12 ms·
I'm still very pro-legalization because most of the epidemic is born out of legal prescription drugs, then people move to stronger illegal drugs. So here you h
by gjmacd 9y ago
I'm still very pro-legalization because most of the epidemic is born out of legal prescription drugs, then people move to stronger illegal drugs. So here you have a legal means and illegal means working in simpatico to fuel an epidemic. Stopping one isn't going to stop the other... it's not about the legalities, it's about humans. Some humans are wired for addiction more than others. Once they get on a substance, regardless of how, it's going to only to set these "pre conditioned" folks towards their addiction. Treating the drug as the issue is only going to continue the process and make it harder for acceptance of this disease. Recovery and prevention is what people need to learn. Trying to make something illegal isn't going to stop people -- we've seen this with alcohol (arguably just as big of a problem). It's interesting how as a society we treat opioid addiction differently BECAUSE drugs like Heroin are deemed illegal -- the stigma around "illegal" detracts from the root cause of the issue and therefore stunts any idea of a solid course towards acceptance and then hopefully treatment or a cure. I can only feel that if we treated all drugs as legal and the addiction as a health crisis, we might have made better strides. Lastly, we did the "War on Drugs", it didn't work -- let's look at that data and realize that it's not a problem of substance and access, it's a problem of human nature. Spending money on supporting the illegal nature of something like this only continues to perpetuate the problem.
- dontreact 9y agoThe article is in favor of making consumption legal (as in Portugal). However, the Portugese model (which has had some success) also depends on not making drugs like fentanyl and heroin commercializable. This is really what the article means by "making drugs illegal". Which is somewhat deceptive, but I do think that is the argument actually made in the article. Given the massive misrepresentation of Oxycontin as a drug effective at treating pain for 12-24 hours with a single pill which has caused so much addiction: http://www.latimes.com/projects/oxycontin-part1/ http://www.latimes.com/projects/oxycontin-part1/ Do you not see some issues with giving these companies which have already successfully deceived the public another set of dangerous products like Fentanyl and Heroin?