7 ms·

Every time I read about how "decriminalization of X was a failure" it's because the governmental bodies responsible didn't properly set up the support structure

Every time I read about how "decriminalization of X was a failure" it's because the governmental bodies responsible didn't properly set up the support structures and procedures that were meant to mitigate the problems that arise (or more accurately, already exist but are ignored). If I weren't so ready to lean on incompetence as the most likely reason, I would think it's sabotage.

api 3y ago
Governments aren’t really great at anything except law, police, and military. All they have is a hammer. It’s pretty clear that just decriminalizing very hard drugs doesn’t work without something else, but governments lack institutional expertise in anything else.
- ajmurmann 3y ago
  What you say is true, but mostly about the US government. Other governments seem to have much more state capacity.
- Karrot_Kream 3y ago
  Anglo governments are especially bad with this. In general Anglo governments have a huge problem with trying to run government on the cheap operationally but inflating their budgets for projects and tort defense. They try to keep taxes low to appease their citizens but when new infrastructure or systems need to be built, they hire contractors who are less efficient than on-site dedicated staff and can be paid for with a 10/20/30 year tax increase. Instead of relying on a large bureaucracy to create ministerial due process, they rely on tort reform and an army of expensive lawyers and unclear judicial processes instead. The end result is a lack of state capacity. In the end all of this probably ends up costing society more, not to mention the eroding trust in the state, but it keeps getting politicians reelected because Anglo citizens hate paying taxes. I do activism for transit and pedestrian safety in the US and I see the desire for low taxes to cross almost all party and class lines (though I admit I live in a Blue area.)
  - lazide 3y ago
    Ok, but do you think that is going to get better anytime soon?
    - Karrot_Kream 3y ago
      As a community activist, I hope so. I certainly spend my time and energy talking to regular people and lawmakers about these issues. But my activism is only at the local level.
  - kridsdale3 3y ago
    Is Quebec noticeably better? I'm intrigued at learning more about the deep cultural roots of this, dating back (I presume) to viking days.
    - Karrot_Kream 3y ago
      Yeah actually, Quebec is a lot better at building infrastructure and creating bureaucracy than the Anglo provinces. I'm not sure how effective their bureaucracy is though. I don't really know much about the cultural roots of this, but I will say it's sticky enough that immigrants to Anglo areas end up picking up the same attitudes toward taxation even if their families were not originally from an Anglo area/culture. I also want to emphasize that the tax increases and tort protections that Anglo governments have end up usually costing individuals more than they would under a system that is willing to pay up front for a larger government, but that these costs are hidden in terms of tax garnishes, fees, and other things instead of upfront tax costs.
thaumasiotes 3y ago
> Every time I read about how "decriminalization of X was a failure" it's because the governmental bodies responsible didn't properly set up the support structures and procedures that were meant to mitigate the problems that arise (or more accurately, already exist but are ignored). If we're ignoring them now, what's the problem with continuing to ignore them?
- scheeseman486 3y ago
  Because that's just maintaining the status quo. Are you suggesting the status quo is acceptable?
  - thaumasiotes 3y ago
    I'm suggesting that it makes no sense to label maintaining the status quo a "failure". If you make a policy change, and the circumstance you were already fine with continues to obtain, your policy change has not thereby failed.
    - nerdponx 3y ago
      One negative consequence is that it becomes more of an open-air problem that you see in day to day life, not something that gets hidden away in the seedy side of town after hours.
mbrumlow 3y ago
You should be worried that any system they required government intervention was a good idea. The entire idea is insane. Let’s make drugs legal and provide treatment for the problem we created. It’s the same of saying hey! Lawn darts are now legal, don’t worry we will increase our EMS staff during the summer.
- ajmurmann 3y ago
  You would be correct if we could simply declare drugs illegal and then they all just vanish. But that's not how it works unfortunately.
- jwestbury 3y ago
  > You should be worried that any system they required government intervention was a good idea. You mean like providing basic infrastructure to ensure society and commerce can function? There are plenty of things which can and should require government intervention. Unless you're a hardline anarchist, there's not a lot of wiggle room on this one. As for drugs, let's be clear, they weren't made legal, they were made to function like traffic citations, with required treatment instead of prison time. Are you going to argue that we shouldn't have traffic citations, because they require traffic court and the necessary infrastructure to process the fines?
  - lazide 3y ago
    If not one issues the traffic tickets and just ignores it now because none of the actual mechanisms mentioned actually exist, then defacto it was made legal no?
    - amanaplanacanal 3y ago
      Legal and unregulated maybe. Oh they were really legal they would have to be regulated, so when you bought them at the store you would know that the product was unadulterated and of a known dosage. Which is pretty important info for things you are putting in your body.
- 3y ago
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
Isn’t decriminalization of X simply a matter of not making it against the law anymore? If society is expected to also provide a huge amount of new resources to counteract damage that decriminalization of X enables, then maybe it just shouldn’t decriminalize X in the first place?
- Gud 3y ago
  The decriminalization doesn’t cause the damages from drug use, they were already there.
- bitcharmer 3y ago
  > damage that decriminalization of X enables, This is a pretty ignorant comment to see on HN. So far we have strong evidence to show delegalisation causes huge issues and legalization works as expected. Have a look at any country that went that route.
  - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
    Such as Portugal. Although decriminilisation was part of a wider social shift towards treating drug use a health issue rather than a legal issue. https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-in-po...
    - bombcar 3y ago
      Apparently it worked well for awhile, but WaPo now reports that people aren't as happy with it anymore: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-drugs-decriminalization-heroin-crack/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-dru...
      - clairegraham 3y ago
        It sounds like a big part of the issue is that Portugal has substantially pulled back on funding after COVID... "Speaking more quantitatively, drug users in treatment declined from 1,150 to 352 (from 2015 to 2021) as funding dropped in 2012 from $82.7 million to $17.4 million. " Prior to that, the numbers seemed quite impressive: "By 2018, Portugal’s number of heroin addicts had dropped from 100,000 to 25,000. Portugal had the lowest drug-related death rate in Western Europe, one-tenth of Britain and one-fiftieth of the U.S. HIV infections from drug use injection had declined 90%. The cost per citizen of the program amounted to less than $10/citizen/year while the U.S. had spent over $1 trillion over the same amount of time. Over the first decade, total societal cost savings (e.g., health costs, legal costs, lost individual income) came to 12% and then to 18%." Source: https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-drug-decriminalization-a-failure-or-success-the-answer-isnt-so-simple/ https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-dru...

