4 ms·

The success of drug decriminalization in Portugal

45 points by kqr2 18y ago

sgrove 18y ago
Upvoted for the possibilities. It's a (almost confusingly) controversial topic, but there is a lot of good that could come out decriminalization. I've never done any drugs myself, but I can think of a number of business opportunities not only in legal narcotics trade, but also supporting industries. If the objective, empirical evidence suggests that it does not present society with an immediate nor a long-term health threat, then the economic and cultural benefits would be exciting. That said, it will be a considerably long time before metaphors like "The war on drugs" are dropped in the US. People are passionate about it here.
- usuallyuselss 18y ago
  > but I can think of a number of business opportunities not only in legal narcotics trade, but also supporting industries Like making children addicted and profiting afterwards? Legalizing drugs like heroin, crack or coke is just sick. Just have a look at what meth has done. > I've never done any drugs myself, Talk to one who has, then. It's going to alter your thoughts.
  - dantheman 18y ago
    I don't believe these discussions are very useful, or in general appropriate for HN; but I'll quickly disagree with your statement that drugs should continue to be illegal. If someone wants to do drugs that is their choice, there is no reason that people below a certain age are prohibited much like alcohol and tobacco.
    - usuallyuselss 18y ago
      I would be fine with this if hard drugs weren't "no return tickets".
      - dantheman 18y ago
        They aren't no return tickets, many people can experiment with all sorts of dangerous drugs and be able to stop using them. From:http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/532/most_first_time_drug_users_not_dependent http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/532/most_first_time_drug... The research report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) found that only 1% of first-time users of inhalants and tranquilizers were dependent a year later. For hallucinogens and sedatives, the figure was 2%; for pain relievers and alcohol, 3%. The drug with the highest number of dependent users a year after first use was heroin (13%), followed by crack cocaine (9%), marijuana (6%), stimulants (5%), and powder cocaine (4%). http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k8/newUseDepend/newUseDepend.cfm http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k8/newUseDepend/newUseDepend.cfm
      - anamax 18y ago
        Lots of things have "no return tickets" and yet we don't make them illegal. There was a previous discussion about the rationality of intellectuals. (For the record, I pointed out that they're feces flinging monkeys like the rest of us.) Let me suggest that the "rational" basis for drug law is "do the realized benefits of the restrictions outweigh the incurred costs". Prison is a cost. Folks who don't use because of the law are a benefit. Folks who still use aren't.
      - robotron 18y ago
        I have tried coke, crack and crystal meth a few times. I did not become addicted and decided that I didn't like it and that the chance of addiction was not worth it, so I stopped. If I had been thrown in jail as a result of one of those experiences, I doubt I would be a contributing member of society today. (Another "I don't like these conversations on HN but can't help from responding to hysterics" post)
        usuallyuselss 18y ago
        A lot of people are not that strong, sir. Otherwise, we would not have that many addicts, right?
        18y ago
  - jonasvp 18y ago
    The assumption most people seem to base their conclusions on is that making drugs illegal reduces consumption. All empirical evidence so far - even from less biased sources than the wildly free-market Cato institute - shows that this is not the case. In countries where more drugs are legal, consumption actually goes down. Drug use is a facet of human existence that needs to be managed, not a virus to be exterminated...
