5 ms·

Really? I have a very deep suspicion that drugs destroy society by making a majority of people lethargic and unmotivated to do anything in real life. A case co

by hasenj 10y ago

Really? I have a very deep suspicion that drugs destroy society by making a majority of people lethargic and unmotivated to do anything in real life. A case could be made for exceptions here and there (like the child in this article) but I don't think it works so well in society.

throwaway729 10y ago
> by making a majority of people lethargic and unmotivated to do anything in real life. Almost all of the drug users I know are highly motivated and very successful people. Even if you include illegal drugs. Perhaps this is just selection bias at work, but that knife cuts both ways.
- vinay427 10y ago
  (Not the OP) There isn't just the selection bias of people you tend to know potentially not being representative of most drug users, but the need for comparing how those same drug users would do without drugs (I'm not sure how this is possible to evaluate). It isn't enough to say that some drug users are highly motivated and successful, which I don't contest.
  - baddox 10y ago
    That would be an interesting study, but it's not relevant to the discussion of the war on drugs. The comparison you'd need to make it how those people you know would be doing if they were in prison for using illegal drugs. I'd wager they'd be doing worse.
    - vinay427 10y ago
      I agree about that study being more relevant to the war on drugs, but my point was simply in response to the anecdotal claim about the motivation and success of drug users. If it were possible, it may provide more insight into how drugs should be viewed in society, regardless of legality.
  - throwaway729 10y ago
    In addition to baddox's comment, your comment seems to suggest that extremely productive/intelligent people have a duty to society which extends into their private leisure time. I find that burden to be absurd. If they were enjoying a light marijuana buzz (or a light alcohol/caffeine buzz!!!) during work hours -- or in a way that directly and visibly effects their work performance -- you might have a point. But even in those cases, I would still strongly disagree with your rationale. The same line of reasoning also justifies jailing people for obesity, which "Has Been Known To Significantly Decrease Productivity". And it certainly justifies jailing people who drink alcohol, since even mild hang-overs have rather extreme effects on productivity. If you're too over-weight or hung-over or high to work, then you should be fired. Not jailed. But justifying a law on the basis that individuals should organize their private life choices such that they are optimally productive as members of society? That's quite the burden, and if we're going to impose that burden, I suspect we'd have a compelling justification for jailing literally anyone.
- rtz12 10y ago
  Almost all of the drug users I know are unemployed social outcasts. One of them at least somewhat tries.
  - sv123 10y ago
    Which is why we should make sure they are locked up with violent criminals.
  - throwaway729 10y ago
    Really? Everyone who drinks alcohol and coffee and smokes tobacco? I find that extremely hard to believe. Conversely, all of the drug users I know are employed and earn between 1x and 3x the national average household income. At jobs where they're highly respected for their contributions. Again, maybe that's just anecdote. But the "anecdote" criticism cuts both ways. The only real difference is that I'm not justifying jailing people on the basis of personal anecdote.
    - MichaelBurge 10y ago
      Anecdotes aren't good for determining truth, but if you vote based on personal anecdotes you get a large statistical sample of the population when they count the votes up.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - throwaway729 10y ago
        > but if you vote based on personal anecdotes you get a large statistical sample of the population when they count the votes up. You're saying that by sampling opinions that are formed in small neighborhoods around voters, we can get a picture of ground truth -- even if reality is distorted in various ways around those small neighborhoods. This can work, but not in the case where there's something masking a portion of the data set such that personal anecdote isn't indicative of underlying reality, even locally. In that case, anecdotes aren't even locally accurate, and that effect amortizes over the voting population to result in a globally inaccurate picture of reality. Which is the case here. Criminalizing and stigmatizing drugs means that grandma doesn't necessarily know successful son-in-law smokes pot on the weekend, for example.
- edblarney 10y ago
  "Almost all of the drug users I know are highly motivated and very successful people. " It's definitely selection bias. I too lived in an urban/cool area with 'pro' drug users and (mostly) never saw a problem, though there was one accidental OD in my circle. But get out into the real world, working class areas where meth and crack in particular have laid waste - it's another story. Rural areas, working class areas, ghettos - another story - and I think they represent the 'majority' of users by far. In fact - I think that this bias is the #1 contributor to the misinformation about 'the war on drugs'.
  - throwaway729 10y ago
    > It's definitely selection bias. As I stated in another thread, the "all drug users are lazy" mythos is also a form of selection bias. The only difference is that my selection bias isn't being used as a justification for jailing people. I think that's an important difference. > Rural areas, working class areas, ghettos - another story - and I think they represent the 'majority' of users by far. We see similar harms from excessive tobacco and alcohol abuse in those communities, but we don't outlaw those drugs. So, why do we draw the arbitrary line where we do? And how, exactly, does jailing these people actually help anything? Basically, I don't take this argument seriously unless the person advocating it is in favor of marijuana legalization or else supports alcohol prohibition.
