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

Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 252 posts

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#41

Post by _yosefk »

oska wrote: post #20
_yosefk wrote: post #14

"...the impossibility of winning the “war” against theft, burglary, robbery, and fraud has never been used as an argument that these categories of crime should be abandoned." (From Don't Legalize Drugs, http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_2_a1.html )

It has often been pointed out that taking prohibited drugs is a victimless crime. Your examples of theft, burglary, robbery and fraud are not.

Speeding is also a victimless crime until an accident happens.

I don't have a strong opinion about this, I'm just saying it's more complicated than victimless crime, war that cannot be won, etc. For each such talking point there's a counter-point. What will actually happen once you legalize a given substance I don't know.

The article I linked to has a lot of arguments against legalization, which, judging by the comments, the commenters didn't bother to skim through.

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#42

Post by aidos »

Nursie wrote: post #38
aquadrop wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reality steps in and it's bad. In Russia drug addicts were (and still are, to lesser extent) responsible for very large if not largest portion of crime, especially burglary and theft. It is a major problem, it is there and you can't go around it. And usage isn't punishable here, only distribution. So, don't dismiss parent comment so easily. 'Caffeine and alcohol are drugs' - yes, alcohol comes hand in hand with theft…

>> In Russia drug addicts were (and still are, to lesser extent) responsible for very large if not largest portion of crime, especially burglary and theft ... So, don't dismiss parent comment so easily. My issues with the parent comment are not that addicts never steal, it's the ignorance of lumping all drug use into the same category and then saying 'drugs' make you steal. It's the same in the UK - addicts of one so…

I was composing a reply, but I think you've more than covered what I was adding. Though I also wanted to include the phrase "Drugs are bad, mmmmm'kay?" to cover the tone of the grand parent.

OT but your parent was down-voted for what I would say was a totally reasonable and constructive comment. I guess you didn't do it because you can't down-vote those that reply to you, right? I wish people would keep the down-voting for situations where a comment is offensive / destructive / mean, instead of something they disagree with. Anyways, I'm going to up-vote to counter it.

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#43

Post by Retric »

simplexion wrote: post #35
simonh wrote: post #26

I'm surprised they don't also cite the first war against drugs (actualy, a drug) - prohibition. Exactly the same scenario played out then as is, hopefully, coming to it's inevitable conclusion now in the 'western hemisphere'. If the same thing is starting up again in the East, it's going to be a bloody and chaotic few decades to come before the same lesson gets learned the third time over. Fortunately we do have a la…

I don't understand why the campaigns against alcohol have been so unsuccessful. It is amazing that so many people have no issue with losing control mentally under the influence of alcohol and those same people think it is scary that I would like to try LSD.

The US has seen a significant reduction in drunk driving which seems to be the only real anti drinking campaign. Low levels of drinking seem to be promoted both with direct advertizing and news coverage as both heathy and expected with a minor "be careful" undertone. So, it more or less seems like things are working as intended.

http://www.madd.org/drunk-driving/about/history.html

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#44

Post by tyho »

peteretep wrote: post #4
Osiris wrote: post #2

While I do not condone the use of mind altering substances, I believe that the externalities of the illegal drug trade are far worse than what the drugs do to the users (e.g., the number of murders is Mexico is currently unknown and is somewhere between 20k and 250k a year). A second argument in favor of regulation over an outright ban is personal liberty. Our social contract is about protecting ourselves from each o…

> While I do not condone the use of mind altering > substances Why not? Also, you should try beer, it's AMAZING.

There seems to be some sort of taboo on getting high for whatever reason. I have asked a few people opposed to drugs why they were opposed to drugs and their answers were mostly health related i.e. Cannabis gives you psychosis so you shouldn’t smoke it. I then ask if, hypothetically, there was a drug developed which produces intense happiness for one hour but had no side effects, caused no long term damage and was totally benign, would it be morally acceptable for a person to take that substance, the answer is usually a firm no. We seem to have some vestigial opposition to joy and happiness left over from Catholicism.

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#45

Post by tyho »

Retric wrote: post #43
simplexion wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why the campaigns against alcohol have been so unsuccessful. It is amazing that so many people have no issue with losing control mentally under the influence of alcohol and those same people think it is scary that I would like to try LSD.

