Live data from Hacker News

After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

npr.org

81–90 of 353 posts

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#81
There is, I think, a global misunderstanding about the nature of addiction.

When pushed to the extreme, any addiction can be destructive.

Food, sex, alcohol, tobacco or games are a few perfectly legal examples.

Food addiction is especially interesting because it is at the same time widespread and denied.

Also, the immediate effects and destructive power are less spectacular than crack.

From my completely empirical observations, there is a simple trick to overcome any type of addiction: being happy.

Being wealthy can help.

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you kidding me? The "war" on drugs today is nothing like it was at all in the 90s. For the most obvious example, marijuana is legal to purchase for recreational use in dozens of states, with more coming.

What do we need to do next that would have the biggest effect, decriminalize cocaine/crack cocaine?

Finish decriminalizing weed. Repeal the federal possession prohibition, repeal the remaining possession/"open container" laws, exclude it from drug testing programs, release people currently in prison for cannabis offenses.

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#83

People say it failed without recognizing how bad the crack epidemic was, and is currently only a shadow of what it could be had it been left unchecked. Yes, there are still drug problems - but not to the common extent you saw in the 80's. I think the issue is that people hear the word "war" and think that only the cops and military are the sole soldiers. There is only so much they can be expected to capture without s…

Note that crack itself was a result of the drug war. Crack is a way to get more use out of a given amount of cocaine.

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#85
Can we talk for a second how absurdly good a user experience the text site is? It's 9kb over the wire, the whole thing is one request, it does everything it needs to do to get me the article and it happens instantly and without waste.

The full site is 88 requests, takes 5 seconds to complete, transfers over 300x more data and brings me no additional value. The article doesn't even begin on the first screen, I have to scroll to start reading! The text version gives me the first 7 paragraphs without any user input.

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#86

This is one of those weird things about American Democracy where everyone I speak to thinks the Drug War was a terrible thing and should be stopped. And yet, our politicians never substantially do anything to change the status quo.

You almost certainly occupy a bubble in this. I hate the War on Drugs with every fiber in my being, but it’s broadly popular. Cannabis legalization may recently be popular. But I’d be shocked if more than 5% of Americans supported the legalization hard drugs, and if more than 20% supported by Portuguese style decriminalization. Even soft drug prohibition, like MDMA and LSD, are supported by sizable majorities of vote…

I think we'll eventually find a balance point, but these boundaries are being moved in the opposite direction. Psilocybin decriminalization then recreational use seems like the next leg of the race after federal/all-state legalization of marijuana. Then the next thing to be pushed is only a little more controversial than psilocybin. I doubt we'll ever reach that point with cocaine or heroin though and they'll never be up for medical/recreational consideration.

If it seems unbelievable that there could be significant support for the War on Drugs, remember how many voted for Trump the second time around.

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#87
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> large groups of people that the government wants to marginalize Who does the government want to marginalize? I thought the government (and the rest of the world, really) was all about equality and inclusion as of late.

> Who does the government want to marginalize? I thought the government (and the rest of the world, really) was all about equality and inclusion as of late. Only the moral & good parts of the government. There's plenty of politicians & forces out there whose campaign message & activities are rather the opposite.

I think the problem with this statement is that, if not read generously, it can be an easy way to demonize any opposition. “If you don’t agree with X govt policy intended to combat inequality, you are immoral.”

It’s possible to agree with the moral intent but also disagree with the policy. (Not saying this was your frame of argument, just thought it an important distinction).

Edit: downvotes are fine but please add to the discussion. Maybe you’ll change someone’s mind.

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#88

For someone who hasn't followed closely, what exactly is meant by "War on Drugs" in the article? Is it a specific policy they are referring to or do they mean combatting illegal drugs in general? I think we can all agree that illicit drugs can cause damage to societies. Even the article mentions it in regards to the opioid crisis, which continues to decimate Americans across the nation. Maybe it would be wiser to cal…

You will need to exit the internet if you want a civil conversation that goes beyond punishing buzz word narratives and could possibly lead to useful changes in policy.

But to answer your question, by "war on drugs" they mean the heavy handed nature of police enforcement of drug related laws. Petty drug crimes become life ruining felonies and leave poor families struggling even more than they already were.

There is some very legitimate police activity stopping major drug dealers though, and there are many criminals whom can't be convicted of the crime they committed because of lack of evidence, but can be nailed to the wall for possession of drugs. Overall, the landscape of how to treat drug offenders becomes very muddled.

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#89
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reasoning is well established at this point. It was started by the Nixon administration to reduce the amount of left and left-leaning voters, particularly black Americans. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the…

> It was started by the Nixon administration to reduce the amount of left and left-leaning voters, particularly black Americans. That is interesting information, thank you for commenting. It shows that there was not a misinterpretation, as the article suggests, at least, not the initiators of the "War", but more of a well-calculated hidden agenda that had nothing to do with "drugs".

This documentary is an absolute must-watch and shows how devastating the war on drugs is and was from a race perspective https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krfcq5pF8u8

Re: After 50 years of the war on drugs, 'what good is it doing for us?'

#90

Created a lot of jobs in the industry of arresting and detaining humans. Being number 1 per capita in prison population isn't a lean operation, a lot of people's lives depend on the system continuing. I think the solution is to rent bulldozers, armor them, and just level a bunch of them. Too many prison beds, too many laws, it's all gotten very dumb.

Part of the reason why jails are overrun in recent years is that we've closed a large number of asylums who would have housed and treated these people. Sure, that sort of thing leaves a bad taste in the mouth, but psychological care has certainly advanced leaps and bounds past 1950s standards for mental illness and addiction treatment. There's no reason why we couldn't have effective asylums today like they have in Europe for their mentally ill and addicted.
Post reply on HN