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

What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 145 posts

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#51

Post by dinkumthinkum »

nmjohn wrote: post #15
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When this topic of marijuana legalization comes up, it seems like most conservative news agencies ask the loaded question, "Does this mean you're in favor of decriminalizing hard drugs such as cocaine, heroin, and meth?" I don't know a good response, though. How would you answer?

"Well INSERT_NAME_HERE, by hard drugs, you mean three substances which all are regularly administered as prescription drugs? Cocaine as cocaine hydrochloride, meth as desoxyn, and heroin as diamorphine? So to call them hard drugs is a bit of a misnomer used to unfairly elicit a negative connotation. While decriminalizing all drugs is a controversial issue, a conversation on shifting the focus from drugs as a criminal…

It is kind of high schoolish to say "Oh ya, those 'hard drugs' are used by doctors so haha they are not hard drugs." I mean, really that's just kind of ridiculous. It's sort outrageous, people already refer to pain killers as being part of the "hard drug" addiction. It refers to chemically addictive drugs that are also more dangerous than things like marijuana. This is just playing coy to pretend that in hard drugs don't exist or something silly.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#52

Post by runeks »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #9
rayiner wrote: post #3

I really hope that in the next few decades we see a deescalation of the drug war. But I think many people overestimate how far along we are in terms of the general public's attitude. It was only last year that majority of those polled supported legalizing marijuana: http://www.people-press.org/2013/04/04/majority-now-supports... . At the time of the last dot-com bust (2001), it was 60-40 against legalization. Since a…

When this topic of marijuana legalization comes up, it seems like most conservative news agencies ask the loaded question, "Does this mean you're in favor of decriminalizing hard drugs such as cocaine, heroin, and meth?" I don't know a good response, though. How would you answer?

> I don't know a good response, though. How would you answer?

"Yes" would be my answer.

I would ask the counter question: what is there to gain from criminalization?

Criminalization doesn't lower usage, it makes it harder on addicts (imprisonment retains them in the drug world), it increases the risk of fatality of the drug, and it increases crime, funneling funds from tax payers to criminals.

Every time I hear a story about drug cartels and their unspeakable violence and immense profits, all I can think of is "how can we be so stupid?". We are creating this problem ourselves, and we don't seem to even realize it.

The only argument for criminalization is the irrational one: it's not a good idea to do drugs -- it doesn't solve anything -- therefore we should make it illegal. Once you actually give the issue thought, the conclusion seems completely obvious to me.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#53

Post by joel_perl_prog »

aianus wrote: post #30
joel_perl_prog wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just ask yourself one question: what did all the bootleggers do after alcohol prohibition was dropped? Exactly. There's a sort of twinge of classism (or even racism) in your comment, by the way. The assumption that people who participate in a normal capitalist marketplace are inherently criminals is just silly. They do what they do because it's a bustling marketplace. Period.

I don't know, what did the low level bootleggers and enforcers do after prohibition ended? If I was one, I'd have moved on to similar work in narcotics and prostitution. People choose to risk jail time and physical harm to make mediocre money as a street dealer because they have no better options. Most of them don't even have high school diplomas, what else are they going to do? If we don't do anything other than eli…

Sure, but even if some number of drug dealers moved on to other crime, would there not necessarily be less crime, overall, if a major aspect of normal human life were to suddenly be decriminalized? In other words, when everything is a crime, we are all criminals. That's my basic position on the war on drugs, and so many other things.

Edit: whoops, meant to reply thecabinet.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#54

Post by runeks »

Natsu wrote: post #45
chongli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding drug policy, the biggest misstep of the past 40 years has been taking a public heath issue It's never been a public health issue for its major proponents. The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex.

> The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex. So, there's nothing about not liking the addicts who hassle people on the street?

> So, there's nothing about not liking the addicts who hassle people on the street?

What does that have to do with the War on Drugs? There is no evidence that it lowers drug use; quite the contrary.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#55

Post by dobbsbob »

aianus wrote: post #30
joel_perl_prog wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just ask yourself one question: what did all the bootleggers do after alcohol prohibition was dropped? Exactly. There's a sort of twinge of classism (or even racism) in your comment, by the way. The assumption that people who participate in a normal capitalist marketplace are inherently criminals is just silly. They do what they do because it's a bustling marketplace. Period.

