Hacker News Reader

Comment by seoulmetro | Hacker News Reader

It seems fairly reasonable that the state can restrict drugs... the same way they can restrict drinking ages, drink driving, car reliability tests, etc.

I think what you mean is, the injustice of continuing a war that they do not intend on winning. There definitely is justice in admitting failure and putting the non-solving weapons down. But there is no justice in allowing people to do drugs when it's against the law.

Winning the war on drugs is pretty evident to be way better than losing... see China, Japan, Korea.

View on HN

Resident of Japan here. Young people ruining their kidneys by swallowing whole bottles of OTC cough medicine instead of smoking weed isn't "winning the war drugs". Look up "市販薬OD" if you don't believe me.

Actually it has won the war on drugs. Cough medicine isn't any more mind altering than caffeine is, of course you can destroy yourself overdosing on anything considered a toxin in high doses...

This is hilarious. You think Japan is struggling with drug trafficking, drug abuse and policing of drug use?

Japan, and many other countries around the world follow the US' lead. Your stupid racist cannibis propaganda and subsequent laws infiltrated the world over. We're all paying for it now.

In the name of bantz, we never had culture of cannabis usage in Europe before 20th century. Opioids on the other hand…

Culture of cannabis usage in Europe can actually be traced back to the 19th century.[0]

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Taming-Cannabis-Empire-Nineteenth-Cen...

oh damn, thanks. TIL.

I only learned recently, too!

This is true, unfortunately the biggest export from the US is its mistakes. Probably because it is a lot easier to export something if you have to force yourself to live with it, but then get bitter if others don't.

If you're an American, please stop ruining other peoples countries because you want them to be like your own messed up one.

What? The USA is an amazing net positive on the world.

There is just some stuff that really shouldn't have happened.

The USA was an amazing net positive on the world. That ship sailed a while ago.

DXM is absolutely more mind altering than caffeine. What do you mean?

How so?

Isn't cough medicine with codeine or DXM more mind altering than caffeine?

I've been following drug policy around the world for decades. The reason it is so interesting (and so pernicious) is because it's a big jumble of counterintuitive, niggling details and unintended consequences that defies common sense.

Of course cough medicine isn't any more mind altering than caffeine - except that there at least two types of highly psychoactive cough medicine: opioid, which has narcotic effects, and dextromethorphan, which has dissociative effects.

Experts, including Dr. Toshihiko Matsumoto, claim that wrist-cutting, suicides, and other self-harm increases when it becomes more difficult for young people to purchase cough syrup, presumably because they use it self-medicate trauma.

This is a microcosm for drug policy in general. Prohibition is only successful if you ignore second-order effects.

None of this is to discourage you from learning more about drug policy. Maybe if more people learned about it we would stop repeating the same mistakes over and over again

Bizarre comment.

> I've been following drug policy around the world for decades

Is this supposed to make you an authority on the topic?

> Of course cough medicine …

You literally said “cough medicine isn’t mind altering,” and then used the next paragraph to explain how it is mind-altering.

> … presumably because they use it self-medicate trauma

Are you implying that when vulnerable people try to harm themselves with drugs we should let them pick their own drugs and dosage? How about, you know, real medical help?

> Is this supposed to make you an authority on the topic?

Of course not, that's why I provided the name of an authority.

> You literally said “cough medicine isn’t mind altering,” and then used the next paragraph to explain how it is mind-altering.

Paraphrasing the argument of my interlocutor and then immediately refuting it is a common rhetorical device.

> How about, you know, real medical help?

Of course people need real medical help. It's easier for them to seek it if they aren't at risk of criminal prosecution. Look up "harm reduction".

This is a huge reach. I am almost laughing at the comment, it's that crazy. You know what else makes suicide more common? Having a bad day, being poor, losing a lover, not having a family.

These are all net negatives that can be offset with net positives.

Telling them they can all smoke weed for no reason is not.

I'm actually amazed you think this way, but then again, you are a foreigner in Japan and those are constantly bitter that places in East Asia are actually not rampant with drugs and drug abused homelessness.

>Prohibition is only successful if you ignore second-order effects.

Prohibition is only successful if you want it to be, the West does not. Much of Asia did. That's the difference and it's amazing living in Asia without having to worry about a war on drugs.

>None of this is to discourage you from learning more about drug policy.

Why do you think I'm commenting here so bluntly if you think I don't know about what I'm talking about?

> Telling them they can all smoke weed for no reason is not.

So now you're putting words in my mouth?

> I'm actually amazed you think this way, but then again, you are a foreigner in Japan and those are constantly bitter

"Pointing out ways that something you like can improve means you secretly hate it" is not a cogent argument.

> that places in East Asia are actually not rampant with drugs and drug abused homelessness.

Have you ever been to Japan? I've met a lot of drug users, and I've seen a lot of drugs. I know someone who runs a methamphetamine self-help group and credits cannabis with his recovery. I've met compassionate growers who supply cancer patients with free cannabis. I've been in a brick-and-mortar store that sells grey-market research chemicals from overseas. I know a shaman who runs underground pharmahuasca ceremonies. And last but not least, I dodge drunk salarymen and puddles of vomit on my way home from work every Friday night. Or do you not consider alcohol to be a drug...?

> Why do you think I'm commenting here so bluntly if you think I don't know about what I'm talking about?

You didn't even know about cough medicine. You have a credibility deficit right now. I've given you names and keywords and falsifiable statements and personal experience. All you've given me is baseless confidence and status quo bias. Throw me a bone!

In the meantime, may I suggest you read a book? "Drug Use for Grownups" by Dr. Carl Hart is a good place to start.

>Have you ever been to Japan?

Yes. It sounds like you haven't.

Your comments are just entertainment at this point.

If you have lived in Japan, have you lived anywhere else where drugs do actually have a strong societal impact?

You sound about as naive as someone who blindly seethes after illicit drug use does.

drinking ages, drink driving, car reliability tests, etc.

These aren't the same. Drinking ages don't effect other people.

Drink driving does.

Car reliability does.

Smoking weed or snorting coke does not.

There is usually some societal impact from having drugs legal but the cost of making it illegal typically far outweighs the negatives - war on drugs, cartels, mass incarceration etc.

Smoking weed affects other people as does snorting coke. Any form of drug use affects other people. The same way alcohol does.

>There is usually some societal impact from having drugs legal but the cost of making it illegal typically far outweighs the negatives - war on drugs, cartels, mass incarceration etc.

No it doesn't. Drugs being illegal is insanely good. Drugs being semi-illegal is insanely bad. It's quite easy to see if you actually live in countries that are on both sides of the fence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com