5 ms·

Painful to read. Addiction lives in a gray area of free will. Although people make bad decisions and we all need to own our mistakes, there is a good chance t

by lujim 11y ago

Painful to read. Addiction lives in a gray area of free will. Although people make bad decisions and we all need to own our mistakes, there is a good chance that most of the time you were just along for the same crappy ride as your family and friends. You are in the unfortunate position of having to bear the brunt of the guilt.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago
This is why I'm largely against drug liberalization. Pot and maybe MDMA sure, but everything else, probably best left illegal. I could see exceptions for psychedlics for medical use, but not the kind of thing you would buy at the corner store, but administered by a doctor. The hysterical "legalize everything" crowd has probably set back sane drug reform for decades. I don't think these people remotely understand how addiction ruins lives and families and how hard it is to get out of it.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  There are two things that I see often confused: legalization vs decriminalization and to me they mean different things. The problem is the users and the traders are often lumped together (and sure there are users that trade too). Tackle the traders but leave the users alone. This will still drive up prices and will still force some people into crime (but other crimes than mere possession) but it would be a good first step towards treating substance abuse (and that includes alcohol by the way) as a personal problem rather than a crime. That does not automatically translate into 'crack and heroin should be available at the corner store'. Nor does it translate into a free pass for traders or producers.
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    >Tackle the traders but leave the users alone. I prefer the Swedish model used to handle prostitution. Selling is legal, buying is the crime.
    - drumdance 11y ago
      Just curious - can sellers be forced to disclose their buyer list?
      - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
        One of the reasons that such a model still has problems. (Just to be clear, I don't actually like that model. I just find it interesting that it even exists when the general view for illegal transactions are that sellers are worse than buyers.)
  - dantheman 11y ago
    By making the distribution illegal you create organized crime and export it around the world. Drugs should be legal.
  - morgante 11y ago
    > and that includes alcohol by the way) Give me a break. Having the occasional beer is not substance abuse and shouldn't be criminalized.
    - jacquesm 11y ago
      There are people that can handle alcohol just fine and there are people that can't. I tried to imply that I was talking about the second group by adding the word 'abuse'. Having the occasional beer should definitely not be criminalized and I'm the last person that would suggest so, in fact I think that no substance abuse should be criminalized as should be clear from reading the above comment.
  - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
    Except in your case users and "traders or producers" would end up being the same people. If you can't buy x drug but can google how to make it, its not a short step to cooking the drug and selling your excess to others. When you're an addict you're probably not holding down a real job so selling becomes very tempting. I believe most dealers are users/addicts themselves now with our current policies, so going after the supply chain will only make this worse. >and that includes alcohol by the way We already tried making the production of alcohol illegal and it led to a lot of poisonings and blindness. I think my approach is still superior. If we legalize the LEAST harmful of illegal recreation drugs, then there will be a harm reduction option for people who would otherwise do harder drugs. You can hunt down meth in the ghetto or go to the store and get high on pot. I imagine most will do the latter. The serious drug users in my life actually never got off drugs. They just got on safer drugs like pot. The "legalize everything" crowd still makes no sense.
- tonyedgecombe 11y ago
  I think the point they make isn't that it's harmless, it's that banning it doesn't stop people taking it and has a number of undesirable side effects.
  - vixen99 11y ago
    One response here: http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_2_a1.html http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_2_a1.html.
- barrkel 11y ago
  It's because people understand how addiction ruins lives that they want to medicalize the problem instead of criminalizing it. When you criminalize something, you push it underground and make it harder to treat; and when you do "treat" it, you do so with ineffective things like prison.
- pstuart 11y ago
  > The hysterical "legalize everything" crowd Except that "criminalize everything" makes it worse. By definition it creates crime (directly and indirectly), and the people who do need help are more likely to go to jail than to see a doctor.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    ... or suffer and die silently than either.
- lujim 11y ago
  Alcohol itself is kind of an accident. If it was invented today we would never legalize it. First - I partake and don't have a problem if other people do, and - I don't think prohibition on any level would work with alcohol. However I can't imagine how much better off humans would have been if it never existed or was completely toxic to us.
  - j2bax 11y ago
