3 ms·

We don't know. There are many, many narratives. The point is that drug policy is not targeted towards harm reduction or safety, but towards the demonization of

We don't know. There are many, many narratives. The point is that drug policy is not targeted towards harm reduction or safety, but towards the demonization of the drugs, which means there's possible improvement if we stop doing that.

highCs 11y ago
> the demonization of the drugs It keeps the number of drug addicts low and then makes the harm and safety problem less important at the same time?
- ArkyBeagle 11y ago
  How would we know it actually does that? Somewhere between 50-90% of high school seniors in the late '70s smoked pot at least once. The problem with demonization in general is that it requires willing suspension of disbelief, which is brittle. Please remember also that Nixon's original WOD happened because lots of young people were coming back from 'Nam strung out.
  - rco8786 11y ago
    > lots of young people were coming back from 'Nam strung out. It's quite possible that we saw a bunch of boys coming back "strung out" from the most psychologically damaging war in the country's history, not smoking pot.
    - ArkyBeagle 11y ago
      The concern was over the alarming percentage on heroin.
- baddox 11y ago
  Prohibition might reduce the total number of people who have ever tried a drug, but I very highly doubt it reduces the number of people addicted to a drug. It could just as easily increase the number of addicts.
johncolanduoni 11y ago
This is the rub of the issue. I have a friend who works at a addiction treatment clinic (mostly heroin) whose experience has made her quite opposed to legalizing hard drugs, but she still has no love for existing public policy around drugs.
- uxp 11y ago
  I don't think there is anyone in the world with some sane common sense that _wants_ to legalize drugs like meth and heroin that have high addiction rates, but there are hundreds of thousands that see the benefit of removing the stigma around the drugs, bringing manufacture of the substances into cleaner laboratories and regulated stores. I had a friend die some years back because he shot a large dose of fentanyl into his arm thinking it was typical low to mid-range heroin. Had he bought from a regulated dealer, the likelihood of the mixup would have been significantly less and his girlfriend would have been more likely to call for emergency services sooner instead of being afraid of punishment. Junkies are gonna be junkies, but they're still human beings and they deserve some respect for being a life. Instead of pointing fingers at how awful a person they are for the choices that lead them to addiction, might we, without having some magical something that takes the addiction away forever, help reduce the harm they are doing to themselves and society?
copsarebastards 11y ago
> We don't know. There are many, many narratives. Ugh, who cares about "narratives"? We have science to tell us which narrative is correct and which isn't, and for the most commonly used recreational drugs, we do know.

highCs 11y ago

> the demonization of the drugs It keeps the number of drug addicts low and then makes the harm and safety problem less important at the same time?

ArkyBeagle 11y ago
How would we know it actually does that? Somewhere between 50-90% of high school seniors in the late '70s smoked pot at least once. The problem with demonization in general is that it requires willing suspension of disbelief, which is brittle. Please remember also that Nixon's original WOD happened because lots of young people were coming back from 'Nam strung out.
- rco8786 11y ago
  > lots of young people were coming back from 'Nam strung out. It's quite possible that we saw a bunch of boys coming back "strung out" from the most psychologically damaging war in the country's history, not smoking pot.
  - ArkyBeagle 11y ago
    The concern was over the alarming percentage on heroin.
baddox 11y ago
Prohibition might reduce the total number of people who have ever tried a drug, but I very highly doubt it reduces the number of people addicted to a drug. It could just as easily increase the number of addicts.

johncolanduoni 11y ago

This is the rub of the issue. I have a friend who works at a addiction treatment clinic (mostly heroin) whose experience has made her quite opposed to legalizing hard drugs, but she still has no love for existing public policy around drugs.

uxp 11y ago
I don't think there is anyone in the world with some sane common sense that _wants_ to legalize drugs like meth and heroin that have high addiction rates, but there are hundreds of thousands that see the benefit of removing the stigma around the drugs, bringing manufacture of the substances into cleaner laboratories and regulated stores. I had a friend die some years back because he shot a large dose of fentanyl into his arm thinking it was typical low to mid-range heroin. Had he bought from a regulated dealer, the likelihood of the mixup would have been significantly less and his girlfriend would have been more likely to call for emergency services sooner instead of being afraid of punishment. Junkies are gonna be junkies, but they're still human beings and they deserve some respect for being a life. Instead of pointing fingers at how awful a person they are for the choices that lead them to addiction, might we, without having some magical something that takes the addiction away forever, help reduce the harm they are doing to themselves and society?

copsarebastards 11y ago

> We don't know. There are many, many narratives. Ugh, who cares about "narratives"? We have science to tell us which narrative is correct and which isn't, and for the most commonly used recreational drugs, we do know.