10 ms·

You know… like I get people “want” to do drugs and all. (Not me) But the older I get the more I’m on the side of this stuff isn’t necessary. It is detrimental

• aftbit 3y ago
  Most things aren't necessary. Many things are net detrimental to society. We still allow the vast majority of them, because people are free to do what they want with their lives in this world. Just because you have kids doesn't mean that your wishes have more weight than theirs. The biggest harms from drugs come not from the drugs themselves, but from the fact that their users and sellers have been locked out of our legal dispute resolution system. Drugs only lead to violence as long as someone is trying to stop them. If they were regulated and sold openly, with just 10% of the funding that currently goes to law enforcement to futilely try to stop them instead being diverted to addiction treatment and honest non-fear-mongering education, they would result in an order of magnitude less harm.
• ben_jones 3y ago
  You know... I understand people "want" to drink coffee and all. (Not me) But the older I get, the more I realize this habit isn't necessary. It's not beneficial to society, and if someone feels the need for coffee, they should really reconsider their lifestyle and find something more productive to do. If there was a way to completely eliminate the culture of coffee consumption, I'd support it. Might even take action myself if I could. I don't want my kids to grow up in a world obsessed with coffee. There are so many better and healthier alternatives available. And yes, I understand not everyone has it easy. I certainly didn't, coming from a 3rd world country, but I still chose other options. That's no excuse, though. It's honestly quite demeaning and foolish when well-off people treat coffee drinking as something essential.
  • bequanna 3y ago
    A more apt comparison would be alcohol vs illegal drugs. Coffee vs meth or heroin does even come close to ringing true. What are the individual or societal costs to consuming coffee? Both approach zero.
    • ttt11199907 3y ago
      There may not be societal costs in the consuming country, but there are certainly negative externalities to the people/countries that produce the coffee beans
      • bequanna 3y ago
        I guess I don't consider this a legit argument. You could point to negative externalities that are the result of literally everything humans produce/consume. But if we want to use that metric, OK. I would venture a guess that the production of coffee yields a heck of a lot less suffering than the production of cocaine, heroin or meth. Any far fewer people consume the latter.
        • bb88 3y ago
          Also to further your point: consider blood diamonds, mining of toxic substances, lead batteries, plastic in the oceans, etc.
          • ttt11199907 3y ago
            Yes! These are all things that rely on the subjugation and abuse of other human and are bad for our earth-spaceship
      • rootusrootus 3y ago
        I don't know, the guy in Kona running the coffee farm seemed pretty happy. And the coffee was great (and I typically dislike coffee! It was that good...) In any case, legal production can be regulated in ways that illegal crops cannot. It's hard to draw a legitimate comparison.
• alsetmusic 3y ago
  And yet I introduced my partner to magic mushrooms on xmas day and we both had a great time. I only use drugs very occasionally and this one is decriminalized where we live. We both have stable employment that is not jeopardized by our substance use. We’re happy and productive members of society. I like drugs and I wish we’d end their condemnation.
  • olyjohn 3y ago
    Bit difference between magic mushrooms and fentanyl though.
    • wddkcs 3y ago
      Yes, the difference being fentyl is widely used in legal medical procedures, and the ease of street access largely happens as an offshoot of that legal market- https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/fentanyl-deadly-drug-dealers-lace-illicit-drugs/story?id=96827602 https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/fentanyl-deadly-drug-deale...
  • carlosjobim 3y ago
    Psychedelics shouldn't really be in the same category as "drugs" at all. Completely different things, users and uses. When people are talking about the problems with drugs and drug users, they are not talking about psychedelics.
    • beenBoutIT 3y ago
      The fact is that America had far less problems before the War on Drugs. Police officers would focus their efforts on solving and preventing real crimes as opposed to playing puritan nanny and rifling through people's pockets telling them they're not allowed to be in possession of x, y or z.
      • carlosjobim 3y ago
        Even if all drugs were legal, psychedelics are completely different than addictive and destructive drugs.
• MeImCounting 3y ago
  Echoing the responses from other commenters here that this problem is mostly created by people trying to control what other people do with their own bodies. Its really a sad reality that our society seeks to have so much control over other peoples bodies, uses violence to try to enforce that control then cries "I dont want my kids to live in a world with this violence". Somehow killing, beating and locking people in cages fixes all our problems if we just do it enough? Not working? Just kill beat and lock more people in cages that will fix it surely.
