10 ms·

> Drug trafficking is still a crime. Which is how this should be for many drugs. Though I would like a clean source for the occasional dose of LSD. Just... yo

> Drug trafficking is still a crime. Which is how this should be for many drugs. Though I would like a clean source for the occasional dose of LSD. Just... you know once a month or so.

cylon13 6y ago
Why should we force drug trafficking in to the underground, creating a black market and all the murder that comes with enforcing contracts within it, when people are just going to buy and consume drugs anyway? Because drugs are bad for you? The trade-off doesn't seem worth it.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Mostly agree. I think a lot of drugs should be legalized. Some which I think are addictive/ destructive enough where they should be kept illegal. Bath salts, crack cocaine, are good examples of the latter. I also think we should be deliberate in how we tread this path.
  - netizen-9748 6y ago
    What compound is 'bath salts'? Is there more than one? Do they do different things?
    - ogre_codes 6y ago
      As I said, it should be a deliberate approach with specifics. Blowing it open all at once might be... really bad.
    - klyrs 6y ago
      Apparently, synthetic compounds analogous to those found in Khat. From what I gather, there are several compounds that qualify as "cathinones" and I expect they have varied effects. Drugs often have different effects on different people, too (see alcohol intolerance). Also, with any home-cooked organic chemistry, there will be a lot of variance in the product. Also, with any street supply, you never know what it's cut with (even if it appears to be beautiful dank nugs). https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/synthetic-cathinones-bath-salts https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/synthetic-c...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ttul 6y ago
  "Bath salts" are popular because far better alternatives are illegal... If pure meth, cocaine, heroin, MDMA, and other "hard" drugs were made available in a regulated format, many destructive and dangerous alternatives would no longer have a market.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    This is the big concern about making (any) drugs illegal. There is zero way for a user to ensure safe supply or with consistent dosages. This puts an additional burden on our healthcare system.
  - leakybit 6y ago
    is meth, heroin, and cocaine supposed to be safe for you?
    - filoleg 6y ago
      >is meth, heroin, and cocaine supposed to be safe for you? Most likely not, but definitely much safer than unregulated "bath salts". And keep in mind, "safe" is not binary, it is a spectrum. Even a lot of common household OTC drugs are not safe if taken in improper dosages or without following the instructions carefully. And even regarding those drugs that you've mentioned, a giant chunk of the deaths and overdoses occur due to impurities and unknown mixes that are unaccounted for due to the illegal status of those substances. For example, let's say a heroin addict keeps buying from the same dealer and knows his safe "dosage", which is N grams. The thing is, that's not the real dosage, because street heroin is mixed with tons of garbage fillers to prop up the value and make the drug cheaper to manufacture. So his real "safe" dosage could be 70% of N, with 30% being fillers. Then at some point later, he either switches dealers or his usual dealer switches suppliers, and the fillers only account for 10% of the final product now. So the addict buys his usual "safe dosage" of N grams, without being aware of decreased filler amount(dealers don't post an accurate percentage of fillers in their drugs on the package, cause why bother if it is illegal either way, and it could be that they didn't even know it themselves). Even though the addict thinks he is buying his usual "safe" dosage, in reality his dosage becomes 29% higher (0.9N grams vs. 0.7N grams), hence the overdose. Note: numbers and percentages are absolutely made up, because i have zero idea about typical heroin dosages and percentage of fillers in those. But my point should still be valid, even with the real life numbers probably being much different.
notJim 6y ago
It actually seems really problematic for drug trafficking to be a crime while consumption is decriminalized. It creates an easier market for organized crime to sell into, which reduces their risk. IMO instead we should do something along the lines of allowing doctors to prescribe pure versions of illegal drugs to people who are addicted. Then the drugs can be made by legitimate firms that can be regulated heavily.
- jjeaff 6y ago
  Reducing risk for traffickers is probably a good thing. Because it will flood the market with competitors. Organized crime thrives because of the risk, not in spite of it. They are the only ones willing to take the risk, so they own the market.
  - throwawayboise 6y ago
    They are also inclined to violently remove competition, or force competitors to operate under their control, so I think it remains to be seen how it will play out.
ttul 6y ago
