4 ms·

> This part is always lost on the "legalize everything" crowd. These types of generalizations are usually built of straw and mud, but I'll go ahead and respond

> This part is always lost on the "legalize everything" crowd. These types of generalizations are usually built of straw and mud, but I'll go ahead and respond as someone in said crowd with a "no it's not." There's an implicit assumption here that increased usage is worse than the effects of prohibition, but that's at minimum highly debatable. I tend to think increased usage of a regulated and taxable substance by a well educated and supported populous is significantly preferable to prohibition and scare tactics, to say nothing of the wide swath of wide reaching knock on effects the latter has like powerful cartels/gangs, militarized police actions in response, people being groomed as convicts for their use, etc. I'm not at all inclined to sweep the dangers of hard drugs under the rug, I'm all for looking at their effects and impacts head on, and indeed I think the legalization route is the best route to do so. I think individuals should be given sole stewardship of their own conscious experience, by endogenous or exogenous means, and society's best chance of maximizing those individual choices is through well thought education, regulation, and support (which is likely to all be cheaper and more tractable than prohibition is).

andybak 3y ago
I can think of few things likely to befall a drug user that are more devastating and costly to society than a long period of incarceration.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ozim 3y ago
  Example 20 year old experimenting with drugs: Going to jail for a year breaks any career chances or most of the job opportunities plus messes up his mind by staying with other convicts. Letting him experiment with drugs, he might mess up his health but also he has still a chance to continue rather normal life.
  - culopatin 3y ago
    If he manages to get out. Gets addicted to meth, can’t work, needs more meth, what does he do?
    - andybak 3y ago
      Thing is - you don't need to show the likely outcomes are perfect - you just need to show they are better than what happens now. And right now it seems to be "if you do this thing that sometimes has a really bad outcome and we catch you then we'll make that outcome much worse"
    - mitchdoogle 3y ago
      What does a 20 year old alcoholic do? What does a 20 year old gambling addict do? It's wild that people even think of prison as an acceptable answer when there are so many analogs of things that people can abuse or get addicted to, things which we don't criminalize
- araes 3y ago
  One point people don't tend to know, is that a lot of folks actually get drugs in jail, and often prefer them. There's quite a few opioid replacements that get offered to anyone who can show addiction withdrawl, and many folks say they're actually a better, longer high than the street stuff. There's also some revolving door, and 'Shawshank' style issues, where folks rotate out for a couple months in the spring / summer, do whatever on the street, and then rotate back in the fall / winter with some dumb crime. Eat, rest, stay warm, get the opioid replacements, then head back out. Kind of a homeless shelter where you just have to do some 3-month misdemeanor stint to get room / board. Although long incarceration can definitely be an issue, there are also some folks who've made it a lifestyle.
bostonsre 3y ago
> I tend to think increased usage of a regulated and taxable substance by a well educated and supported populous is significantly preferable to prohibition and scare tactics The problem is opioids and other hard drugs aren't regulated, they are just made legal. Human thought when addicted to hard drugs is not logical. Giving people the freedom to consume them has the effect of allowing them to forfeit their freedom from choice when they become addicted. Making them even more widely available will just cause more to become ensnared in their web. We are organic machines developed without the influence of hard drugs over millions of years. We don't have complete control over our actions or thoughts. Why do you like sex? Why do you like men or women? Our programming controls this and drug addiction is a similar irrational control loop.
- ska 3y ago
  (most) Opiods are already legal and regulate - they are mostly medical useful drugs. The current opiod crisis was largely created by over-prescription of legal, regulated opiods and subsequent rejection of further prescription; something that led many addicts to search out alternative sources, which grew a market for gray and black market opiods, which grew into whatever you want to call what we have now - tons of unregulated and often 'dirty' fentanyl and carfentanil flooding the system and ending up in everything. I guess I'm saying I know where you are coming from, and increasing usage isn't going to be a great idea. On the other hand, felonization of it and the halo effect of street crime etc. absolutely is causing massive harm, arguably worse than the scenario you describe. It's not an easy problem to make real progress with.
  - bostonsre 3y ago
    Yea, it's a mess with no clear right answer. It doesn't sound like it's going too well in Portugal and Portland, but yea, some dystopian police state doesn't seem like the best answer either. It almost feels like some kind of delayed fuse terrorism that is plauging us. If cartels were killing people with guns instead of drugs, there would be military action. I wouldn't normally speak for military action, but having our fellow citizens hooked on hard drugs that kill and ruin lives is an absolute horror. Maybe we attack cartels and try to reduce supply some? Else, another route could be to produce a soma like drug that is safe and cheap so that people can be addicted and maintain their lives. It would have to be government controlled though, I don't think we would want corporations trying to compete and produce the best variant. But this route would lead to more people getting addicted and it would reduce the productivity of our society.