  • GoToRO 3y ago
    When you do drugs with your own body, do you also drive and create accidents, forcing other on what to do with their bodies (go to hospital, cemetery)? Right now in my country this is the situation with the rise of drugs use.
    • olyjohn 3y ago
      That's not a problem with drugs. That's a problem of irresponsible behavior.
      • blargey 3y ago
        Yes, and X% of drug use is going to be "irresponsible". The societal burden doesn't change from phrasing.
      • GoToRO 3y ago
        I agree with you. I don't agree with the tone of the parent commenter that implied that people who try to solve the problems of drugs use, somehow try to impose on others what to do with their body.
        • MeImCounting 3y ago
          By definition making it illegal to ingest a given substance is imposing what someone can or cannot do with their body. It is a different conversation entirely than solving the problems with drug use which for the most part comes down to education and fixing broader societal issues that lead to people seeking out hard drugs in the first place. Opiate addiction is a scourge on our society and despite the seeming failures of some recent decriminalization efforts I truly dont believe continued violence and repression is the answer. I believe my stance is supported by the failure of the "war on drugs" to curb the problem despite immense resources being dedicated to it.
• Xenoamorphous 3y ago
  Alcohol too?
  • warner25 3y ago
    I'd say alcohol too. I didn't drink in college, so I got a lot of questions about why not. I responded basically that I viewed it as not necessary and detrimental to reaching all of my goals - academic, financial, health, relationships, etc.
    • Xenoamorphous 3y ago
      Ah, as an introvert alcohol definitely didn’t play a detrimental role in my relationships, quite the opposite actually, rather pivotal.
      • warner25 3y ago
        To be clear, I do think that drinking would've helped me to make more friends and meet more girls (some guys asked me, incredulously, how I would ever meet girls if not at a kegger). But I didn't think that it would help me to make friends with people who shared my worldview, or develop the kinds of relationships that I wanted.
    • yard2010 3y ago
      While I agree with this attitude, sometimes I love to set an "exploration coin toss experiment, in which I deliberately choose something against my agency
• huytersd 3y ago
  Not doing drugs leads to a healthier society and better people. However it definitely results in much lower life enjoyment. Getting satisfaction from being productive is not universal. Me for instance. I’ve worked on and managed hugely important projects and get almost no satisfaction from it being successful. I’m happy and content when I have nothing to do and can peacefully work on my hobbies that may or may not be productive. Nothing compares to having a good time at the rave in ecstasy or gambling and sex high on cocaine. I haven’t done hard drugs in a decade but they do make life enjoyable for people not driven by traditional societal drivers.
  • arcbyte 3y ago
    > Nothing compares to having a good time at the rave in ecstasy or gambling and sex high on cocaine. This attitude is the problem. Drugs are an easy trigger for those experiences and feelings that avoid all the self work humans are meant to do that would give them BETTER and more intense versions of the same feelings without any of the downsides. You don't need drugs to have highs and psychedelic experiences.
    • dns_snek 3y ago
      Is it a problem? Why, exactly? Humans are "meant to"? By whom? You should keep in mind that stigmatization and criminalization of drug use is a very recent invention. Recorded psychedelic drug use goes back many thousands of years, if not more.
    • lawlessone 3y ago
      >You don't need drugs to have highs and psychedelic experiences If someone is having psychedelic experiences without drugs they'll usually want drugs to stop that..
    • huytersd 3y ago
      Eh you’re never going to experience the high like you get from ecstasy. Not from sex, not from achievements, not even the birth of your child. It’s unattainable through the normal course of life. I agree humans would have a better life if they never did drugs but at the same time you are definitely missing out on unique experiences.
• calmworm 3y ago
  Where would you draw the line for “drugs” that should and shouldn’t exist with your hot patch fix?
  • amanaplanacanal 3y ago
    For most people it’s “get rid of the drugs I don’t like but keep the drugs I like.”
    • rylittle 3y ago
      I'm pretty sure theres a lot of people who would get rid of heroin even if they know they might enjoy the experience or "like" it.
      • rootusrootus 3y ago
        Heroin is an easy target because it is only used recreationally (in the US, at least), so we don't have any legitimate patients who'd be impacted by eliminating it.
      • amanaplanacanal 3y ago
        Maybe. But what about the rest of the opioids? Then you get some kind of cancer where you need them. There is no simple solution here.
