Hacker News Reader

Comment by ktRolster | Hacker News Reader

  >For one thing, decriminalization is easy to do.

Decriminalization is a bad idea. It increases demand, which gives gangs and mafia types more money. If you're going to do it, legalize it.

View on HN

The Portuguese case study says that it's really not a bad idea (though not referring specifically the increasing or diminishing illegal business, just less "street value") [1][2]. But I agree with your corollary.

[1] https://www.drugpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DPA_Fact_Shee...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal#Observ...

Well, even if it doesn't change much, you're still stuck with the absolute worst part of drug prohibition – unregulated and unclean drugs, turf wars and violence, and hundreds of thousands of murders in less fortunate countries.

I find decriminalisation to be a pretty egoistic way around the problem. Sure, it makes lives better for people at home, but it completely ignores the massive amount of suffering countries (including Canada) has brought on supply and transit countries.

I can't see that being an option in the case of heroin or meth.

It makes sense to decriminalize users/addicts because they are the victims whom drug legislation is supposed to protect in the first place.

But to me it makes no sense to allow anyone to profit from a substance that causes this much harm.

> But to me it makes no sense to allow anyone to profit from a substance that causes this much harm.

It's possible to use heroin daily for the remainder of your life and have a better health outcome than a cigarette smoker.

The drug war makes heroin use more dangerous. Now you have dirty needles, cut drugs, highly inconsistent doses, lack of free treatment/therapy, fear of police and the legal system that leads to reluctance to seek medical attention, etc. And of course black market violence still exists here and abroad.

"Like most opioids, unadulterated heroin does not cause many long-term complications other than dependence and constipation."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#Adverse_effects

Switzerland had success with the heroin problem. They've made it legal and free, but to get it free, you need to visit a hospital for your daily injection, where they also can give you psychological help.

The program seems to have been a success, destroying the market for illegal heroin, and also reducing demand because it gives the drug a perception of being for losers.

How did they manage it in the 30s (or whenever depending on your nationality)? Are you absolutely certain that criminalization wasn't an overreaction to a problem that after all wasn't all that big?

If you've got a free hour-or-so sometime this BBC documentary is pretty engaging and describes the opiate timeline regarding use and legal status: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3M1QPoeNMU

In fact it still isn't that big.

>An estimated 13.5 million people in the world take opioids (opium-like substances), including 9.2 million who use heroin.

That's an insignificant number compared to the global population and all the harm the BS cat/mouse game with mafia and police has caused.

Short answer: They didn't.

Back then lives were being ruined as well. And the availability and affordability of dangerous drugs has only increased since then.

People just didn't make such a "fuss" of addiction, and especially in the case of poorer people, nobody really cared.

>People just didn't make such a "fuss" of addiction

So why should we make a fuss out of it today?

>and especially in the case of poorer people, nobody really cared.

Whereas now they do?

Is a case of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com