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

Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

edition.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 190 posts

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#101

Post by girvo »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #94

This legalization talk is flawed. Alcohol is legal, and that doesn't stop people, specially teenagers, from abusing it. It's also proven tobacco addiction starts during adolescence. In this case, legalization is just removing responsibility from the people who profit from it, since in practice the law isn't protecting who it's supposed to protect. Just because something is legal doesn't make it ethical. Then, we know…

I respect that you have that opinion, even though I disagree with it personally.

The big question to me, is what causes more harm: drug use, or the criminals that it funds? I'd wager the latter; drug use can be dealt with as a medical problem (I'm living proof) to some extent, murderous cartels, warlords, and corruption around the world can't be.

Something to think about anyway!

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#102

Post by hcarvalhoalves »

girvo wrote: post #101
hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #94

This legalization talk is flawed. Alcohol is legal, and that doesn't stop people, specially teenagers, from abusing it. It's also proven tobacco addiction starts during adolescence. In this case, legalization is just removing responsibility from the people who profit from it, since in practice the law isn't protecting who it's supposed to protect. Just because something is legal doesn't make it ethical. Then, we know…

I respect that you have that opinion, even though I disagree with it personally. The big question to me, is what causes more harm: drug use, or the criminals that it funds? I'd wager the latter; drug use can be dealt with as a medical problem (I'm living proof) to some extent, murderous cartels, warlords, and corruption around the world can't be. Something to think about anyway!

You know what's one of the most trafficked products in Brazil?

Tobacco.

Tons of counterfeit cigarettes cross the border between Paraguay and Brazil, and that funds crime syndicates. A legal and regulated product. Now imagine if marijuana or anything else is legalized... they will do the same thing to avoid taxation, which would go to fund health assistance, and buyers won't care about where it comes from - they'll just care that their fix is available for cheap.

That drugs should be dealt with as a health issue, I don't disagree with, but legalizing substances isn't a silver bullet to stop crime, crime is rooted on other issues (education, poverty, lack of assistance).

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#103

Post by a_c_s »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #64
tokenizer wrote: post #5

IMO the battle is won in stages, and the first step in the legalization of Marijuana at the Federal level. The next step is when we recognize the victims of the War on Drugs, specifically persons who were sent to jail because of Marijuana. You expand the affected to be people who've committed all non-violent crimes, and advocate for reform from that angle. I don't care what the law really has to say regarding Heroin,…

>> and the first step in the legalization of Marijuana at the Federal level. You don't want that. Trust me, you don't that. All you need to do is look at how heavily regulated tobacco is. Right now, the way to get people to stop smoking is to simply make it unaffordable. It just keeps getting taxed more and more and the price keeps going up and up. Thinking the Feds will do a better job than the states is a joke. Loo…

Right now it is illegal at the Federal level. To really allow states to have a choice (instead of the current the-feds-might-look-the-other-way-if-they-feel-like-it arrangement) is for it to not be illegal at the Federal level.

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#104

Post by mseebach »

balabaster wrote: post #23
antidaily wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baby steps: plenty of politicians are in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

Yes, but if you decriminalize all drugs then the whole industry surrounding incarceration of all those 'criminals' that are only inside because of drugs falls to pieces. There are plenty of lobbyists on the hill that are paid to do everything they can to prevent that from happening.

Lobbyists can lean on and skew and sway. That's bad enough, but they're not unstoppable forces that will dictate policy indefinitely.

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#105

Post by pessimizer »

rayiner wrote: post #31
tlongren wrote: post #2

Easy to say, but it'll never happen, especially in the US (at least not in my lifetime, hopefully my daughters). Too many jobs would be unnecessary if the "war on drugs" was over.

We had far more invested in prohibition, with far more outright corruption (politicians on the take from bootleggers), but managed to end that somehow. The difference was that alcohol consumption was mainstream so ordinary voters cared about the impact of prohibition. Drug consumption is not mainstream and enforcement largely affects minorities, so ordinary voters don't care.

>We had far more invested in prohibition

Is this actually true? We've invested an enormous amount in the war on drugs.

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#106

Post by anonymoushn »

harryh wrote: post #91
proksoup wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Support the drug war ... for moral reasons? That mother showing pictures of her 4 missing boys in the article this thread is about, I think she would argue the war is immoral. I think the people who think the drug war is moral, would change their mind if they spent more than 30 seconds thinking about it. Baffles my mind, and when pressed in person, even pious blowhards admit there are serious violent death problems w…

If your daughter was routinely going over to a friend's house where the friend's parent was visibly high on a regular basis how would you feel about it?

