44 ms·

Clearly the prohibition on drugs is not preventing those people from accessing them. Obviously rehabilitation would be ideal. But all else being equal, it would

Clearly the prohibition on drugs is not preventing those people from accessing them. Obviously rehabilitation would be ideal. But all else being equal, it would be better if the drugs were cheaper and safer.

kcb 3y ago
It's not so hard to believe that lack of access prevents some from getting hooked.
- brnaftr361 3y ago
  The dangers of getting hooked are greatly exacerbated by current "treatment" modalities and the culture the black market breeds.
- SyzygistSix 3y ago
  Hard drugs don't need to be made available to non-addicts just because the sale is legalized and formalized.
bobthepanda 3y ago
The real root issue, is that we drastically underfund rehabilitation. There are generally just not enough rehab spots, therapists, psychiatrists, etc. to address the unmet need. There are not enough of them in the health system because we don't pay for them enough. There are also not really resources in the prison system either. A lot of the prison-reform movement was actually supported initially by conservatives, because low-tax governments cannot afford to lock large numbers of people up for petty crime. No matter what the solution is, it requires spending money.
darth_avocado 3y ago
> would be better if the drugs were cheaper and safer. Drugs are never going to be safer. If FDA approved painkillers can get you addicted, I am not sure how much safer can Fentanyl get. And making them cheaper is only going to create more problems. Prohibition doesn’t prevent people from accessing drugs. But that doesn’t mean we make it easily accessible. Theft is illegal, but it doesn’t stop people from stealing. That doesn’t mean we legalize it. Because if we do, we’ll have a free for all like we have in SF and other parts of California.
- setr 3y ago
  Safer drugs is usually referring to not getting drugs cut with other unknown shit. A common scenario is heroin from dealer A being mixed, then you switch to dealer B and get it pure (or at least more so) but not knowing that, you take the same dosage and overdose
  - anon84873628 3y ago
    Yes, exactly.
  - darth_avocado 3y ago
    That is never going to go away though. After weed was legalized in California, 2/3 purchases are still from the black market. [1] That market always will exist because cutting makes drugs cheaper and legal drugs will never be able to compete. [1] https://calmatters.org/commentary/2023/06/california-illicit-cannabis-market-thrive/ https://calmatters.org/commentary/2023/06/california-illicit...
    - vhlhvjcov 3y ago
      How much moonshine do you drink? As another commenter pointed out, from the article you posted: > all of this is taking place in an industry without bankruptcy protections, where individuals carry personal liability for business taxes, and where businesses are barred from writing off normal expenses. So your argument is not backed up by your own link > That market always will exist because cutting makes drugs cheaper and legal drugs will never be able to compete.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - xienze 3y ago
        > How much moonshine do you drink? That question varies depending on where in the country you ask it. There’s a huge cultural aspect to moonshining and a lot of people in the south drink it.
toomim 3y ago
That's not true. If that were true, then decriminalization wouldn't be making them easier to access. But since drugs have been decriminalized, they have gotten much easier to access. There are open-air drug markets in SF and Portland. You can walk through and say "fent?" and get offers to sell right there. You couldn't do that 10 years ago.
- anon84873628 3y ago
  10 years ago you could do that in many places across the country.
- monocasa 3y ago
  There absolutely were places you could walk around SF and Portland ten years ago, say "oxy?" and get offers right there.
dan_mctree 3y ago
Can we all just be honest and just agree that prohibitions do in fact make access to the prohibited thing harder and reduce the prevalence of it. This is true whether your topic of choice is drugs, guns, abortions, alcohol, some form of sex, vpn access or whatever you want to talk about. Sometimes the prohibition can make obtaining illegal things more difficult and risky, and many of us are too lazy or risk avoidant to push through that. Sometimes accessing a prohibited things requires social contacts not everyone has access to. Sometimes people will just straight up respect the law and not obtain the illegal thing even if it is easy or avoid providing it. Prohibitions can be very effective in reducing the incidence of some thing, especially if enforcement is draconian Prohibitions can have negative effects, obviously especially for those who like the thing that is being prohibited, but it just seems dishonest to try to pretend like prohibitions don't change behavior whenever that happens to suit some political preference
- gochi 3y ago
  Why do you want prohibitions to be viewed as very effective? Their side effects seem to always be far more disastrous than the core incident.
- pas 3y ago
  well, drug use is on the rise in many places with prohibition. so maybe that general statement needs some serious qualifiers, no? prohibition as a concept works, and prohibition when implemented has an effect, but that effect might be small compared to society's overall demand changes. yes, of course, draconian measures have significant effects, usually the side-effects are bigger though
  - Aerbil313 3y ago
    Muslims have been very successfull in prohibiton of all kinds of drugs and alcohol since 15 centuries. Compare this with the failed American Prohibition. There are more factors at play than what the law says. What do you believe will happen if you drink alcohol in secret, away from the eyes of the State? Muslims believe this will have consequences in afterlife. Atheists don't. Many Christians believe they'll be saved and forgiven by God as long as they are Christian. > A 2012 study suggested that belief in hell decreases crime rates, while belief in heaven increases them, and indicated that these correlations were stronger than other correlates like national wealth or income inequality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlates_of_crime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlates_of_crime I live in Turkey, probably the most heavily and forcefully secularized muslim country in the world. (Ataturk killed half a million people for his secular reforms, Islamic alphabet got abolished, European dress code literally became law, religious clothing got prohibited, religion schools closed, scholars executed & prosecuted and Islamic prayer call was banned for 18 years). It's free to drink here, but drugs are banned. Only a very small minority drinks alcohol in my region, I have no relatives I know of that ever drank. Drugs/weed/marijuana are horrible things no one ever wants in my entire social circle, I don't think I have ever seen a user of such substances in my entire life IRL. Western and some coastal cities drink more and there's more drug activity too (they're less religious too). From here, it’s hilarious to see Westerners thinking prohibition is impossible and preaching against it.

