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

81–90 of 126 posts

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#81

Post by yummyfajitas »

jbooth wrote: post #74
yummyfajitas wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trusting the individual prostitute who voluntarily chose to sell sex on the belief that it made him/her better off. I trust his/her experience more than yours. As for this "unless you have personal experience, you can't comment" argument, I call BS. That is nothing but an attempt to keep outside views out of the debate. Thanks to the powers of logic and reason, humans can draw all sorts of correct conclusions wit…

Yes. You have absolutely no idea what it's like to grow up in the projects and any attempts to map your life experience onto theirs are completely compromised by your predilection to think, "hey, they could've just tried hard in school and gone to college like I did". I don't know what it's like to grow up in the projects either, and I don't even have a huge disagreement with you in regards to this particular niche o…

I see. By virtue of lacking a certain set of experiences, you conclude that I must be irrational. You apparently believe this because you imagine I said someone should have gone to college (not sure when I said this, but whatever).

I'm done here.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#82

Post by CWuestefeld »

Qz wrote: post #59
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.

Killing someone while drunk should be considered premeditated. This is crazy talk. In some cases it might be true, but the idea of applying such a broad judgment on an entire class of crimes would be a huge injustice. Severity of punishment is not a good way to reduce the incidence of crime. Do you think someone who's judgment is so impaired that they're ready to drive while drunk is really going to stop and think, h…

The solution is better education, not increased punishment.

Without commenting on the question of a person's criminal liability for drunk driving...

How do you think education will help? Do you really think that today, in 2010, there is anybody who hasn't spent at least an aggregate 24 hours hearing the "don't drink and drive" message?

It seems to me that too often, people attempt to address problems with a knee-jerk "we need more education". But at least here in the USA, I've got to believe that we've all heard the messages about drunk driving, your brain on drugs, AIDS, domestic abuse, etc., ad nauseam. What more education do you want?

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#83

Post by protomyth »

Qz wrote: post #77
gsmaverick wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can't make clear judgement while drunk, such as not driving, then maybe you shouldn't be getting drunk in the first place. Driving is a privilege you kill someone while drunk and you should NEVER be allowed to drive again.

Right, and I believe that educating people about the real risks involved with drunk driving will prevent more of those deaths than punishing people who have already demonstrated the poor judgment in doing that in the first place. I fully agree with permanently barring someone from driving after they kill someone while drunk driving, but tacking on 'pre-meditated' to the original crime is nonsense.

Why is it nonsense? The person made the decision to drink and drive. Someone is dead or injured and the person causing the pain needs to be punished.

Education doesn't really get us there, people know it is bad and do it anyway. Look at the repeat stats on DUI, suspended licenses don't deter as much as people wished.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#84

Post by Qz »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #82
Qz wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killing someone while drunk should be considered premeditated. This is crazy talk. In some cases it might be true, but the idea of applying such a broad judgment on an entire class of crimes would be a huge injustice. Severity of punishment is not a good way to reduce the incidence of crime. Do you think someone who's judgment is so impaired that they're ready to drive while drunk is really going to stop and think, h…

The solution is better education, not increased punishment. Without commenting on the question of a person's criminal liability for drunk driving... How do you think education will help? Do you really think that today, in 2010, there is anybody who hasn't spent at least an aggregate 24 hours hearing the "don't drink and drive" message? It seems to me that too often, people attempt to address problems with a knee-jerk…

There is a difference between being informed and being educated. Someone who has lost a friend or family member due to drunk driving is more educated about the risks than someone who has been informed about the risks from seeing the ubiquitous TV commercials.

I'm not sure exactly how to best go about educating people, or I would be out doing it.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#85

Post by jbooth »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #81
jbooth wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. You have absolutely no idea what it's like to grow up in the projects and any attempts to map your life experience onto theirs are completely compromised by your predilection to think, "hey, they could've just tried hard in school and gone to college like I did". I don't know what it's like to grow up in the projects either, and I don't even have a huge disagreement with you in regards to this particular niche o…

I see. By virtue of lacking a certain set of experiences, you conclude that I must be irrational. You apparently believe this because you imagine I said someone should have gone to college (not sure when I said this, but whatever). I'm done here.

Hey, no offense intended, but according to your profile, you're a postdoc at NYU.

That's more than a "slightly different" human experience than giving $20 blowjobs in order to get through to next week. We're talking about something that's entirely alien to your (and my) cushy existences here.

Personally, I had more of a head start by age 5 than anyone in the projects is likely to ever have. I realize this. It's humbling, but it's the truth -- I'm not that special, mostly just lucky.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#86

Post by Qz »

protomyth wrote: post #83
Qz wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, and I believe that educating people about the real risks involved with drunk driving will prevent more of those deaths than punishing people who have already demonstrated the poor judgment in doing that in the first place. I fully agree with permanently barring someone from driving after they kill someone while drunk driving, but tacking on 'pre-meditated' to the original crime is nonsense.

