4 ms·
> That's not a good example of non-prohibition Yep, which is why I used the term "more lenient policies," not necessarily non-prohibition. Opium dens were gett
by dvt 3y ago
> That's not a good example of non-prohibition
Yep, which is why I used the term "more lenient policies," not necessarily non-prohibition. Opium dens were getting more and more problematic in San Francisco[1] until they were criminalized in the late 19th century.
> I mean, people haven't really stopped doing Cocaine or Meth
I don't think the end goal of prohibition is zero use of said substance, but rather its control as to prevent large-scale societal disruption.
[1] https://www.foundsf.org/index.php?title=Chinatown%27s_Opium_Dens https://www.foundsf.org/index.php?title=Chinatown%27s_Opium_...
- monocasa 3y ago> Yep, which is why I used the term "more lenient policies," not necessarily non-prohibition. Opium dens were getting more and more problematic in San Francisco[1] until they were criminalized in the late 19th century. The point is that prohibition the issue. Being more lenient while still keeping prohibition isn't a half way point, but still keeps the most harmful elements intact. > I don't think the end goal of prohibition is zero use of said substance, but rather its control as to prevent large-scale societal disruption. Do you think that prohibition is effectively preventing large scale societal disruption?