Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it? • Hacker News Board

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#261

Post by rusk » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:17 AM UTC

minikites wrote: post #254

rusk wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there may be something to this. Though perhaps a better term than "rebuttal" is "backlash". The conservative backlash has long been mooted by social commentators. It's likely a large cohort of Trumps voters were those who were incensed by "central government interfering in local affairs", in particular the case of Kim Davis springs to mind. Never mind that Trump doesn't exactly embody conservatism, I'd imagin…

>I'd imagine a large amount of conservative voters, alarmed by social progress would have voted him out of spite. Most conservatives are driven almost entirely by spite: http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/29/17971903-to-figh... >When the more expensive CFLs were sold without environmental messaging — but touted the fact that CFLs last 9,000 hours longer than the less expensive incandescent bulbs and reduce ener…

I hadn't heard of that. Rolling Coal. What a terrifically hilarious concept, and terrifying at the same time.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#262

Post by Nursie » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:19 AM UTC

yAnonymous wrote: post #257

toomanybeersies wrote: post #50

This scenario doesn't just happen with drug policy, but with practically any divisive policy discussion. People will debate something that is done elsewhere, and ignore completely that it's done elsewhere. Gay marriage is a prime example, as it's something that has been legalised in a lot of countries now. Every time a country goes through the process of debating whether to legalise gay marriage, there's a bunch of p…

>there's a bunch of people that say it's going to cause the corruption of society Well, just look at the US. Political correctness is getting totally out of hand and the same is happening more and more in European countries. Changing traditions causes a lot of entitlement in people who also feel that they should get a special treatment and it seems that there's no end to it. In a democratic society, entitlement from…

>> They absolutely need to have it called marriage

Yes, because that's equality.

We've tried "separate but equal" before, haven't we? It doesn't work out, and it's used as an excuse for continuing discrimination.

This is not entitlement, it's equal treatment.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#263

Post by andrenth » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:22 AM UTC

daemin wrote: post #216

ueushzvzis wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fewer guns does not equal fewer deaths in the developed world. You are doing exactly what you claim to be against. Cherry picking data to suit your narrative.

Yeah it does, Australia. That's the prime example of fewer guns = fewer deaths.

Australia also had reduced number of gun-unrelated deaths. In fact the percent reduction in those cases was larger than the reduction of gun deaths.

So the stricter gun laws can't be considered the sole explanation for fewer deaths.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#264

Post by Nursie » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:23 AM UTC

minikites wrote: post #254

rusk wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there may be something to this. Though perhaps a better term than "rebuttal" is "backlash". The conservative backlash has long been mooted by social commentators. It's likely a large cohort of Trumps voters were those who were incensed by "central government interfering in local affairs", in particular the case of Kim Davis springs to mind. Never mind that Trump doesn't exactly embody conservatism, I'd imagin…

>I'd imagine a large amount of conservative voters, alarmed by social progress would have voted him out of spite. Most conservatives are driven almost entirely by spite: http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/29/17971903-to-figh... >When the more expensive CFLs were sold without environmental messaging — but touted the fact that CFLs last 9,000 hours longer than the less expensive incandescent bulbs and reduce ener…

Oh wow, that's insane.

I know, I'll poison the air around myself, that'll make those damn liberals crazy!

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#265

Post by ueushzvzis » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:23 AM UTC

flipp3r wrote: post #230

ueushzvzis wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how you do the same thing you get mad about other people doing. You say that less guns equals less gun deaths... well duh. Then you go on to say less handguns equals less deaths and this actually isn't true. As it stands, in the developed world more guns does not equate to more violence or more deaths. Obviously there are more deaths due to guns because people have access to them but the argument tha…

According to Wikipedia's "Firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population per year" America is at 10.54, compared to countries like Finland and Switzerland which are at 3.5-ish, it is very high. You can however see America's cause of the gun problem clearly, but you're not allowed to say it out loud; https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Reeves-... You could call it "culture" which the other countrie…

See you're doing it again. You're only looking at firearm related deaths and not total homicides.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#266

Post by alkonaut » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:23 AM UTC

bbot23 wrote: post #243

alkonaut wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This does not follow. If the ban didn't actually lessen the number of handguns, then we don't have the left hand side of the implication! These are two things: ban on handguns -> less handguns less handguns -> fewer deaths Someone argued that the second is true, and you seem to refute it by saying the first isn't. So maybe you aren't talking about the same thing. I'm going to argue that the second thing isn't contr…

Your implication fails in the real world in the same way that banning, demonizing, and siphoning drugs out of the country has failed. Yes, stricter laws, a buy-back policy and a generational shift will most definitely lower the current amount of guns in circulation in a given society. But just like with drugs, and sadly with a lot of gun-strict cities in the US, it has no bearing on the subsequent widening of the ill…

> it has no bearing on the subsequent widening of the illegal gun pipeline

All guns were legal at one point. Buy backs, fewer sales etc mean fewer legal and illegal guns in circulation (unless you see an increase in illegal smuggling and manufacturing - but obviously that's a problem you need to address first then). There will always be demand for weapons, legal or illegal. Just like with drugs. If you don't want people to buy illegal drugs or illegal guns, you only need to keep supply so low that prices are too high for most.

