Hacker News Reader

Comment by immibis | Hacker News Reader

Policing drug use is a waste of taxpayer money as well as a waste of labour (of both the drug users when they're not doing drugs, and the cops). The results of drug use should be policed, not the use itself; safe environments for occasional drug use should also be created (the free market would do this if it wasn't illegal, and in some places if you know where to look, has already quietly done this).

I have to disclaim I don't know what meth is like, what meth users are like, or what it's like to be on meth, but if 20 people are doing meth and not bothering anyone, and the police officer is keeping watch to ensure they don't bother anyone, that is fine by me. We should treat them like drunk alcoholics, not like murderers (unless they murdered someone).

Separately, we could encourage people to try less harmful drugs than meth. That isn't really possible as long as we give out the same penalties for weed as for meth.

View on HN

While I’m not and would not propose the drastic measures that Singapore or Japan take, but there is much less drug use in those two places among others and they prove that enforcement, if you’re willing to address the problem, can greatly reduce use of illegal drugs.

Meth is very addictive and debilitating. It’s worse than crack. It takes people down. They are no longer able to be productive citizens. They become a burden for families and for society.

And arresting the users solves none of that. Maybe it hides it from casual observers, but if you actually want to help people, treatment programs and assistance, not cops, are what you need.

Obviously you have to go after supply … but both Japan and Singapore successfully tackle outdoor usage. You don’t see people openly using illegal drugs in either place. Obviously if you are able to procure and do your illegal drugs at home the police can’t stop you unless your neighbors rat you out.

I don't think you can compare East and West cultures like that. I think a big reason the West has so many open drug users is because shame and rule-following are not deeply ingrained parts of the culture. I don't think enforcement is what's doing the grunt of the heavy lifting in the East.

So does alcohol, but we don't lock people up for using alcohol - only when it becomes a problem for that individual person - and even then we try to avoid locking them up.

BTW, crack cocaine is just cocaine, delivered in a different format. The effects are the same. The disparity in punishment stems from the demographics of the average user of each.

Crack was affordable --mostly preppies used coke. Your everyday Joe bought crack. It was bad. I saw what it did to people. But from what I hear about Meth it's just so much worse. People on crack would steal money and they were very flakey but they could still show up to work. Meth addicts just can't function. Alcoholics can function. Now with regard to alcohol, it's such a historically baked-in party of society -we've had it with us for myriads there is no prying it away from folks despite the devastation it brings to its addicts --but that said, it's far from being as bad as Meth.

There are plenty of high functioning meth users. Not every meth user smokes their first pipe and instantly ends up on the street covered in scabs.

Edit: not to suggest using meth recreationally is a safe, smart or good thing to do.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com