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

How the war on drugs creates violence

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 114 posts

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#11

Post by inDigiNeous »

shocks wrote: post #4
awjr wrote: post #2

I've pretty much come down on the side of prohibition is bad. Yes hard drugs destroy lives, but many many many more are destroyed by socially acceptable drugs like alcohol and nicotine. We live within societies where the way we control substances creates a huge social and financial cost. We'd be better off legalising every drug and creating a social framework within which these drugs can be taxed, consumed safely, an…

> users supported This is the biggest thing, IMO. Legalising drugs isn't about getting control of distrubution and profits, it's more about changing societies view on drugs. We need to stop treating these people as addicts that need to be swept under the rug. We need to treat them as they are - human beings with a disease/illness for which they need help. How can they turn to us for help if we chuck them in prison fo…

Exactly. Many of the medicine that we label illegal, is from the nature, like cannabis. For that purpose also, we should regulate them, so that people would have better and more controlled access, and not have to figure out healing themselves and caught addicted because they have no legal way to get help.

Reality is there are many people who do not trust the medical companies and their "medicine", and are looking for alternative, natural remedies. Misuse is also a big problem, because when there is no legal source, there is no way to assure what you are getting is good, aside from experimenting and finding people who know their shit on this subject, and it can be difficult to look beyond the stigma of society.

This is very much a problem in countries where cannabis is illegal. People buy too much, use too much, because they have no idea or control when they are going to access more. Been through that process. Nobody is denying cannabis is not addictive, it is, very.

But putting it in the hands of people who know what it does, how it does and in what amounts you should use it, this will help people who have no idea to control their medicinal use better.

Of course there is recreational use, abusive use, but this is also partly because we have no real discussion going on in the public about this. Why? Because it's illegal to discuss even, and can immediately label you as a "drug user".

Same goes for different medicine from the nature also, mushrooms, ayahuasca, iboga and so on. If these were understood, studied and regulated, we would have real medicine to heal people with, not just things created by humans which are produced just to keep people addicted and hooked on the bill of medical cost.

Many medical companies know exactly this, and this why I feel many laws are kept in place to prevent natural use, it's just to protect the immoral practice of selling sickness to people.

Just make everything legal already, and have people who have experience working with these medicines act as healers in the process. This is already happening also, but it is not discussed on a public level, as it is illegal and can cause stigma and fear, but I hope more and more people will do it so we can have a real alternative to the current system again in place.

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#12

Post by DanielBMarkham »

I'm a libertarian, so I'm already sold on legalization. Count me in.

As such, hopefully I can quibble with the text a bit.

"Ceasing this hypocritical practice by releasing nonviolent offenders is morally urgent."

Yeah, not so much. Yes, there is a severe moral problem here, but please do not make moral arguments! It's folks with moral arguments riding around on high horses that got us into this mess. Instead, argue from the standpoint of practicality (which she does).

One of the practicality arguments she does not make, which deserves mentioning, is that because the drug war is unwinnable, there are too many laws. This makes folks with the power of selective enforcement lords over the rest of us.

Have a traffic stop? Cops ask to search your car? You have a right to say "no". But if you do, be prepared to wait around until the drug dog shows up. He'll sniff around your car and "alert" the cops, even if there's no drugs present. Then, guess what? They get to tear apart your car while you watch. All because of the war on drugs.

Let's say you are a drug user. You have a joint in the ashtray. In this case, it gets even better. Then -- if I'm not mistaken -- they get to take your car! A few dollars worth of illegal pot, which might not even be yours, and you could lose tens of thousands of dollars worth of car.

It's not that this is morally outrageous. It certainly is. It's that a system of justice cannot maintain the consent of the governed when it turns LE officers into something approaching highway bandits. Selective enforcement of drug laws -- both by cops and prosecutors -- distorts the legal system so much as to make it unworkable. Sure, it's bad, but the bigger point is that it cannot continue working in this fashion. Something's gotta give.