The US has seen a significant reduction in drunk driving which seems to be the only real anti drinking campaign. Low levels of drinking seem to be promoted both with direct advertizing and news coverage as both heathy and expected with a minor "be careful" undertone. So, it more or less seems like things are working as intended. http://www.madd.org/drunk-driving/about/history.html

Please drink responsibly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrVLB3MtUjo

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#46

Post by emiliobumachar »

mibbitirc wrote: post #21
Nursie wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well given these are crimes against another person, rather than 'crimes' against oneself, that argument is a load of bollocks!

Drug usage goes hand in hand with theft. Once you're addicted to drugs, you have to steal to pay for that habit. It's hardly a victimless crime.

>Once you're addicted to drugs, you have to steal to pay for that habit.

How much does generic-brand sugar cost? A dollar per kilo? Two?

Cocaine should cost about that, definitely less than ten times that, if it was manufactured at scale by corporations in a competitive market, and one didn't need to compensate everyone in the distribution network for the risk of being arrested or killed.

Your stereotypical addict on the streets should be able to get as much as they "need" from panhandling for an hour a week. A tragedy, but a contained one.

Instead, they need twenty bucks for the next dose, precisely because of the war on drugs. Think about that.

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#47

Post by tmp-20150107 »

mibbitirc wrote: post #21
Nursie wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well given these are crimes against another person, rather than 'crimes' against oneself, that argument is a load of bollocks!

Drug usage goes hand in hand with theft. Once you're addicted to drugs, you have to steal to pay for that habit. It's hardly a victimless crime.

> Once you're addicted to drugs, you have to steal to pay for that habit.

Not at all.

Of course, you could just get a job that pays enough to support your habit? Software Engineering works for me, for example, and has allowed me to maintain a twenty year heroin habit, almost.

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#49

Post by Nursie »

gadders wrote: post #19
Osiris wrote: post #2

While I do not condone the use of mind altering substances, I believe that the externalities of the illegal drug trade are far worse than what the drugs do to the users (e.g., the number of murders is Mexico is currently unknown and is somewhere between 20k and 250k a year). A second argument in favor of regulation over an outright ban is personal liberty. Our social contract is about protecting ourselves from each o…

>>Our social contract is about protecting ourselves from each other, not from ourselves. Drug use that negatively impacts the lives of someone other than the user should be illegal I kind of agree with you there, but where do you factor in healthcare and other costs that need to paid by all due to addicition? How should they pay for their treatment?

With proper regulation we should expect some of the negative consequences to go down. Heroin deaths (for example) are largely related to illegality - unknown quantities and ingredients, contaminated equipment etc. Cannabis is considered a less harmful alternative to alcohol by many people.

In a social system like the one in the UK, I don't think drug users should be penalised over anyone else - taking ecstasy has roughly the same harm profile as horse riding. Do we tell equestrians we won't treat them?

Re: Illegal drugs: The wars don’t work

#50

Post by NotOscarWilde »

tyho wrote: post #44
peteretep wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While I do not condone the use of mind altering > substances Why not? Also, you should try beer, it's AMAZING.

There seems to be some sort of taboo on getting high for whatever reason. I have asked a few people opposed to drugs why they were opposed to drugs and their answers were mostly health related i.e. Cannabis gives you psychosis so you shouldn’t smoke it. I then ask if, hypothetically, there was a drug developed which produces intense happiness for one hour but had no side effects, caused no long term damage and was to…

>I then ask if, hypothetically, there was a drug developed which produces intense happiness for one hour but had no side effects, caused no long term damage and was totally benign, would it be morally acceptable for a person to take that substance

Being morally acceptable is just a tip of the iceberg.

Consider this: playing video games is perfectly legal, morally allowed, and the escapism and progress usually triggers some form of comfort and happiness. Still, there is a lot of people who try hard to limit their gameplay, to focus on their work, school and other activities. Procrastination (like reading Reddit/HN/Facebook several times a day) is quite similar.

My understanding is that to increase focus to the comparably unexciting work, you have to limit the activities that are easy, exciting and rewarding.

For some it is easy because they love their work so much, the work is not mentally draining, or they never tasted these easy and rewarding distractions. For others, it is a conscious effort and a life-long struggle to be productive and not spend your day on Facebook with maybe 3 hours of real work.

I believe that as drugs become easier to obtain, side-effect-free and happiness-inducing, the struggle with procrastination and escapism will be that much harder.

Post reply on HN