The problem for the US is that there are already so many guns, that effective legislation is problematic. For any legislation to be effective you'd first need to lower the amount of guns in society - because as you say otherwise there are too many guns that flow into the "illegal gun pipeline". So it's a chicken and egg problem. The questoin is: is it really an ok solution to say "we can't change regulation to something that would mean less guns in society because we have too many guns"?

> It's interesting to me that a lot progressive, popular armchair analysis of the issue advocates for strict gun laws, and at the same time advocates for loose drug laws

I think progressives mostly argue for looser drug laws for USE, not sale, apart from possibly also legalizing a few drugs. I don't think many progressives argue for lower penalties for drug smuggling, manufacturing and sales. The big difference between gun ownership and drug use in that context is that gun ownership would be a choice. If you are conservative you might argue that using drugs, being gay etc. is also a choice - but that's the philosophical side of it - I won't go there.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#267

Post by tskaiser » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:23 AM UTC

yAnonymous wrote: post #257

toomanybeersies wrote: post #50

This scenario doesn't just happen with drug policy, but with practically any divisive policy discussion. People will debate something that is done elsewhere, and ignore completely that it's done elsewhere. Gay marriage is a prime example, as it's something that has been legalised in a lot of countries now. Every time a country goes through the process of debating whether to legalise gay marriage, there's a bunch of p…

>there's a bunch of people that say it's going to cause the corruption of society Well, just look at the US. Political correctness is getting totally out of hand and the same is happening more and more in European countries. Changing traditions causes a lot of entitlement in people who also feel that they should get a special treatment and it seems that there's no end to it. In a democratic society, entitlement from…

Wanting not to be discriminated against / handled separately != wanting special treatment. It is quite the opposite, in fact. The only people who consider that an entitled position are those who think there is nothing wrong with relegating people to second-class citizen status, even if they refuse to consider it as such.

Heck, it is quite entitled for people to think that they inherently deserve privileges that others are denied simply because "that is how it has always been". Bullheaded traditionalism is the actual cancer.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#268

Post by icc97 » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:24 AM UTC

ewjordan wrote: post #114

barsonme wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It has also reduced drunk driving rates. What happened to the overall DUI rates, though?

I'll take 10 stoned drivers over 1 drunk one any day of the week. Stoned drivers may be slow as hell and really annoying, but drunk ones speed and kill people all the time.

The song "Let's push things forward" [0] by UK band The Streets is a great song that depicts some of the differences between drunk and stoned people. You need to listen to the song rather than just read the lyrics.

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let%27s_Push_Things_Forward

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#269

Post by vertex-four » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:26 AM UTC

yAnonymous wrote: post #257

toomanybeersies wrote: post #50

This scenario doesn't just happen with drug policy, but with practically any divisive policy discussion. People will debate something that is done elsewhere, and ignore completely that it's done elsewhere. Gay marriage is a prime example, as it's something that has been legalised in a lot of countries now. Every time a country goes through the process of debating whether to legalise gay marriage, there's a bunch of p…

>there's a bunch of people that say it's going to cause the corruption of society Well, just look at the US. Political correctness is getting totally out of hand and the same is happening more and more in European countries. Changing traditions causes a lot of entitlement in people who also feel that they should get a special treatment and it seems that there's no end to it. In a democratic society, entitlement from…

Sorry mate, marriage isn't just religious. It's also societal, and Governmental. Many, many people get married outside of church, and for entirely nonreligious reasons - do you speak out against those as well as much as you do marriage between people of the same sex? What about people of a different religion getting married against your religion's rules?

By the way - last time I looked into this, marriage predates organised religion, and definitely predates Christianity. If your intention is to maintain a Christian country to the detriment of those following other religions or none at all, at least be honest about it.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#270

Post by stupidcar » Wed, Dec 06, 2017, 11:27 AM UTC

yAnonymous wrote: post #257

toomanybeersies wrote: post #50

This scenario doesn't just happen with drug policy, but with practically any divisive policy discussion. People will debate something that is done elsewhere, and ignore completely that it's done elsewhere. Gay marriage is a prime example, as it's something that has been legalised in a lot of countries now. Every time a country goes through the process of debating whether to legalise gay marriage, there's a bunch of p…

>there's a bunch of people that say it's going to cause the corruption of society Well, just look at the US. Political correctness is getting totally out of hand and the same is happening more and more in European countries. Changing traditions causes a lot of entitlement in people who also feel that they should get a special treatment and it seems that there's no end to it. In a democratic society, entitlement from…

It's hilarious to me that conservatives will talk about political correctness getting "out of hand", while downplaying or ignoring pathologies that result from their own beliefs that have caused, and continue to cause, extraordinary amounts of death, torture, poverty and suffering.

Come back when lynch mobs have literally hanged thousands of people for being politically incorrect. Or when millions of people are being systemically disenfranchised because they're politically incorrect. Or when a US president is about to trigger a nuclear war over "political correctness".