I liked the article. It's good to see public discourse slowly become much more reasonable about drug addiction and its consequences. One caution, though: in my opinion what we need to do is still stay tough on violent, hardened criminals while being more pragmatic about drug crimes. Otherwise we'll end up being slandered as soft-headed and irrational.

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#13

Post by pjc50 »

shocks wrote: post #4
awjr wrote: post #2

I've pretty much come down on the side of prohibition is bad. Yes hard drugs destroy lives, but many many many more are destroyed by socially acceptable drugs like alcohol and nicotine. We live within societies where the way we control substances creates a huge social and financial cost. We'd be better off legalising every drug and creating a social framework within which these drugs can be taxed, consumed safely, an…

> users supported This is the biggest thing, IMO. Legalising drugs isn't about getting control of distrubution and profits, it's more about changing societies view on drugs. We need to stop treating these people as addicts that need to be swept under the rug. We need to treat them as they are - human beings with a disease/illness for which they need help. How can they turn to us for help if we chuck them in prison fo…

I'd argue that, especially given the social history of how the prohibitions came to be, that it's the other way round: condemning 'vice' starts out as a pretext for social exclusion and blaming the poor for their condition. We don't want to help so we set up a situation where we don't have to.

Nobody suggests testing the financial services industry for performance-enhancing drugs, for example.

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#14

Post by cm2187 »

awjr wrote: post #2

I've pretty much come down on the side of prohibition is bad. Yes hard drugs destroy lives, but many many many more are destroyed by socially acceptable drugs like alcohol and nicotine. We live within societies where the way we control substances creates a huge social and financial cost. We'd be better off legalising every drug and creating a social framework within which these drugs can be taxed, consumed safely, an…

On that topic I strongly recommend the TV show "Narcos". If that degree of violence is the price for prohibition then prohibition has to go.

It is pointless to vote laws that are unenforceable.

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#15

Post by icanhackit »

suneilp wrote: post #3

Is it creating violence or exacerbating violence? I'm more inclined to choose the latter. The reason why I distinguish the two is that I see the continuation and increase in drug use as something symptomatic of other issues in the big picture. Economic issues, politics, racism.... oppression on various fronts from the system down to the family to the self. Drugs (and alcohol) are an escape. Normal activities also pro…

> Is it creating violence or exacerbating violence?

Depends on the substance, depends on the market, depends on the reason for using. I haven't seen too many people on MDMA become violent or impoverished through addiction, though their incessant hugs and platitudes can lead to a violent response if they don't have enough to go around.

It's complex, but not that complex. We have the power of observation - where we can plot what is safe to use recreationally, what can be considered substance abuse, which substances often lead to abusive behaviour, which socio-economic factors lead to use in the first place, factors in the marketplace that lead to violence and crime, how we can monetarily/socially/legislatively abate the negative factors...and yet here we are with our proverbial junk in our hand wondering what to do. Start being objective, use methodologies that we've used for years for other problems that aren't taboo. We've travelled to the fucking moon.

My non-objective opinion: Drugs are interesting. Drugs take the edge off of a less-than-stellar life. Drugs help the mind momentarily escape the trap set by forces who care little for your happiness and wellbeing. You can fix the latter, which is unlikely in our lifetime, or reduce the burden of being a drug user in the interim.

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#16

Post by TeMPOraL »

shocks wrote: post #4
awjr wrote: post #2

I've pretty much come down on the side of prohibition is bad. Yes hard drugs destroy lives, but many many many more are destroyed by socially acceptable drugs like alcohol and nicotine. We live within societies where the way we control substances creates a huge social and financial cost. We'd be better off legalising every drug and creating a social framework within which these drugs can be taxed, consumed safely, an…

> users supported This is the biggest thing, IMO. Legalising drugs isn't about getting control of distrubution and profits, it's more about changing societies view on drugs. We need to stop treating these people as addicts that need to be swept under the rug. We need to treat them as they are - human beings with a disease/illness for which they need help. How can they turn to us for help if we chuck them in prison fo…

Yvain's classic on disease/failure of personality is worth bringing up[0].

