3 ms·
The rest of that sentence indicates it has to do with smuggling. In other words, given the border situation, there should be less contraband availability. And s
by Gargoyle 10y ago
The rest of that sentence indicates it has to do with smuggling. In other words, given the border situation, there should be less contraband availability. And so presumably less abuse of controlled substances.
I'm not sure it really is a major factor, but it's a valid point to raise.
- jameshart 10y agoAh, but this is not a comparison study between Iceland and other countries, this is a comparison between Iceland today and Iceland in 1998. So the 'smugglers did it' hypothesis must be that 20 years ago, Iceland was larger and located closer to major continents, making it a better target for smuggling contraband, but that volatile icelanic geology has moved it out into the north atlantic and led to the reported changes in juvenile delinquency and substance abuse. Possible. We should conduct further studies to eliminate this confounding factor.
- Gargoyle 10y agoHas snark ever been a convincing tool? I think it must be among the very least effective tactics available. The point here is that due to having less contraband, any efforts to restrict the substances can be more effective. If there's more contraband floating around, restrictions are harder to enforce. In other words, you can get more result for your effort if there aren't alternative ways to obtain the substances.