4 ms·

> The leading causes Did you just make my point? Drugs are already very regulated. > Maybe there is a need for regulation? Probably not.

yardstick 3y ago
Do you believe there will be fewer deaths if existing legal drugs were unregulated? Edit: Clarified it’s about existing legal drugs, not illegal drugs.
- M4v3R 3y ago
  No one is advocating for no regulation at all, but there is evidence on how limited regulation and not putting people behind bars for consuming even hard drugs like heroin is actually benefitial and results in fewer deaths, look up what happened in Sweden.
  - yardstick 3y ago
    Clarification- I didn’t think they were referencing illegal drugs, rather I believed they were talking about regulations to bring medical drugs into the market. Eg cancer drugs etc, which have to go through rigorous trials and validation first.
mschuster91 3y ago
> Drugs are already very regulated. Enforcement is lacking, incentives for criminals are extremely high - cocaine, for example, explodes in value from $2000/kg in the jungle where it's made to $20000/kg after it's been smuggled to the US - and quite a few popular drugs can be made at home using basic tools and skills (cannabis, amphetamine, alcohol, tobacco).
- unpopular42 3y ago
  Enforcement isn't lacking, it's just done counter-productively. About 20% of US prison population is already for drug offences, and of course it doesn't help anything. There is absolutely no reason to believe that other regulations are or will be enforced in a smarter way.
zapnuk 3y ago
Apples and oranges. Road safety is increased in countries with more regulations - there is direct evidence across the (developed) world. Drugs is an entirely different problem that has way more factors that make comparisons between countries rather difficult. And just because drugs are regulated AND an increasing doesn't mean that the problem is resolved by less regulation. Maybe there is just a need for different / adjusted regulations.

yardstick 3y ago

Do you believe there will be fewer deaths if existing legal drugs were unregulated? Edit: Clarified it’s about existing legal drugs, not illegal drugs.

M4v3R 3y ago
No one is advocating for no regulation at all, but there is evidence on how limited regulation and not putting people behind bars for consuming even hard drugs like heroin is actually benefitial and results in fewer deaths, look up what happened in Sweden.
- yardstick 3y ago
  Clarification- I didn’t think they were referencing illegal drugs, rather I believed they were talking about regulations to bring medical drugs into the market. Eg cancer drugs etc, which have to go through rigorous trials and validation first.

mschuster91 3y ago

> Drugs are already very regulated. Enforcement is lacking, incentives for criminals are extremely high - cocaine, for example, explodes in value from $2000/kg in the jungle where it's made to $20000/kg after it's been smuggled to the US - and quite a few popular drugs can be made at home using basic tools and skills (cannabis, amphetamine, alcohol, tobacco).

unpopular42 3y ago
Enforcement isn't lacking, it's just done counter-productively. About 20% of US prison population is already for drug offences, and of course it doesn't help anything. There is absolutely no reason to believe that other regulations are or will be enforced in a smarter way.

zapnuk 3y ago

Apples and oranges. Road safety is increased in countries with more regulations - there is direct evidence across the (developed) world. Drugs is an entirely different problem that has way more factors that make comparisons between countries rather difficult. And just because drugs are regulated AND an increasing doesn't mean that the problem is resolved by less regulation. Maybe there is just a need for different / adjusted regulations.