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

Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 252 posts

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#91

Post by xzel »

50656E6973 wrote: post #26
anm89 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's unfortunate that this sounds so tin foil hat because it is absolutely true. There is no grand conspiracy to keep drugs illegal. There is a vast, semi well intentioned system built over a century that people adapted to over time to profit off of and now that they are profiting they are not going to give it up easily. Because of the governmental nature of the people who profit they are also very well positioned to…

>There is no grand conspiracy to keep drugs illegal Many people working together to keep something illegal in order to profit is not a "conspiracy", it's lobbying. >semi well intentioned system How is valuing money and power over millions of lives "semi well intenioned"?

It is both. They way Purdue Pharma managed and sold OxyContin was 100% a conspiracy. They have also lobbied a huge amount. Imo in medicine, with doctor kickbacks etc, the line between lobbying and conspiracy is extremely fine and a few "legal" lobbying tactics should probably be illegal.

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#92

Post by weberc2 »

labster wrote: post #88
adamcharnock wrote: post #21

From what I hear (as someone now living in rural Portugal), a turning point came when most of the electorate knew someone suffering from a drug addiction. Be it a family member, partner, or friend - there came a point when the majority of people could not only see the problems caused by the epidemic, but could also empathise with those with addictions. As a result of this understanding/empathy, it was possible to pas…

And yet most people in the USA know a victim of gun violence, yet we are unable to copy even a portion of the regulations used by a majority of our allies. There's also a point beyond which a problem is so endemic that people consider it the natural state of affairs.

Is this true? Almost no one in my social circles knows a victim of gun violence, and I live in one of the most violent cities in the country. Even if you count suicides (and you really shouldn’t), I would be surprised if this were true.

I suspect most people in the country don’t know a victim or offender of gun violence, while they do know several law-abiding gun owners leading them to believe that inner city issues—not guns—are the real driver of gun violence.

This is how I perceive the debate; I’m not advocating for either side.

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#93

Post by darkpuma »

jacquesm wrote: post #82
acpetrov wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source on racial/class distribution for lgbt? Would be interested to see it

Are you trolling? It would seem obvious that such things are distributed exactly the same no matter what ones social status or ethnic background is. It would be very surprising if it wasn't.

Do you have data to that effect? What you're saying runs contrary to the data I've seen (e.g. https://news.gallup.com/poll/234863/estimate-lgbt-population...) and it doesn't matter how elegant a theory is, if the data doesn't fit. There of course may well be additional data that I'm missing, which is why I'm asking.

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#94

Post by javagram »

weberc2 wrote: post #92
labster wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet most people in the USA know a victim of gun violence, yet we are unable to copy even a portion of the regulations used by a majority of our allies. There's also a point beyond which a problem is so endemic that people consider it the natural state of affairs.

Is this true? Almost no one in my social circles knows a victim of gun violence, and I live in one of the most violent cities in the country. Even if you count suicides (and you really shouldn’t), I would be surprised if this were true. I suspect most people in the country don’t know a victim or offender of gun violence, while they do know several law-abiding gun owners leading them to believe that inner city issues—…

You don’t know anyone who’s ever been robbed at gunpoint or something like that? I think it might depend on who you define as a victim, but if you include suicides and robberies that didn’t result in a homicide this claim doesn’t seem unreasonable to me.

I guess one thing is that it may be generational, as violent crime was far higher 20-50 years ago. Since the mid 1990s violent crime including gun crime has dropped dramatically so Gen Z and younger millennials would be less likely to have experienced it.

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#95

Post by dondawest »

jacquesm wrote: post #82
acpetrov wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source on racial/class distribution for lgbt? Would be interested to see it

Are you trolling? It would seem obvious that such things are distributed exactly the same no matter what ones social status or ethnic background is. It would be very surprising if it wasn't.

It’s not obvious AT ALL. If you’re aware of the “cluster effect” of those with rapid-onset gender dysphoria, you’re aware that being trans is highly influenced by ones social conditions.

You’re making an argument that nature is everything when it comes to one’s LGBT status and nurture means nothing, but there’s mountains of evidence to show this is not the case.

If you want to tell me that it’s JUST A COINKYDINK that so many female movie stars have male children that JUST SO HAPPEN to be gender dysphoric, your “nature means everything and nurture means nothing” philosophy on LGBT status seems incredibly far-fetched.

