4 ms·

It's really that simple. No, it's not. For a whole host of ideological reasons, certain problem-causing agents (like alcohol and tobacco) are tolerated, despi

It's really that simple. No, it's not. For a whole host of ideological reasons, certain problem-causing agents (like alcohol and tobacco) are tolerated, despite their deadly and very costly impact on society, while others are not. I didn't like the comment above yours either, BTW. Both are untenable oversimplifications.

gozur88 10y ago
In the US they tried to make alcohol illegal for the same reason heroin and cocaine are illegal. Tobacco and caffeine don't cause the same sorts of problem. Nobody is going to break into your house while you're at work because they can't afford smokes. Smokers and coffee drinkers can hold down jobs and they don't OD at age 22, leaving behind kids the community has to take care of.
- beat 10y ago
  No one has ever overdosed on marijuana.
- mountaineer22 10y ago
  In the US, alcohol was illegal. Also, cocaine and heroin were legal and have accepted medical uses. Cigarette smoking causes cancer. Drinking more than three cups of coffee a day increases one's risk of pancreatic cancer.
  - gozur88 10y ago
    >In the US, alcohol was illegal. Yes. That was why I brought it up.
  - lol768 10y ago
    > Drinking more than three cups of coffee a day increases one's risk of pancreatic cancer. I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with this statement. Take a look at this meta-analysis: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3063915/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3063915/ which suggests, if anything, an inverse relationship between drinking coffee and pancreatic cancer. See also http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2011509/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2011509/ which establishes no relationship between drinking coffee and the risk of developing pancreatic cancer. Can you provide any sources that suggest the opposite and have not been rebutted by future publications?
    - mountaineer22 10y ago
      2011 and 1983? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26402414 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26402414 This is more recent (2015), you are right (I upvoted you). I am wrong.
- kafkaesq 10y ago
  Nobody is going to break into your house while you're at work because they can't afford smokes. You might be surprised at what conclusions were reached when researchers conducted a side-by-side analysis of the relative addictiveness of tobacco and heroin: http://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/29/magazine/nicotine-harder-to-kickthan-heroin.html http://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/29/magazine/nicotine-harder-t... The fact that the total criminalization of the heroin market leads to wildly inflated prices might have something to do with the rate of criminality among heroin addicts. Which BTW isn't that high. Smokers and coffee drinkers can hold down jobs and they don't OD at age 22, leaving behind kids the community has to take care of. The vast majority of heroin users hold down regular jobs; and the risk of OD'ing is generally understood to be wildly inflated as a direct result of the unregulated street market. Heroin users aren't stupid, or even intrinsically self-destructive; when they know what they're getting (and how much), overdoses are quite rare in fact. Anyway, rather go back and forth over anecdotal side points like this, I'd (kindly and sincerely) suggest you do some general reading on the topic, taking care to look at the social costs holistically (rather than pivoting on this or that side aspect). In particular, there's a lot to be learned from how other countries (particularly in Europe) have approached the issue of heroin (and other) addictions over the years, and the lessons they have learned.
  - gozur88 10y ago
    I'm not sure why you think anyone who disagrees with you hasn't done any reading on the topic. As it happens, I'm against drug prohibition on personal liberty grounds. I just don't think it's reasonable to put on social justice blinders and assume drug laws exist because teh racism. If you spend even a little time around a junkie it's not hard to see the logic behind making addictive substances illegal. It may be a misguided impulse, but these laws are an attempt to address a real problem.
    - kafkaesq 10y ago
      I'm not sure why you think anyone who disagrees with you hasn't done any reading on the topic. I based that inference not on the fact that you disagreed with me; but on the quality of the arguments you were making. If you spend even a little time around a junkie it's not hard to see the logic behind making addictive substances illegal. I've personally known several heroin users, and have lived in neighborhoods that were chock full of them (in fact, quite famously so). Enough to know that (unless they choose to tell you), the vast majority of the time you'd have no idea they were using. It is in fact exactly these experiences which led me to study the problem more closely. So on balance I'd recommend looking at data and published studies, not just ones subjective experiences when interacting casually with (the most visible, worst case) users.
- jacobolus 10y ago
  The illegalization of alcohol in the US was effective public policy. Cf. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470475/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470475/

gozur88 10y ago

In the US they tried to make alcohol illegal for the same reason heroin and cocaine are illegal. Tobacco and caffeine don't cause the same sorts of problem. Nobody is going to break into your house while you're at work because they can't afford smokes. Smokers and coffee drinkers can hold down jobs and they don't OD at age 22, leaving behind kids the community has to take care of.