Why is it nonsense? The person made the decision to drink and drive. Someone is dead or injured and the person causing the pain needs to be punished. Education doesn't really get us there, people know it is bad and do it anyway. Look at the repeat stats on DUI, suspended licenses don't deter as much as people wished.

Pre-meditation has a specific legal meaning that really doesn't apply to typical drunk driving. Something more along the lines of what you're talking about is the Felony murder rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule

Unfortunately drunk driving is a misdemeanor and doesn't qualify.

Just to clarify, by nonsense I'm referring specifically to the idea of arbitrarily applying legal terms to situations where they aren't valid for punitive purposes. I disagree with harsher punishment as a crime deterrent, but I don't think harsher punishment itself is 'nonsense'.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#87

Post by protomyth »

sgrove wrote: post #62
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.

Killing someone while drunk should be considered premeditated. Are you suggesting that in 100% of the cases where killing someone (and I assume this includes manslaughter) is premeditated? Because if you are not, then it should not be considered premeditated. That's dishonest. Simply give the judge some additional window to affect sentencing for a set of crimes committed while intoxicated. If you want to punish somet…

I really don't think its "dishonest". No, I am not say 100% cases of killing someone are premeditated. Accidents happen. Bad things go wrong in worse ways.

That being said, I believe if you knowing impair your ability to make judgements and then kill or injure someone, you made a conscious decision.

Now, if you frame this in some "mandatory minimum" debate, I am definitely not going there. I still believe judges need their leeway, but prosecutors need to charge the crime as something more than a simple "he was drinking and an accident happened".

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#88

Post by CWuestefeld »

endtime wrote: post #63
Jeema3000 wrote: post #61

Incarceration rates in the United States today, which are due largely to the anti-drug get-tough policies of the last 30 years, should alarm anyone who believes in the principles of liberty that this nation was founded on, IMO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rat...

If you think the laws themselves are faulty, then argue against their merit. But arguments of the form "if we removed laws, less laws would get broken" have always seemed somewhat vacuous to me. Edit: Given the downvotes, I'd love to have a discussion with someone who disagrees.

Well, here's one aspect.

Start with the facts that this is supposed to be a free nation, a republic with representational democracy, putatively making our own laws.

Now consider that a large fraction of the population is in prison for these very crimes, more so than anywhere else in this world.

This should suggest (although not prove) that the government is imposing its own will, overriding the wishes of the people whose right it is to determine the laws (through their representatives).

I'm reminded of the old 55mph speed limit laws. States would be tested by the federal government; if it was found that more than 50% of drivers exceeded 55, the state could lose federal highway funding. It seems to me that if more than half of the drivers exceeded the speed limit, well then, that's pretty much the same thing as having a referendum with a majority of voters saying that the speed limit is too low.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#89

Post by protomyth »

chbarts wrote: post #53
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.

> Killing someone while drunk should be considered premeditated. I agree. > Some of the current drugs out there need to stay illegal. Not because they get you high, but because they are toxic. OK, I'll replace 'toxic' with 'potentially more addictive and dangerous than weed, alcohol, and nicotine' (Tobacco is damned addictive but it doesn't seem to cause antisocial behaviors.), because otherwise what you said makes n…

I was actually talking about the chemical mixes that are actually toxic / poison that are being brewed in trailers in the rural areas or kitchens in apartment complexes. I wasn't writing about addictiveness.

I wasn't contradicting your historical analysis.

Re: Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?

#90

Post by jacabado »

Rod wrote: post #46
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 revol…

My small contribution to the discussion: Spain has one of the biggest problems with the youth drug use, I read somewhere that more 20-year people were consuming cocaine than 21-25 combined. I share that generation and I see the same problem here in Portugal.

My experience tells me that things were worst some years ago, I remember lots of people were on hard drugs on my home town, sadly most of them died. Also the big drug ghettos in Lisbon almost disappeared. The thing is Portugal as a peripheric country is in a very peculiar situation and the regulation problem should be seen in that context. It is normal for Portugal to lead drug aprehensions every other year because it's one of the main drug gateways from Africa (Marrocos) and from South America and it's close relationship with Brasil.

But the spirit of the law doesn't convince me at all, there are lots of people living from selling drugs and from the stats like 50% arrested were in the 16-20 years range, mostly everybody consumes marijuana. The problem may not be the law, but the environment around the schools doesn't benefit from this law, this should be somehow compensated.

Nice to meet Portuguese people here! Would you bother to fill your details? Or contact me: jracabadoemgmail.com would be wonderfull to talk to you guys!

Post reply on HN