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#96

Post by darkpuma »

weberc2 wrote: post #92
labster wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet most people in the USA know a victim of gun violence, yet we are unable to copy even a portion of the regulations used by a majority of our allies. There's also a point beyond which a problem is so endemic that people consider it the natural state of affairs.

Is this true? Almost no one in my social circles knows a victim of gun violence, and I live in one of the most violent cities in the country. Even if you count suicides (and you really shouldn’t), I would be surprised if this were true. I suspect most people in the country don’t know a victim or offender of gun violence, while they do know several law-abiding gun owners leading them to believe that inner city issues—…

I'm not sure, it could be true. I'm two degrees away from gun violence although I never met the victim (friend of a friend was accidentally shot in the ankle by a cop during a broad daylight robbery of a store he was in. The robber was unarmed but apparently very bold), one degree from knife violence (nobody has ever threatened me with a gun, but I've been threatened with knives more times than I can even remember.)

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#97

Post by daenz »

Ensorceled wrote: post #77
daenz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For obvious reasons, I think many people would be against the suggestion that if more people were suffering from life-destroying drug addiction, a turning point would be reached and the problem would be solved faster. Surely there is a way to push back the spread of drugs and addiction, without letting it overtake society first.

People became more sympathetic to LGBTQ issues when people started coming out of the closet and they learned that their neighbours, cousins, nieces and nephews were being prevented from marrying their loved ones. We didn't need to "turn more people gay" to accomplish this. Similarly, we need to raise the visibility and openness of dealing with drug addiction, to come out of the closet so to speak, not increase drug a…

You probably don't mean it, but the phrasing you're using is very tone deaf to LGBTQ people who have historically been considered "diseased" and something to be "cured."

To your point though, anecdotally, most people I know know someone personally who is suffering or has suffered from addiction. I would imagine much of the USA is that way. So in terms of visibility, I would venture to say that most of the population has/had some kind of personal contact with it. In terms of stigmatization, addiction is stigmatized because nobody wants to admit that they're out of control of their being. There's all kinds of social implications for de-stigmatizing being out of control.

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#98

Post by [deleted] »

jdavis703 wrote: post #57
achenatx wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, the problem is that status quo problems are "acceptable". If a politician legalizes drugs they become personally responsible for every death from those legal drugs.

Taken another way, would this mean if I pay taxes for a war I think is unjust I'm personally responsible for every death?

[deleted]

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#99

Post by e1g »

jacquesm wrote: post #82
acpetrov wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source on racial/class distribution for lgbt? Would be interested to see it

Are you trolling? It would seem obvious that such things are distributed exactly the same no matter what ones social status or ethnic background is. It would be very surprising if it wasn't.

It’s an interesting question. For example, gender-at-birth should be evenly distributed, but in wealthy families kids skew towards male much more frequently than expected. As another factor, some social structures and norms will make it more difficult for LGBTQ people to come out - even with identical odds, there will be less visibility and personal experience within those groups.

Re: Portugal’s radical drugs policy is working (2017)

#100

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

jacquesm wrote: post #84
Ensorceled wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People became more sympathetic to LGBTQ issues when people started coming out of the closet and they learned that their neighbours, cousins, nieces and nephews were being prevented from marrying their loved ones. We didn't need to "turn more people gay" to accomplish this. Similarly, we need to raise the visibility and openness of dealing with drug addiction, to come out of the closet so to speak, not increase drug a…

Unfortunately those in power are not nearly as badly affected by the drug epidemic as the poorer people. Even if they develop a habit or some complication related to it they will have access to the best care and treatment options. So there is very little cost to being 'tough on drugs' until the effects are also felt at all layers of society. Portugal, a country that is a lot more relaxed about many things than the US…

Some of those in power benefit from keeping drugs criminalised. See for example the way that possession of crack cocaine - used on the street - carries much heavier sentences than powder cocaine, used by the middle classes.

And the way large parts of the US jail system are run as a for-profit work camp. This results in miscarriages of justice, unjustifiably long sentences for trivial possession, and outright corruption.

This is not an unfortunate accident. It's motivated partly by greed, partly by class violence, and partly by racism.

Most Western countries don't quite have the culture of political extremism needed to create these conditions.

Meanwhile the murky story of CIA links to drug smuggling is a different topic altogether.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_drug_traffi...

Post reply on HN