3 ms·

Perhaps there is the notion that as a society you want to marginalize drug consumption - whatever the cost. You might want to send the message that doing drugs

Perhaps there is the notion that as a society you want to marginalize drug consumption - whatever the cost. You might want to send the message that doing drugs for entertainment purposes isn't a "normal" activity and you prefer to have citizens that look for something else than "having fun". But there's more to the story... It's over simplification to say that puritanism is behind entertainment drugs prohibition. Endemic and widespread drug usage is a real possibility and generally results in a society coming to a halt. A contemporary example is Djibouti and its widespread Khat consumption problem. France, early XXth century had a major issue with Absinthe as well. Older example is China and Opium. Most of the drugs that are illegal were legal at some point. In the early XXth century you could purchase heroin at the apothecary. This is no longer the case, and that's not just because "doing drugs is bad m'k". Having drugs illegal makes sure it cannot go beyond a certain point, with counterproductive effects, that's true. But even if it were legal you would have a black market for cheaper/stronger drugs. No silver bullet...

dalore 15y ago
Treating drug users as criminals is definitely wrong. They should be treated like mental patients, but only if their drug use is causing a problem.
- shin_lao 15y ago
  They're not treated as criminals, worst case scenario they are treated as felons.
InclinedPlane 15y ago
Should I wait for your next post where you will address any of my major points (such as those in the 2nd to last paragraph especially) or is this it? As to your points above I have a quite suitable counter-argument in the form of the existence proof of modern, productive, civil societies that have legalized or decriminalized drug use and have not seen the catastrophic problems that people such as yourself have predicted, namely: The Netherlands and Portugal. When observation differs from the predictions of a model it's time to abandon that model. The predictions of the model "prohibition is almost invariably worse than legalization/decriminalization" so far have a rather incredibly high batting average.
- shin_lao 15y ago
  In Portugal you are brought in front of a judge where you will be offered help with addictions. You're still arrested for having and/or using drugs. People holding more than small amounts or producing are still jailed. In the Netherlands they have such a problem of narco-tourism that they had to harden laws regarding drugs and I would not be surprised that more hardening will come. Additionally, not all drugs were made legal. You seem to believe that penalizing drugs usage is wrong and counter-productive. My point of view is that it's normal for a state to regulate substances that are potentially harmful. At some point we leave the domain of objective arguments for the domain of personal beliefs.
anamax 15y ago
> Endemic and widespread drug usage is a real possibility and generally results in a society coming to a halt. Lots of things can cause society to come to a halt. However, the relevant question is what to do about those things. As has been pointed out, some "solutions" to the drug problem cost far more than the savings. (No, you don't get to count the size of the problem. You only get to count the difference that you make.) > But even if it were legal you would have a black market for cheaper/stronger drugs. Yup, look at those stronger cigarettes and stronger alcohol. What? They don't exist? Note that price does matter - legal but very expensive is effectively illegal. (Which reminds me, at least some of the "illegal drugs" are legal if you pay the very expensive taxes. These taxes often take the form of a "stamp", which frustrates collectors who would like to have all US stamps issued in 2011.)

dalore 15y ago

Treating drug users as criminals is definitely wrong. They should be treated like mental patients, but only if their drug use is causing a problem.

shin_lao 15y ago
They're not treated as criminals, worst case scenario they are treated as felons.

InclinedPlane 15y ago

Should I wait for your next post where you will address any of my major points (such as those in the 2nd to last paragraph especially) or is this it? As to your points above I have a quite suitable counter-argument in the form of the existence proof of modern, productive, civil societies that have legalized or decriminalized drug use and have not seen the catastrophic problems that people such as yourself have predicted, namely: The Netherlands and Portugal. When observation differs from the predictions of a model it's time to abandon that model. The predictions of the model "prohibition is almost invariably worse than legalization/decriminalization" so far have a rather incredibly high batting average.

shin_lao 15y ago
In Portugal you are brought in front of a judge where you will be offered help with addictions. You're still arrested for having and/or using drugs. People holding more than small amounts or producing are still jailed. In the Netherlands they have such a problem of narco-tourism that they had to harden laws regarding drugs and I would not be surprised that more hardening will come. Additionally, not all drugs were made legal. You seem to believe that penalizing drugs usage is wrong and counter-productive. My point of view is that it's normal for a state to regulate substances that are potentially harmful. At some point we leave the domain of objective arguments for the domain of personal beliefs.

anamax 15y ago

> Endemic and widespread drug usage is a real possibility and generally results in a society coming to a halt. Lots of things can cause society to come to a halt. However, the relevant question is what to do about those things. As has been pointed out, some "solutions" to the drug problem cost far more than the savings. (No, you don't get to count the size of the problem. You only get to count the difference that you make.) > But even if it were legal you would have a black market for cheaper/stronger drugs. Yup, look at those stronger cigarettes and stronger alcohol. What? They don't exist? Note that price does matter - legal but very expensive is effectively illegal. (Which reminds me, at least some of the "illegal drugs" are legal if you pay the very expensive taxes. These taxes often take the form of a "stamp", which frustrates collectors who would like to have all US stamps issued in 2011.)