Hacker News Reader

Comment by iso1631 | Hacker News Reader

So you think that everyone in a liberal democracy should be able to buy Heroin?

What's the alternative? In a liberal democracy do you lock people who use Heroin in a cage instead? That's hardly anymore "liberal".

And if the use isn't illegal you might as well allow it to be legally purchased to reduce the risk of people buying something unpure while promoting criminal drug gangs.

I'm not saying it should be purchasable from a corner shop. But if it's purchasable from a place that can provide support and help for the addict? Sure.

Yes absolutely, and all other so called "hard" drugs.

Or on other hand maybe we should ban ethanol too and treat it exactly like heroine. After all the damage and costs to society are pretty similar.

Could you provide a list of liberal democracies then please?

"Liberal Democracy" is not the same as "Libertarian Paradise"

Heroin abuse is just the symptom of broader problems.

Sure you can't have the population strung out on heroin while effectively juicing them for their productivity but at the same time it's not like a junkie would be living a safe healthy productive life if it weren't for heroin.

I think the War on Drugs has devastated the US to little effect considering how many die of opiate overdose every year.

I’m trying to figure out if you’re even serious to suggest banning heroin worked when fentanyl is the leading cause of Millennials dying.

I personally like the idea of fully legalized drugs, but I don't necessarily think they should be allowed to be imported and sold, at least not directly. There's a "middle way" that frames drug use in term of health, but it shouldn't be legal to profit from people's addictions.

Politicians can decide to pass any laws they want. The ability of the state to enforce those laws is a different matter. Nothing inherent about democracy prevents it from being as restrictive on freedom as a dictatorship.

Every adult, certainly.

How about fentanyl and how about other theoretical substances with higher addictiveness and mortality rates?

@DalasNoin The solution for Fentanyl and other theoretical substances with higher addictiveness and mortality rates is to make supply a very serious offense, currently a disastrous failure in the USA. The solution with cigarettes is to make them expensive and hard to buy.

Banning things does not work and lulls people into a false sense of security imo. Guns in the UK are a good example of that.

I’m from the UK and IMO the gun ban is very effective. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone that wasn’t a special armed policeman or a soldier with a gun. It’s very rare for someone to be shot here, and most criminals don’t carry guns because they know the penalties if caught are so much higher that it’s not worth it. Even if you were to held up with a gun (which isn’t common at all), you’d be much less likely to be shot as they wouldn’t have to worry about you shooting them.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/01/gun-rising-i...

Criminals using illegal guns don't adhere to laws. Same issue in US.

"London has halved its gun crime over the past decade"

Gun deaths are half what they were before the handgun ban was introduced. The UK doesn't make 5 year olds practice hiding under desks if there's an "active shooter". It doesn't need to, I don't think any country does apart from th eUS.

Plenty of people have guns, but gun crime has certainly dropped dramatically since the days of Dunblane

https://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/192/total_nu...

I actually do not care about the addictiveness nor toxicity of any of those substances. My opinion comes from my stance that anyone should be able to do whatever they want with their own bodies. That same stance informs my thoughts on trans people, gay people, women's rights, vaccines, abortion etc etc. I see all those issues as an extension of one's right to bodily autonomy.

Humanity has done an insane amount of damage to society since everyone followed along in the "war on drugs", which stemmed from racial origins and continues to have such disproportionate impact. I'm glad we are (slowly) moving away from this atrocity :)

As far as I know, fentanyl only really became a problem because it is so potent that it's easy to smuggle. 50x stronger than heroin = you only have to smuggle 1/50th as much to make the same amount of money.

> So you think that everyone in a liberal democracy should be able to buy Heroin?

Of course not. Only the choosen ones. Is New Zeeland still a democracy ?

Just adults. Why not?

This is the right answer. Given the extreme harm of having it illegal (police costs, property theft and damage costs from thieving to pay for it, health costs of having impure illegal adulterated sources, erosion of liberty due to authoritarian ratchet up over time to try and make illegal actually work, etc) I seriously doubt selling all the drugs under a system similar to how most places treat alcohol (maybe with the added health warnings on packaging most places apply to cigarettes) would be more harmful than status quo.

By default, adults should be allowed to buy heroin.

Yes, every person of voting age.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com