stepanhruda 10y ago
That's not the point. Addiction should be regarded as a disease, and drug problems helped with by communities. Instead they are criminalized and stigmatized.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
RhodesianHunter 10y ago
What's your deep suspicion based on? Certainly not medical research.
- hasenj 10y ago
  Visiting Vancouver
  - xj9 10y ago
    deep suspicion based on anecdotal data. sounds legit. i think this is a perfectly reasonable basis to violate individual liberty and utilize coercive methods to punish "undesirable behavior". what happens when you become the target? what if society decides that your behavior is undesirable?
    - hasenj 10y ago
      When society deems your behavior undesirable, you become a social outcast and live a miserable life. No one would hire you. No one would want to be your friend. It's not just anecdotal evidence, but also a basic understanding of human psychology and how drugs and addiction influences people.
      - xj9 10y ago
        [citation needed] show me your proof. i use drugs every day. i also have a high-paying job, friends, family. i pay my taxes, and participate in the community. i know lots of other people who live similar lifestyles. the question is, why aren't drugs destroying us? why hasn't colorado burnt to the ground? or portugal for that matter? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/05/why-hardly-anyone-dies-from-a-drug-overdose-in-portugal/?utm_term=.147fbaa20a33 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/05/why-h... https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.AcLWrvWxx https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decr... https://news.vice.com/article/ungass-portugal-what-happened-after-decriminalization-drugs-weed-to-heroin https://news.vice.com/article/ungass-portugal-what-happened-... https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/revenue/colorado-marijuana-tax-data https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/revenue/colorado-marijuana-...
xj9 10y ago
so, based on your suspicion you get to decide what substances I may ingest during my personal time? addiction can ruin lives, but the war on drugs only makes it worse for drug users. addicts need help, not punishment. you may or may not agree with drug use, but it is evident that what we are doing right now is not working.
- hasenj 10y ago
  You want your own personal desires (vice?) to trump what's beneficial or destructive to society as a whole.
  - xj9 10y ago
    [citation needed] you are positing something that you have no proof of. what we do know is that the war on drugs is damaging to society. we also know that decriminalization worked for Portugal. where is your proof? i want to be free. i don't want you or anyone else to have the power to dictate my (or anyone's) behavior.
    - hasenj 10y ago
      I think your attitude is rather childish. Your assumptions are not knowledge. Also, your concept of freedom seems rather misplaced. Everyone already does dictate your behavior. If you think otherwise, you are not thinking hard enough.
      - xj9 10y ago
        i know people try to dictate my behavior, but i can always find the courage to rebel. :) have some data: https://www.bjs.gov/content/dcf/duc.cfm https://www.bjs.gov/content/dcf/duc.cfm http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_239505_EN_TDAT15001ENN.pdf http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_239505_EN_T... decriminalization works. punishing users doesn't. if you want to do something about drugs, treat the addiction. fund rehab programs. see them as people with a medical issue, rather than morally corrupt individuals.
EliRivers 10y ago
I understand the evidence indicates otherwise. Particularly the evidence from nations states or regions therein that have legalised various drugs. Do you have any evidence to support your "deep suspicion"?
geofft 10y ago
It's certainly possible for drugs to destroy society and the war on drugs to destroy society. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and in fact they're often correlated in the more conventional type of wars: saying that the bombing of Dresden was bad for Dresden doesn't imply that Nazi rule was good for it, nor does saying that Nazi rule was bad imply that the bombing was good for the city. This is why declaring war is traditionally a last-resort approach, appropriate only when you believe the inevitable evils of waging war are worth enduring to eliminate the great evil you're facing. If the evil you're facing is not that great, war is not the right tool.
cooper12 10y ago
By your logic, the states that have legalized recreational marijuana should all be failing right now. Oh and if you were specifically talking about all drugs, Portugal decriminalized possession in 2001 and it was a staggering success. (https://www.thefix.com/content/decrim-nation-portugal-ten-years-later https://www.thefix.com/content/decrim-nation-portugal-ten-ye...)
- hasenj 10y ago
  Well, Vancouver is failing. It's a sample of one, but it's something I saw with my own eyes.
chillwaves 10y ago
> Almost 70 percent of Americans take at least one prescription drug, and more than half take two, according to researchers at the Mayo Clinic and Olmsted Medical Center. https://www.drugwatch.com/2015/07/29/drug-abuse-in-america/ https://www.drugwatch.com/2015/07/29/drug-abuse-in-america/
- hasenj 10y ago
  Also, almost 70% of Americans are obese or overweight.
throwaway-hn123 10y ago
Your religion is way more harmful than drugs, I suggest we ban it.