beat 10y ago
No one has ever overdosed on marijuana.
mountaineer22 10y ago
In the US, alcohol was illegal. Also, cocaine and heroin were legal and have accepted medical uses. Cigarette smoking causes cancer. Drinking more than three cups of coffee a day increases one's risk of pancreatic cancer.
- gozur88 10y ago
  >In the US, alcohol was illegal. Yes. That was why I brought it up.
- lol768 10y ago
  > Drinking more than three cups of coffee a day increases one's risk of pancreatic cancer. I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with this statement. Take a look at this meta-analysis: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3063915/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3063915/ which suggests, if anything, an inverse relationship between drinking coffee and pancreatic cancer. See also http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2011509/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2011509/ which establishes no relationship between drinking coffee and the risk of developing pancreatic cancer. Can you provide any sources that suggest the opposite and have not been rebutted by future publications?
  - mountaineer22 10y ago
    2011 and 1983? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26402414 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26402414 This is more recent (2015), you are right (I upvoted you). I am wrong.
kafkaesq 10y ago
Nobody is going to break into your house while you're at work because they can't afford smokes. You might be surprised at what conclusions were reached when researchers conducted a side-by-side analysis of the relative addictiveness of tobacco and heroin: http://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/29/magazine/nicotine-harder-to-kickthan-heroin.html http://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/29/magazine/nicotine-harder-t... The fact that the total criminalization of the heroin market leads to wildly inflated prices might have something to do with the rate of criminality among heroin addicts. Which BTW isn't that high. Smokers and coffee drinkers can hold down jobs and they don't OD at age 22, leaving behind kids the community has to take care of. The vast majority of heroin users hold down regular jobs; and the risk of OD'ing is generally understood to be wildly inflated as a direct result of the unregulated street market. Heroin users aren't stupid, or even intrinsically self-destructive; when they know what they're getting (and how much), overdoses are quite rare in fact. Anyway, rather go back and forth over anecdotal side points like this, I'd (kindly and sincerely) suggest you do some general reading on the topic, taking care to look at the social costs holistically (rather than pivoting on this or that side aspect). In particular, there's a lot to be learned from how other countries (particularly in Europe) have approached the issue of heroin (and other) addictions over the years, and the lessons they have learned.
- gozur88 10y ago
  I'm not sure why you think anyone who disagrees with you hasn't done any reading on the topic. As it happens, I'm against drug prohibition on personal liberty grounds. I just don't think it's reasonable to put on social justice blinders and assume drug laws exist because teh racism. If you spend even a little time around a junkie it's not hard to see the logic behind making addictive substances illegal. It may be a misguided impulse, but these laws are an attempt to address a real problem.
  - kafkaesq 10y ago
    I'm not sure why you think anyone who disagrees with you hasn't done any reading on the topic. I based that inference not on the fact that you disagreed with me; but on the quality of the arguments you were making. If you spend even a little time around a junkie it's not hard to see the logic behind making addictive substances illegal. I've personally known several heroin users, and have lived in neighborhoods that were chock full of them (in fact, quite famously so). Enough to know that (unless they choose to tell you), the vast majority of the time you'd have no idea they were using. It is in fact exactly these experiences which led me to study the problem more closely. So on balance I'd recommend looking at data and published studies, not just ones subjective experiences when interacting casually with (the most visible, worst case) users.
jacobolus 10y ago
The illegalization of alcohol in the US was effective public policy. Cf. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470475/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470475/