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

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

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 304 posts

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

#231

Post by leakybit »

BurningFrog wrote: post #37
ericmay wrote: 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…

Most heroin deaths come from using illegal heroin with unknown strength and unknown contaminants. The typical death is from getting a new supply that's more concentrated than the old one, and accidentally dying from an overdose. The other two disasters that happen is that (1) the drug costs huge amounts of money, so you have to become a prostitute and/or burglar or (2) the legal system puts you in jail for 20 years.…

decriminalization is not legalization.

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

#233

Post by mythrwy »

pessimizer wrote: post #177
zdragnar wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 o…

"The war on drugs started for a single function"

Really? China's banning of Opium was because of racism?

There were real concerns about drugs (and alcohol see: prohibition). That is the main reason it happened.

Disenfranchising minorities and hippies was likely only a side benefit for unscrupulous people.

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

#234

Post by mythrwy »

pjc50 wrote: post #111
cptnapalm wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Margret Sanger was a eugenicist.

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

The relative percentages of babies aborted by race might though.

(disclaimer: pro-choice)

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

#235

Post by roenxi »

cptnapalm wrote: post #109
pjc50 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Planned Parenthood was the work of Margaret Sanger, who was a feminist who believed in reproductive choice and free speech; she was repeatedly arrested because distributing knowledge of contraception violated the Comstock Act.

Margret Sanger was a eugenicist.

Eugenics is a broad term. There are many aspects of eugenics that make horrific government policy, but are still pretty sensible ideas. Being a "eugenicist" isn't a black spot on her record.

Looking at her wiki page [0] she supported people thinking about how large a family they could support and then making decisions to stay within that. That is a commendable philosophy.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger#Eugenics

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

#236

Post by heavyset_go »

kombucha111 wrote: post #228
wombatmobile wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you quantify the revenue derived from that?

You can literally look it up or file a FOIA request.

To this end, MuckRock[1] is a non-profit SaaS platform that can assist you in filing requests for public records.

[1] https://www.muckrock.com/

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

#237

Post by newbie789 »

I very much hope that this experiment has a positive outcome.

I don't pretend to know what the best way to handle this issue is, but it certainly seems to me that increasing incarceration has not had a desirable outcome for American society. After all, in many cases it's possible to procure heroin or methamphetamine in jail or prison. So the carceral system could in theory be seen as simply moving people around without addressing the issue of drug use, using public funds.

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

#238

Post by mistermann »

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #212
bluedino wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what’s the purpose of them in Japan?

We don't have to explain the purpose of the laws in Japan to prove their purpose in the United States.

Has an actual proof been provided of their purpose in the United states? I see only a theory.

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

#239

Post by colinmhayes »

o_class_star wrote: post #138

The problem we have on the Left is that even though 65% of the American population prefers our ideas (when stripped of D/R labels) they don't really like us. We're not very good at branding, and we've let Capital convince half the country that it's actually a "liberal elite" that is holding them down. We need to get better at getting our actual message out there. The recent victory is a start, but if it were down to…

This is clearly the democrats biggest problem. Biden just lost Florida largely because Trump falsely called him a socialist. Democrats are absolute losers when it comes to successfully getting people to understand their message.

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

#240

Post by grugagag »

heavyset_go wrote: post #119
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of ruining people's lives, we could just raise taxes slightly, but I doubt that will fly.

The threat of ruining people's lives is part of the racket. Kids are arrested and charged for low-level drug offenses for doing something innocuous like smoking a joint. Then, prosecutors in municipalities will offer them plea deals and offers to expunge their records in return for paying exorbitant fees and participating in a jobs program for probation officers. Why would someone take a plea deal and agree to pay mu…

Got caught smoking a joint in a park with friends. All of us white. They told us to throw out the material and move on. I wonder if the same scenario would occur if we were brown?
Post reply on HN