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

Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 377 posts

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#51

Post by mythrwy »

fsloth wrote: post #5

Finally. I hope this will signal a turning point on this insane approach to national health in all countries. Drugs are a health problem, not a criminal problem. Lone experts have been fired in western countries when they have expressed this common sense sentiments alone [0]. I hope this groups fares better. Nixon started the war on drugs anyway as a mean to attack left and black activists [1]. Any previous legislati…

Almost every post about drugs on HN has the obligatory bit about Nixon starting the war on drugs. It's like a Shibboleth or something.

Nixon probably tried to make political hay out of it sure, but the war against intoxicants has been going on probably since people started using intoxicants. No shortage of earlier historical examples. At most Nixon is a chapter in the ongoing saga. So please, for all that is holy, stop with this repetitive "Nixon started" thing. Just because people might think Nixon is a bad guy doesn't give the point about drugs any more validity.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#52

Post by stickfigure »

mc32 wrote: post #25
fsloth wrote: post #5

Finally. I hope this will signal a turning point on this insane approach to national health in all countries. Drugs are a health problem, not a criminal problem. Lone experts have been fired in western countries when they have expressed this common sense sentiments alone [0]. I hope this groups fares better. Nixon started the war on drugs anyway as a mean to attack left and black activists [1]. Any previous legislati…

I'll agree with consumption not being punishable but a medically treatable issue. Misditribution (illegal distribution) of controlled dugs (not over the counter) should be punishable --whether they be doctors who knowingly over prescribe or black market sellers (drug dealers).

You cannot avoid the nasty social effects of drug prohibition (crime, violence, contamination, etc) without making distribution legal. If you want to live in a world without homeless junkies breaking into your car, or a world without running gun battles in the street, or a world without your wayward kids accidentally ODing on their next batch, you need drugs like cocaine and heroin to be sold openly and affordably at the corner Walgreens.

"Help the addict but punish the dealer" feels good to say but the world just isn't that simple.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#53

Post by everdev »

ekianjo wrote: post #48
justonepost wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on your goal. If it's to reduce mortality, yes, decriminalize is good. But it will increase usage.

>But it will increase usage. Not necessarily. When people really want something they will eventually find a way to get it anyway, it's not because you criminalize it that its usage drops. Just like IP infringement has not significantly dropped since they can put people in jail for it.

Well, barriers to entry matter. If you're craving a drug and it's sold in a convenient store around the corner, you might purchase it more frequently than if you had to buy it from potentially dangerous people in a seedy part of town. That said, as with any bad habit I'm sure usage would still decrease over time for most individuals as they mature or if healthier alternatives are readily available.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#54

Post by [deleted] »

ekianjo wrote: post #48
justonepost wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on your goal. If it's to reduce mortality, yes, decriminalize is good. But it will increase usage.

>But it will increase usage. Not necessarily. When people really want something they will eventually find a way to get it anyway, it's not because you criminalize it that its usage drops. Just like IP infringement has not significantly dropped since they can put people in jail for it.

[deleted]

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#55

Post by spaceseaman »

jeffdavis wrote: post #28

"scientific consensus" I am very troubled by this phrase -- it's almost an oxymoron. Science is not democratic, and scientists aren't anointed arbiters of facts. Anyone can be a scientist simply by following the scientific method and collecting data in good faith; and a lone outsider with new data can challenge 100 years of "consensus". Obviously they are subject to challenges themselves, or if it's unlikely enough t…

I don't know. I think the phrase still has a quite a bit of usefulness. The point is to communicate to the public that many people whose job it is to research such a thing agree. I also disagree that consensus has any implication with democracy. It's a word used for general agreement, and in my experience democracies are rarely in agreement.

How else would you tell people that most scientists agree on a position? Also, even if a lone outsider challenged the new data, that's not something you communicate to the public yet. Policy and publicity would need to wait until consensus actually did occur because at that point, the legitimacy of the science would have been worked out.

