially open it up to a much larger group who might not have otherwise considered using it.
Find it misleading that almost all of the recent articles on this subject talk about decriminalization as the cause for the drop in drug related health issues. They shifted a significant chunk of money to health services. If it proves anything, it is only that health services can reduce drug related health issues. Without a control, there is nothing to point to regarding criminalization vs decriminalization. People a…
They shifted a significant chunk of money to health services. But everyone knows this, it's the obvious corollary of decriminalization and has been stated over and over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Romania did better than Portugal. What are they doing better than Portugal? Why is Portugal's liberal policy on drugs heralded so great when it's not the best of the list? (I'm not saying that it's a bad policy but why is the article focused on pushing that policy?) Also what I want to see: What about Portugal makes it work? Could you test that assertion against a different country if you made the contextual changes…
I think you missed the point of jacquesm's comment: "They are also tracking them quite well so don't compare them to let's say Romania or Bulgaria where tracking is next to non-existent." In other words, it's highly likely that Romania didn't "do better" than Portugal, but rather they're doing a very poor job tracking overdoses at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you missed the point of jacquesm's comment: "They are also tracking them quite well so don't compare them to let's say Romania or Bulgaria where tracking is next to non-existent." In other words, it's highly likely that Romania didn't "do better" than Portugal, but rather they're doing a very poor job tracking overdoses at all.
Oh, if that data was bad, they should have even included it in the graph.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They shifted a significant chunk of money to health services. But everyone knows this, it's the obvious corollary of decriminalization and has been stated over and over.
How? It's entirely possible to decriminalize and simply move law enforcement monies to other efforts, leaving nothing for health services.
Portugal's performance in perspective: Only three people for every million die of a drug overdose in Portugal, which puts one of the eurozone's poorest countries in a different league than rich international powerhouse Germany (17.6 per million) and in a different universe than social democratic utopia Sweden (69.7 per million). There's a fascinating documentary called American Addict on what nearly happened before t…
While I generally agree with most of what you state I'd like to offer the unpopular opinion that the personal decision to use hard or addicting drugs is something of a moral failing. Not that there aren't extenuating circumstances, not that it's a "terrible crime", but, it is a vice in which people for the most part, at least initially, have some choice. Again, I'm in favor of most everything you suggest, particularl…
Portugal's performance in perspective: Only three people for every million die of a drug overdose in Portugal, which puts one of the eurozone's poorest countries in a different league than rich international powerhouse Germany (17.6 per million) and in a different universe than social democratic utopia Sweden (69.7 per million). There's a fascinating documentary called American Addict on what nearly happened before t…
While I generally agree with most of what you state I'd like to offer the unpopular opinion that the personal decision to use hard or addicting drugs is something of a moral failing. Not that there aren't extenuating circumstances, not that it's a "terrible crime", but, it is a vice in which people for the most part, at least initially, have some choice. Again, I'm in favor of most everything you suggest, particularl…
At least in this case, perhaps it's not just a moral failing. Maybe it's an education issue? Or some other way we should help prevent situations like this.