As a result of medical treatment or recreationally? Assuming the latter and a popular choice of recreational drug, I don't much harm will come from a kid seeing a friend's parent saying stupid things and eating snack foods. If the friend's parent was visibly drunk, that would be something to worry about.

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#107

Post by jlgreco »

7952 wrote: post #99
jlgreco wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a teenager, it was easier for me to buy pot than beer because pot was illegal in general while beer was legally available for most of the population. From what I have heard, this situation was not atypical.

I think this would vary hugely by location (Europe will be different). In some places underage drinking is accepted by adults where drug use is not.

Drinking was by no means less acceptable at the time than smoking pot; the relative ease of getting pot was despite it being frowned upon much more.

Think of it this way: who requires a black market for pot? Every single person who wants pot. Who requires a black market for booze? Not everyone who wants booze... just a narrow band of people spanning 5 or 6 birth years. A group of people who tend to be rather broke.

You can find an adult or two that is willing to buy you a sixpack once in a while fairly easily, but that isn't their job, they couldn't make it their job (since the market is limited and poor), and they probably have more interesting people to hang out with. Pot though? The guy that sells the pot does it for a living. He's going to be far less flaky.

If you, as an adult in an area where medical pot is legal, try to buy pot regularly from somebody who has a medical card, you will likely find that they are less reliable than somebody who does it fulltime. As pot becomes legal to a greater portion of adults, this effect will only increase.

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#108

Post by mseebach »

eitland wrote: post #71
Bsharp wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It could make it much easier for children to get hold of. There are currently no age restrictions on heroin. All a child needs is a morally-bankrupt drug dealer, which imo is easier than finding a morally-bankrupt store clerk if it were legal. > You would also need to define what is "pure" and police that for an endless list of possible products. 'Pure' can be easily defined, and it doesn't have to be 'pure' anyway…

Where I live McDonalds are the only fast food chain to hammer the fact that their burgers are 100% pure beef (produced inside the borders of my country even). Don't know if it is correct but repeating it on tv for months sounds risky if they are lying.

I assume that what the GP referred to is that even though it's all "beef" (part of a cow's body), one beef product might be mostly tendons, bonemeal and fat, while another is a cut of fillet, almost 100% muscle tissue. Colloquially, I think most people would agree that the latter is more pure than the former.

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#109

Post by knodi »

No one in the government cares because this only effects poor people and they don't have the money to make a difference.

If Obama wanted to make a real change he would have stopped the war on drugs already.

Re: Kofi Annan: Stop 'war on drugs'

#110

Post by netcan »

bmelton wrote: post #93
netcan wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's fair .. at least not in most cases. Politician is not just a job. It's a leadership role, moral leadership among other things. Being principled is a major component of the job they've undertaken. If a doctor found a discrepancy between his career and the welfare of his patients or a judge between his career and justice, I really do think they are morally obligated to choose selflessly. Maybe it's…

The problem therein is that, at least in the vast majority of circumstances, everybody thinks that they are being "just", but their justice is always colored by their own personal morals, which may or may not conform to your morals or mine. I'm sure that the judge who recently disallowed a mother from naming her child "Messiah" felt like he was being just, but that justice was undoubtedly colored by his religious fai…

I agree. It's hard. But think that's a different type of problem. This is not a case of disagreement about a moral question. This is a case of politicians choosing politically convenient over moral paths and effectively being dishonest about their judgment.

There are certain issues (drugs prohibition is a big example) where politicians often 'come out' about their true position after leaving office. They don't want to be the "weed guy," so they don't publicly support legalization while in office. This is different from genuinely disagreeing about the correct policy.

Even just honesty would be an improvement. "I think marijuana/gay marriage/whatever should be legal, but I don't think the majority want that/it's not worth pursuing right now/insert real reason they aren't pushing this." I don't think that's impossible. It requires a change from us. We need to be willing to let politicians openly hold a position while not pursuing it in legislation.

For example (I'm not American, so this is contrived), my view on the American gun issues is that widespread ownership of firearms for self defense is bad, but it's going to be very difficult to pursue disarmament effectively when so many people disagree so strongly.

Post reply on HN