andybak 3y ago

I can think of few things likely to befall a drug user that are more devastating and costly to society than a long period of incarceration.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ozim 3y ago
Example 20 year old experimenting with drugs: Going to jail for a year breaks any career chances or most of the job opportunities plus messes up his mind by staying with other convicts. Letting him experiment with drugs, he might mess up his health but also he has still a chance to continue rather normal life.
- culopatin 3y ago
  If he manages to get out. Gets addicted to meth, can’t work, needs more meth, what does he do?
  - andybak 3y ago
    Thing is - you don't need to show the likely outcomes are perfect - you just need to show they are better than what happens now. And right now it seems to be "if you do this thing that sometimes has a really bad outcome and we catch you then we'll make that outcome much worse"
  - mitchdoogle 3y ago
    What does a 20 year old alcoholic do? What does a 20 year old gambling addict do? It's wild that people even think of prison as an acceptable answer when there are so many analogs of things that people can abuse or get addicted to, things which we don't criminalize
araes 3y ago
One point people don't tend to know, is that a lot of folks actually get drugs in jail, and often prefer them. There's quite a few opioid replacements that get offered to anyone who can show addiction withdrawl, and many folks say they're actually a better, longer high than the street stuff. There's also some revolving door, and 'Shawshank' style issues, where folks rotate out for a couple months in the spring / summer, do whatever on the street, and then rotate back in the fall / winter with some dumb crime. Eat, rest, stay warm, get the opioid replacements, then head back out. Kind of a homeless shelter where you just have to do some 3-month misdemeanor stint to get room / board. Although long incarceration can definitely be an issue, there are also some folks who've made it a lifestyle.

bostonsre 3y ago

> I tend to think increased usage of a regulated and taxable substance by a well educated and supported populous is significantly preferable to prohibition and scare tactics The problem is opioids and other hard drugs aren't regulated, they are just made legal. Human thought when addicted to hard drugs is not logical. Giving people the freedom to consume them has the effect of allowing them to forfeit their freedom from choice when they become addicted. Making them even more widely available will just cause more to become ensnared in their web. We are organic machines developed without the influence of hard drugs over millions of years. We don't have complete control over our actions or thoughts. Why do you like sex? Why do you like men or women? Our programming controls this and drug addiction is a similar irrational control loop.

ska 3y ago
(most) Opiods are already legal and regulate - they are mostly medical useful drugs. The current opiod crisis was largely created by over-prescription of legal, regulated opiods and subsequent rejection of further prescription; something that led many addicts to search out alternative sources, which grew a market for gray and black market opiods, which grew into whatever you want to call what we have now - tons of unregulated and often 'dirty' fentanyl and carfentanil flooding the system and ending up in everything. I guess I'm saying I know where you are coming from, and increasing usage isn't going to be a great idea. On the other hand, felonization of it and the halo effect of street crime etc. absolutely is causing massive harm, arguably worse than the scenario you describe. It's not an easy problem to make real progress with.
- bostonsre 3y ago
  Yea, it's a mess with no clear right answer. It doesn't sound like it's going too well in Portugal and Portland, but yea, some dystopian police state doesn't seem like the best answer either. It almost feels like some kind of delayed fuse terrorism that is plauging us. If cartels were killing people with guns instead of drugs, there would be military action. I wouldn't normally speak for military action, but having our fellow citizens hooked on hard drugs that kill and ruin lives is an absolute horror. Maybe we attack cartels and try to reduce supply some? Else, another route could be to produce a soma like drug that is safe and cheap so that people can be addicted and maintain their lives. It would have to be government controlled though, I don't think we would want corporations trying to compete and produce the best variant. But this route would lead to more people getting addicted and it would reduce the productivity of our society.