6 ms·

Much as I hate smoking and cigarette smoke, this politically flies in the face of free will in a liberal democracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_

Much as I hate smoking and cigarette smoke, this politically flies in the face of free will in a liberal democracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_New_Zealand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_New_Zealand

iso1631 4y ago
So you think that everyone in a liberal democracy should be able to buy Heroin?
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  I think the War on Drugs has devastated the US to little effect considering how many die of opiate overdose every year. I’m trying to figure out if you’re even serious to suggest banning heroin worked when fentanyl is the leading cause of Millennials dying.
- substation13 4y ago
  By default, adults should be allowed to buy heroin.
- Karsteski 4y ago
  Every adult, certainly.
  - DalasNoin 4y ago
    How about fentanyl and how about other theoretical substances with higher addictiveness and mortality rates?
    - Karsteski 4y ago
      I actually do not care about the addictiveness nor toxicity of any of those substances. My opinion comes from my stance that anyone should be able to do whatever they want with their own bodies. That same stance informs my thoughts on trans people, gay people, women's rights, vaccines, abortion etc etc. I see all those issues as an extension of one's right to bodily autonomy. Humanity has done an insane amount of damage to society since everyone followed along in the "war on drugs", which stemmed from racial origins and continues to have such disproportionate impact. I'm glad we are (slowly) moving away from this atrocity :)
    - olivermarks 4y ago
      @DalasNoin The solution for Fentanyl and other theoretical substances with higher addictiveness and mortality rates is to make supply a very serious offense, currently a disastrous failure in the USA. The solution with cigarettes is to make them expensive and hard to buy. Banning things does not work and lulls people into a false sense of security imo. Guns in the UK are a good example of that.
      - nicoburns 4y ago
        I’m from the UK and IMO the gun ban is very effective. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone that wasn’t a special armed policeman or a soldier with a gun. It’s very rare for someone to be shot here, and most criminals don’t carry guns because they know the penalties if caught are so much higher that it’s not worth it. Even if you were to held up with a gun (which isn’t common at all), you’d be much less likely to be shot as they wouldn’t have to worry about you shooting them.
        iso1631 4y ago
        Plenty of people have guns, but gun crime has certainly dropped dramatically since the days of Dunblane https://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/192/total_number_of_gun_deaths https://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/192/total_nu...
        olivermarks 4y ago
        https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/01/gun-rising-in-two-thirds-of-police-force-areas-in-england-and-wales https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/01/gun-rising-i... Criminals using illegal guns don't adhere to laws. Same issue in US.
        iso1631 4y ago
        "London has halved its gun crime over the past decade" Gun deaths are half what they were before the handgun ban was introduced. The UK doesn't make 5 year olds practice hiding under desks if there's an "active shooter". It doesn't need to, I don't think any country does apart from th eUS.
    - Turing_Machine 4y ago
      As far as I know, fentanyl only really became a problem because it is so potent that it's easy to smuggle. 50x stronger than heroin = you only have to smuggle 1/50th as much to make the same amount of money.
- hulitu 4y ago
  > So you think that everyone in a liberal democracy should be able to buy Heroin? Of course not. Only the choosen ones. Is New Zeeland still a democracy ?
- jamesredd 4y ago
  Politicians can decide to pass any laws they want. The ability of the state to enforce those laws is a different matter. Nothing inherent about democracy prevents it from being as restrictive on freedom as a dictatorship.
- CTDOCodebases 4y ago
  Heroin abuse is just the symptom of broader problems. Sure you can't have the population strung out on heroin while effectively juicing them for their productivity but at the same time it's not like a junkie would be living a safe healthy productive life if it weren't for heroin.
