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

Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#611

Post by javajosh »

K0balt wrote: post #520

The USA and a few other cultures have unfortunately devalued shame to the point where it holds nearly no cultural power. Shame is an important aspect of behaviour moderation, a negative emotion usefully experienced when doing something that breaks the social contract. Devaluing shame instad of targeting the parts of the contract that needed to be changed has cost us a critical tool for self moderation and has created…

It presents an interesting problem for those "left behind" who value shame, self-restraint, and other unpopular virtues. The neoliberal view is that you can prove your point by forming subcultures that do better than the surrounding culture. I think that's true, but it's a plan B - plan A should be to fight hard to not lose those values in the first place.

It's appalling that public discourse about systemic issues has entirely displaced talk of personal responsibility. It's appalling that a positive openness to alternative lifestyles has extended to an absurd dropping of ALL standards. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

Sean Carroll has a recent podcast episode descrying the "crisis in physics", which he (partially) articulates as a problem of perception. As much as he himself always wanted to be a science heretic, he notes that all previous successful heretics were experts in the established state-of-the-art, and now if a member of the public researches physics, ALL they hear from are "heretics" who don't know the first thing about established physics. It's like the act of rebellion itself has eclipsed the utility of the specific act.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#612

Post by whiddershins »

havblue wrote: post #436
lm28469 wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you should be able to do what you want. I'm still baffled at how this argument makes it anywhere paste high school. Living a single second makes it plain obvious that no, you don't do what you want. Living in any type of society or even the most basic and smallest community will tell you that

I've heard that this is a generational difference: xers thought of free speech as being an essential value and to hell with the sanctimonious totalitarians who are telling you that you can't listen to rap music. This gave way to accepting any and all behavior, social contact be damned. So social stigmas themselves are repressive and it doesn't matter if you're hurting your heath, that's your choice as an individual.…

Xers continue to have thoughts.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#613

Post by droopyEyelids »

NotSuspicious wrote: post #590
brightlancer wrote: post #186

Rubbish. Folks made the exact same arguments about alcohol and marijuana. Specifically with alcohol, anyone can walk into a treatment center without fear that they'll be arrested for the mere _use_ of a substance. (Marijuana has very low risk and rates of addiction, physical or psychological.) If "hard" drugs are legalized, then they will likely be treated the same as alcohol and pot and tobacco: highly regulated, so…

> Folks made the exact same arguments about alcohol and marijuana. Maybe those people were right? Prohibition decreased the amount of people addicted to alcohol and the number of people who beat their wives. If we had a more hard-line response to alcohol instead of the half-in/half-out wishy-washy nonsense that was Prohibition enforcement maybe less people would have their lives ruined by alcohol to this day. Singapo…

Pre-prohibition society dealt with alcohol in an extremely dysfunctional way, and the problems that prohibition addressed are now invisible. This sucks because it makes prohibition seem like a comically stupid policy, when really it was a great step forward and an overreaction to a serious problem.

A lot of this is detailed in Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, which remains an entertaining and educational book to this day. https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/upton-sinclair/the-jungle

Post prohibition we were left with the states being able to control liquor sales, and license liquor establishments. We were able to set a drinking age, establish three tier systems to separate the production, wholesale, and retail of alcohol, and alcohol was regulated and taxed nationally too.

These changes helped curb many of the most predatory abuses of the alcohol industry, and stopped other predatory industries from using alcohol as a way to immiserate their workers.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#614

Post by op00to »

zer8k wrote: post #581
pierat wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The USA and a few other cultures have unfortunately devalued shame to the point where it holds nearly no cultural power. Wait, are you talking about "personal" shame, or "corporate" shame. Cause if anything, corporations have none, and people are *learning* to also have no shame. Doesnt get you anything. Just makes you feel bad for no good reason, cause others are pointing a finger at you. > Shame is an important a…

> Simply put: fuck the social contract. I didn't sign it. It doesnt get me any benefits, and all it is a whole lot of "costs", all of which are ill defined. All of your "polite" behavior is modified by shame. To use an extreme, contrived, example if you shit on the floor your parents probably shamed you into using the restroom properly. You can, of course, continue to shit on the floor but you also can't act with suc…

Uh, as a person who recently potty trained two people, I did not use shame to teach my kids how to use the toilet.

When a child had an accident, we acknowledged it, cleaned up, and moved on. No punishment, no shame.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#615

Post by ryanwaggoner »

ryandrake wrote: post #605
ellisd wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a fascinating view on the sedative crisis. The lack of shame from "normal" people feels very real. Complete inaction to the staggering and ever increasing death count rate and bodies piling on the ground IS utterly shameful, but not for 2023 USA. I've noticed as well that when I've spoke to friends and family about open drug use and markets I become the one who's "out of line." Do we as a free society have no…

There's a huge strain of "mind your own business" running through the USA right now. When someone is out of line, you used to be able to rely on the public to correct that behavior. Now if you try, you're the bad guy--or "Karen" as they say, and everyone flips out their cell phone cameras to try to capture that crazed weirdo who has the audacity to ask someone else to behave themselves. I brought my kid to a pumpkin…

You think that assholes are a new phenomenon? You think that a few decades ago that lady would have meekly apologized and walked away?