api 3y ago

Governments aren’t really great at anything except law, police, and military. All they have is a hammer. It’s pretty clear that just decriminalizing very hard drugs doesn’t work without something else, but governments lack institutional expertise in anything else.

ajmurmann 3y ago
What you say is true, but mostly about the US government. Other governments seem to have much more state capacity.
Karrot_Kream 3y ago
Anglo governments are especially bad with this. In general Anglo governments have a huge problem with trying to run government on the cheap operationally but inflating their budgets for projects and tort defense. They try to keep taxes low to appease their citizens but when new infrastructure or systems need to be built, they hire contractors who are less efficient than on-site dedicated staff and can be paid for with a 10/20/30 year tax increase. Instead of relying on a large bureaucracy to create ministerial due process, they rely on tort reform and an army of expensive lawyers and unclear judicial processes instead. The end result is a lack of state capacity. In the end all of this probably ends up costing society more, not to mention the eroding trust in the state, but it keeps getting politicians reelected because Anglo citizens hate paying taxes. I do activism for transit and pedestrian safety in the US and I see the desire for low taxes to cross almost all party and class lines (though I admit I live in a Blue area.)
- lazide 3y ago
  Ok, but do you think that is going to get better anytime soon?
  - Karrot_Kream 3y ago
    As a community activist, I hope so. I certainly spend my time and energy talking to regular people and lawmakers about these issues. But my activism is only at the local level.
- kridsdale3 3y ago
  Is Quebec noticeably better? I'm intrigued at learning more about the deep cultural roots of this, dating back (I presume) to viking days.
  - Karrot_Kream 3y ago
    Yeah actually, Quebec is a lot better at building infrastructure and creating bureaucracy than the Anglo provinces. I'm not sure how effective their bureaucracy is though. I don't really know much about the cultural roots of this, but I will say it's sticky enough that immigrants to Anglo areas end up picking up the same attitudes toward taxation even if their families were not originally from an Anglo area/culture. I also want to emphasize that the tax increases and tort protections that Anglo governments have end up usually costing individuals more than they would under a system that is willing to pay up front for a larger government, but that these costs are hidden in terms of tax garnishes, fees, and other things instead of upfront tax costs.