  • rootusrootus 3y ago
    Not OP, but I'd use externalities to guide the decision. After all, it isn't the drug users partaking in the quiet of their home that we really care about. It's the junkies on the street making life worse for everyone else around them, the smugglers, the violence, the people dying from overdoses, etc. Of course the problem is that almost all of the drugs in question have legitimate medical uses so we can't just wave a magic wand and make them go away. I'd personally try the angle of making drug use completely non-criminal (but not the associated behavior problems that do impact other people; this is a non-trivial element), and then make dealing drugs punishable with a LOT of time.
  • deleted 3y ago
• lawlessone 3y ago
  >You know… like I get people “want” to do drugs and all. (Not me) > if someone wants to do drugs they should honestly reconsider their life and do something productive. I don't think you get it. For some people it's like drinking a beer. Not everyone feels the need to be productive 24/7/365. On the other side. The people that are addicted to worse substances, can't just choose not to not and "do something productive" An addict isn't waking up tomorrow, sweating, in pain, sick from withdrawal and thinking "Man i should just learn to code"
  • rootusrootus 3y ago
    When an addict reaches that point, they are almost certainly costing society resources. Not just being non-productive, but everything from social services to law enforcement, they are costing the rest of us resources which would be better used as an investment in our collective future. Society has a legitimate interest in the problem.
    • pixl97 3y ago
      Ah yes, the path of good intentions that leads to hell. "That point" is a nebulous term that has a very wide range of potential definitions. Also 'non-productive' is one of those terms that get bandied about by the worst of us as excuses to commit the worst acts against the other humans. I mean, in your idea, we should give up democracy and follow some kind of authoritarian system that perfectly optimizes our choices for 'the greater good'. We've seen this doesn't work out so well in practice as even "good upstanding citizens" are still greedy pieces of shit that will screw over their fellow human for another dollar.
      • petsfed 3y ago
        >as even "good upstanding citizens" are still greedy pieces of shit that will screw over their fellow human for another dollar. I think a more charitable way to look at this is that whatever "good" is being pushed, hasn't really been sold effectively, or its being meted out unfairly or in a way that negates the "good". People are not greedy in a vacuum, they are greedy because they believe that failing to be so puts them at risk of losing resources they need. People in general don't horde toilet paper, but they definitely did when they thought their ability to get more toilet paper later was in danger.
• warner25 3y ago
  I was a libertarian, and I still have some libertarian views, but I agree that my views have changed as I've gotten older and now have kids. In theory, I'm all for consenting adults doing whatever they want as long as it doesn't infringe on others, but I don't want my kids doing whatever they want or being influenced by some things. Things that were abstract to me, like drugs, because I would never consider doing them, are more concrete now. Our kids are still very young, but my wife has recently said things like, "I'm really afraid of our kids ending up on drugs someday," after hearing yet another story about the opioid crisis. And I was like, "Oh wow, yeah, it hasn't crossed my mind until now, but that's a really scary thought."
  • lawlessone 3y ago
    I don't know if you intended it or not but: "I was a libertarian until I had children" is very funny.
    • warner25 3y ago
      That's pretty much it. I've seen how market mechanisms and natural consequences don't necessarily lead to my kids making sound decisions. Before having kids I envisioned myself being a Laissez-faire parent. Now my wife tells me that I need to calm down and be less authoritarian.
      • galdosdi 3y ago
        Same experience. Everyone is a libertarian until they meet kids and realize how impressionable and gullible even the smartest of them are at a young age -- easy prey for the advertising industry, the junk food industry, the junk media industry, and worse. Giving them total freedom at too young an age doesn't really help them be free, it helps them be slaves to someone else with more ad dollars. Libertarianism and freedom, etc, rest upon a foundation of a well educated society with members who have enough understanding of themselves and their world to resist exploitative influences -- you are not born ready for freedom, in fact, you are born literally a baby, totally dependent for years. After years of good parenting which helps you develop self respect, values, and critical thinking, hopefully then you are ready to responsibly embrace that freedom. Moreover, how much my perspective was changed made me realize some problems in today's society could have to do with the fact that being a parent or at least being around and being responsible for kids, was a universal fact of life for nearly all adults until very recently, but now it's possible for a young adult to barely ever encounter a child through their entire 20s and beyond. No wonder it's easy to end up with a worldview that does not account for how children can fit into it.
• pprotas 3y ago
  Most drug users aren’t junkies, they just smoke a joint in the weekend or pop a pill once a year at a festival. Or, you know, drink a beer with their mates. Life isn’t about being productive, and humans have used substances recreationally for our entire history. It’s definitely a problem when some take it too far, though.