This terminology is ancient and has been used long before climate change debate.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#56

Post by mc32 »

stickfigure wrote: post #52
mc32 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll agree with consumption not being punishable but a medically treatable issue. Misditribution (illegal distribution) of controlled dugs (not over the counter) should be punishable --whether they be doctors who knowingly over prescribe or black market sellers (drug dealers).

You cannot avoid the nasty social effects of drug prohibition (crime, violence, contamination, etc) without making distribution legal. If you want to live in a world without homeless junkies breaking into your car, or a world without running gun battles in the street, or a world without your wayward kids accidentally ODing on their next batch, you need drugs like cocaine and heroin to be sold openly and affordably at…

I don't see that borne out by the opioid crisis. Many believe it was lax prescription that allowed opioids to become preferred and prevalent narcotics to abuse. If they are not available it does not matter how many cars or houses you brake into, it does no good if no one is selling.

So you say, well in that case someone will make them dirty and available for a price. Punish the illegal seller and prosecute all suppliers who knowingly sold to someone not registered. Prosecute any and all corruption related to making and distributing the product illegally.

Do people get their coke from Coca-cola imported leaves? No. They know the consequences and take appropriate precautions to ensure they are not subverted by greedy employees.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#57

Post by throwaway613834 »

mythrwy wrote: post #51
fsloth wrote: post #5

Finally. I hope this will signal a turning point on this insane approach to national health in all countries. Drugs are a health problem, not a criminal problem. Lone experts have been fired in western countries when they have expressed this common sense sentiments alone [0]. I hope this groups fares better. Nixon started the war on drugs anyway as a mean to attack left and black activists [1]. Any previous legislati…

Almost every post about drugs on HN has the obligatory bit about Nixon starting the war on drugs. It's like a Shibboleth or something. Nixon probably tried to make political hay out of it sure, but the war against intoxicants has been going on probably since people started using intoxicants. No shortage of earlier historical examples. At most Nixon is a chapter in the ongoing saga. So please, for all that is holy, st…

My understanding is that there's the war on drugs and then there's the War on Drugs, and the latter is what is (correctly?) attributed to Nixon, even when it is not bothered to be capitalized.

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#58

Post by Synaesthesia »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #9
Synaesthesia wrote: post #6

As Chomsky said, the way to deal with drug abuse is through education and treatment. That’s how we successfully reduced smoking, drinking coffee and other unhealthy habits in the USA. Not by throwing people in jail.

Drinking coffee is unhealthy? You sure about that? > Studies have shown that coffee may have health benefits, including protecting against Parkinson's disease, type 2 diabetes and liver disease, including liver cancer. Coffee also appears to improve cognitive function and decrease the risk of depression. http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-he...

I don't think it's good for you, especially when drunk to excess, but that's not going to stop us drinking it is it?

Re: Top medical experts say we should decriminalize all drugs (2016)

#59

Post by beefield »

addicted wrote: post #43
beefield wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"drinking & driving doesn't necessarily hurt others--unless there is an accident as a result - but until there is an accident -- innocent till guilty of an accident while influenced." Do you agree also with the statement above? My view is that most of the externalities of drug uses should be managed by taxation, not forbidden. But there are some externalities that require more brutal coercion than just taxation.

This isn't comparable. The odds of hurting someone else when youre driving after drinking are ridiculously high. If someone is driving after consuming a drug throw the book at them. But if they're just chilling at home that's a completely different matter.

> The odds of hurting someone else when youre driving after drinking are ridiculously high.

No. They are not ridiculously high. They are minuscule.

"In 2015, nearly 1.1 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. That’s one percent of the 111 million self-reported episodes of alcohol-impaired driving among U.S. adults each year"[1]

Assuming that all the drunk drivers that hurt someone else are arrested and most arrested ones haven't hurt anyone, odds of hurting someone when drinking & driving are way less than 1%.

(This is not to imply that I would like to allow drunk driving.)

[1]https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impa...

Post reply on HN