Norway votes to decriminalise drugs and offer treatment instead of jail time

Actually I think the U.S. is ahead of Norway here, as cannabis has been decriminalized in several states in the U.S. As to the racial component — Norway is not as racially diverse as the U.S., but if you are black you will be routinely stopped by police and interrogated on the street in Norway. This will not happen if you are white. I know of a university professor from Africa that experiences this several times a year — he has just resigned to the fact.

On a diffrent note, Norway has a huge problem with drug-related deaths: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19/which-european-nati...

Please, nobody would ever know how difficult it is. The problem is that a century of draconian enforcement has created a MASSIVE private complex that feeds and pays so many people that the interests have rooted in the system.

Don't be fooled, the lack of progress is almost exclusively a product of vested interest in enforcement and this vague intellectual question of "how?"

Australian here. I was charged with two counts of Traffic Controlled Drug and one count of Possess Prescription Drug without lawful excuse on the 28th of December 2012. I was carrying only a little bit more that I might typically be in possession of because it was three days before new years eve.

It took two years three months to sort it out in the courts. Fortunately I got referred to a barrister who managed to get the charges dropped. I got all my cash back from the police, that was a pleasant experience.

Point being, in those two years and three months I cleaned myself up, got a job and was ready to buy a house, but still had the charges hanging over me. My god, what a stress.

The error in the law would be if selling some speakers once is okay, but opening a hi-fi store is punishable with jail time.

If we agree that consuming drugs is fine, then why are we simultaneously trying to put dealers and distributors in jail? What’s the point?

If drugs are legalized—truly legalized—the need for “gangster types” diminishes and all that is left is supply and demand.

I am very concerned about stronger penalties that are there to coerce someone to do something rather than be proportional as a deterrent or whatever else the legal system is supposed to do in a given country. It puts you too much at the mercy of the police. This reminds me of the strategy prosecutors are using in the US where they are piling insane amounts of charges on to force the supposed criminal to take a plea bargain instead of going to court.

To me that's a quick path to where legal systems go to die.

To add a different perspective: the only reason gangster types are in this business is exactly because it is criminalized.

Gangsters aren't particularly good at doing business, and will be out-competed by professional outfits when the law allows.

I don't know about this. Weed is semi-legal in The Netherlands but people who deal "on the side" are still very common.

Probably something to do with the transaction costs and margins that can be achieved.

Yeah unfortunately here we use the drug laws to effectively reintroduce slavery. Its legal under US law to use prisoners as slave labor. As we used to say in the 90s people in the 'hood don't have planes. By the 2000s rather than the CIA cocaine and heroin smuggling we saw Wallstreet move in and the rise of the Oxycontin era where Wallstreet shareholders have been directly benefiting both from selling opiates to the masses and then from their slave labor when they land in a private prison after converting from oxy to heroin addiction.

It's been a long slog in Norway too, though, and there's still substantial pressure from groups that peddle outright lies about the dangers of drugs. Norway has long had some of the worst drug policies in Europe, in part because there is significant split in Norway between on one hand a focus on a human justice system, and on the other hand a puritan lutheran and evangelical community that sees all drugs (including alcohol) as a moral failing.

So punishments and pressure on police to take drug related crime extra seriously has for a long time been disproportionate to the impacts them have relative to other crimes.

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." -- John Ehrlichman, who served as domestic policy chief for President Richard Nixon when the administration declared its war on drugs in 1971

Portuguese drug use has gone up in fact. But Portugal isn't even a good test case because it's a country that didn't have much of a drug culture to begin with. It's not very helpful to cite it as a useful test case for possible American drug policy, as people have been doing lately.

>druggies

I hear that word used a lot over here in the UK, usually by people on right of the political spectrum, but the word sounds rather pejorative to me. I presume the people using it mean "users of drugs, excluding alcohol" in order to differentiate themselves from the users of the other drugs.

One point that may be significant is that South Korea has only one land border, and it is heavily guarded.