• celticninja 3y ago
  Sometimes productivity can be bettering yourself not necessarily increasing the size of the economy. The insights you can gain about yourself from MDMA or LSD for example are significant. I think perhaps you are only seeing problem drug users, there are plenty of productive members of society who choose to use drugs, and you really dont understand the subject matter if you are not also lumping alcohol in with the drugs you want nuked from existence.
• mrshadowgoose 3y ago
  > But the older I get the more I’m on the side of this stuff isn’t necessary. It is detrimental to society and if someone wants to do drugs they should honestly reconsider their life and do something productive. How would you feel if someone said this about an activity that you personally value and enjoy? Would you willingly give that activity up, just because some other people don't personally value it? Why do you feel the need to control the activities of others, when those activities do not encumber your ability to live your life?
  • thatguy0900 3y ago
    The kinds of drugs drones are flying over to the US easily can encumbere your way of life. I take it you've never had to navigate past meth heads or crack addicts on your daily walks.
    • throwaday8383 3y ago
      I have. Live in Philadelphia near one of the worst open air heroin markets. While I empathize with people having to deal with such a mess, I do all the time, I still would not want to persecute them. That is a slippery slope. Am I also awful because I partake occasionally? I think not. Neither are all my friends who are professionals that pay taxes and bother no one.
    • mrshadowgoose 3y ago
      Briefly, but yes, I've experienced that. My reaction was "our social support systems really suck" and not "we need to restrict how people choose to live their lives".
  • lgkk 3y ago
    You really think someone shooting up heroin or fentanyl and someone going rock climbing or playing jazz are the same thing? Why the insanely unrelated analogies? I specifically said drugs, like the kind you see when you pass any alley near Civic Center or downtown SF with dozens of people just laying there and drug dealers with backpacks walking around. Is that a sign of a good society? Those people don’t want help and they sure as hell aren’t engaging in anything productive like building software, buildings, or offering any services on Taskrabbit.. yes it’s sad but there’s also a balance and line between what’s acceptable and not for a functioning society. This is a minority % wise of society (don’t want help, aren’t interested in getting clean) and they cause a disproportionate level of destruction. The problem is drugs and people are willing to do whatever it takes across the drug supply chain to keep it operating. Btw you need to be productive in order to afford rock climbing or skiing or even gaming on a pc… Unbelievable.
• GeoAtreides 3y ago
  It's wonderful knowing there are people out there ready to police my body and my lifestyle! Truly, what's better than to be protected from myself, for my own good of course! (And the kids of other people, god forbids they see something bad on the streets) Freedom never felt more free, now in the year of our lord 2024. I grew up in a totalitarian regime; to see the same authoritarian streaks being now replicated by westerners is mind blowing. They told us how to live, how to cut our hair, what to think, moment after moment, day after day, year after year after year, all for this idea of "harmonious society", a society in their image, crushing any individuality, any originality. Is it so hard to live and let live?
  • rootusrootus 3y ago
    > Is it so hard to live and let live? No, it is easy. As long as the junkies have the same courtesy towards the rest of us.
    • GeoAtreides 3y ago
      That's also easy: the junkies just want drugs. They don't care about the rest of us at all. If the junkies had access to the drugs they wanted, you won't see them on the streets, they will be in an institution somewhere, being high. The problems start when the junkies don't have access to their drugs...
      • paulddraper 3y ago
        Or...they need money to fuel their addiction which is simultaneously preventing them from finding gainful employment.
        • yard2010 3y ago
          That's a huge over simplification IMO! Addiction problems often come with personality traits that correlate being jobless and miserable. As humans I believe we should solve these problems logically, holistically with love and empathy.
• fivre 3y ago
  so are what are you actually opposed to? the general concept of drugs? you can't really get rid of those: pharmacologically active substances exist as a natural consequence of how biological receptor and message-based systems work. unless you propose dispensing with organic bodies altogether and uploading our consciousnesses to the cloud. until such time nature can and will produce molecules that fit into the same receptors that dopamine, serotonin, GABA, glutamate, etc. do are you opposed to "non-productive activity"? fuck it, let's ban the entire concept of recreation. free solo climbing isn't particularly productive and is a risky activity; anyone caught doing so should be promptly and harshly scolded, and then sent to the salt mines forever to produce economic value are you opposed to violence and human suffering? yeah, me too, but drug abuse is by far not the only thing that can result in negative societal consequences. antisocial behavior (which, to be clear, is not _all_ drug use, but is some, same as how not all driving is reckless driving) is an unfortunate aspect of the human condition "things that I don't engage with personally are inherently bad and should be purged from society" is a bigoted and egotistic argument. you probably do things i find unpleasant and i probably do things you find unpleasant. as a society, we find ways to understand why others do things and to minimize their negative impacts--we allow drinking, but not the markedly more dangerous drunk driving. "simply eliminate everything that may have a negative impact that i, personally, the saintliest person in the world, do not partake in" is a non-starter.