by hasenj 10y ago

throwaway729 10y ago

> by making a majority of people lethargic and unmotivated to do anything in real life. Almost all of the drug users I know are highly motivated and very successful people. Even if you include illegal drugs. Perhaps this is just selection bias at work, but that knife cuts both ways.

vinay427 10y ago
(Not the OP) There isn't just the selection bias of people you tend to know potentially not being representative of most drug users, but the need for comparing how those same drug users would do without drugs (I'm not sure how this is possible to evaluate). It isn't enough to say that some drug users are highly motivated and successful, which I don't contest.
- baddox 10y ago
  That would be an interesting study, but it's not relevant to the discussion of the war on drugs. The comparison you'd need to make it how those people you know would be doing if they were in prison for using illegal drugs. I'd wager they'd be doing worse.
  - vinay427 10y ago
    I agree about that study being more relevant to the war on drugs, but my point was simply in response to the anecdotal claim about the motivation and success of drug users. If it were possible, it may provide more insight into how drugs should be viewed in society, regardless of legality.
- throwaway729 10y ago
  In addition to baddox's comment, your comment seems to suggest that extremely productive/intelligent people have a duty to society which extends into their private leisure time. I find that burden to be absurd. If they were enjoying a light marijuana buzz (or a light alcohol/caffeine buzz!!!) during work hours -- or in a way that directly and visibly effects their work performance -- you might have a point. But even in those cases, I would still strongly disagree with your rationale. The same line of reasoning also justifies jailing people for obesity, which "Has Been Known To Significantly Decrease Productivity". And it certainly justifies jailing people who drink alcohol, since even mild hang-overs have rather extreme effects on productivity. If you're too over-weight or hung-over or high to work, then you should be fired. Not jailed. But justifying a law on the basis that individuals should organize their private life choices such that they are optimally productive as members of society? That's quite the burden, and if we're going to impose that burden, I suspect we'd have a compelling justification for jailing literally anyone.
rtz12 10y ago
Almost all of the drug users I know are unemployed social outcasts. One of them at least somewhat tries.
- sv123 10y ago
  Which is why we should make sure they are locked up with violent criminals.
- throwaway729 10y ago
  Really? Everyone who drinks alcohol and coffee and smokes tobacco? I find that extremely hard to believe. Conversely, all of the drug users I know are employed and earn between 1x and 3x the national average household income. At jobs where they're highly respected for their contributions. Again, maybe that's just anecdote. But the "anecdote" criticism cuts both ways. The only real difference is that I'm not justifying jailing people on the basis of personal anecdote.
  - MichaelBurge 10y ago
    Anecdotes aren't good for determining truth, but if you vote based on personal anecdotes you get a large statistical sample of the population when they count the votes up.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - throwaway729 10y ago
      > but if you vote based on personal anecdotes you get a large statistical sample of the population when they count the votes up. You're saying that by sampling opinions that are formed in small neighborhoods around voters, we can get a picture of ground truth -- even if reality is distorted in various ways around those small neighborhoods. This can work, but not in the case where there's something masking a portion of the data set such that personal anecdote isn't indicative of underlying reality, even locally. In that case, anecdotes aren't even locally accurate, and that effect amortizes over the voting population to result in a globally inaccurate picture of reality. Which is the case here. Criminalizing and stigmatizing drugs means that grandma doesn't necessarily know successful son-in-law smokes pot on the weekend, for example.
edblarney 10y ago
"Almost all of the drug users I know are highly motivated and very successful people. " It's definitely selection bias. I too lived in an urban/cool area with 'pro' drug users and (mostly) never saw a problem, though there was one accidental OD in my circle. But get out into the real world, working class areas where meth and crack in particular have laid waste - it's another story. Rural areas, working class areas, ghettos - another story - and I think they represent the 'majority' of users by far. In fact - I think that this bias is the #1 contributor to the misinformation about 'the war on drugs'.
- throwaway729 10y ago
  > It's definitely selection bias. As I stated in another thread, the "all drug users are lazy" mythos is also a form of selection bias. The only difference is that my selection bias isn't being used as a justification for jailing people. I think that's an important difference. > Rural areas, working class areas, ghettos - another story - and I think they represent the 'majority' of users by far. We see similar harms from excessive tobacco and alcohol abuse in those communities, but we don't outlaw those drugs. So, why do we draw the arbitrary line where we do? And how, exactly, does jailing these people actually help anything? Basically, I don't take this argument seriously unless the person advocating it is in favor of marijuana legalization or else supports alcohol prohibition.