I don't know, what did the low level bootleggers and enforcers do after prohibition ended? If I was one, I'd have moved on to similar work in narcotics and prostitution. People choose to risk jail time and physical harm to make mediocre money as a street dealer because they have no better options. Most of them don't even have high school diplomas, what else are they going to do? If we don't do anything other than eli…

Most gangs are not directly involved in the sale of narcotics, instead they are involved in extortion "taxing" those who are selling drugs in their area. If drugs disappear they will find another black market to tax like gambling, fencing stolen goods or selling weapons. However the difference is they won't make a million dollars per month taxing somebody running an illegal gambling operation unlike jacking cocaine drivers. It will be a much smaller criminal enterprise, they won't be able to afford a small army of thugs to terrorize an entire city like they currently do here now with all their windfall narco profits.

As for non violent street peddlers I imagine they will go into exports, shipping narcotics to countries where it's still illegal. After Marijuana was symbolically decriminalized by police here refusing to arrest people for possession, and the black market was swamped with declining prices, many former dealers and growers instead decided to operate unlicensed tourist operations selling weed travel packages, and running their own storefronts for legal drugs using their profits as street dealers to bootstrap it.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#56

Post by joel_perl_prog »

Spooky23 wrote: post #39
aianus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I've always wondered: what would street dealers do if they couldn't make money selling crack anymore? I somehow doubt they'd give up and get a job at McDonald's. Legalizing drugs might therefore lead to an increase in robberies, muggings, kidnappings, sex trafficking, etc as these former dealers need to find new ways to support themselves. Thoughts?

Actually, they might. Street level people are pawns who make nothing.

But that is where the violence occurs. That's where the anti-social consequences occur. Are felt most directly. Impose most directly on peoples' lives.

So while it's true those big shots will move (or attempt to move) to other areas (politics springs to mind), decriminalizing would have a major impact on the street level crime. Again the analogy of prohibition. But also, see other countries, where even more legalization (than just pot, which we see here in Colorado now) has already occurred. There are models, and there are successes. I'm not aware of any failures, in fact. Well, except US drug policy, and all policies like it.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#57

Post by CHsurfer »

Natsu wrote: post #45
chongli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding drug policy, the biggest misstep of the past 40 years has been taking a public heath issue It's never been a public health issue for its major proponents. The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex.

> The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex. So, there's nothing about not liking the addicts who hassle people on the street?

I live near Zurich, which in the Nineties had a lot of issues with public drug use. For example, all bathrooms in public places and major department stores had blue lights instead of normal lights because you can't see the veins in your arm so it's hard to shoot up. There was also a serious crime element as addicts were robbing people to get money to buy drugs. Now, you can get them for free at clinics. With their new policies, the addicts are no longer nearly as visible and the related crime seems to be practically gone. The blue lights in the bathrooms are gone, needle park is gone and it's generally a very nice city to live in.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#58

Post by unclebucknasty »

Natsu wrote: post #45
chongli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding drug policy, the biggest misstep of the past 40 years has been taking a public heath issue It's never been a public health issue for its major proponents. The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex.

> The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex. So, there's nothing about not liking the addicts who hassle people on the street?

Maybe we should start a war on homelessness.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#59

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

angersock wrote: post #21
GauntletWizard wrote: post #2

Then organized crime would run the streets, as the combative pressure keeping these operations small would removed. Gangs would spring up like weeds, get absorbed into syndicates, and wield large amounts of power over ghettos and other blighted areas without regular sweeps to keep them in line.

Yeah, I'll bet my money on Bayer, Merck, and Pfizer, thank you very much.

One might think it odd that Big Pharma doesn't do more to legalise drugs, then you realise they already have legal sales and distribution channels.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#60

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

honestcoyote wrote: post #28
GauntletWizard wrote: post #2

Then organized crime would run the streets, as the combative pressure keeping these operations small would removed. Gangs would spring up like weeds, get absorbed into syndicates, and wield large amounts of power over ghettos and other blighted areas without regular sweeps to keep them in line.

I realized the drug war was a farce when I was a teenager watching the evening news with my parents. They ran a story about arresting a Colombian drug lord and raiding his mansion. Immediately following was a commercial break which featured August Busch talking about some charity his brewery was sponsoring. And it hit me: one drug lord gets a small army sent after him and another drug lord is allowed to operate openl…

I like asking bottle shop attendants "What's like being a drug dealer?"
Post reply on HN