kcb 3y ago

It's not so hard to believe that lack of access prevents some from getting hooked.

brnaftr361 3y ago
The dangers of getting hooked are greatly exacerbated by current "treatment" modalities and the culture the black market breeds.
SyzygistSix 3y ago
Hard drugs don't need to be made available to non-addicts just because the sale is legalized and formalized.

bobthepanda 3y ago

The real root issue, is that we drastically underfund rehabilitation. There are generally just not enough rehab spots, therapists, psychiatrists, etc. to address the unmet need. There are not enough of them in the health system because we don't pay for them enough. There are also not really resources in the prison system either. A lot of the prison-reform movement was actually supported initially by conservatives, because low-tax governments cannot afford to lock large numbers of people up for petty crime. No matter what the solution is, it requires spending money.

darth_avocado 3y ago

> would be better if the drugs were cheaper and safer. Drugs are never going to be safer. If FDA approved painkillers can get you addicted, I am not sure how much safer can Fentanyl get. And making them cheaper is only going to create more problems. Prohibition doesn’t prevent people from accessing drugs. But that doesn’t mean we make it easily accessible. Theft is illegal, but it doesn’t stop people from stealing. That doesn’t mean we legalize it. Because if we do, we’ll have a free for all like we have in SF and other parts of California.

setr 3y ago
Safer drugs is usually referring to not getting drugs cut with other unknown shit. A common scenario is heroin from dealer A being mixed, then you switch to dealer B and get it pure (or at least more so) but not knowing that, you take the same dosage and overdose
- anon84873628 3y ago
  Yes, exactly.
- darth_avocado 3y ago
  That is never going to go away though. After weed was legalized in California, 2/3 purchases are still from the black market. [1] That market always will exist because cutting makes drugs cheaper and legal drugs will never be able to compete. [1] https://calmatters.org/commentary/2023/06/california-illicit-cannabis-market-thrive/ https://calmatters.org/commentary/2023/06/california-illicit...
  - vhlhvjcov 3y ago
    How much moonshine do you drink? As another commenter pointed out, from the article you posted: > all of this is taking place in an industry without bankruptcy protections, where individuals carry personal liability for business taxes, and where businesses are barred from writing off normal expenses. So your argument is not backed up by your own link > That market always will exist because cutting makes drugs cheaper and legal drugs will never be able to compete.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - xienze 3y ago
      > How much moonshine do you drink? That question varies depending on where in the country you ask it. There’s a huge cultural aspect to moonshining and a lot of people in the south drink it.

toomim 3y ago

That's not true. If that were true, then decriminalization wouldn't be making them easier to access. But since drugs have been decriminalized, they have gotten much easier to access. There are open-air drug markets in SF and Portland. You can walk through and say "fent?" and get offers to sell right there. You couldn't do that 10 years ago.

anon84873628 3y ago
10 years ago you could do that in many places across the country.
monocasa 3y ago
There absolutely were places you could walk around SF and Portland ten years ago, say "oxy?" and get offers right there.

dan_mctree 3y ago

Can we all just be honest and just agree that prohibitions do in fact make access to the prohibited thing harder and reduce the prevalence of it. This is true whether your topic of choice is drugs, guns, abortions, alcohol, some form of sex, vpn access or whatever you want to talk about. Sometimes the prohibition can make obtaining illegal things more difficult and risky, and many of us are too lazy or risk avoidant to push through that. Sometimes accessing a prohibited things requires social contacts not everyone has access to. Sometimes people will just straight up respect the law and not obtain the illegal thing even if it is easy or avoid providing it. Prohibitions can be very effective in reducing the incidence of some thing, especially if enforcement is draconian Prohibitions can have negative effects, obviously especially for those who like the thing that is being prohibited, but it just seems dishonest to try to pretend like prohibitions don't change behavior whenever that happens to suit some political preference

gochi 3y ago
Why do you want prohibitions to be viewed as very effective? Their side effects seem to always be far more disastrous than the core incident.
pas 3y ago
well, drug use is on the rise in many places with prohibition. so maybe that general statement needs some serious qualifiers, no? prohibition as a concept works, and prohibition when implemented has an effect, but that effect might be small compared to society's overall demand changes. yes, of course, draconian measures have significant effects, usually the side-effects are bigger though
- Aerbil313 3y ago
  Muslims have been very successfull in prohibiton of all kinds of drugs and alcohol since 15 centuries. Compare this with the failed American Prohibition. There are more factors at play than what the law says. What do you believe will happen if you drink alcohol in secret, away from the eyes of the State? Muslims believe this will have consequences in afterlife. Atheists don't. Many Christians believe they'll be saved and forgiven by God as long as they are Christian. > A 2012 study suggested that belief in hell decreases crime rates, while belief in heaven increases them, and indicated that these correlations were stronger than other correlates like national wealth or income inequality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlates_of_crime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlates_of_crime I live in Turkey, probably the most heavily and forcefully secularized muslim country in the world. (Ataturk killed half a million people for his secular reforms, Islamic alphabet got abolished, European dress code literally became law, religious clothing got prohibited, religion schools closed, scholars executed & prosecuted and Islamic prayer call was banned for 18 years). It's free to drink here, but drugs are banned. Only a very small minority drinks alcohol in my region, I have no relatives I know of that ever drank. Drugs/weed/marijuana are horrible things no one ever wants in my entire social circle, I don't think I have ever seen a user of such substances in my entire life IRL. Western and some coastal cities drink more and there's more drug activity too (they're less religious too). From here, it’s hilarious to see Westerners thinking prohibition is impossible and preaching against it.