    I sometimes wonder if there is still a mindset passed on from the 20's and 30's prohibition era that alcohol is illegal and therefore cool/badass. Before that was it just a way of life or was it always like this? I constantly hear family members and other grown adults talk about it like its the greatest thing ever. All of their social events revolve around it and it's just so cool to talk about drinking and getting drunk. It really drives me mad. These aren't raging alcoholics either (at least most of them). Isn't there a lot more to life than alcohol? Why does everyone want me to drink with them so badly? I might honestly enjoy trying various craft beers and such if everyone's obsession with the stuff didn't annoy me so much. /rant
    - ElComradio 11y ago
      Because it's fun. It's usually that simple. Sometimes people like doing it because it lowers inhibitions and allows them to be more of their real selves. In that case they are bandaiding their own repression. But mostly, it's because it's fun.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Agreed. Its the least interesting way to have 'fun' I can imagine.
    - maxerickson 11y ago
      It's at least more complicated than that. Per capita consumption was very high in the early 1800s. Anti drink was a social movement in the US for quite some time before it was law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperance_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperance_movement
  - 11y ago
- quaunaut 11y ago
  A lot of these same "legalize everything" people want a lot of money put into rehabilitation programs. Also, making this stuff illegal hasn't exactly proven to make it difficult to get- in fact, the highest growing segment of drug use for quite some time is prescription drugs, but even the full-on-illegal stuff isn't difficult to get in most neighborhoods. For what it's worth, I'm more on the "decriminalize" side(ie, no jail time for simple possession, heavier fines/time for the sale/smuggling of significant quantities). Also, my own view may be biased from the fact that a parent was addicted to prescription opioids.
  - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
    This is like saying we'll give matches to children but build more fire stations. Just getting addicted is social harm and hard to recover from. Most addicts claims its a daily fight for the rest of their lives. I don't think millions (billions?) of dollars pushed into rehab programs are remotely as effective as trying to keep it out of the hands of would-be users. Also, it makes more sense to address the mental issues addicts might be trying to self-medicate for instead of handing them a jug of meth and telling them to go have a good time. >quite some time is prescription drugs I imagine as we continue crack down on bullshit "pain clinics" this stuff is going to go way down. We're already seeing it Florida and elsewhere as legislation is catching up to corrupt doctors. I don't know why people make this sounds like its a given and will never change. The recent rise of prescription opiate abuse is well know and is being reigned back in.
    - ahoy 11y ago
      No, it's like saying "These adults already have matches. Lets stop locking them up for having matches."
    - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
      >I don't think millions (billions?) of dollars pushed into rehab programs are remotely as effective as trying to keep it out of the hands of would-be users. Considering the effectiveness of prohibition is a rounding error away from 0, it wouldn't take much for rehabilitation to be better.
- mikeash 11y ago
  I believe that drugs should be liberalized. I don't believe this because I think that drugs are totally cool and don't cause problems, I believe this because I think that loosening drug laws will cause fewer problems overall, including fewer problems due to drug addiction. From what I can see, people who want to keep drugs illegal believe that behavior always moves in the direction of the law. Nobody is naive enough to believe that outlawing something will stop it completely, but a lot of people believe that outlawing something reduces its incidence. That seems to be the approach taken by drug prohibitionists, and looks like it's your approach as well. It boils down to, X is bad, so we want to reduce the incidence of X, so let's outlaw X. The problem is that outlawing something doesn't always reduce it. The experience of countries like Portugal is that loosening drug prohibition reduces drug addiction.
- ageofwant 11y ago
  Addiction ruins lives predominantly because of the way society reacts to it. If addicts were provided with what they need a whole slew of society driven live ruining will go away. If you step away from all the moralising you'll realise its better to simply pay addicts off. Society won't crumble because of it, in fact a lot of the problems will go away. A minority of the at 10-15% of people with addictive personalities will find a way to get high and you can nothing about that. Addiction is a medical problem and should be treated like it.
  - lujim 11y ago
    It gets tricky when you have a family member that is in a spiral. You are trying to do anything you can to keep them going long enough in the hopes they will wake up one day and be ready to come back. Not the most rational thing in the world. Eventually we will be able to "vaccinate" people to wipe out the addictive channels in the brain humans will be in a good spot.
  - xrange 11y ago
    I wonder if anyone has thoughts on the book "The Games People Play", and more specifically the "Alcoholic" game: http://www.ericberne.com/games-people-play/alcoholic/ http://www.ericberne.com/games-people-play/alcoholic/ https://archive.org/details/TheGamesPeoplePlay https://archive.org/details/TheGamesPeoplePlay
- antihero 11y ago
  And how exactly does criminalisation help us treat the victims of drug addiction? Lock 'em up, that'll help right.

