Live data from Hacker News

Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

arstechnica.com

21–30 of 304 posts

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#21
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried cocaine??? It's great!

Exhilaration and lasting euphoria, which in no way differs from the normal euphoria of the healthy person. You perceive an increase of self-control and possess more vitality and capacity for work. In other words, you are simply normal, and it is soon hard to believe you are under the influence of any drug. Long intensive physical work is performed without any fatigue. This result is enjoyed without any of the unpleas…

Given your (dangerously wrong) last sentence, I don't know what to make of the rest of this.

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#22
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried cocaine??? It's great!

Exhilaration and lasting euphoria, which in no way differs from the normal euphoria of the healthy person. You perceive an increase of self-control and possess more vitality and capacity for work. In other words, you are simply normal, and it is soon hard to believe you are under the influence of any drug. Long intensive physical work is performed without any fatigue. This result is enjoyed without any of the unpleas…

Get help.

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#23
I've mentioned this elsewhere, and I say this believing that substance abuse is a public health problem and not a criminal one, but:

I'm not sure it's the best idea to give a bunch of people stuck living a lonely life in the suburbs, addicted to social media, and have to pay for their own healthcare, an easier path to hard drugs like heroin. There is no doubt in my mind that decriminalization will make these types of drugs easier to obtain.

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Alcohol works great for treating symptoms of stress Yes? This is how it can work. If you can’t have some wine without cleaning out the village, it might be a sign of alcoholism.

It's one thing to acknowledge that alcohol has an affect on stress. But that isn't what this is happening. It would be another thing entirely to REBRAND alcohol as a "therapy tool". FFS.

If alcohol was as restricted as MDMA, we just might start calling alcohol a therapy tool. But right now anyone (of legal age) who wants it can order a glass of wine or two, so the people that benefit from it have it. Nobody thinks twice.

You sound incredulous that psilocybin or mdma could be therapy tools. Are you a psychologist? Do you have any firsthand experience with these chemicals? Why are you skeptical?

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#25
post #4

Could this be a situation where politicians have faulty data and use that to guide how they act? I would have assumed that a majority of these states - and my home state of NJ - would be very anti-drug but these votes with >60% in favor of legalization show that significant portions of America think drug-related activities are not "immoral" or "wrong" and should not be criminalized. If you had asked me a few years ag…

> Maybe now that politicians see that people are very against drug laws we'll see some of them renege on their hard anti-drug stances. The purpose of existing drug laws, especially marijuana, is to give police a reason to harass and discriminate against certain populations.

I'm not so sure if that's the only thing people voted for when they wanted to be hard on drugs. As you can see in this comment thread (on an extremely left-leaning site) we have some people who think drug use is immoral. One of the sister comments says "I believe it's wrong".

Definitely some section of the population wanted to use this as a way to bully minorities but another section of the population was convinced "drugs are bad".

Either way if "hard on drugs" was a dog whistle to signal "hard on minorities" then politicians may realize saying "hard on drugs" will actually hurt their voter base far more than they realized. Maybe that will put an end to this kind of signalling/abuse.

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#26

> Cannabis has been rebranded as a wellness panacea. Mushrooms and MDMA are making headlines as therapy tools, not party fuel. Man, these guys are late to the party. Alcohol works great for treating symptoms of stress, too! Can't be stressed, anxious, or depressed if I'm blitzed out of my mind!

Right, you'll just be twice as stressed and anxious tomorrow unless you like to keep the party going. And then you've got a bigger problem.

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#27
post #16

> Cannabis has been rebranded as a wellness panacea. Mushrooms and MDMA are making headlines as therapy tools, not party fuel. Man, these guys are late to the party. Alcohol works great for treating symptoms of stress, too! Can't be stressed, anxious, or depressed if I'm blitzed out of my mind!

Amphetamines were originally marketed as diet pills. Valium (diazepam) was marketed as a stress reducer.

> Valium (diazepam) was marketed as a stress reducer.

Benzos are anxiolytics (stress reducers).

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#28
post #23

I've mentioned this elsewhere, and I say this believing that substance abuse is a public health problem and not a criminal one, but: I'm not sure it's the best idea to give a bunch of people stuck living a lonely life in the suburbs, addicted to social media, and have to pay for their own healthcare, an easier path to hard drugs like heroin. There is no doubt in my mind that decriminalization will make these types of…

They could already access hard drugs.

The law provides a lot of additional funding to mental health and substance abuse programs, which could actually help people in those situations.

Decriminalization has worked extremely well elsewhere (it dramatically reduced substance abuse problems); hopefully it will in the US as well.

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#29
post #28
post #23

I've mentioned this elsewhere, and I say this believing that substance abuse is a public health problem and not a criminal one, but: I'm not sure it's the best idea to give a bunch of people stuck living a lonely life in the suburbs, addicted to social media, and have to pay for their own healthcare, an easier path to hard drugs like heroin. There is no doubt in my mind that decriminalization will make these types of…

They could already access hard drugs. The law provides a lot of additional funding to mental health and substance abuse programs, which could actually help people in those situations. Decriminalization has worked extremely well elsewhere (it dramatically reduced substance abuse problems); hopefully it will in the US as well.

Yea but you can also say criminalization has worked extremely well. Singapore for example.

What I worry about here is another instance of treating symptoms instead of causes. Why do people feel like they need to use drugs like heroin?

> The law provides a lot of additional funding to mental health and substance abuse programs, which could actually help people in those situations.

So if I want healthcare I should get addicted to meth? I'm being flippant here but this goes back to the earlier point about paying for your own healthcare here in this equation.

Re: Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health

#30
post #16

> Cannabis has been rebranded as a wellness panacea. Mushrooms and MDMA are making headlines as therapy tools, not party fuel. Man, these guys are late to the party. Alcohol works great for treating symptoms of stress, too! Can't be stressed, anxious, or depressed if I'm blitzed out of my mind!

Amphetamines were originally marketed as diet pills. Valium (diazepam) was marketed as a stress reducer.

Amphetamine is used off-label for depression with some success.
Post reply on HN