Also, his more recent take on (US) attitude towards treating heroin addicts[1].

The ending paragraph of [1] works as a great TL;DR:

"Society is fixed, biology is mutable. People have tried everything to fix drug abuse. Being harsh and sending drug users to jail. Being nice and sending them to nice treatment centers that focus on rehabilitation. Old timey religion where fire-and-brimstone preachers talk about how Jesus wants them to stay off drugs. Flaky New Age religion where counselors tell you about how drug abuse is keeping you from your true self. Government programs. University programs. Private programs. Giving people money. Fining people money. Being unusually nice. Being unusually mean. More social support. Less social support. This school of therapy. That school of therapy. What works is just giving people a chemical to saturate the brain receptor directly. We know it works. The studies show it works. And we’re still collectively beating our heads against the wall of finding a social solution."

[0] - http://lesswrong.com/lw/2as/diseased_thinking_dissolving_que...

[1] - http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/02/02/practically-a-book-revi...

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#17

Post by reddytowns »

shocks wrote: post #10
reddytowns wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it that having certain problems gives you a license to demand that everyone else help you with them? We've all got problems, but for some reason whenever I mess up on my taxes or something, I'm to blame, but if someone else robs a liquor store when being addicted to heroin, "the needle made me do it, mumble ... mumble ..." is an acceptable excuse.

You've got it totally wrong. I didn't say anything like this. In your example, you can turn to the government (or someone else) for help with your taxes. There is no stigma (or law) that makes it difficult for you. That's not the case for a drug addict. It's a lot harder to get help. I also didn't say that addicts should not be held accountable for their actions. Of course they should. (...unless you're tring to evad…

If I make a mistake on my taxes, or lets say, park in the wrong place, I get fined.

If someone does heroin and gets hooked, they get a treatment program.

What is the difference? Why, according to you, should I be punished, while the person on heroin should get all these treatment options opened up to them?

Where is my "parked my car in the wrong place" rehab program?

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#18

Post by kawa »

There's only so much profit in the drug business because of the illegality of many drugs. Changing that would kill the profits of many very rich and powerful criminals and cartels. So it's very understandable that those people do everything they can to prevent their business model from collapsing.

The usual way of doing it is simply lots of lobbying: Paying "well meaning" people, journalists and politicians to stay on the track of keeping most drugs illegal, so that the drug lords and cartels can continue to earn money.

So does really anybody wonder why the (obviously totally pointless) "war on drugs" is still waged and will probably waged for quite a while?

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#19

Post by aidos »

The other day Richard Branson posted a leaked report from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime that agrees with the notion of drug use as a health issue, not a criminal one. Of course, they've turned around and said that's not their official stance. Sigh.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/19/un-call-decri...

http://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/finally-a-change-in-co...

Re: How the war on drugs creates violence

#20

Post by TeMPOraL »

kawa wrote: post #18

There's only so much profit in the drug business because of the illegality of many drugs. Changing that would kill the profits of many very rich and powerful criminals and cartels. So it's very understandable that those people do everything they can to prevent their business model from collapsing. The usual way of doing it is simply lots of lobbying: Paying "well meaning" people, journalists and politicians to stay o…

It's interesting that we actually have a potential big opponent for the drug cartels - drug companies. Legalizing drugs will drive cartels out of business because they'd be competing with clean drugs sold in pharmacies, prepared in well-funded laboratories of entities used to cooperating with safety regulations. So why the Big Pharma isn't lobbying for ending the war on drugs?

I wonder if it isn't the social view that's blocking them - the first pharmaceutical company to step up and vote for legalization could face a serious PR shitstorm centered about morality of "legitimizing addiction".

Post reply on HN