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#616

Post by ryanwaggoner »

zer8k wrote: post #581
pierat wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The USA and a few other cultures have unfortunately devalued shame to the point where it holds nearly no cultural power. Wait, are you talking about "personal" shame, or "corporate" shame. Cause if anything, corporations have none, and people are *learning* to also have no shame. Doesnt get you anything. Just makes you feel bad for no good reason, cause others are pointing a finger at you. > Shame is an important a…

> Simply put: fuck the social contract. I didn't sign it. It doesnt get me any benefits, and all it is a whole lot of "costs", all of which are ill defined. All of your "polite" behavior is modified by shame. To use an extreme, contrived, example if you shit on the floor your parents probably shamed you into using the restroom properly. You can, of course, continue to shit on the floor but you also can't act with suc…

It’s kinda horrifying that you think shaming kids is how you teach them anything.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#617

Post by seattle_spring »

Manuel_D wrote: post #524
brightlancer wrote: post #186

Rubbish. Folks made the exact same arguments about alcohol and marijuana. Specifically with alcohol, anyone can walk into a treatment center without fear that they'll be arrested for the mere _use_ of a substance. (Marijuana has very low risk and rates of addiction, physical or psychological.) If "hard" drugs are legalized, then they will likely be treated the same as alcohol and pot and tobacco: highly regulated, so…

> If "hard" drugs are legalized, then they will likely be treated the same as alcohol and pot and tobacco: highly regulated, sold only to adults in very limited stores, and folks can enter treatment without fear of arrest. I can tell you firsthand that minors have no problem acquiring alcohol and tobacco.

I can tell you firsthand that, when I was a minor, it was far easier to obtain fully illegal marijuana than it was regulated substances like alcohol and tobacco.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#618

Post by MobiusHorizons »

zer8k wrote: post #581
pierat wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The USA and a few other cultures have unfortunately devalued shame to the point where it holds nearly no cultural power. Wait, are you talking about "personal" shame, or "corporate" shame. Cause if anything, corporations have none, and people are *learning* to also have no shame. Doesnt get you anything. Just makes you feel bad for no good reason, cause others are pointing a finger at you. > Shame is an important a…

> Simply put: fuck the social contract. I didn't sign it. It doesnt get me any benefits, and all it is a whole lot of "costs", all of which are ill defined. All of your "polite" behavior is modified by shame. To use an extreme, contrived, example if you shit on the floor your parents probably shamed you into using the restroom properly. You can, of course, continue to shit on the floor but you also can't act with suc…

Society certainly still tries to impose the contract, we just don't seem to agree on what it is. Think about how people reacted (both on the right and the left) to covid restrictions. In some communities you were a pariah if you wore a mask in any context, and in others you were a pariah if you didn't get the vaccine. Regardless of what you think the correct behavior there was, there were very strong pockets of society where shame was being leveraged for some form of social contract, the contract was just not the same everywhere. I believe the same dynamic is true (although thankfully somewhat less charged) when it comes to opinions about various political issues or beliefs.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#619

Post by wonderwonder »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #569
wonderwonder wrote: post #36

If you decriminalize hard drugs, all that happens is that addicts stay addicts, have a higher likely hood of becoming homeless and higher chance of dying. Hard drugs for the most part outside of controlled environments have almost no positive qualities. Drugs like cannabis have medical attributes and can provide benefits. People addicted to hard drugs require treatment, leaving them to their own devices is likely to…

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. -- Albert Einstein In a later comment you ask ...how should I provide help & compassion? I would say one-on-one as an individual walking the streets, you probably shouldn't, especially if you have children in tow. We need to address our nationwide affordable housing crisis. California is disproportionately impacted and takes a lot of th…

I agree with you for the most part. There is a massive housing cost crisis. I bought my house 5 years ago for $320k and its worth just under $600k now. For the same house. It makes no sense. Plus its not like I can sell it and get 2 more at the original price. I don't know how entry level salary people could even consider home ownership now.

I don't think decriminalization of hard drugs works without an ample amount of long term money set aside for treatment. Plus money for additional law enforcement to aggressively enforce existing property, violence and public intoxication laws. People should not have to endure a slipping down life because others choose to do drugs.

As far as the why people do drugs, I'm not sure we need that much study. It starts out fun, then it turns into something to numb the pain, then its something that is needed. I've done a myriad of drugs in my time, thankfully I never passed the fun phase. I don't presume to know what drove people to the 'numb the pain' phase and I do feel for them. I am not willing to upend my life or endanger my kids to find out. There is also a limit, how much money should society be expected to spend to constantly on an individual who keeps going through treatment and keeps going back to using? With that said, I do think the number is above zero.

My patience fails though at those that endanger others and commit crimes to further their addiction.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#620

Post by lo_zamoyski »

teolandon wrote: post #579
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Radical individualism leads to absurd ideas like "I have the right to harm myself if I choose". Heh, nope. This is the ridiculous liberal "notion" of "right", which is incoherent and absurd. The very idea of "right" presupposes an objective good. Harming oneself (drugs, suicide, whatever) is objectively evil. You cannot have a right to an evil thing.

Whole lot of assertions here that a lot of people would disagree with. Why does "right" presuppose an objective good? Why is harming oneself objectively evil?

And they'd be wrong. The whole raison d'etre of rights, the whole purpose, is to "secure" some good end due to us by nature. It is a kind of "debt" in the sense that we are owed something from others. If we have a right to something, then it is something others must render unto us. Only goods are owed. It makes absolutely no sense to talk about "brute rights" that are just because they are. The burden is on those who claim them to explain why they have a right to something, and that explanation is going to be one that appeals to a good that is due by virtue of being a human being.

If these people you mention took the time to examine the concept of right and had the honesty to search for an justification for them, they would see that rights are always for the sake of some good end, and an end that is due by virtue of being a human being. Take freedom, which is the ability to pursue the good as determined by human nature. A lack of freedom is an impediment to that pursuit in some way. Freedom isn't an end in itself. It is that by which we are able to pursue the good. We do not have the freedom to pursue evil. So it is with rights.

Post reply on HN