First thing I‘d ask is if South Korea had a high amount of users and addicts and deaths ever in the past. I could imagine US and Portugal are more similar to each other.

According to wikipedia use of drugs are a lesser offense in south korea, so if that is correct it is not highly criminalized.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_South_Korea

Supply of drugs has also historically been limited according to the following article that goes over drugs in South Korea at length:

- https://www.koreaexpose.com/drugs-south-korea-a-silent-crisi...

SK also has one of the highest suicide rates (2nd) in the world. There's a confounding effect between people who wants release that can get drugs for it and those that can't which results in suicide.

I'd say income - even marijuana is expensive, not to mention the strong drugs - and the availability of decent booze for cheap.

You really need to look at trends more than absolute numbers, or you will run into the issue of actually verifying that the numbers are comparable.

E.g. death due to X tends to depend greatly on what the policy is on autopsies and other checks, and whether or not there's any pressure on coroners to speculate about cause of death vs. just pronounce a generic reason.

In Norway for example, an autopsy only happens rarely unless there is a reason to expect foul play, mostly because it's seen as expensive and unnecessary. As a result, a lot of "natural causes" or "heart failure" can obscure more specific causes that will only be recorded if accompanied by e.g. police observations.

Then, even if you do tests, there's the question of how you record deaths where there are multiple possible causes. E.g. you might have heart failure possibly due to a combination of alcohol and other drugs. Depending on your reporting system you might put it down in any number of different ways.

Then on top of this, you have to consider what make people use, not just what potentially make people not use. It could be the differences in legal system, or just that other societal differences makes fewer people predisposed to want to use in the first place.

All of this basically makes it impossible to compare country to country and conclude that changes in a single area such as law enforcement makes a difference.

The reason we look to Portugal is not primarily because it looks good compared to other countries, but because it performs well compared to itself prior to decriminalisation, and because it was a recent change.

In Poland, drugs were way too expensive to be widespread up until the fall of communism. After that, people were generally more aware of how bad drugs are (AIDS, the overdoses of rockstars etc.), so I’m guessing they were reluctant to even try them out and the drug culture never caught on.

That probably depends on how much space it needs at the end and whether or not you allow things like coffee shops (after all, we are talking full legalisation).

If they just need a counter, I'm guessing Vinmonopolet will do just fine even though their stores tend to be small with well-used space. If they allow for coffee shops/bars, it might be split much like alcohol: Weaker or set strength pre-rolled joints available at grocery stores much like cigarettes and beer and unrolled pot/hash at the liquor stores.

Or they see drug addicts as health care issue, not criminals. Portugal has decriminalised more than a decade ago and they don't seem to turn to legalisation any time soon?

I think it's interesting that you fear a hypothetical future of "undeserving youth abusing the welfare system" more than the current reality of "undeserving youth not getting the help they need and dying in the streets". You might wanna double-check your math on that value system you're using.

AFAIK, it's actually illegal to carry them in any public space, even if it's for personal consumption.

There are also some other points where I think the law/jurisprudence can be improved (e.g. harm reduction supplies such as accurate scales can be considered as evidence of trafficking), but still, overall the law doesn't impose excessive penalties on drug users, and of course is better than most other countries in the world.

I would have thought you could give my very serious policy proposal some slightly more considered analysis.

Ok. Lets take a look at how this would be administered legally.

I'm going to assume they'll have measured doses with the precision of a prescription drug. It'll probably be cut with some food-grade and safe substance to make it easier to measure as an alternative. If dosage is dependent on body mass, the store employee measures this before dispensing your dose. There is a strict limit on the number of doses a person can safely buy.

If it makes my life better and I know a few people who said that it also makes their lifes better - then surely it makes someone else's life better.

Now you could argue that it may also make someone else's life better, but we can't yet make any official research on the topic due to the legal framework against drugs.

On the misinformation clause - I can't say there's much misinformation on the dosages and expected effects on the hard reduction websites. They do their job well.