    - usuallyuselss 18y ago
      > The assumption most people seem to base their conclusions on is that making drugs illegal reduces consumption. All empirical evidence so far - even from less biased sources than the wildly free-market Cato institute - shows that this is not the case. In countries where more drugs are legal, consumption actually goes down. We have empirical evidence on cannabis, true. In that case (Netherlands) statistics say that "everything is roughly better", but differences are so small that it's difficult to say it's due to the drug laws. We do not have empirical evidence on drugs that make you physically and/or psychologically addicted after one shot. And there should be no toying with this. Getting of cannabis after years of using it is a piece of cake compared to getting of heroin after less than five shots. It's a totally different story.
      - robotron 18y ago
        So the laws should continue to make one a criminal for becoming addicted? The laws only serve to make people like you feel better (ala sticking head in sand) and to line the pockets of drug cartels.
        usuallyuselss 18y ago
        > So the laws should continue to make one a criminal for becoming addicted? Sorry, where did I say that? I am from Germany, drug use is not illegal here, only possession, trade and production. I am very well aware that this is a good thing. > The laws only serve to make people like you feel better (ala sticking head in sand) and to line the pockets of drug cartels. Stop judging me on your misinterpretations of my writings, please.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
usuallyuselss 18y ago
Anyone else believed drug consumption, possession, trading and the like were legal in portugal after reading this article? Well it is not. Only consumption and possession of small amounts is. And that is the case in a lot of European countries. Badly written article for leaving out important facts. Author obviously biased. http://www.encod.org/info/PORTUGAL.html http://www.encod.org/info/PORTUGAL.html
- Dilpil 18y ago
  That would be legalization, he uses the word decriminalization.
  - usuallyuselss 18y ago
    I used "Anyone else believed", not "The article states". Yes, the error is on my side here, but the author was not very clear.
numair 18y ago
Americans and their obsession with drugs is so strange. We're 5% of the population, yet we consume over 50% of all illegal drugs. Something tells me that this cultural inclination for drug usage makes it much more difficult to justify legalization. We're a country that can barely handle a free-market debt system -- I don't even want to know what we would do with a liberalized drug market. Then again, I am one of those people who doesn't do drugs, drink, smoke, or eat processed foods, because I understand that it's extremely expensive (in that you lose long-term quality of life / life expectancy - the single most important non-renewable resource for a living creature); I am obviously a minority...
- jacoblyles 18y ago
  >"We're a country that can barely handle a free-market debt system -- I don't even want to know what we would do with a liberalized drug market." There are a ton of packaged assumptions and a nice non-sequitir in just this one little sentence. That's sloppy rhetoric. It would take a page to unpack and discuss them all with clear thinking. >"Then again, I am one of those people who doesn't do drugs, drink, smoke, or eat processed foods" Probably most of the people that advocate drug legalization aren't regular users, and many of them have never used drugs. Rather, they support legalization because of the effects of prohibition on society. I wouldn't impute selfish motives to people that disagree with you without understanding them first.