stepanhruda 10y ago

That's not the point. Addiction should be regarded as a disease, and drug problems helped with by communities. Instead they are criminalized and stigmatized.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

RhodesianHunter 10y ago

What's your deep suspicion based on? Certainly not medical research.

hasenj 10y ago
Visiting Vancouver
- xj9 10y ago
  deep suspicion based on anecdotal data. sounds legit. i think this is a perfectly reasonable basis to violate individual liberty and utilize coercive methods to punish "undesirable behavior". what happens when you become the target? what if society decides that your behavior is undesirable?
  - hasenj 10y ago
    When society deems your behavior undesirable, you become a social outcast and live a miserable life. No one would hire you. No one would want to be your friend. It's not just anecdotal evidence, but also a basic understanding of human psychology and how drugs and addiction influences people.
    - xj9 10y ago
      [citation needed] show me your proof. i use drugs every day. i also have a high-paying job, friends, family. i pay my taxes, and participate in the community. i know lots of other people who live similar lifestyles. the question is, why aren't drugs destroying us? why hasn't colorado burnt to the ground? or portugal for that matter? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/05/why-hardly-anyone-dies-from-a-drug-overdose-in-portugal/?utm_term=.147fbaa20a33 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/05/why-h... https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.AcLWrvWxx https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decr... https://news.vice.com/article/ungass-portugal-what-happened-after-decriminalization-drugs-weed-to-heroin https://news.vice.com/article/ungass-portugal-what-happened-... https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/revenue/colorado-marijuana-tax-data https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/revenue/colorado-marijuana-...

xj9 10y ago

so, based on your suspicion you get to decide what substances I may ingest during my personal time? addiction can ruin lives, but the war on drugs only makes it worse for drug users. addicts need help, not punishment. you may or may not agree with drug use, but it is evident that what we are doing right now is not working.

hasenj 10y ago
You want your own personal desires (vice?) to trump what's beneficial or destructive to society as a whole.
- xj9 10y ago
  [citation needed] you are positing something that you have no proof of. what we do know is that the war on drugs is damaging to society. we also know that decriminalization worked for Portugal. where is your proof? i want to be free. i don't want you or anyone else to have the power to dictate my (or anyone's) behavior.
  - hasenj 10y ago
    I think your attitude is rather childish. Your assumptions are not knowledge. Also, your concept of freedom seems rather misplaced. Everyone already does dictate your behavior. If you think otherwise, you are not thinking hard enough.
    - xj9 10y ago
      i know people try to dictate my behavior, but i can always find the courage to rebel. :) have some data: https://www.bjs.gov/content/dcf/duc.cfm https://www.bjs.gov/content/dcf/duc.cfm http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_239505_EN_TDAT15001ENN.pdf http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_239505_EN_T... decriminalization works. punishing users doesn't. if you want to do something about drugs, treat the addiction. fund rehab programs. see them as people with a medical issue, rather than morally corrupt individuals.

EliRivers 10y ago

I understand the evidence indicates otherwise. Particularly the evidence from nations states or regions therein that have legalised various drugs. Do you have any evidence to support your "deep suspicion"?

geofft 10y ago

It's certainly possible for drugs to destroy society and the war on drugs to destroy society. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and in fact they're often correlated in the more conventional type of wars: saying that the bombing of Dresden was bad for Dresden doesn't imply that Nazi rule was good for it, nor does saying that Nazi rule was bad imply that the bombing was good for the city. This is why declaring war is traditionally a last-resort approach, appropriate only when you believe the inevitable evils of waging war are worth enduring to eliminate the great evil you're facing. If the evil you're facing is not that great, war is not the right tool.

cooper12 10y ago

By your logic, the states that have legalized recreational marijuana should all be failing right now. Oh and if you were specifically talking about all drugs, Portugal decriminalized possession in 2001 and it was a staggering success. (https://www.thefix.com/content/decrim-nation-portugal-ten-years-later https://www.thefix.com/content/decrim-nation-portugal-ten-ye...)

hasenj 10y ago
Well, Vancouver is failing. It's a sample of one, but it's something I saw with my own eyes.

chillwaves 10y ago

> Almost 70 percent of Americans take at least one prescription drug, and more than half take two, according to researchers at the Mayo Clinic and Olmsted Medical Center. https://www.drugwatch.com/2015/07/29/drug-abuse-in-america/ https://www.drugwatch.com/2015/07/29/drug-abuse-in-america/

hasenj 10y ago
Also, almost 70% of Americans are obese or overweight.

throwaway-hn123 10y ago

Your religion is way more harmful than drugs, I suggest we ban it.