I wholeheartedly disagree with you. Criminalization of drug production and distribution has been an abject policy failure from the start. Ending the criminalization of drugs and bringing all drugs into a regulatory framework that is guided by health outcomes rather than the one-size-fits-all goal of eradication is the only path that has a hope of reducing the harms associated with the hardest of drugs. You can't stop people from using even the most devastating drugs simply by making drugs illegal to produce and distribute. There will always be someone willing to take the risk, regardless of the penalties. Criminalization is the WORST form of regulation. Instead of ending up with a dangerous, yet pure product, from a trusted, regulated supplier, you end up with an impure and potentially deadly product from an unregulated and completely untrusted supplier. You can judge drug users all day long, but they're going to seek these drugs regardless of the prohibitions. And there will always be a criminal willing to supply the addiction, because the demand is 100% inelastic (i.e. totally unrelated to price). Drug criminalization has created a $400B global market that fuels terrorism, human trafficking, child exploitation, and the destruction of democracy in many corners of the world.
- sandworm101 6y ago
  >> bringing all drugs into a regulatory framework that is guided by health outcomes Outcomes for who? The individual or the population? Seriously. Ask a doctor and they would probably agree that, for a particular patient, having access to legal safe alternatives is a good thing. But ask them about drugs as a whole, for the entire population, and the answer will always be "less is better but zero is best." Stemming the supply will damage current users, but illegality also suppresses uptake by new users. Opioids are different than pot. LSD is different than rohypnol. Cocaine is not the same as ketamine. Balling all "drugs" into one category and declaring them legal for traffic and sale is a horrible idea. I don't want to see GHB to ever be sold or transported openly.
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    illegality also suppresses uptake by new users. Clearly that's not true, as evidenced by the enormous illegal drug trade. Highly regulated availability of safer substitutes for the worst drugs might reduce uptake of those worse drugs. Balling all "drugs" into one category and declaring them legal for traffic and sale is a horrible idea. That's not what the parent comment said. They specifically said based on health.
valuearb 6y ago
Drug “trafficking” should absolutely be legal. While Decriminalization is laudatory and beneficial, it solves far fewer problems than outright legalization. With decriminalization: 1) drug users will still not know what they are actually consuming. They can very easily invest drugs heavily mixed with other drugs, or dangerous chemicals. This will lead to far higher levels of accidental overdoses and is a path to more addictive substances. 2) Drug sellers will still be subject to lengthy prison terms. This directly creates to massive amounts of drug violence. If you are a dealer, you will commonly hold large amounts of cash and valuable drugs, making you a prime target for robbery including home invasions. Since you cannot rely on banks to deposit your sales, nor police to protect your property, you will need to be heavily armed. And if you suspect a partner or customer to actually be an informant who can net you a sentence nearly as long as murder, there is almost no downside to killing them. How many innocent kids have been buried in fields because of the paranoia of their dealer? 3) Our individual rights have been reduced significantly because of drug sales prohibition. Because of the war on drugs, police can get no knock warrants to burst in your house, kill your dogs, maybe even you, and not even apologize when it turns out their “tip” was wrong. If you are driving or flying with a large amount of cash, police can simply take it from you without showing it was linked to any crime, and force you to spend thousands on a lawyer to even have a chance of seeing it returned. Then there are zero tolerance laws that allowed police to seize your property because anyone on it was using drugs. We all pay the price for the drug prohibition, whether we use drugs or not. Time to end it completely.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  I'm not going to argue this because I agree in many (most?) cases. But I do think there is value in taking a measured approach to the problem as opposed to opening the flood gates.
  - briffle 6y ago
    I agree, I see this in many forms: (From IT projects, to dealing with huge homeless problems, to drug crime) We shouldn't do this, because this doesn't 'solve' the problem in 100% of cases. That is how nothing ever gets done. I think we should absolutely hit the low hanging fruit. I mean, a few years ago, Oregon legalized Weed. This last election, they legalized shrooms (in certain clinical settings). Once people see progress being made, they are much more likely to go with the next step.
encoderer 6y ago
A few doses of LSD likely saved my marriage. Things were very frozen and the drug let us really talk for the first time in a year+ (having kids is hard lol) It’s insane to me that doctors can’t prescribe this stuff. If there was any justice in the world you could go to your doctor for a safe dose of anything on your birthday.
trianglem 6y ago
I agree, but once a month? Hoo buddy, more like once a year for me. It is amazing but just completely kicks me out of my routine.

