Voters rejecting the war on drugs is a win for public health • Hacker News Board

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

#171

Post by Judgmentality » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:26 PM UTC

throwaway201103 wrote: post #147

hourislate wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only data Politicians use is campaign donation data. When you have several different industries that rely on a steady flow of meat into the grinder (Prison, Police Unions, Lawyers, Probation Officers/Administrative, etc) and they give generous support and campaign donations , well you know why it has taken so long to end this useless "War on Drugs". Millions of Tax dollars were spent incarcerating people for havi…

A lot of the draconian laws and mandatory sentences trace back to the late 1980s/early 1990s when crack cocaine hit. If you were too young to remember or not born yet, it was absolutely devastating. At least the equivalent of today's opioid crisis if not worse. Entire neighborhoods just fell apart. Politicians and voters freaked out and demanded harsh new drug laws and penalties. Lobbiest support from those who benef…

I really hate to sidetrack this discussion with an obvious political rant, but it's important to remember the CIA was intimately involved in creating the crack epidemic in the United States.

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

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

#172

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:28 PM UTC

throwaway201103 wrote: post #147

hourislate wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only data Politicians use is campaign donation data. When you have several different industries that rely on a steady flow of meat into the grinder (Prison, Police Unions, Lawyers, Probation Officers/Administrative, etc) and they give generous support and campaign donations , well you know why it has taken so long to end this useless "War on Drugs". Millions of Tax dollars were spent incarcerating people for havi…

A lot of the draconian laws and mandatory sentences trace back to the late 1980s/early 1990s when crack cocaine hit. If you were too young to remember or not born yet, it was absolutely devastating. At least the equivalent of today's opioid crisis if not worse. Entire neighborhoods just fell apart. Politicians and voters freaked out and demanded harsh new drug laws and penalties. Lobbiest support from those who benef…

I was a black teenager living on the South Side of Chicago during that time, and the media crack obsession was largely hysterics, and sometimes outright fiction (as with "crack babies.")

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

#173

Post by intricatedetail » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:29 PM UTC

ip26 wrote: post #162

crispyporkbites wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those things have large negative externalities that the individual doesn’t pay for. Drugs don’t really have that- unless you make them high cost and illegal.

That isn't quite true, addiction has a high social cost. Hurts relationships, breaks families apart, and increases national medical spending.

Some drugs do cause problems like alcohol, but for other drugs issues come from legal status rather than drugs themselves. I know plenty of people who take cannabis multiple times a day and they have great lives.

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

#174

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:30 PM UTC

wombatmobile wrote: post #133

heavyset_go wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason that my local PBA is losing their minds over the potential for drugs like marijuana becoming legal, and it isn't because marijuana is harmful. It's because 60% of the town's budget goes to funding law enforcement salaries, benefits and pensions, and the majority of arrests in this area are for marijuana possession.

But does it necessarily follow that law enforcement budgets will be cut if weed is legalised? Ideally, how might the budget be reconfigured constructively with the same dollar amount to make a better community?

Why would we keep breeding the same number of horses after switching to cars?

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

#175

Post by dec0dedab0de » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:31 PM UTC

gravypod wrote: 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…

I'm from NJ and most people Ive spoken to about it over the last 25 years have shared the general sentiment that weed should legal, and that drug addicts are ill and are already punishing themselves enough. Including people from different backgrounds that agreed nothing else. Though as someone else commented, it was very different in the 80s and early 90s, but that could also just be how i remember it because I was a child and noone had the internet.

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

#176

Post by intricatedetail » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:33 PM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #141

intricatedetail wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you write more about Singapore? My view is that when drug laws are very harsh, then people will less likely admit to use and dealers will use more precautions. Since drug use is mostly estimated based on surveys and police report you may see the policy effective on paper, but the reality may be far different. It is a natural instinct to use drugs akin to listening to music or having sex for pleasure. If you ban m…

> It is a natural instinct to use drugs Citation? I’m not particularly tempted to try heroin. What’s wrong with me?

Check https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20140528-do-animals-take-...

It mostly comes to individual needs, maybe you don't fancy some heroin but you likely have experienced some alcohol, coffee or your body own drug anandamide

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

#177

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:36 PM UTC

zdragnar wrote: post #33

downrightmike wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war on drugs was started as a way to target people of color by Nixon. Before then, MJ was around and used, it is a plant and good pain killer that you can grow yourself. And Nixon stated that is why he was doing it in the White House tapes. For 50 years the WoD was used to justify invading other countries and setting up coups and all that has lead to our current issue with powerful militarized Narco gangs and all…

> The war on drugs was started as a way to target people of color by Nixon So was Planned Parenthood. Instead of endlessly prosecuting the past, which can never change, let's look at today and tomorrow instead. Or, if you prefer, we could look at the exact opposite approach- the Opium wars were fought to force China to allow the sale and consumption of opium, the extensive use of which was practically epidemic. As su…

I don't understand your point. The war on drugs started for a single function, and operated to accomplish that function consistently during its entire history, and currently accomplishes that function.

Planned Parenthood also helps poor people have access to family planning. Sanger started it with exactly that purpose in mind. That now it helps educated people have access to family planning also is a nice expansion of its original purpose. That Sanger's purpose in encouraging family planning in the poor was to eradicate them is as relevant as Nixon's love for Notre Dame football.

> Things are way more complex than just pointing at simplified versions of history and banging on the race drum.

You haven't given any evidence of that. You're encouraging to ignore our lying eyes and our entire history and replace them with your bitterness about the discussion of race.

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

#178

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:38 PM UTC

zdragnar wrote: post #117

pjc50 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unfortunately true. Does not imply that the current organization is, though.

That was entirely my original point- that the war on drugs may have been started with ill intent 50 years ago should not have bearing on today's policy decisions. Whether we legalize or not, whether that helps minorities or not, i think we agree that constantly recriminating the past isn't helping.

> i think we agree that constantly recriminating the past isn't helping.

We don't. You're advocating for both actively ignoring the reasons that we did things, and for the assumption that things that we do are done for a reason.

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

#179

Post by toomuchtodo » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:40 PM UTC

wombatmobile wrote: post #133

heavyset_go wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason that my local PBA is losing their minds over the potential for drugs like marijuana becoming legal, and it isn't because marijuana is harmful. It's because 60% of the town's budget goes to funding law enforcement salaries, benefits and pensions, and the majority of arrests in this area are for marijuana possession.

But does it necessarily follow that law enforcement budgets will be cut if weed is legalised? Ideally, how might the budget be reconfigured constructively with the same dollar amount to make a better community?

> Ideally, how might the budget be reconfigured constructively with the same dollar amount to make a better community?

Attrition of police officers with those remaining for only when force is required, while bolstering social worker and community outreach services and funding. Non violent emergency calls go to social response.

St Petersburg, Florida is making a go of this. Budgeting details in the link below.

https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/region-pinellas/st-peters...

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

#180

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 7:41 PM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #146

dantheman wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you legalize consumption but not production and sale - you make the black market thrive and basically sponsor organized crime. Full legalization is the only moral and practical approach.

> you make the black market thrive and basically sponsor organized crime You aren't "Making" a market, it exists already. The difference is we are no longer severely punishing the people who are getting victimized. > Full legalization is the only moral and practical approach. Full legalization for most drugs, I agree (weed, LSD, shrooms, plus a few others). But I'm not sure I'd agree that all drugs should be legalize…

> The difference is we are no longer severely punishing the people who are getting victimized.

No, the difference is that we are no longer victimizing the people who are doing drugs.