thaumasiotes 3y ago

> Every time I read about how "decriminalization of X was a failure" it's because the governmental bodies responsible didn't properly set up the support structures and procedures that were meant to mitigate the problems that arise (or more accurately, already exist but are ignored). If we're ignoring them now, what's the problem with continuing to ignore them?

scheeseman486 3y ago
Because that's just maintaining the status quo. Are you suggesting the status quo is acceptable?
- thaumasiotes 3y ago
  I'm suggesting that it makes no sense to label maintaining the status quo a "failure". If you make a policy change, and the circumstance you were already fine with continues to obtain, your policy change has not thereby failed.
  - nerdponx 3y ago
    One negative consequence is that it becomes more of an open-air problem that you see in day to day life, not something that gets hidden away in the seedy side of town after hours.

mbrumlow 3y ago

You should be worried that any system they required government intervention was a good idea. The entire idea is insane. Let’s make drugs legal and provide treatment for the problem we created. It’s the same of saying hey! Lawn darts are now legal, don’t worry we will increase our EMS staff during the summer.

ajmurmann 3y ago
You would be correct if we could simply declare drugs illegal and then they all just vanish. But that's not how it works unfortunately.
jwestbury 3y ago
> You should be worried that any system they required government intervention was a good idea. You mean like providing basic infrastructure to ensure society and commerce can function? There are plenty of things which can and should require government intervention. Unless you're a hardline anarchist, there's not a lot of wiggle room on this one. As for drugs, let's be clear, they weren't made legal, they were made to function like traffic citations, with required treatment instead of prison time. Are you going to argue that we shouldn't have traffic citations, because they require traffic court and the necessary infrastructure to process the fines?
- lazide 3y ago
  If not one issues the traffic tickets and just ignores it now because none of the actual mechanisms mentioned actually exist, then defacto it was made legal no?
  - amanaplanacanal 3y ago
    Legal and unregulated maybe. Oh they were really legal they would have to be regulated, so when you bought them at the store you would know that the product was unadulterated and of a known dosage. Which is pretty important info for things you are putting in your body.
3y ago

seanmcdirmid 3y ago

Isn’t decriminalization of X simply a matter of not making it against the law anymore? If society is expected to also provide a huge amount of new resources to counteract damage that decriminalization of X enables, then maybe it just shouldn’t decriminalize X in the first place?

Gud 3y ago
The decriminalization doesn’t cause the damages from drug use, they were already there.
bitcharmer 3y ago
> damage that decriminalization of X enables, This is a pretty ignorant comment to see on HN. So far we have strong evidence to show delegalisation causes huge issues and legalization works as expected. Have a look at any country that went that route.
- TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
  Such as Portugal. Although decriminilisation was part of a wider social shift towards treating drug use a health issue rather than a legal issue. https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-in-portugal-setting-the-record-straight https://transformdrugs.org/blog/drug-decriminalisation-in-po...
  - bombcar 3y ago
    Apparently it worked well for awhile, but WaPo now reports that people aren't as happy with it anymore: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-drugs-decriminalization-heroin-crack/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-dru...
    - clairegraham 3y ago
      It sounds like a big part of the issue is that Portugal has substantially pulled back on funding after COVID... "Speaking more quantitatively, drug users in treatment declined from 1,150 to 352 (from 2015 to 2021) as funding dropped in 2012 from $82.7 million to $17.4 million. " Prior to that, the numbers seemed quite impressive: "By 2018, Portugal’s number of heroin addicts had dropped from 100,000 to 25,000. Portugal had the lowest drug-related death rate in Western Europe, one-tenth of Britain and one-fiftieth of the U.S. HIV infections from drug use injection had declined 90%. The cost per citizen of the program amounted to less than $10/citizen/year while the U.S. had spent over $1 trillion over the same amount of time. Over the first decade, total societal cost savings (e.g., health costs, legal costs, lost individual income) came to 12% and then to 18%." Source: https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-drug-decriminalization-a-failure-or-success-the-answer-isnt-so-simple/ https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-dru...