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

Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 545 posts

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#381

Post by VeronicaJJ123 »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #50

This scenario doesn't just happen with drug policy, but with practically any divisive policy discussion. People will debate something that is done elsewhere, and ignore completely that it's done elsewhere. Gay marriage is a prime example, as it's something that has been legalised in a lot of countries now. Every time a country goes through the process of debating whether to legalise gay marriage, there's a bunch of p…

Would also like to point out "more muslims = more terrorist attacks". But it would be begotry to ban immigration of Muslims and wont work in most western countries though it has worked real well in Japan and China.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#382

Post by saladeen »

mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #356
saladeen wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP asked about relation of gun laws vs death numbers. You are pretending to answer that, but you weasel in the change from 'general violence' to 'gun violence'. Of course if guns are more easily available, there will be more gun violence, but that's not what GP asked.

I believe the less deaths part is really meant as gun deaths. Do you honestly think that he wants information about less guns leading to lower cardiac arrests? Or perhaps less motor vehicle accidents involving death? There is only one type of death that is in context in a discussion about firearms, death caused by firearms.

We are discussing crime. If crime wasn't commited by firearms, there would be no need to have legal framework regulating firearms. However, once firearms are heavily regulated, the violence commited through use of firearms doesn't magically go away. Violent criminals just switch to other methods.

You can see similar things happening in UK recently, where they had a heavy campaign on banning knifes. This has resulted in increased use of acid attacks in gang/criminal violence.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#384

Post by chrisco255 »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #50

This scenario doesn't just happen with drug policy, but with practically any divisive policy discussion. People will debate something that is done elsewhere, and ignore completely that it's done elsewhere. Gay marriage is a prime example, as it's something that has been legalised in a lot of countries now. Every time a country goes through the process of debating whether to legalise gay marriage, there's a bunch of p…

Not all policies, broadly applied, work in all cultures, economies, and environments. Ignoring the local context of a nation's unique situation is a recipe for disaster.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#385

Post by owebmaster »

nerdponx wrote: post #322
owebmaster wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gay marriage is like plant-based/fake burgers. Some people will say it is burger, some will say it is not. I'm more inclined to say that it is a "fake marriage", but I have nothing to do with the relationship of any two-person out there.

Just because marriage has traditionally been defined one way in your society does not mean that all societies you interact with must adopt the same definition. In fact, your burger analogy perfectly demonstrates the point. Yes, once upon a time, "hamburger" meant a patty of ground beef. However the word "burger" has long since lost the implication of meat and is now freely used to refer to any and all grilled, fried,…

Exactly! But... Why get so angry with people that loves meat burger and don't agree that "veggie burgers" are burgers? Unless they go out and attack veggie restaurants, they are not wrong.

Moving this logic to social dynamics, if the majority of the population don't agree two person of the same sex forming a couple is a marriage, why get so angry at this? It is counterproductive as it helps the right wing join forces irrationally around a common ground. People that don't agree with this discussion are not all "cis-gendered white males".

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#386

Post by mattbrewsbytes »

saladeen wrote: post #382
mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the less deaths part is really meant as gun deaths. Do you honestly think that he wants information about less guns leading to lower cardiac arrests? Or perhaps less motor vehicle accidents involving death? There is only one type of death that is in context in a discussion about firearms, death caused by firearms.

We are discussing crime. If crime wasn't commited by firearms, there would be no need to have legal framework regulating firearms. However, once firearms are heavily regulated, the violence commited through use of firearms doesn't magically go away. Violent criminals just switch to other methods. You can see similar things happening in UK recently, where they had a heavy campaign on banning knifes. This has resulted…

The original comment was:

"The same willful ignorance of existing examples is also applied to ..."

I was merely pointing out that haggy's comment ("I would love to see hard statistical evidence that less guns = less deaths...") was an exact example of this willful ignorance. The fact that we are discussing gun death/violence isn't really the point.

The point is that there are policies/laws working in other areas of the world and its kinda silly to outright dismiss them because "its different here" etc.

There will always be violent criminals. My belief is if there are less firearms, there are less choices for those criminals to easily commit violence. I would think survival chances when a criminal is attacking with a knife are much higher than if they had a gun.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#387

Post by owebmaster »

ambicapter wrote: post #335
owebmaster wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gay marriage is like plant-based/fake burgers. Some people will say it is burger, some will say it is not. I'm more inclined to say that it is a "fake marriage", but I have nothing to do with the relationship of any two-person out there.

What makes it fake?

As a social dynamics that evolved for safer copulation and procreation, what in 2 people bonding together looks like a marriage? You can pretend that they are just like every other couple (fake until 'we' make it?), but this is exactly what I call fake.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#388

Post by Zanta »

icc97 wrote: post #268
ewjordan wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take 10 stoned drivers over 1 drunk one any day of the week. Stoned drivers may be slow as hell and really annoying, but drunk ones speed and kill people all the time.

The song "Let's push things forward" [0] by UK band The Streets is a great song that depicts some of the differences between drunk and stoned people. You need to listen to the song rather than just read the lyrics. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let%27s_Push_Things_Forward

I think you mean to refer to another track from that album, "The Irony of It All"

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#389

Post by raiyu »

sandworm101 wrote: post #329
toomanybeersies wrote: post #50

This scenario doesn't just happen with drug policy, but with practically any divisive policy discussion. People will debate something that is done elsewhere, and ignore completely that it's done elsewhere. Gay marriage is a prime example, as it's something that has been legalised in a lot of countries now. Every time a country goes through the process of debating whether to legalise gay marriage, there's a bunch of p…

But the sky has fallen. For these people the big evil is the thing they are fighting against. They dont want gay marriage not because of its impacts but because they dont want gay marriage. Full stop. They dont want to decriminalize drugs because they dont want them decriminalized. When an issue becomes so internalized, so tied to ones identity, it is impossible to change. We need to work on keeping people from ident…

This is spot on.

Otherwise every decision would just be made through a review of data and only the first country to make a massive change would be venturing into the unknown while everyone else could simply observe what happens and decide to follow suit if the outcome is favorable.

Being in the US you see identity politics quite clearly. People simply vote by who supports abortion and who doesn't. To them the rest of the platform doesn't matter, but this one issue is so critical that they simply look at it alone and nothing else.

If you look at many of the votes on key issues you will notice that they aren't passed 90 to 10, they are usually 55 to 45, if you are lucky, or even closer. Given how close these votes are it's a surprise anything ever changes at all.

Re: Portugal’s radical drug policy is working. Why hasn’t the world copied it?

#390

Post by kstenerud »

kstenerud wrote: post #370
hectorlorenzo wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Tighter gun controls" doesn't always lead to "harder access to guns". How strong is the black market in Brazil (for everything, not only guns). How strong it is in the USA? How easy is to access otherwise prohibited goods in general?

The point is that gun control is not proven to reduce violent deaths. Gun ownership just doesn't correlate to violent deaths. People want it to because guns are instruments of violence and "it just stands to reason", but the numbers don't bear this out. The USA has 101 guns per 100 residents and a homicide rate of 15.696 per 100,000. The Bahamas has 5.3 per 100 residents and a homicide rate of 29.81. Canada has 30.8…

What's even more telling is the downvotes to my previous comment. Am I going against the community standards in how I'm going about supporting a position? Is the data I posted so sinful that you feel compelled to punish me for posting it? Is the data wrong? Is the conclusion wrong such that you can articulate why, and where exactly the logic breaks down?

Or is it just that gun control, like drug legalization, is an emotional topic and not a rational one?

Post reply on HN