- kypro 4y ago
  What's the alternative? In a liberal democracy do you lock people who use Heroin in a cage instead? That's hardly anymore "liberal". And if the use isn't illegal you might as well allow it to be legally purchased to reduce the risk of people buying something unpure while promoting criminal drug gangs. I'm not saying it should be purchasable from a corner shop. But if it's purchasable from a place that can provide support and help for the addict? Sure.
- campl3r 4y ago
  Yes, every person of voting age.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Yes absolutely, and all other so called "hard" drugs. Or on other hand maybe we should ban ethanol too and treat it exactly like heroine. After all the damage and costs to society are pretty similar.
  - iso1631 4y ago
    Could you provide a list of liberal democracies then please? "Liberal Democracy" is not the same as "Libertarian Paradise"
- afarviral 4y ago
  I personally like the idea of fully legalized drugs, but I don't necessarily think they should be allowed to be imported and sold, at least not directly. There's a "middle way" that frames drug use in term of health, but it shouldn't be legal to profit from people's addictions.
- jjgreen 4y ago
  Just adults. Why not?
  - snapplebobapple 4y ago
    This is the right answer. Given the extreme harm of having it illegal (police costs, property theft and damage costs from thieving to pay for it, health costs of having impure illegal adulterated sources, erosion of liberty due to authoritarian ratchet up over time to try and make illegal actually work, etc) I seriously doubt selling all the drugs under a system similar to how most places treat alcohol (maybe with the added health warnings on packaging most places apply to cigarettes) would be more harmful than status quo.
mkl 4y ago
Smoking costs NZ taxpayers an enormous amount for healthcare. I (and probably most people) would rather have fewer smokers so my taxes can be used for more productive things. Individual freedoms are always constrained in various ways for the good of society, and I don't see this as much different. Sidenote: it's 1am here in NZ, so we may not get a very informed discussion here.
- ajdegol 4y ago
  you should probably make it illegal to be unhealthy in any way...
  - markus92 4y ago
    Slippery slope argument, so easy.
  - Jensson 4y ago
    That is close to what they are doing, for example they deport people for being fat. https://www.nbcnews.com/healthmain/new-zealands-solution-rising-health-costs-deport-fat-people-6c10861122 https://www.nbcnews.com/healthmain/new-zealands-solution-ris...
    - black_13 4y ago
- gregshap 4y ago
  The healthcare cost impact is more complicated. Smokers consume more healthcare at any given age, but die earlier and cost less in healthcare in their lifetime. At the national level the lifetime costs and aging population impact are arguably more important than single year costs. NEJM[https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199710093371506 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199710093371506]
  - jaclaz 4y ago
    If the average lifetime increases noticeably there might be consequences on retirement, likely increasing of expense for pensions, and - before or later - an increase in minimum age requirements to access retirement/pension. Right now - I believe - the set age is 65 years, which is "common" worldwide, but quite a few countries have gone in recent years or are going to 66-67-68 : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age
afarviral 4y ago
Nah, this policy rocks. No one who is already addicted to smoking will suffer as they ratchet the age so that existing smokers can continue to smoke. If you really want to try/start you can bloody well learn to cultivate it yourself and no one can stop you. It was signed, sealed and delivered within a liberal democracy. Kiwi here.
- chroma 4y ago
  New Zealand is not a liberal democracy. It restricts freedom of information. New Zealand has banned over 1,300 books, and restricted access to another 728. The country also bans certain video games, and even the second Human Centipede film. New Zealand also blocks its citizens from opening TCP connections to certain IP addresses, as they deem the sites so dangerous that visiting them for any reason (even research) could be harmful to society. Somehow other countries do fine without these restrictions.