by lujim 11y ago

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

This is why I'm largely against drug liberalization. Pot and maybe MDMA sure, but everything else, probably best left illegal. I could see exceptions for psychedlics for medical use, but not the kind of thing you would buy at the corner store, but administered by a doctor. The hysterical "legalize everything" crowd has probably set back sane drug reform for decades. I don't think these people remotely understand how addiction ruins lives and families and how hard it is to get out of it.

jacquesm 11y ago
There are two things that I see often confused: legalization vs decriminalization and to me they mean different things. The problem is the users and the traders are often lumped together (and sure there are users that trade too). Tackle the traders but leave the users alone. This will still drive up prices and will still force some people into crime (but other crimes than mere possession) but it would be a good first step towards treating substance abuse (and that includes alcohol by the way) as a personal problem rather than a crime. That does not automatically translate into 'crack and heroin should be available at the corner store'. Nor does it translate into a free pass for traders or producers.
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  >Tackle the traders but leave the users alone. I prefer the Swedish model used to handle prostitution. Selling is legal, buying is the crime.
  - drumdance 11y ago
    Just curious - can sellers be forced to disclose their buyer list?
    - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
      One of the reasons that such a model still has problems. (Just to be clear, I don't actually like that model. I just find it interesting that it even exists when the general view for illegal transactions are that sellers are worse than buyers.)
- dantheman 11y ago
  By making the distribution illegal you create organized crime and export it around the world. Drugs should be legal.
- morgante 11y ago
  > and that includes alcohol by the way) Give me a break. Having the occasional beer is not substance abuse and shouldn't be criminalized.
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    There are people that can handle alcohol just fine and there are people that can't. I tried to imply that I was talking about the second group by adding the word 'abuse'. Having the occasional beer should definitely not be criminalized and I'm the last person that would suggest so, in fact I think that no substance abuse should be criminalized as should be clear from reading the above comment.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  Except in your case users and "traders or producers" would end up being the same people. If you can't buy x drug but can google how to make it, its not a short step to cooking the drug and selling your excess to others. When you're an addict you're probably not holding down a real job so selling becomes very tempting. I believe most dealers are users/addicts themselves now with our current policies, so going after the supply chain will only make this worse. >and that includes alcohol by the way We already tried making the production of alcohol illegal and it led to a lot of poisonings and blindness. I think my approach is still superior. If we legalize the LEAST harmful of illegal recreation drugs, then there will be a harm reduction option for people who would otherwise do harder drugs. You can hunt down meth in the ghetto or go to the store and get high on pot. I imagine most will do the latter. The serious drug users in my life actually never got off drugs. They just got on safer drugs like pot. The "legalize everything" crowd still makes no sense.
tonyedgecombe 11y ago
I think the point they make isn't that it's harmless, it's that banning it doesn't stop people taking it and has a number of undesirable side effects.
- vixen99 11y ago
  One response here: http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_2_a1.html http://www.city-journal.org/html/7_2_a1.html.
barrkel 11y ago
It's because people understand how addiction ruins lives that they want to medicalize the problem instead of criminalizing it. When you criminalize something, you push it underground and make it harder to treat; and when you do "treat" it, you do so with ineffective things like prison.
pstuart 11y ago
> The hysterical "legalize everything" crowd Except that "criminalize everything" makes it worse. By definition it creates crime (directly and indirectly), and the people who do need help are more likely to go to jail than to see a doctor.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  ... or suffer and die silently than either.
lujim 11y ago
Alcohol itself is kind of an accident. If it was invented today we would never legalize it. First - I partake and don't have a problem if other people do, and - I don't think prohibition on any level would work with alcohol. However I can't imagine how much better off humans would have been if it never existed or was completely toxic to us.
- j2bax 11y ago
  I sometimes wonder if there is still a mindset passed on from the 20's and 30's prohibition era that alcohol is illegal and therefore cool/badass. Before that was it just a way of life or was it always like this? I constantly hear family members and other grown adults talk about it like its the greatest thing ever. All of their social events revolve around it and it's just so cool to talk about drinking and getting drunk. It really drives me mad. These aren't raging alcoholics either (at least most of them). Isn't there a lot more to life than alcohol? Why does everyone want me to drink with them so badly? I might honestly enjoy trying various craft beers and such if everyone's obsession with the stuff didn't annoy me so much. /rant
