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

Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 126 posts

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#41

Post by yummyfajitas »

jbooth wrote: post #37
yummyfajitas wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law I was questioning assumes every single prostitute is a victim, including the ones who are not enslaved. It also assumes every single drug seller is not a victim, even the ones who are enslaved. If the real issue is enslavement, why not just carve out a general exception in criminal law to acts which you are performing against your will? I.e., if you rob a bank because your wife/children are being held hostage…

I think a good way to look at it is that it's not so much about right and wrong or about who's a victim but about average outcomes. The average outcome of prosecuting a drug user or prostitute is you spent a bunch of government resources processing, trying and incarcerating the person in order to take someone off the streets who's not actually particularly dangerous. So, why do it? Drug dealers on the other hand freq…

I don't think you really believe that logic.

Hypothetically, suppose it turns out that black drug dealers are far more likely than white drug dealers to be violent criminals [1]. Would you then favor prosecuting drug crimes committed by blacks, but not by whites? Depending on what the numbers work out to be, you will get the same statistical "bang for buck" that you would prosecuting drug sellers but not sex sellers.

[1] Lets give this hypothetical a TV face: take Weeds as the average white drug dealer, and The Wire as the average black drug dealer. Of course, this is only statistics - there are violent white drug dealers and harmless black drug dealers, even in the hypothetical.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#42

Post by jbooth »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #41
jbooth wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a good way to look at it is that it's not so much about right and wrong or about who's a victim but about average outcomes. The average outcome of prosecuting a drug user or prostitute is you spent a bunch of government resources processing, trying and incarcerating the person in order to take someone off the streets who's not actually particularly dangerous. So, why do it? Drug dealers on the other hand freq…

I don't think you really believe that logic. Hypothetically, suppose it turns out that black drug dealers are far more likely than white drug dealers to be violent criminals [1]. Would you then favor prosecuting drug crimes committed by blacks, but not by whites? Depending on what the numbers work out to be, you will get the same statistical "bang for buck" that you would prosecuting drug sellers but not sex sellers.…

I was arguing prosecuting dealers as opposed to users, because it's a massive waste of money to prosecute the latter (not that that stops us from doing it, with 3 million people in jail and growing). Entirely different argument.

Regarding prosecuting black ones instead of white ones.. well we already do that, so I'd say the reality has surpassed both of us. However, as far as what I think should happen, then yes, I would differentiate between gang bangers who own corners, run protection rackets, etc and the dude in high school who sells a little weed to his friends. But as far as consistency in the law, if you're decriminalizing usage and keeping dealing criminal, then you need to apply that consistently when you catch people dealing.

Anecdotally, I think the difference you're perceiving isn't so much black/white as it is weed/hard and suburban/urban.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#43

Post by CWuestefeld »

iaskwhy wrote: post #13

I'm from Portugal. There's something important missing from the article which might be useful to explain why there were so many people using drugs in Portugal. Before 1975, the country was under a dictatorship and drug use was obviously low. Then there was a revolution and people were free to the outside world's culture. On the years following the revolution, young adults were pretty much amazed by all the things you…

Reading between the lines of your post, I think you're suggesting that the Portugal experience is unique due to recent cultural changes, and we shouldn't try to apply these lessons elsewhere. However,

I know bad stories about drugs were all the time on the news. For instance, in my house my father always said: "If you ever try drugs don't ever come back." He never knew about my brother but there was a cousin in the family completely addicted, he died recently.

I'm on my twenties so I'd say I'm from the generation after my brother's. I never tried drugs but all my friends did, no exception. They just aren't addicted, don't know why.

This sounds very much like a typical experience in America.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#44

Post by steveklabnik »

nerfhammer wrote: post #40
jamesbressi wrote: post #5

Does the findings in this article surprise anyone? No? Good. I'm not a hippy, but let's get over this b.s. "War on Drugs" and begin to use our common sense when dealing with social issues and impeding on natural rights.

I would take the article a lot more seriously if it wasn't based entirely on a study by the Cato Institute.

I voted you back up from 0. It's true, even though it's not incorrect BECAUSE it's from Cato, it deserves extra scrutiny since the study comes from someone with an agenda.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#45

Post by rick888 »

jbooth wrote: post #42
yummyfajitas wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you really believe that logic. Hypothetically, suppose it turns out that black drug dealers are far more likely than white drug dealers to be violent criminals [1]. Would you then favor prosecuting drug crimes committed by blacks, but not by whites? Depending on what the numbers work out to be, you will get the same statistical "bang for buck" that you would prosecuting drug sellers but not sex sellers.…

I was arguing prosecuting dealers as opposed to users, because it's a massive waste of money to prosecute the latter (not that that stops us from doing it, with 3 million people in jail and growing). Entirely different argument. Regarding prosecuting black ones instead of white ones.. well we already do that, so I'd say the reality has surpassed both of us. However, as far as what I think should happen, then yes, I w…

"Regarding prosecuting black ones instead of white ones.. well we already do that, so I'd say the reality has surpassed both of us."

After this statement, I can't really take you seriously. Do you have any proof beyond this statement?

"However, as far as what I think should happen, then yes, I would differentiate between gang bangers who own corners, run protection rackets, etc and the dude in high school who sells a little weed to his friends. But as far as consistency in the law, if you're decriminalizing usage and keeping dealing criminal, then you need to apply that consistently when you catch people dealing."

If drugs were legalized, most likely, dealing without some sort of license would still be illegal.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#46

Post by Rod »

iaskwhy wrote: post #13

I'm from Portugal. There's something important missing from the article which might be useful to explain why there were so many people using drugs in Portugal. Before 1975, the country was under a dictatorship and drug use was obviously low. Then there was a revolution and people were free to the outside world's culture. On the years following the revolution, young adults were pretty much amazed by all the things you…

I am also from Portugal. After reading your post, I was wondering whether we lived in the same country. I suspect I am from a generation younger than yours, which may explain a lot.