93. DE MEDICINIS SECUNDUM QUATTUOR ELEMENTA. (On the Chemical Agents According to the Four Elements) Concerning the Use of chemical Agents, and be mindful that thou abuse them not, learn that the Sacrament itself relateth to Spirit, and the Four Elements balanced thereunder in its Perfection. So also thy Lion himself hath a fourfold Menstruum for his Serpents. Now to Fire belong Cocaine, which fortifieth the Will, loosing him from bodily Fatigue, Morphine, which purifieth the Mind, making the Thought safe, and slow, and single, Heroin which partaketh as it seemeth, of he Nature of these twain aforesaid albeit in Degree less notable than either of them, and Alcohol, which is Food, that is, Fuel, for the whole Man. To Water, attribute Hashish and Mescal, for they make Images, and they open the hidden Springs of Pleasure and of Beauty. Morphine, for its Ease, hath also part in Water. Air ruleth Ethyl Oxide, for it is as a Sword, dividing asunder ever Part of thee, making easy the Way of Analysis, so that thou comest to learn thyself of what Elements thou art compact. Lastly, of the Nature of Earth are the direct Hypnotics, which operate by Repose, and restore thy Strength by laying thee as a Child in the Arms of the Great Mother, I say rather of Her material and physiological Vicegerent.

94. DE VIRTUTE EXPERIMENTIAE IN HOC ARTE. (On the Virtue of Experience in this Art) Not Sleep, not Rest, not Contentment are of the Will of the Hero, but these Things he hateth, and consenteth to enjoy them only with Same of his weak Nature. But he will analyse himself without Pity, and he will do all Things soever that may free and fortify his Mind and Will. Know that the Technick of the Right Use of this Magick with Poisons is subtle; and since the Nature of every Man differeth from that of his Fellow, there entereth Idiosyncrasy, and thine Experience shall be thy Master in this Art. Heed also this Word following: The Right Use of these Agents is to gain a Knowledge preliminary of thine own Powers, and of High States, so that thou goest not altogether blindly and without Aim in thy Quest, ignorant of the Ways of thine own inner Being. Also, thou must work always for a definite End, never for Pleasure or for Relaxation, except thy wilt, as a good Knight is sworn to do. And thou being Hero and Magician art in Peril of abusing the fiery Agents only, not those of Earth, Air or Water; because these do really work with thee in Purity, making thee wholly what thou wouldst be, an Engine indefatigable, a Mind clear, calm, and concentrated, and a Heart fierce aglow.

It's really pretty simple: you let people figure this out.

The kind of stuff that deserves to be regulated, is the stuff that has known health issues (including strong physical addiction, as e.g. opiates do).

A lot of drugs are in both categories. On that note, it really isn't different from alcohol, coffee, or gambling. Most folks just use them to relax sometimes, so mostly benefit.

On the crowley note: My time spent in occult circles tells me something similar. Some folks benefit, some folks don't and it has just as much to do with their particular slant on Thelema or other path as it does with their personality and reaction. Though I will say LSD, shrooms, DMT, pot, tobacco and alcohol seem to be the more common "helpers".

Norway relies on a "restorative justice" system which aims to repair the harm caused by crime rather than punish people. Drugs are not that accessible, I speak from experience. Drug addiction is not a crime, punishing an addict is. I took the time to talk to inmates and hear their stories. Every ones got a story, listen carefully and you may find empathy in the strangest of places and if not at least an understanding.

nah, java style verbing any and every noun is something else.

We war on:

    drugs
    cancer
    terror
    poverty
    gangs
    crime

we need to verb the noun war in the sense that, 'the president "warred on" ...' Meaning a stupid policy was followed that generally left everyone one vastly worse off except a bunch of high priced consultants.

"warred on" should have the same general meaning as "shat on their own desk"

I read it as snark directed at the U.S., not Norway.

Except how do you prove someone owns bitcoin?

my point is a simple observation