  - ElComradio 11y ago
    Because it's fun. It's usually that simple. Sometimes people like doing it because it lowers inhibitions and allows them to be more of their real selves. In that case they are bandaiding their own repression. But mostly, it's because it's fun.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Agreed. Its the least interesting way to have 'fun' I can imagine.
  - maxerickson 11y ago
    It's at least more complicated than that. Per capita consumption was very high in the early 1800s. Anti drink was a social movement in the US for quite some time before it was law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperance_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperance_movement
- 11y ago
quaunaut 11y ago
A lot of these same "legalize everything" people want a lot of money put into rehabilitation programs. Also, making this stuff illegal hasn't exactly proven to make it difficult to get- in fact, the highest growing segment of drug use for quite some time is prescription drugs, but even the full-on-illegal stuff isn't difficult to get in most neighborhoods. For what it's worth, I'm more on the "decriminalize" side(ie, no jail time for simple possession, heavier fines/time for the sale/smuggling of significant quantities). Also, my own view may be biased from the fact that a parent was addicted to prescription opioids.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  This is like saying we'll give matches to children but build more fire stations. Just getting addicted is social harm and hard to recover from. Most addicts claims its a daily fight for the rest of their lives. I don't think millions (billions?) of dollars pushed into rehab programs are remotely as effective as trying to keep it out of the hands of would-be users. Also, it makes more sense to address the mental issues addicts might be trying to self-medicate for instead of handing them a jug of meth and telling them to go have a good time. >quite some time is prescription drugs I imagine as we continue crack down on bullshit "pain clinics" this stuff is going to go way down. We're already seeing it Florida and elsewhere as legislation is catching up to corrupt doctors. I don't know why people make this sounds like its a given and will never change. The recent rise of prescription opiate abuse is well know and is being reigned back in.
  - ahoy 11y ago
    No, it's like saying "These adults already have matches. Lets stop locking them up for having matches."
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    >I don't think millions (billions?) of dollars pushed into rehab programs are remotely as effective as trying to keep it out of the hands of would-be users. Considering the effectiveness of prohibition is a rounding error away from 0, it wouldn't take much for rehabilitation to be better.
mikeash 11y ago
I believe that drugs should be liberalized. I don't believe this because I think that drugs are totally cool and don't cause problems, I believe this because I think that loosening drug laws will cause fewer problems overall, including fewer problems due to drug addiction. From what I can see, people who want to keep drugs illegal believe that behavior always moves in the direction of the law. Nobody is naive enough to believe that outlawing something will stop it completely, but a lot of people believe that outlawing something reduces its incidence. That seems to be the approach taken by drug prohibitionists, and looks like it's your approach as well. It boils down to, X is bad, so we want to reduce the incidence of X, so let's outlaw X. The problem is that outlawing something doesn't always reduce it. The experience of countries like Portugal is that loosening drug prohibition reduces drug addiction.
ageofwant 11y ago
Addiction ruins lives predominantly because of the way society reacts to it. If addicts were provided with what they need a whole slew of society driven live ruining will go away. If you step away from all the moralising you'll realise its better to simply pay addicts off. Society won't crumble because of it, in fact a lot of the problems will go away. A minority of the at 10-15% of people with addictive personalities will find a way to get high and you can nothing about that. Addiction is a medical problem and should be treated like it.
- lujim 11y ago
  It gets tricky when you have a family member that is in a spiral. You are trying to do anything you can to keep them going long enough in the hopes they will wake up one day and be ready to come back. Not the most rational thing in the world. Eventually we will be able to "vaccinate" people to wipe out the addictive channels in the brain humans will be in a good spot.
- xrange 11y ago
  I wonder if anyone has thoughts on the book "The Games People Play", and more specifically the "Alcoholic" game: http://www.ericberne.com/games-people-play/alcoholic/ http://www.ericberne.com/games-people-play/alcoholic/ https://archive.org/details/TheGamesPeoplePlay https://archive.org/details/TheGamesPeoplePlay
antihero 11y ago
And how exactly does criminalisation help us treat the victims of drug addiction? Lock 'em up, that'll help right.