4 ms·
Slippery slope. What happens when a drug addict looking his next fix attacks someone? This is why we have drug laws to start with, was to protect people. Ther
by RobertRoberts 5y ago
Slippery slope.
What happens when a drug addict looking his next fix attacks someone? This is why we have drug laws to start with, was to protect people.
There are no simple answers here.
- wonderwonder 5y agoHave assaults gone up in the states where marijuana has been legalized?
- RobertRoberts 5y agoI would argue that any drug that are depressants would have a different effect when high vs when the user is in withdrawl. Marijuana is considerably different than narcotics from my first hand experience/witness of it's effect on people. Dope heads don't jones for their next hit. But I have seen a sweet young naive young teen turn into a mugger from meth.
- AQuantized 5y agoArrest them for assault...? Basically every study or reasonable implementation of decriminalization has shown both fewer negative effects of drug use, and in many cases decreased drug use itself. So there is in fact a simple answer, and I think you'll find that drug laws were likely conceived much more cynically than for the protection of the common person.
- RobertRoberts 5y agoWe have already (as a society) decided we will no longer forcibly help people, so what do you do with someone that hurts others to feed their addiction? Put them all in jail for every little offense? Fine them? (they have no money) Force them into rehab? (another form of jail) Let the roam the streets attacking people? (recycle through jail or rehab) No, it's not simple.
- nradov 5y agoAssault is not a "little offense". Anyone convicted of criminal assault should spend a significant amount of time in prison (regardless of whether they're a drug addict or not) in order to protect the rest of society.
- leishman 5y agoIt is in San Francisco
- NovemberWhiskey 5y agoWe just elected a district attorney in Manhattan who has adopted a policy that he will not seek imprisonment for charges of simple assault.
- haroldp 5y agoAssaulting people for drug money is an artifact of the drug war, not the drug. Alcohol addicts don't typically assault people for alcohol money. Alcohol gangs do not shoot each other up on the streets over alcohol territory. Or they haven't since 1933.
- reverend_gonzo 5y agoAssault is already a crime. What happens when a person robs someone so he can buy a new car? You don’t outlaw cars.
- _-david-_ 5y agoCars don't cause impaired judgment and withdraw.
- tikkabhuna 5y agoI don't believe the poster above is saying that there should be no intervention, they're saying they shouldn't be criminally prosecuted. There should be a non-criminal route for helping drug addicts that doesn't result in prison.
- RobertRoberts 5y agoI can agree with that, but what is it? It can't be forced rehab, that is just jail but different. And addicts by definition _won't_ seek help or a solution.
- destar 5y agoI don't agree with your definition, often people affected by addiction will desperately seek help. Unfortunately, many fall into relapse cycles and it's a long and hard process to recovery. I think a good solution would be making quality non-forced resources available for free. For example, rehab, therapy, or jobs specifically created for those seeking to overcome their addiction. Ideally these programs could pay for themselves in net returns for society as a whole.
- RobertRoberts 5y agoThere is help right now for addicts. What change are you suggesting?
- destar 5y agoSorry for the late reply. I think much of the help available is cost prohibitive, I think addiction treatment programs should be free. A much better use of money than locking people up in cages which is both inhumane and more expensive.
- haroldp 5y agoWhat you are thinking of as the side effects of drug addiction are mainly the side effects of prohibition. Alcohol addiction is a serious problem, with serious negative consequences. So we made it illegal. And then we had two problems instead of one. Drug laws do not decrease addiction rates. They do make drugs unnecessarily expensive, and force addicts to interact with violent criminal gangs to get them. The negative unintended consequences of drug prohibition are worse than the problem they purport, but fail to solve.
- RobertRoberts 5y agoWhich drug will do more harm if freely available to all children? Alcohol, meth, heroin or crack? I will pick alcohol every time over the others.
- haroldp 5y agoWhich vehicle will do more harm if freely available to all children? Car, tank or crane with wrecking ball? I would suggest that children shouldn't be driving at all.
- boomboomsubban 5y agoWhy am I forced to choose any or just one? Why do you think alcohol does less harm then any of the others? Currently far, far more children die due to alcohol than the others, and while that's definitely due to availability it's not obvious that wouldn't still be the case if all were legal.
- RobertRoberts 5y ago> Why do you think alcohol does less harm then any of the others? A simple test, give each to a baby/small child and see what happens... I lived in a time where babies were given tiny amounts of alcohol for pain relief and it did no harm that I ever heard. I doubt you can say the same for meth.
- 5y ago
- the_only_law 5y ago> What happens when a drug addict looking his next fix attacks someone? You arrest and charge them for attacking someone?
- josephcsible 5y agoBut if the person they attacked dies, arresting the attacker after the fact doesn't bring them back to life. Do you also think DUI should be legal until you get in a crash?
- the_only_law 5y ago> Do you also think DUI should be legal until you get in a crash? No clearly we should charge anyone found in possession of alcohol with a felony to lower the possibility. Drinking is not a crime, being drunk alone is not a crime, driving is not a crime. Being drunk, while driving is. On the other hand, assault is a crime regardless.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]