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

America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 161 posts

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#151

Post by jcalvinowens »

gnaritas wrote: post #129
jcalvinowens wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Quite a few over-the-counter drugs can kill you, or at least severely cripple you, if used improperly. Do you think outlawing them is a good idea? No, of course I don't: making something illegal because it is dangerous when misused or used contrary to its intended purpose is silly. I'm not arguing that. What I am arguing is that a substance that is created to be used in a specific manner, and causes known substanti…

You've confused drug use with drug abuse. You've demonized recreational drug use and decided people shouldn't be allowed to decide for themselves what they put in their own bodies. You are the reason we're having this ridiculous drug war and you are the problem with this country.

> You've demonized recreational drug use and decided people shouldn't be allowed to decide for themselves what they put in their own bodies.

There's an enormous difference between prohibiting individual use of a dangerous drug, and allowing somebody to manufacture and sell a dangerous drug for profit. The latter troubles me deeply, and that's what I'm talking about.

Profiting off of human suffering is not something society should ever tolerate.

> you are the problem with this country.

Oh boy! Do I get a sticker?

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#152

Post by jcalvinowens »

pstuart wrote: post #91
jcalvinowens wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Alcohol is responsible for 10s of thousands of deaths in the U.S. alone. Nope: _Abuse_ of Alcohol is responsible for 10s of thousands of deaths in the U.S. alone. You don't have to abuse cigarettes: you just use them, and they kill you.

The _abuse_ of anything is bad. Alcohol is still a societal danger. If you really want to protect people you should make it illegal. But I bet you like a drink now and then, so you're willing to let other people die so you can get a buzz on. Edit: can't reply to your reply so I'm appending here: Your non reply confirms my guess. Because you like your drug of choice you are ok with it being legal, but other people can…

> Your non reply confirms my guess. Because you like your drug of choice you are ok with it being legal, but other people can get fucked.

Alcohol is not my drug of choice. You're assuming a lot here...

> Do you really think people are protected from drugs by making them illegal?

Do I think prosecuting individuals for using drugs makes sense? Not at all, and that has never been my argument here.

I don't want Meth4U Inc. getting people hooked on meth, ruining their lives, and making a massive profit off of them. That is unconscionable.

So decriminalize the use of all drugs. I don't care. I never said I did. Going after individual users is a ridiculous waste of money and human capital.

However, I feel very strongly that the manufacture and sale of dangerous drugs like meth and heroin (or cigarettes) should not be tolerated by society. Will people still find a way to get away with it? Probably, but it's quite a bit harder to make and keep a profit if it's illegal.

> Or are you just a sanctimonious narcissistic nanny-stater?

I think that profiting off of human suffering is not something society should ever tolerate. If that makes me a "nanny-stater", so be it.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#153

Post by gnaritas »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #148
gnaritas wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing wrong with that as long as the women agree.

Where on Earth have we ever seen large-scale polygamy with all the women entirely agreed?

Not relevant as I clearly stipulated only if the women agree.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#154

Post by gnaritas »

hansjorg wrote: post #138
gnaritas wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In a world where the government provides health care as a service (which is where we're trending, eventually), abusing your own health does have a victim: the taxpayer. An almost fair point... if and only if we get there, I'm not yet convinced we will, however drug use is not drug abuse. To call it a health issue it'd first have to affect your health negatively. If it does, that can be seen by the doctor and noted…

> I reject the notion that you can be your own victim. If you choose to make decisions that hurt you, you must suffer the consequences; it is not the state's place to protect you from yourself. Forget the state for a moment and try to scale it down. In a village where everybody knows and depends on each other, what would you do if an outsider came along and tricked one of your fellow villagers out of all their means?…

You're talking about fraud, I am not, your example does not apply. People like to gamble, they know they're probably going to lose, they are not being defrauded or lied to by being allowed to gamble.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#155

Post by gnaritas »

jcalvinowens wrote: post #151
gnaritas wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've confused drug use with drug abuse. You've demonized recreational drug use and decided people shouldn't be allowed to decide for themselves what they put in their own bodies. You are the reason we're having this ridiculous drug war and you are the problem with this country.

> You've demonized recreational drug use and decided people shouldn't be allowed to decide for themselves what they put in their own bodies. There's an enormous difference between prohibiting individual use of a dangerous drug, and allowing somebody to manufacture and sell a dangerous drug for profit. The latter troubles me deeply, and that's what I'm talking about. Profiting off of human suffering is not something s…

> There's an enormous difference between prohibiting individual use of a dangerous drug, and allowing somebody to manufacture and sell a dangerous drug for profit.

