6 ms·

I work at a shelter, let me give my on-the-ground opinion. People who get hooked on drugs normally do so because their life is awful. Opioids, amphetamines, and

by zwkrt 5y ago

I work at a shelter, let me give my on-the-ground opinion. People who get hooked on drugs normally do so because their life is awful. Opioids, amphetamines, and barbiturates (not common b/c of cost) are all different ways to escape reality. This checks out if you think of the main demographics of users: the homeless, the unemployed, the lonely elderly, poor rural workers, “problem” students, cooped up housewives. People with things going for them and/or who have a sense of purpose tend not to take these drugs, because the negative side effects are too great, mainly that no one wants to hang out with you if you are strung out. And the drugs are not in scarce supply. They are not hard to find. What they /are/ though is incredibly dangerous. Most people taking them are very short on cash because they are hooked on drugs, so the drug is getting in the way of paying for food, housing, and family. And drugs are almost always cut with cheaper additives. Opioids are often cut with wildly addictive chemicals that are 100s or 1000s of times stronger than what users are paying for. Needles are expensive and controlled so they get reused. Uppers are cut with many kinds of other amphetamines with awful downsides and agitation that lasts for days on end. Alcohol is so cheap and available we don’t even consider it a dangerous drug, but those dependent on it will die of incredibly painful seizures if they stop taking it. So put this all together and what we have is a nationwide mental health crisis being compounded by the fact that the easily available medicine people are using to self medicate is illegal, and that makes it dangerous. Making all drugs legal is only one small part in solving the problem, but if it was legal we wouldn’t be dealing with homemade meth, fentanyl, relapse overdoses, and death by involuntary withdrawal (i.e., running out of money for the drug you are physically dependent on). Legalized drugs won’t cause your children or loved ones to start doing drugs, a lack of opportunity will.