> Drug trafficking is still a crime. Which is how this should be for many drugs. Though I would like a clean source for the occasional dose of LSD. Just... you know once a month or so.

cylon13 6y ago

Why should we force drug trafficking in to the underground, creating a black market and all the murder that comes with enforcing contracts within it, when people are just going to buy and consume drugs anyway? Because drugs are bad for you? The trade-off doesn't seem worth it.

ogre_codes 6y ago
Mostly agree. I think a lot of drugs should be legalized. Some which I think are addictive/ destructive enough where they should be kept illegal. Bath salts, crack cocaine, are good examples of the latter. I also think we should be deliberate in how we tread this path.
- netizen-9748 6y ago
  What compound is 'bath salts'? Is there more than one? Do they do different things?
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    As I said, it should be a deliberate approach with specifics. Blowing it open all at once might be... really bad.
  - klyrs 6y ago
    Apparently, synthetic compounds analogous to those found in Khat. From what I gather, there are several compounds that qualify as "cathinones" and I expect they have varied effects. Drugs often have different effects on different people, too (see alcohol intolerance). Also, with any home-cooked organic chemistry, there will be a lot of variance in the product. Also, with any street supply, you never know what it's cut with (even if it appears to be beautiful dank nugs). https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/synthetic-cathinones-bath-salts https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/synthetic-c...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ttul 6y ago
"Bath salts" are popular because far better alternatives are illegal... If pure meth, cocaine, heroin, MDMA, and other "hard" drugs were made available in a regulated format, many destructive and dangerous alternatives would no longer have a market.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  This is the big concern about making (any) drugs illegal. There is zero way for a user to ensure safe supply or with consistent dosages. This puts an additional burden on our healthcare system.
- leakybit 6y ago
  is meth, heroin, and cocaine supposed to be safe for you?
  - filoleg 6y ago
    >is meth, heroin, and cocaine supposed to be safe for you? Most likely not, but definitely much safer than unregulated "bath salts". And keep in mind, "safe" is not binary, it is a spectrum. Even a lot of common household OTC drugs are not safe if taken in improper dosages or without following the instructions carefully. And even regarding those drugs that you've mentioned, a giant chunk of the deaths and overdoses occur due to impurities and unknown mixes that are unaccounted for due to the illegal status of those substances. For example, let's say a heroin addict keeps buying from the same dealer and knows his safe "dosage", which is N grams. The thing is, that's not the real dosage, because street heroin is mixed with tons of garbage fillers to prop up the value and make the drug cheaper to manufacture. So his real "safe" dosage could be 70% of N, with 30% being fillers. Then at some point later, he either switches dealers or his usual dealer switches suppliers, and the fillers only account for 10% of the final product now. So the addict buys his usual "safe dosage" of N grams, without being aware of decreased filler amount(dealers don't post an accurate percentage of fillers in their drugs on the package, cause why bother if it is illegal either way, and it could be that they didn't even know it themselves). Even though the addict thinks he is buying his usual "safe" dosage, in reality his dosage becomes 29% higher (0.9N grams vs. 0.7N grams), hence the overdose. Note: numbers and percentages are absolutely made up, because i have zero idea about typical heroin dosages and percentage of fillers in those. But my point should still be valid, even with the real life numbers probably being much different.

notJim 6y ago

It actually seems really problematic for drug trafficking to be a crime while consumption is decriminalized. It creates an easier market for organized crime to sell into, which reduces their risk. IMO instead we should do something along the lines of allowing doctors to prescribe pure versions of illegal drugs to people who are addicted. Then the drugs can be made by legitimate firms that can be regulated heavily.

jjeaff 6y ago
Reducing risk for traffickers is probably a good thing. Because it will flood the market with competitors. Organized crime thrives because of the risk, not in spite of it. They are the only ones willing to take the risk, so they own the market.
- throwawayboise 6y ago
  They are also inclined to violently remove competition, or force competitors to operate under their control, so I think it remains to be seen how it will play out.

