4 ms·

>I mean, you also can't advertise illegal drugs either. Doesn't seem to curb demand though. Making drugs illegal does not eliminate demand, but it absolutely c

by Maxatar 6mo ago

>I mean, you also can't advertise illegal drugs either. Doesn't seem to curb demand though. Making drugs illegal does not eliminate demand, but it absolutely curbs it. The converse is also true, for example legalizing cannabis in Canada has significantly increased demand for it [1]. While it's true cannabis use had been gradually increasing for decades prior to legalization, there was a significant spike afterwards which has since levelled off. [1] https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231016/dq231016c-eng.htm https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231016/dq231...

deaux 6mo ago
> The converse is also true It isn't true, at least not as a hard and fast rule. Post-legalization changes in demand differ greatly per country. It completely depends on contemporary cultural factors of the country in question.
- Maxatar 6mo ago
  Your claim is far too open ended to interpret clearly. A change in demand post-legalization can absolutely be highly variable across different countries/cultures, but unless you can demonstrate a country that legalized cannabis and saw a decline in demand, then your as of yet unsubstantiated claim does not refute mine.
  - deaux 6mo ago
    No, all I need to demonstrate is a country that saw no significant increase, not necessarily a decline. From everything I know, the US states as well as the Netherlands that all decriminalized it in the 70s didn't see local use increase in significant numbers. Neither did it in Belgium who did the same in 2003. And before you go "decriminalization is not the same as legalization", in the "Making drugs illegal does not eliminate demand, but it absolutely curbs it." is clearly about drugs that have not been decriminalized at all.
AnthonyMouse 6mo ago
> The converse is also true, for example legalizing cannabis in Canada has significantly increased demand for it The relevant thing that link actually says is that more survey respondents admitted to cannabis use after legalization, the obvious problem being that before legalization they would be admitting to a crime, which will suppress response rates. The same link also points out that the legalization happened right before COVID and then you have a major confounder because even if cannabis use is actually up, you don't know if it's because of legalization or people turning to cannabis over stress from COVID. Moreover, the reported usage increased during COVID but started to decline in 2023. This implies that either the apparent spike was COVID, or that it was something like media reports about recent legalization acting as temporary free advertising and causing a temporary increase in usage. Neither of those is evidence of a sustained increase in demand. Meanwhile legal options do cause people to prefer legal sources over the black market, and then you get fewer people becoming addicts because the thing they thought they were buying was spiked with something significantly more addictive by a black market seller. Or the black market products have higher variation in the dose and then customers can't predict how much they're getting and occasionally take more than expected, leading to a higher rate of overdose and stronger dependency-inducing withdrawal.
- pixl97 6mo ago
  >Meanwhile legal options do cause people to prefer legal sources over the black market In the case of cannabis it's been showing to lead to less underage use too. If it's a crime, then selling to anyone of any age is still just a crime. But if it's only a crime to sell to under 18/21 then legal shops will avoid selling to the under age to avoid revocation of their license.
  - thaumasiotes 6mo ago
    > If it's a crime, then selling to anyone of any age is still just a crime. But if it's only a crime to sell to under 18/21 then legal shops will avoid selling to the under age to avoid revocation of their license. That isn't true; crimes can have aggravating factors and selling drugs to a minor could aggravate the crime of selling drugs. I don't think the laws were written that way, but they could have been.

by Maxatar 6mo ago

deaux 6mo ago

> The converse is also true It isn't true, at least not as a hard and fast rule. Post-legalization changes in demand differ greatly per country. It completely depends on contemporary cultural factors of the country in question.

Maxatar 6mo ago
Your claim is far too open ended to interpret clearly. A change in demand post-legalization can absolutely be highly variable across different countries/cultures, but unless you can demonstrate a country that legalized cannabis and saw a decline in demand, then your as of yet unsubstantiated claim does not refute mine.
- deaux 6mo ago
  No, all I need to demonstrate is a country that saw no significant increase, not necessarily a decline. From everything I know, the US states as well as the Netherlands that all decriminalized it in the 70s didn't see local use increase in significant numbers. Neither did it in Belgium who did the same in 2003. And before you go "decriminalization is not the same as legalization", in the "Making drugs illegal does not eliminate demand, but it absolutely curbs it." is clearly about drugs that have not been decriminalized at all.

AnthonyMouse 6mo ago

> The converse is also true, for example legalizing cannabis in Canada has significantly increased demand for it The relevant thing that link actually says is that more survey respondents admitted to cannabis use after legalization, the obvious problem being that before legalization they would be admitting to a crime, which will suppress response rates. The same link also points out that the legalization happened right before COVID and then you have a major confounder because even if cannabis use is actually up, you don't know if it's because of legalization or people turning to cannabis over stress from COVID. Moreover, the reported usage increased during COVID but started to decline in 2023. This implies that either the apparent spike was COVID, or that it was something like media reports about recent legalization acting as temporary free advertising and causing a temporary increase in usage. Neither of those is evidence of a sustained increase in demand. Meanwhile legal options do cause people to prefer legal sources over the black market, and then you get fewer people becoming addicts because the thing they thought they were buying was spiked with something significantly more addictive by a black market seller. Or the black market products have higher variation in the dose and then customers can't predict how much they're getting and occasionally take more than expected, leading to a higher rate of overdose and stronger dependency-inducing withdrawal.

pixl97 6mo ago
>Meanwhile legal options do cause people to prefer legal sources over the black market In the case of cannabis it's been showing to lead to less underage use too. If it's a crime, then selling to anyone of any age is still just a crime. But if it's only a crime to sell to under 18/21 then legal shops will avoid selling to the under age to avoid revocation of their license.
- thaumasiotes 6mo ago
  > If it's a crime, then selling to anyone of any age is still just a crime. But if it's only a crime to sell to under 18/21 then legal shops will avoid selling to the under age to avoid revocation of their license. That isn't true; crimes can have aggravating factors and selling drugs to a minor could aggravate the crime of selling drugs. I don't think the laws were written that way, but they could have been.