iso1631 4y ago

So you think that everyone in a liberal democracy should be able to buy Heroin?

zmgsabst 4y ago
I think the War on Drugs has devastated the US to little effect considering how many die of opiate overdose every year. I’m trying to figure out if you’re even serious to suggest banning heroin worked when fentanyl is the leading cause of Millennials dying.
substation13 4y ago
By default, adults should be allowed to buy heroin.
Karsteski 4y ago
Every adult, certainly.
- DalasNoin 4y ago
  How about fentanyl and how about other theoretical substances with higher addictiveness and mortality rates?
  - Karsteski 4y ago
    I actually do not care about the addictiveness nor toxicity of any of those substances. My opinion comes from my stance that anyone should be able to do whatever they want with their own bodies. That same stance informs my thoughts on trans people, gay people, women's rights, vaccines, abortion etc etc. I see all those issues as an extension of one's right to bodily autonomy. Humanity has done an insane amount of damage to society since everyone followed along in the "war on drugs", which stemmed from racial origins and continues to have such disproportionate impact. I'm glad we are (slowly) moving away from this atrocity :)
  - olivermarks 4y ago
    @DalasNoin The solution for Fentanyl and other theoretical substances with higher addictiveness and mortality rates is to make supply a very serious offense, currently a disastrous failure in the USA. The solution with cigarettes is to make them expensive and hard to buy. Banning things does not work and lulls people into a false sense of security imo. Guns in the UK are a good example of that.
    - nicoburns 4y ago
      I’m from the UK and IMO the gun ban is very effective. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone that wasn’t a special armed policeman or a soldier with a gun. It’s very rare for someone to be shot here, and most criminals don’t carry guns because they know the penalties if caught are so much higher that it’s not worth it. Even if you were to held up with a gun (which isn’t common at all), you’d be much less likely to be shot as they wouldn’t have to worry about you shooting them.
      - iso1631 4y ago
        Plenty of people have guns, but gun crime has certainly dropped dramatically since the days of Dunblane https://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/192/total_number_of_gun_deaths https://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/192/total_nu...
      - olivermarks 4y ago
        https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/01/gun-rising-in-two-thirds-of-police-force-areas-in-england-and-wales https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/01/gun-rising-i... Criminals using illegal guns don't adhere to laws. Same issue in US.
        iso1631 4y ago
        "London has halved its gun crime over the past decade" Gun deaths are half what they were before the handgun ban was introduced. The UK doesn't make 5 year olds practice hiding under desks if there's an "active shooter". It doesn't need to, I don't think any country does apart from th eUS.
  - Turing_Machine 4y ago
    As far as I know, fentanyl only really became a problem because it is so potent that it's easy to smuggle. 50x stronger than heroin = you only have to smuggle 1/50th as much to make the same amount of money.
hulitu 4y ago
> So you think that everyone in a liberal democracy should be able to buy Heroin? Of course not. Only the choosen ones. Is New Zeeland still a democracy ?
jamesredd 4y ago
Politicians can decide to pass any laws they want. The ability of the state to enforce those laws is a different matter. Nothing inherent about democracy prevents it from being as restrictive on freedom as a dictatorship.
CTDOCodebases 4y ago
Heroin abuse is just the symptom of broader problems. Sure you can't have the population strung out on heroin while effectively juicing them for their productivity but at the same time it's not like a junkie would be living a safe healthy productive life if it weren't for heroin.
kypro 4y ago
What's the alternative? In a liberal democracy do you lock people who use Heroin in a cage instead? That's hardly anymore "liberal". And if the use isn't illegal you might as well allow it to be legally purchased to reduce the risk of people buying something unpure while promoting criminal drug gangs. I'm not saying it should be purchasable from a corner shop. But if it's purchasable from a place that can provide support and help for the addict? Sure.
campl3r 4y ago
Yes, every person of voting age.
Ekaros 4y ago
Yes absolutely, and all other so called "hard" drugs. Or on other hand maybe we should ban ethanol too and treat it exactly like heroine. After all the damage and costs to society are pretty similar.
- iso1631 4y ago
  Could you provide a list of liberal democracies then please? "Liberal Democracy" is not the same as "Libertarian Paradise"
afarviral 4y ago
I personally like the idea of fully legalized drugs, but I don't necessarily think they should be allowed to be imported and sold, at least not directly. There's a "middle way" that frames drug use in term of health, but it shouldn't be legal to profit from people's addictions.
jjgreen 4y ago
Just adults. Why not?
- snapplebobapple 4y ago
  This is the right answer. Given the extreme harm of having it illegal (police costs, property theft and damage costs from thieving to pay for it, health costs of having impure illegal adulterated sources, erosion of liberty due to authoritarian ratchet up over time to try and make illegal actually work, etc) I seriously doubt selling all the drugs under a system similar to how most places treat alcohol (maybe with the added health warnings on packaging most places apply to cigarettes) would be more harmful than status quo.

mkl 4y ago

Smoking costs NZ taxpayers an enormous amount for healthcare. I (and probably most people) would rather have fewer smokers so my taxes can be used for more productive things. Individual freedoms are always constrained in various ways for the good of society, and I don't see this as much different. Sidenote: it's 1am here in NZ, so we may not get a very informed discussion here.

ajdegol 4y ago
you should probably make it illegal to be unhealthy in any way...
- markus92 4y ago
  Slippery slope argument, so easy.
- Jensson 4y ago
  That is close to what they are doing, for example they deport people for being fat. https://www.nbcnews.com/healthmain/new-zealands-solution-rising-health-costs-deport-fat-people-6c10861122 https://www.nbcnews.com/healthmain/new-zealands-solution-ris...
  - black_13 4y ago
gregshap 4y ago
The healthcare cost impact is more complicated. Smokers consume more healthcare at any given age, but die earlier and cost less in healthcare in their lifetime. At the national level the lifetime costs and aging population impact are arguably more important than single year costs. NEJM[https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199710093371506 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199710093371506]
- jaclaz 4y ago
  If the average lifetime increases noticeably there might be consequences on retirement, likely increasing of expense for pensions, and - before or later - an increase in minimum age requirements to access retirement/pension. Right now - I believe - the set age is 65 years, which is "common" worldwide, but quite a few countries have gone in recent years or are going to 66-67-68 : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age

afarviral 4y ago

Nah, this policy rocks. No one who is already addicted to smoking will suffer as they ratchet the age so that existing smokers can continue to smoke. If you really want to try/start you can bloody well learn to cultivate it yourself and no one can stop you. It was signed, sealed and delivered within a liberal democracy. Kiwi here.

chroma 4y ago
New Zealand is not a liberal democracy. It restricts freedom of information. New Zealand has banned over 1,300 books, and restricted access to another 728. The country also bans certain video games, and even the second Human Centipede film. New Zealand also blocks its citizens from opening TCP connections to certain IP addresses, as they deem the sites so dangerous that visiting them for any reason (even research) could be harmful to society. Somehow other countries do fine without these restrictions.