ttul 6y ago

I wholeheartedly disagree with you. Criminalization of drug production and distribution has been an abject policy failure from the start. Ending the criminalization of drugs and bringing all drugs into a regulatory framework that is guided by health outcomes rather than the one-size-fits-all goal of eradication is the only path that has a hope of reducing the harms associated with the hardest of drugs. You can't stop people from using even the most devastating drugs simply by making drugs illegal to produce and distribute. There will always be someone willing to take the risk, regardless of the penalties. Criminalization is the WORST form of regulation. Instead of ending up with a dangerous, yet pure product, from a trusted, regulated supplier, you end up with an impure and potentially deadly product from an unregulated and completely untrusted supplier. You can judge drug users all day long, but they're going to seek these drugs regardless of the prohibitions. And there will always be a criminal willing to supply the addiction, because the demand is 100% inelastic (i.e. totally unrelated to price). Drug criminalization has created a $400B global market that fuels terrorism, human trafficking, child exploitation, and the destruction of democracy in many corners of the world.

sandworm101 6y ago
>> bringing all drugs into a regulatory framework that is guided by health outcomes Outcomes for who? The individual or the population? Seriously. Ask a doctor and they would probably agree that, for a particular patient, having access to legal safe alternatives is a good thing. But ask them about drugs as a whole, for the entire population, and the answer will always be "less is better but zero is best." Stemming the supply will damage current users, but illegality also suppresses uptake by new users. Opioids are different than pot. LSD is different than rohypnol. Cocaine is not the same as ketamine. Balling all "drugs" into one category and declaring them legal for traffic and sale is a horrible idea. I don't want to see GHB to ever be sold or transported openly.
- nitrogen 6y ago
  illegality also suppresses uptake by new users. Clearly that's not true, as evidenced by the enormous illegal drug trade. Highly regulated availability of safer substitutes for the worst drugs might reduce uptake of those worse drugs. Balling all "drugs" into one category and declaring them legal for traffic and sale is a horrible idea. That's not what the parent comment said. They specifically said based on health.

valuearb 6y ago

Drug “trafficking” should absolutely be legal. While Decriminalization is laudatory and beneficial, it solves far fewer problems than outright legalization. With decriminalization: 1) drug users will still not know what they are actually consuming. They can very easily invest drugs heavily mixed with other drugs, or dangerous chemicals. This will lead to far higher levels of accidental overdoses and is a path to more addictive substances. 2) Drug sellers will still be subject to lengthy prison terms. This directly creates to massive amounts of drug violence. If you are a dealer, you will commonly hold large amounts of cash and valuable drugs, making you a prime target for robbery including home invasions. Since you cannot rely on banks to deposit your sales, nor police to protect your property, you will need to be heavily armed. And if you suspect a partner or customer to actually be an informant who can net you a sentence nearly as long as murder, there is almost no downside to killing them. How many innocent kids have been buried in fields because of the paranoia of their dealer? 3) Our individual rights have been reduced significantly because of drug sales prohibition. Because of the war on drugs, police can get no knock warrants to burst in your house, kill your dogs, maybe even you, and not even apologize when it turns out their “tip” was wrong. If you are driving or flying with a large amount of cash, police can simply take it from you without showing it was linked to any crime, and force you to spend thousands on a lawyer to even have a chance of seeing it returned. Then there are zero tolerance laws that allowed police to seize your property because anyone on it was using drugs. We all pay the price for the drug prohibition, whether we use drugs or not. Time to end it completely.

ogre_codes 6y ago
I'm not going to argue this because I agree in many (most?) cases. But I do think there is value in taking a measured approach to the problem as opposed to opening the flood gates.
- briffle 6y ago
  I agree, I see this in many forms: (From IT projects, to dealing with huge homeless problems, to drug crime) We shouldn't do this, because this doesn't 'solve' the problem in 100% of cases. That is how nothing ever gets done. I think we should absolutely hit the low hanging fruit. I mean, a few years ago, Oregon legalized Weed. This last election, they legalized shrooms (in certain clinical settings). Once people see progress being made, they are much more likely to go with the next step.

encoderer 6y ago

A few doses of LSD likely saved my marriage. Things were very frozen and the drug let us really talk for the first time in a year+ (having kids is hard lol) It’s insane to me that doctors can’t prescribe this stuff. If there was any justice in the world you could go to your doctor for a safe dose of anything on your birthday.

trianglem 6y ago

I agree, but once a month? Hoo buddy, more like once a year for me. It is amazing but just completely kicks me out of my routine.