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

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

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 545 posts

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

#291

Post by mantas »

dmitriid wrote: post #159
andrenth wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> less handguns = less deaths. This does not follow. Take Brazil for example. 60k homicides per year, and guns are pretty much forbidden. Of course, criminals don’t seem to care.

Take Europe for example. Less homicides than the States, guns are pretty much forbidden (yes, they are all but forbidden in Switzerland, too).

What? I could get a gun license anytime I want. Yes, it takes time and paperwork. But unless you're ex-convict or have mental health history, there's nothing stopping you from owning a light firearm. Hunting rifles are easy to get too. Only military-ish style guns are forbidden.

This is in EU country and I believe quite a few other countries are on similar level.

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

#292

Post by mantas »

TheArcane wrote: post #177
ramy_d wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

shockingly true https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Brazil

> this is exactly what above comment talks about. You are picking the country that fits that narrative but forget about all of the rest. Try Europe.

What about Europe? Guns are allowed, although strictly regulated, and there're very few homicides.

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

#293

Post by haggy »

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…

I would love to see hard statistical evidence that less guns = less deaths. The problem with your hypothesis (because without proof, that's all that your comment is) is that less guns in the hands of innocent people is a recipe for disaster. I live in the US and we see the exact opposite of what you claim. We typically see higher death rates of innocent people in states with very strict gun regulation (Chicago for example). On the opposite side of the coin, states like Texas and New Hampshire see much less criminal gun violence and domestic terrorism. In fact there have been multiple incidents recently where armed criminals tried to wreak havoc and were stopped by armed civilians.

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

#294

Post by [deleted] »

haggy wrote: post #293
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…

I would love to see hard statistical evidence that less guns = less deaths. The problem with your hypothesis (because without proof, that's all that your comment is) is that less guns in the hands of innocent people is a recipe for disaster. I live in the US and we see the exact opposite of what you claim. We typically see higher death rates of innocent people in states with very strict gun regulation (Chicago for ex…

[deleted]

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

#295

Post by alkonaut »

andrenth wrote: post #247
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…

A law to ban guns will lead to less guns... but only in the hands of people who care about laws.

That's a pretty tired tautology.

It might also lead to less guns also in the hands of those who don't care about laws. For example because fewer guns can make them a lot more expensive and/or more risky to aquire illegaly.

One can't simply argue that "A law against X only affects those who care about laws!". That's always the case. Seatbelt laws leads to fewer deaths - among those who care about seatbelt laws. A ban on smoking in restaurants leads to fewer people who care about bans smoking in restaurants...

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

#296

Post by pavlov »

haggy wrote: post #293
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…

I would love to see hard statistical evidence that less guns = less deaths. The problem with your hypothesis (because without proof, that's all that your comment is) is that less guns in the hands of innocent people is a recipe for disaster. I live in the US and we see the exact opposite of what you claim. We typically see higher death rates of innocent people in states with very strict gun regulation (Chicago for ex…

Less than three months have passed since the Las Vegas massacre, and it's already forgotten? Nevada has very lax gun laws.

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

#297

Post by andrenth »

alkonaut wrote: post #295
andrenth wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A law to ban guns will lead to less guns... but only in the hands of people who care about laws.

That's a pretty tired tautology. It might also lead to less guns also in the hands of those who don't care about laws. For example because fewer guns can make them a lot more expensive and/or more risky to aquire illegaly. One can't simply argue that "A law against X only affects those who care about laws!". That's always the case. Seatbelt laws leads to fewer deaths - among those who care about seatbelt laws. A ban…

Those are absolutely flawed comparisons, because a criminal, by definition, is someone who doesn't care about the law. You cannot make that assumption about smokers or drivers.

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

#298

Post by tehwalrus »

haggy wrote: post #293
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…

I would love to see hard statistical evidence that less guns = less deaths. The problem with your hypothesis (because without proof, that's all that your comment is) is that less guns in the hands of innocent people is a recipe for disaster. I live in the US and we see the exact opposite of what you claim. We typically see higher death rates of innocent people in states with very strict gun regulation (Chicago for ex…

The grandparent cites the UK, where we have two orders of magnitude fewer firearm deaths per capita[1] with complete prohibition of private handgun ownership. (People can still join a shooting club, which keeps them in a locked cabinet).

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm...

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

#299

Post by oxide »

haggy wrote: post #293
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…

I would love to see hard statistical evidence that less guns = less deaths. The problem with your hypothesis (because without proof, that's all that your comment is) is that less guns in the hands of innocent people is a recipe for disaster. I live in the US and we see the exact opposite of what you claim. We typically see higher death rates of innocent people in states with very strict gun regulation (Chicago for ex…

To tie this back on topic, opiates are really rather safe drugs, in terms of oral therapeutic usage, that have been made deadly solely due to prohibition. It's driven injection abuse through the roof as people try to get the most bang for their buck at any cost, and with the introduction of fentalogues into the heroin supply, we get a trumped-up (no pun intended) public health crisis that has a working solution in place.

The expansion of maintenance access, both to suboxone and methadone clinics, safe injection sites, needle exchanges and other hard decisions are going to need to be made more quickly than usual to stem the tide.

Harm reduction works, prohibition doesn't.

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

#300

Post by afsina »

major505 wrote: post #285

Each country needs to have its own thing. In Brazil for example, a measure like this wold not have any impact because we do not have control over our borders. Take smoking for example. Even if tabacco its alowed, its really expensive to buy legalized cigarrets. So peoplo just smoke cheap ones, that enter from Paraguai border, with no quality control, and brougth in Brazil by organized crime, or even produced in cland…

Governments heavily tax tobacco with the hope of lowering the associated health costs (and tax money is always juicy). But almost all the time it backfires and these happen: -People just keep smoking -It creates an economical burden in house holds with smokers because of the prices and difficulty of quitting -Smuggling or bad quality tobacco consumption increases.

So, like most things government does, intervention with good intentions creates more problems. IMO, government should not interfere with it, and smokers should not get cheap health insurance (or none from government).

Post reply on HN