rantwasp 5y ago
this person get it. my theory is that poverty and social inequality in general (as a precursor of poverty) are at a root of a lot of things. It's very easy to pay lip service to X, Y and Z and ignore the elephant in the room.
pmoriarty 5y ago
"Making all drugs legal is only the first step to solving the problem, but if it was legal we wouldn't be dealing with homemade meth, fentanyl, overdoses, and death by involuntary withdrawal..." I'm 110% for legalization, but we need to set realistic expectations. Legalization will make drug use way, way, way safer and lots less people will die and have their lives ruined (both from safer drugs and because they're not getting arrested, separated from their families, imprisoned, or killed by the police, etc..). But overdoses will still happen because some people will still: 1 - intentionally overdose to kill themselves 2 - mix drugs, which is usually way more dangerous than using a single drug, and (depending on the drugs) how they interact might not even be known, so no safe dosage can be ascertained even if both were perfectly legal.. incidentally, mixing any of a large variety of drugs with alcohol is one of the deadliest combinations 3 - while on drugs people tend not to make the most carefully considered decisions, including whether to take more Of course, all of this is still possible and still done even when drugs are illegal, and making drugs legal will improve almost all of these outcomes (except intentional suicide), since at least the drugs in question will be of known purity and dosage.. but there will still be overdoses (just a lot less of them).
- rantwasp 5y ago
  look, if someone wants to kill themselves they will find a way. IMHO, education is the key. With great power (access to drugs) comes great responsibility (you need to do the right thing). Nobody will mix things they know will get them killed. Nobody will overdose on purpose. Education and Personal Freedom.
  - pmoriarty 5y ago
    "Nobody will mix things they know will get them killed. Nobody will overdose on purpose." Well, setting aside intentional suicides, this is true. However, that doesn't mean that they won't mix stuff they don't know will get them killed. Case in point is alcohol and any of a whole bunch of other drugs, which kills people all the time. Alcohol's already legal, and making other drugs legal won't stop people from mixing their (now pure) drugs with alcohol. Education will definitely help, and I'm all for it. It's probably the most powerful source of good apart from legalization itself. However, some people just won't care or won't listen or won't believe or will be peer pressured in to doing it by their friends, or will already be too smashed on alcohol or some other drug to make the best decision so will mix in unsafe combinations anyway. "Education and Personal Freedom." I'm all for both, but we need to be aware that there will still be both intentional and unintentional overdoses. They happen from both currently legal over-the-counter and prescription medications, after all. Legalized drugs will be no different.
mynameisash 5y ago
Perhaps I'm getting into semantics, but I've heard the distinction made between legalization and decriminalization. Based on my understanding, 'decriminalization' is essentially "don't prosecute someone for using drugs," which can shift funding away from police and toward health care, focusing our societal attention accordingly. Contrast this with 'legalization', which I would phrase as having a sanctioned way to legally sell to the general public. Am I wrong here? When I see people saying, "Legalize all drugs," I interpret it to mean, "make it so anyone can sell drugs and pay taxes on them" which seems pretty extreme to me. But "decriminalize all drugs" makes a lot more sense in this context. To be clear, it seems logical to me that we stop arresting people for using drugs, but it doesn't seem reasonable to go a step further and allow retail sales of opioids. (Again, it's complicated by the catchall term 'drugs', where retail pot sales are much less problematic than the example of opioids.) Edit: Recognizing that exceedingly few people are likely to wake up one day and say, "I think I'll try heroin," maybe there's less of a difference between these two terms than I imagine? If legalization means regulations on the quality/purity of the product, for example, then 'sanctioning' retail sales would provide a benefit that 'decriminalization' wouldn't have.
- rantwasp 5y ago
  you got it. decriminalization == it’s still illegal, but you won’t get prosecuted for it (this deincentivizes law enforcement from pursuing it) legalization == it’s legal and now you can buy it and consume it.
- eurasiantiger 5y ago
  Decriminalization is a back door for criminal enterprises. They would still control supply, which means they would control quality, variety, price and availability. Do we want to give monopoly on those powers to organized crime? Just look at the Netherlands: on the surface everything looks fine, but then there are murders of politicians…
cromka 5y ago
> People who get hooked on drugs normally do so because their life is awful. The thing is, we don't know what kind of people would get hooked on drugs if all of them were legal. We don't know if there's correlation between illegality and inaccessibility of the drugs and their abuse by people whose life if awful. > They are not hard to find. Vast majority of people do not know where immediately get hard drugs from. Making them legal would make vast majority of them absolutely aware of where to get them from. > Legalized drugs won’t cause your children or loved ones to start doing drugs, a lack of opportunity will. Oh yes it will. Not everyone who lacks opportunities in life is willing to resort to illegal drugs right now. But if they were legal, many more would. I am sorry, but from logical standpoint, your experience is is an observational bias. Looking at a society at large, from statistical perspective, legalizing hard drugs would make many more compelled to try them, purely by enabling them to do so. Decriminalizing them, however, would surely improve situation, especially if the money spent on enforcement was spent on mental health instead – see Portugal as a great example of such policy. BTW: replace "drugs" with "guns" and you sound like "guns don't kill people, people do".
- eurasiantiger 5y ago
  It’s baffling how people cherry-pick their opinions on this subject. When someone working the field says the usual ”drugs are bad” mantra, people agree and say: listen to this expert, he knows what actually happens. But when that field expert says otherwise, she is no longer being listened to. Were we listening, understanding and thinking the first time? Btw, drugs don’t kill people — people selling fake, cut and laced drugs do. In other words, profit motives kill people.
- tayo42 5y ago
  > BTW: replace "drugs" with "guns" and you sound like "guns don't kill people, people do". I think this misses the nuances of these arguments. I can speak for my self, where my view points could be summarized to be to increase restrictions on guns and legalize all drugs. You would be right this seems to be inconsistent. But that's not really my view point at least. Guns are necessary to some degree, but I dont think they need to be given out at as freely as they are. Not everyone needs one, i think we can restrict through something like applications you has one and who doesn't. Also restrict the types of firearms(And im not here to debate gun control, im just explaining there's more then just a one liner to the opinion) With drugs, I think we can legalize them all. But this also doesn't mean a free for all on availability. We should have limits on marketing, age restrictions, improved education. Like heroine should be available from a store, but maybe only in a plain white box, with a label on it. No one gets to market it as cool.

by zwkrt 5y ago

rantwasp 5y ago

this person get it. my theory is that poverty and social inequality in general (as a precursor of poverty) are at a root of a lot of things. It's very easy to pay lip service to X, Y and Z and ignore the elephant in the room.

pmoriarty 5y ago

"Making all drugs legal is only the first step to solving the problem, but if it was legal we wouldn't be dealing with homemade meth, fentanyl, overdoses, and death by involuntary withdrawal..." I'm 110% for legalization, but we need to set realistic expectations. Legalization will make drug use way, way, way safer and lots less people will die and have their lives ruined (both from safer drugs and because they're not getting arrested, separated from their families, imprisoned, or killed by the police, etc..). But overdoses will still happen because some people will still: 1 - intentionally overdose to kill themselves 2 - mix drugs, which is usually way more dangerous than using a single drug, and (depending on the drugs) how they interact might not even be known, so no safe dosage can be ascertained even if both were perfectly legal.. incidentally, mixing any of a large variety of drugs with alcohol is one of the deadliest combinations 3 - while on drugs people tend not to make the most carefully considered decisions, including whether to take more Of course, all of this is still possible and still done even when drugs are illegal, and making drugs legal will improve almost all of these outcomes (except intentional suicide), since at least the drugs in question will be of known purity and dosage.. but there will still be overdoses (just a lot less of them).