According to your rationale, oppressive regimes lead to increased drug abuse. Well, Spain also had a dictatorship for decades. The entire "Eastern Europe" lived under Soviet oppression for decades, too. The USSR didn't have a sexual revolution in the 1960s. I would love to see data that suggests that oppression causes people to go crazy and indulge themselves with drugs once they are "free". I am not saying it's not a possibility, but there's talk, and then there's data...

Almost all my friends in Portugal smoked Marijuana. They were not all that open about it, but everyone knew. By contrast, none of them ever touched cocaine or heroine. They were not stupid. Everyone had seen heroine junkies dragging themselves around town, their lives destroyed beyond repair.

Personally, I think the ones drawn to hard drugs are the weak people who can't deal with reality. Many of them die, but then... perhaps the purpose of their lives is to serve as warnings to others.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#47

Post by chbarts »

Qz wrote: post #23
mey wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is my understanding on why decriminalization of drugs is beneficial. First, legitimate competition from suppliers would drive down costs, forcing high risk/high reward illegal operations from other countries out of the market. How can a Mexican drug cartel compete against grand-ma and her backyard? Secondly, what is the violent side of drug activitey? Again my understanding is that it's mostly revolved around pr…

First, legitimate competition from suppliers would drive down costs, forcing high risk/high reward illegal operations from other countries out of the market. How can a Mexican drug cartel compete against grand-ma and her backyard? Secondly, what is the violent side of drug activitey? Again my understanding is that it's mostly revolved around protecting/hiding illegal production, and moving the drugs to a dealer. If y…

> Drug violence is rarely about cartels vs cops -- more often it's cartels vs cartels and dealers vs dealers.

Precisely the point: If the cartels come to intimidate grandma, she calls the police, because her operation is legal and the intimidation is not. The police, because her operation is legal, then go after the cartel and shut them down.

Additionally, contract laws and theft/burglary laws and so on work in grandma's favor, because the legal system is at least potentially on the side of her legal operation. This alone greatly reduces the need for violence.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#48

Post by rick888 »

mey wrote: post #35
protomyth wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the current drugs out there need to stay illegal. Not because they get you high, but because they are toxic. I do believe, if some form of decriminalization happens, we really need to up the penalty for crimes committed while under the influence. Maybe assume premeditation. I should point out I believe the same thing about alcohol. Killing someone while drunk should be considered premeditated.

A lot of things people ingest are toxic, the trick I feel is making that well known and public knowledge, not necessarily illegal. For example, the surgeon generals warning on the pack of a cigarette, or the chemical warnings on a bottle of bleach, I feel are a better way to approach the problem. Part of my attitude comes from growing up in New Hampshire. For example, if you are a consenting adult, and you are only h…

"A lot of things people ingest are toxic, the trick I feel is making that well known and public knowledge, not necessarily illegal. For example, the surgeon generals warning on the pack of a cigarette, or the chemical warnings on a bottle of bleach, I feel are a better way to approach the problem."

This still won't stop people from trying to sue companies that try to sell them something that knowingly harms them. Hell, even fast food restaurant chains have been sued in the US for making someone fat.

My problem is that the same people that want drugs legalized then want the tax payers to pay for an addict to get clean.

Most people aren't born addicted to drugs. You have to make the decision to start taking drugs. I have no problem allowing anyone to have the freedom to put whatever the hell the want into their body as long as it doesn't affect other people. This includes leaching off of the government.

This may seem harsh. But if you take the risk you also need to be prepared for the consequences (good or bad).

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#49

Post by jbooth »

rick888 wrote: post #45
jbooth wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was arguing prosecuting dealers as opposed to users, because it's a massive waste of money to prosecute the latter (not that that stops us from doing it, with 3 million people in jail and growing). Entirely different argument. Regarding prosecuting black ones instead of white ones.. well we already do that, so I'd say the reality has surpassed both of us. However, as far as what I think should happen, then yes, I w…

"Regarding prosecuting black ones instead of white ones.. well we already do that, so I'd say the reality has surpassed both of us." After this statement, I can't really take you seriously. Do you have any proof beyond this statement? "However, as far as what I think should happen, then yes, I would differentiate between gang bangers who own corners, run protection rackets, etc and the dude in high school who sells a…

Really?

You're really under the impression that black people aren't systematically questioned/harrassed/arrested in proportionally higher numbers than white people?

I mean that's its own whole discussion but I'd say the number of young african american men currently in jail pretty much proves the point.

If you have any black friends, ask them about profiling sometime.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#50

Post by Qz »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #34
jbooth wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on your definition of "forced", it could run from literal sex slave through "hooked on drugs and unable to fend for self so stuck with pimp" to just plain "has to feed self and has no other options". I'd say all of those are forced to some degree.

If the customers are helping the prostitute feed herself, how is she a victim and how are they harming her? She would be worse off if not for the voluntary transaction. In fact, the government is actually harming the hungry prostitute by reducing demand for her services by criminalizing the customers.

You can't take the isolated circumstances of 'customer helps prostitute feed herself' and proclaim everything peachy, because the reality of the situation is that it goes beyond individual prostitutes, and involves a global dynamic of human trafficking, sexism, class discrimination, income inequality, media stereotypes, and more.

It's easy to read some article and say, if A then B so therefore C (or not C, whatever, etc.), but if you don't have experience with people who actually suffer through these experiences every day, then you have no basis from which to say "In fact".

Post reply on HN