  • RestlessMind 3y ago
    Not the OP. But trying to engage in good faith here. > what are you actually opposed to? the general concept of drugs? No > are you opposed to "non-productive activity"? No > are you opposed to violence and human suffering? yeah, me too, good, we are on the same page > but drug abuse is by far not the only thing that can result in negative societal consequences. So? You can be opposed to more than one things that can result in negative societal consequences. > antisocial behavior (...) is an unfortunate aspect of the human condition Similarly, constraining it via various means to achieve overall societal harmony is a fortunate aspect of human societies. Else, there would be anarchy.
• grecy 3y ago
  > If it was possible to hot patch this crap out of existence I’d be in favor of it. I assume, of course, you feel this way about all drugs, and don't want to keep the ones you like. Goodbye alcohol, cigarettes & coffee. You're good with that?
• pard68 3y ago
  I agree with you and am confused by so many replies to your comment essentially suggesting that drugs are the only means to enjoying life or being recreationally unproductive. I have spent some decades now enjoying life and being very enjoyably unproductive at times while remaining sober.
  • lgkk 3y ago
    It’s pretty wild lol. I think they might be trolling.
  • broscillator 3y ago
    You know, it is not surprising that someone who hasn't experimented with mind expanding drugs has a very narrow view and limited empathy for how other minds might experience the world different from themselves.
• haswell 3y ago
  > if someone wants to do drugs they should honestly reconsider their life and do something productive I think this is a problematic way to frame the situation. If we zoom out a bit to look at systemic factors, a significant portion of drug use stems from other situations in a person’s life. People commonly start using/seeking out forms of mental escape from these circumstances. This also runs us immediately into the question of what type of drugs are we talking about? I’ve seen elsewhere you’ve said this is just about the hard stuff, but that then points us directly back to systemic factors. Declaring that someone should have just tried harder to make better life choices seems a bit like telling a depressed person they just need to start feeling better. I’d be more interested in focusing on ways we can help people past their need for drugs in the first place. Research on Psylocibin-assisted therapy in particular looks extremely promising and an increasingly important area of focus. As a thought experiment, it’s interesting to wonder what would have happened if research into psychedelics wasn’t set back an entire generation. Where would the world be in terms of mental health and trauma recovery? How many people who turned to hard drugs could have chosen a better option? I’m not saying people shouldn’t be responsible for their life choices, but responsibility and causality are different things.
• stetrain 3y ago
  You know… like I get people “want” to drink and all. (Not me) But the older I get the more I’m on the side of this stuff isn’t necessary. It is detrimental to society and if someone wants to drink they should honestly reconsider their life and do something productive. If it was possible to hot patch this crap out of existence I’d be in favor of it. Might even implement it myself if I could. I don’t want my kids to see drunks or live in a world where this kind of violence happens. When there are way nicer and better options out there. And yea I get it not everyone has it well. I certainly didn’t coming from a 3rd world country, but I still found other ways. But that’s not an excuse. Honestly kind of demeaning/stupid when well to do people treat it that way.
• uwuminatti 3y ago
  Hey, just wanted you to know, I told the junkies outside your advice that they should reconsider their life and do something productive. They didn't realize "just don't" was an option! They shook my hand, and went on to become corporate lawyers for Raytheon. They thank you from the bottom of their hearts.
• educaysean 3y ago
  Ban caffeine! Ban alcohol! Ban rock music!
• thfuran 3y ago
  How much coffee do you drink?
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• lgkk 3y ago
  Just finished reading through all the replies to me. Honestly all these responses just make me double down on my love for free market capitalism and selfish individualism (non destructive, ahimsa like). Rest assured, I will continue doing my best to ensure my family and I are never affected by any of this, and I don’t really need to feel bad either considering how much others are okay with just letting things degrade almost by a factor of 9-1. It’s also true that 10% of people account for 90% of contributions so I’m glad to be in the 10%. I’ll keep focused on my business, skills as an SWE, and money management. That’s ultimately what keeps me and my family safe, happy, and open to new and awesome experiences. I wish everyone the best for themselves. Really eye opening, honestly grateful. Cheers!