5 ms·

As much as I don't want to make the best the enemy of the good, I'm really skeptical of "decriminalization". Yeah, you won't get sent to jail for it, but if you

by x1798DE 12y ago

As much as I don't want to make the best the enemy of the good, I'm really skeptical of "decriminalization". Yeah, you won't get sent to jail for it, but if you don't make it legal, you are still dealing in a black market commodity. That means that you'll still have criminals with no access to the legal system supplying the stuff, so you won't see the same reduction in drug-related violence and you won't see quality control. With heroin at least, the "bad batches" that kill people (and have killed a number of my family members and people in my extended social circle) tend to be the ones that are purer - people know that they usually need 1 bag to get high, then suddenly there's twice as much heroin in a given bag because the batch is purer than they expected and it causes a bunch of people to OD. This problem would be solved if it were legal and you could buy it in a store from a person who you could sue if they caused your wrongful death, but decriminalizing heroin wouldn't do anything for that. Furthermore, this doesn't reduce the incentive that Mexican drug gangs have for killing thousands of people to secure their territory along the border, because you'd still need to produce the drugs somewhere and smuggle them into rich countries like the US. Certainly it'd be nice if in addition to all these other horrible problems we also didn't spend a ton of money throwing people in jail for using drugs, but honestly I don't see decriminalization as anything more than a stepping stone on the way to full legalization of all drugs.

joesmo 12y ago
Decriminalization will (presumably) allow needle exchange programs reducing the spread of many diseases such as HIV and Hep C. Many places already have such programs regardless of criminality. It would be a lot easier for such programs and legislation allowing for access to clean needles to survive in a climate of decriminalization than one where even possession of needles themselves is a crime. I think Portugal more than proves that full legalization is not necessary for benefits, despite being the obvious rational choice.
- x1798DE 12y ago
  I agree that it's a step forward, just that I think it doesn't address the biggest problems and it's not a solution. It certainly helps with the health problems, but it's only a good step in the sense that nearly anything is better than the situation we have now. I think another thing you should take from the Portugal situation is that full legalization would be unlikely to have many costs, because you're already making it so that the average consumer can get drugs anyway, so from their perspective the drugs are already "legal". Going from decriminalized to legal can more or less only have upsides. If you want to say, "Hey, let's decriminalize it first, see how people react, then legalize it", that's great. If you are trying to say, "Keeping it illegal but not punishing the users as much is a good long-term compromise", that's where I'd push back. It helps, but all the biggest issues are essentially still there.
  - joesmo 12y ago
    Full legalization is the optimal solution but this is still a political problem. To pass something like this, you have to pander to a lot of stupid idiots who may be persuaded to accept decriminalization but not full legalization, even in cases where the two are semi-equivalent. I think generally decriminalization is pushed for because of such wider support and the chance that it might and has succeeded in the past. Of course, once drugs are decriminalized, legalization is the next step. The reason for such roundabout tactics is that the opposition is not rational.
Blahah 12y ago
> you could buy it in a store from a person who you could sue if they caused your wrongful death It's vanishingly rare than anyone is capable of suing after they've died. (I agree with you on everything else).
- icantthinkofone 12y ago
  Your relations still can.
- taejo 12y ago
  But you're still capable of being sued after you've killed someone.
benjaminhaley 12y ago
Legal drugs cause their fair share of trouble. Consider the social ills brought to us by Philip Morris, Budweiser, and 17th century British opium trade. Profit making companies have an incentive to promote addiction as do governments who base too much revenue on drug taxes. Finding a happy medium between black market and free market is a tricky problem. I suspect it will continue to require a complex set of regulations. I'm quite happy to see states in America experimenting with various policies towards marijuana. Hopefully one of them will land on something not worse than what's happening right now. Hopefully too, the attitudes of the WHO will encourage even more experimentation.

by x1798DE 12y ago

joesmo 12y ago

Decriminalization will (presumably) allow needle exchange programs reducing the spread of many diseases such as HIV and Hep C. Many places already have such programs regardless of criminality. It would be a lot easier for such programs and legislation allowing for access to clean needles to survive in a climate of decriminalization than one where even possession of needles themselves is a crime. I think Portugal more than proves that full legalization is not necessary for benefits, despite being the obvious rational choice.

x1798DE 12y ago
I agree that it's a step forward, just that I think it doesn't address the biggest problems and it's not a solution. It certainly helps with the health problems, but it's only a good step in the sense that nearly anything is better than the situation we have now. I think another thing you should take from the Portugal situation is that full legalization would be unlikely to have many costs, because you're already making it so that the average consumer can get drugs anyway, so from their perspective the drugs are already "legal". Going from decriminalized to legal can more or less only have upsides. If you want to say, "Hey, let's decriminalize it first, see how people react, then legalize it", that's great. If you are trying to say, "Keeping it illegal but not punishing the users as much is a good long-term compromise", that's where I'd push back. It helps, but all the biggest issues are essentially still there.
- joesmo 12y ago
  Full legalization is the optimal solution but this is still a political problem. To pass something like this, you have to pander to a lot of stupid idiots who may be persuaded to accept decriminalization but not full legalization, even in cases where the two are semi-equivalent. I think generally decriminalization is pushed for because of such wider support and the chance that it might and has succeeded in the past. Of course, once drugs are decriminalized, legalization is the next step. The reason for such roundabout tactics is that the opposition is not rational.

Blahah 12y ago

> you could buy it in a store from a person who you could sue if they caused your wrongful death It's vanishingly rare than anyone is capable of suing after they've died. (I agree with you on everything else).

icantthinkofone 12y ago
Your relations still can.
taejo 12y ago
But you're still capable of being sued after you've killed someone.

benjaminhaley 12y ago

Legal drugs cause their fair share of trouble. Consider the social ills brought to us by Philip Morris, Budweiser, and 17th century British opium trade. Profit making companies have an incentive to promote addiction as do governments who base too much revenue on drug taxes. Finding a happy medium between black market and free market is a tricky problem. I suspect it will continue to require a complex set of regulations. I'm quite happy to see states in America experimenting with various policies towards marijuana. Hopefully one of them will land on something not worse than what's happening right now. Hopefully too, the attitudes of the WHO will encourage even more experimentation.