45 points by kqr2 18y ago

Upvoted for the possibilities. It's a (almost confusingly) controversial topic, but there is a lot of good that could come out decriminalization. I've never done any drugs myself, but I can think of a number of business opportunities not only in legal narcotics trade, but also supporting industries. If the objective, empirical evidence suggests that it does not present society with an immediate nor a long-term health threat, then the economic and cultural benefits would be exciting. That said, it will be a considerably long time before metaphors like "The war on drugs" are dropped in the US. People are passionate about it here.

usuallyuselss 18y ago
> but I can think of a number of business opportunities not only in legal narcotics trade, but also supporting industries Like making children addicted and profiting afterwards? Legalizing drugs like heroin, crack or coke is just sick. Just have a look at what meth has done. > I've never done any drugs myself, Talk to one who has, then. It's going to alter your thoughts.
- dantheman 18y ago
  I don't believe these discussions are very useful, or in general appropriate for HN; but I'll quickly disagree with your statement that drugs should continue to be illegal. If someone wants to do drugs that is their choice, there is no reason that people below a certain age are prohibited much like alcohol and tobacco.
  - usuallyuselss 18y ago
    I would be fine with this if hard drugs weren't "no return tickets".
    - dantheman 18y ago
      They aren't no return tickets, many people can experiment with all sorts of dangerous drugs and be able to stop using them. From:http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/532/most_first_time_drug_users_not_dependent http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/532/most_first_time_drug... The research report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) found that only 1% of first-time users of inhalants and tranquilizers were dependent a year later. For hallucinogens and sedatives, the figure was 2%; for pain relievers and alcohol, 3%. The drug with the highest number of dependent users a year after first use was heroin (13%), followed by crack cocaine (9%), marijuana (6%), stimulants (5%), and powder cocaine (4%). http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k8/newUseDepend/newUseDepend.cfm http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k8/newUseDepend/newUseDepend.cfm
    - anamax 18y ago
      Lots of things have "no return tickets" and yet we don't make them illegal. There was a previous discussion about the rationality of intellectuals. (For the record, I pointed out that they're feces flinging monkeys like the rest of us.) Let me suggest that the "rational" basis for drug law is "do the realized benefits of the restrictions outweigh the incurred costs". Prison is a cost. Folks who don't use because of the law are a benefit. Folks who still use aren't.
    - robotron 18y ago
      I have tried coke, crack and crystal meth a few times. I did not become addicted and decided that I didn't like it and that the chance of addiction was not worth it, so I stopped. If I had been thrown in jail as a result of one of those experiences, I doubt I would be a contributing member of society today. (Another "I don't like these conversations on HN but can't help from responding to hysterics" post)
      - usuallyuselss 18y ago
        A lot of people are not that strong, sir. Otherwise, we would not have that many addicts, right?
        18y ago
- jonasvp 18y ago
  The assumption most people seem to base their conclusions on is that making drugs illegal reduces consumption. All empirical evidence so far - even from less biased sources than the wildly free-market Cato institute - shows that this is not the case. In countries where more drugs are legal, consumption actually goes down. Drug use is a facet of human existence that needs to be managed, not a virus to be exterminated...
  - usuallyuselss 18y ago
    > The assumption most people seem to base their conclusions on is that making drugs illegal reduces consumption. All empirical evidence so far - even from less biased sources than the wildly free-market Cato institute - shows that this is not the case. In countries where more drugs are legal, consumption actually goes down. We have empirical evidence on cannabis, true. In that case (Netherlands) statistics say that "everything is roughly better", but differences are so small that it's difficult to say it's due to the drug laws. We do not have empirical evidence on drugs that make you physically and/or psychologically addicted after one shot. And there should be no toying with this. Getting of cannabis after years of using it is a piece of cake compared to getting of heroin after less than five shots. It's a totally different story.
    - robotron 18y ago
      So the laws should continue to make one a criminal for becoming addicted? The laws only serve to make people like you feel better (ala sticking head in sand) and to line the pockets of drug cartels.
      - usuallyuselss 18y ago
        > So the laws should continue to make one a criminal for becoming addicted? Sorry, where did I say that? I am from Germany, drug use is not illegal here, only possession, trade and production. I am very well aware that this is a good thing. > The laws only serve to make people like you feel better (ala sticking head in sand) and to line the pockets of drug cartels. Stop judging me on your misinterpretations of my writings, please.

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

usuallyuselss 18y ago

Anyone else believed drug consumption, possession, trading and the like were legal in portugal after reading this article? Well it is not. Only consumption and possession of small amounts is. And that is the case in a lot of European countries. Badly written article for leaving out important facts. Author obviously biased. http://www.encod.org/info/PORTUGAL.html http://www.encod.org/info/PORTUGAL.html

Dilpil 18y ago
That would be legalization, he uses the word decriminalization.
- usuallyuselss 18y ago
  I used "Anyone else believed", not "The article states". Yes, the error is on my side here, but the author was not very clear.

numair 18y ago

Americans and their obsession with drugs is so strange. We're 5% of the population, yet we consume over 50% of all illegal drugs. Something tells me that this cultural inclination for drug usage makes it much more difficult to justify legalization. We're a country that can barely handle a free-market debt system -- I don't even want to know what we would do with a liberalized drug market. Then again, I am one of those people who doesn't do drugs, drink, smoke, or eat processed foods, because I understand that it's extremely expensive (in that you lose long-term quality of life / life expectancy - the single most important non-renewable resource for a living creature); I am obviously a minority...

jacoblyles 18y ago
>"We're a country that can barely handle a free-market debt system -- I don't even want to know what we would do with a liberalized drug market." There are a ton of packaged assumptions and a nice non-sequitir in just this one little sentence. That's sloppy rhetoric. It would take a page to unpack and discuss them all with clear thinking. >"Then again, I am one of those people who doesn't do drugs, drink, smoke, or eat processed foods" Probably most of the people that advocate drug legalization aren't regular users, and many of them have never used drugs. Rather, they support legalization because of the effects of prohibition on society. I wouldn't impute selfish motives to people that disagree with you without understanding them first.