No there isn't, if it's acceptable to consume, it's acceptable to sell; you can't allow one without the other and claim any sort of logic behind it, it's simply stupid.

> Profiting off of human suffering

And once again confusing use with abuse. Drug users are not suffering.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#156

Post by saraid216 »

Yaa101 wrote: post #147
saraid216 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, GP's comment is a black-and-black view, as it allows for no possibility for improvement.

Nope, a realistic view, and there is a posibility for improvement when it is oportune. Don't fool yourself with romanticizing history, history is very dark and grim. And of course you should try to make a lighter and fairer future, but people are people and nature/evolution isn't fair at all.

Aw. You think wisdom is the same as cynicism.

Grow up.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#157

Post by ianferrel »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #90
ianferrel wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any action that is potentially dangerous enough that an instance of it in which no one happened to be harmed should be a criminal offense? Say I walk down the street firing a gun randomly, but I don't strike anyone with a bullet. Civil remedies only?

> Say I walk down the street firing a gun randomly, but I don't strike anyone with a bullet. Civil remedies only? Why not? If you are in actual fact endangering people then you are risking the severe criminal penalties that would be imposed if you hit someone. That is enough to deter anyone acting rationally. On the other hand, if you are not deterred because you have somehow ensured that your actions will cause no d…

Incentives that apply perfectly to rational actors have a pretty poor track record of influencing human behavior in the desired way.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#158

Post by Yaa101 »

saraid216 wrote: post #156
Yaa101 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, a realistic view, and there is a posibility for improvement when it is oportune. Don't fool yourself with romanticizing history, history is very dark and grim. And of course you should try to make a lighter and fairer future, but people are people and nature/evolution isn't fair at all.

Aw. You think wisdom is the same as cynicism. Grow up.

I am probably older than you, but I am not cynical, I am just not a person with his head in the sand.

My experience and wisdom is what made me thrive for this long, I am far from cynical, I am in fact a happy person. :-)

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#159

Post by joesmo »

eru wrote: post #137
joesmo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"In a world where the government provides health care as a service" No need to dwell on hypotheticals. We can revisit this when the government starts paying for our healthcare. Regardless, this is a financial issue where the logical punishment is a fine, not prison.

Lots of countries do have public health care.

This article is specifically about America, however.

Re: America Has a Black-Market Problem, Not a Drug Problem

#160

Post by arg01 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #150
arg01 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we estimate a fair market price on what the average person is willing to be paid to be hit? Let's not forget to price in what people would accept for you taking away a loved one through reckless behaviour. I'd hazard in a lot of cases the cost they would settle for given a choice would be your blood. Maybe a fair market value considering this fact is your time in jail.

Society is obviously willing to accept a certain level of loss of life as the cost of faster transportation, otherwise we wouldn't have motor vehicles whatsoever. You can't actually give someone your life. Killing the perpetrator doesn't bring back the victim, it's just revenge. And revenge is never justice. What benefits the victim more? Setting the perpetrator on fire, or making the perpetrator [carry insurance suf…

The point is that value is not directly mutable for a person. For instance you would probably happily give up all your property in exchange for surviving something that would otherwise kill you but would not do the same for some John Doe. Just like the victims may be happy to exchange the wrongful death fee in exchange for punishment and a millionaire might happily pay a wrongful death fee to drive around town so drunk that he can't stand up.

Then there is the key point that jail costs time which is proportional to the individual fined rather than the victim. In a proportional payment system there would be an even larger perverse incentive to get hit by moneyed people if the fine was in anyway punitive.

"But it costs society to incarcerate and is a net negative from the point after the accident on", Yes but we decided that prisoners shouldn't incur debt for being imprisoned for some very good reasons.

What of the victims? What benefits the victims more than giving them money after the fact is reducing the risk of it happening in the first place. A payment system has either a more harsh proportional punishment than the current system to decrease this happening further, or reckless driving will increase because it is more tenable for the drivers (or people are irrational when assessing jail time and money as punishment and the deterrent affect is not proportional).

So my main point is while I agree that it may be utilitarian to lower the cost to society after the fact there can be even more utility to play the ultimatum game before the event.

Post reply on HN