rantwasp 5y ago
look, if someone wants to kill themselves they will find a way. IMHO, education is the key. With great power (access to drugs) comes great responsibility (you need to do the right thing). Nobody will mix things they know will get them killed. Nobody will overdose on purpose. Education and Personal Freedom.
- pmoriarty 5y ago
  "Nobody will mix things they know will get them killed. Nobody will overdose on purpose." Well, setting aside intentional suicides, this is true. However, that doesn't mean that they won't mix stuff they don't know will get them killed. Case in point is alcohol and any of a whole bunch of other drugs, which kills people all the time. Alcohol's already legal, and making other drugs legal won't stop people from mixing their (now pure) drugs with alcohol. Education will definitely help, and I'm all for it. It's probably the most powerful source of good apart from legalization itself. However, some people just won't care or won't listen or won't believe or will be peer pressured in to doing it by their friends, or will already be too smashed on alcohol or some other drug to make the best decision so will mix in unsafe combinations anyway. "Education and Personal Freedom." I'm all for both, but we need to be aware that there will still be both intentional and unintentional overdoses. They happen from both currently legal over-the-counter and prescription medications, after all. Legalized drugs will be no different.

mynameisash 5y ago

Perhaps I'm getting into semantics, but I've heard the distinction made between legalization and decriminalization. Based on my understanding, 'decriminalization' is essentially "don't prosecute someone for using drugs," which can shift funding away from police and toward health care, focusing our societal attention accordingly. Contrast this with 'legalization', which I would phrase as having a sanctioned way to legally sell to the general public. Am I wrong here? When I see people saying, "Legalize all drugs," I interpret it to mean, "make it so anyone can sell drugs and pay taxes on them" which seems pretty extreme to me. But "decriminalize all drugs" makes a lot more sense in this context. To be clear, it seems logical to me that we stop arresting people for using drugs, but it doesn't seem reasonable to go a step further and allow retail sales of opioids. (Again, it's complicated by the catchall term 'drugs', where retail pot sales are much less problematic than the example of opioids.) Edit: Recognizing that exceedingly few people are likely to wake up one day and say, "I think I'll try heroin," maybe there's less of a difference between these two terms than I imagine? If legalization means regulations on the quality/purity of the product, for example, then 'sanctioning' retail sales would provide a benefit that 'decriminalization' wouldn't have.

rantwasp 5y ago
you got it. decriminalization == it’s still illegal, but you won’t get prosecuted for it (this deincentivizes law enforcement from pursuing it) legalization == it’s legal and now you can buy it and consume it.
eurasiantiger 5y ago
Decriminalization is a back door for criminal enterprises. They would still control supply, which means they would control quality, variety, price and availability. Do we want to give monopoly on those powers to organized crime? Just look at the Netherlands: on the surface everything looks fine, but then there are murders of politicians…

cromka 5y ago

> People who get hooked on drugs normally do so because their life is awful. The thing is, we don't know what kind of people would get hooked on drugs if all of them were legal. We don't know if there's correlation between illegality and inaccessibility of the drugs and their abuse by people whose life if awful. > They are not hard to find. Vast majority of people do not know where immediately get hard drugs from. Making them legal would make vast majority of them absolutely aware of where to get them from. > Legalized drugs won’t cause your children or loved ones to start doing drugs, a lack of opportunity will. Oh yes it will. Not everyone who lacks opportunities in life is willing to resort to illegal drugs right now. But if they were legal, many more would. I am sorry, but from logical standpoint, your experience is is an observational bias. Looking at a society at large, from statistical perspective, legalizing hard drugs would make many more compelled to try them, purely by enabling them to do so. Decriminalizing them, however, would surely improve situation, especially if the money spent on enforcement was spent on mental health instead – see Portugal as a great example of such policy. BTW: replace "drugs" with "guns" and you sound like "guns don't kill people, people do".

eurasiantiger 5y ago
It’s baffling how people cherry-pick their opinions on this subject. When someone working the field says the usual ”drugs are bad” mantra, people agree and say: listen to this expert, he knows what actually happens. But when that field expert says otherwise, she is no longer being listened to. Were we listening, understanding and thinking the first time? Btw, drugs don’t kill people — people selling fake, cut and laced drugs do. In other words, profit motives kill people.
tayo42 5y ago
> BTW: replace "drugs" with "guns" and you sound like "guns don't kill people, people do". I think this misses the nuances of these arguments. I can speak for my self, where my view points could be summarized to be to increase restrictions on guns and legalize all drugs. You would be right this seems to be inconsistent. But that's not really my view point at least. Guns are necessary to some degree, but I dont think they need to be given out at as freely as they are. Not everyone needs one, i think we can restrict through something like applications you has one and who doesn't. Also restrict the types of firearms(And im not here to debate gun control, im just explaining there's more then just a one liner to the opinion) With drugs, I think we can legalize them all. But this also doesn't mean a free for all on availability. We should have limits on marketing, age restrictions, improved education. Like heroine should be available from a store, but maybe only in a plain white box, with a label on it. No one gets to market it as cool.