Hacker News Reader

Comment by MarcusBrutus | Hacker News Reader

It's a very real problem for some individuals, no quarrel there. But it's not a "real social problem". As a matter of fact I could so far as to say that I would be hard-pressed to find any "real social problems". They really all boil down to individuals making bad choices but asking society to foot the bill. And of course "social problems" are very much welcomed by the political class and various others busybodies , do-gooders, etc. who earn their livelihoods (and sometimes much more than that) by "fixing" "social problems". And please don't play the "it's about the kids" card. If the effects spill over to non-consenting adults or minors, custody can be removed or charges can be brought just like the case of parents copulating in front of their kids without having to criminalize sex.

View on HN

Walk around Philly surrounded by strung out junkies and tell me its not a social problem. Step on a used syringe in New York and tell me its not a social problem. Talk to some foster kids who were taken away from parents with heroin or meth addictions and tell me its not a social problem.

Ok, then. How do you propose we fix this "social problem"? The War on Drugs clearly has not worked and D.A.R.E. has been found to be generally ineffective[1]. Throwing money at the problem is not going to fix it, bigger guns and nicer presentations are not going to change the fact that people use drugs, and will use them regardless of the consequences.

Giving people safe avenues to do what they were going to do anyway is the only sane solution. Obviously rehab clinics are here to stay, I am not arguing that drug use is always positive, because it is not. People will and do abuse legal substances, all you can offer is resources to help them stop; people have to make their own decisions.

Prohibition only exacerbates the problem[2].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Abuse_Resistance_Educatio...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_Stat...

I don't disagree with anything you said. But lets not pretend that drug use isn't actually a social problem like some pro legalization folks want to do. It has real social costs and really hurts people and communities, just like other "moral crimes" that should nonetheless probably be legal. You can think prostitution should be legal without pretending that its this totally above-board thing with totally consenting adults that doesn't have a lot of negative costs.

Prostitution is actually a bad argument. The places where it is legal, prostitutes get things like health care, readily preventative measures against the spread of STDs and forgo the need for pimps.

The "war on drugs" is really pre-crime. Its the notion that everyone that does x becomes an addict. That everyone eventually falls down the slippery slope of needing to commit crimes like stealing to get their fix, which I think we can agree just isn't true.

As a Christian, and this sadly should not be but may be hard to believe, I follow the path of free will. You are free to destroy the planet if you so choose. Its not my right to determine which poison you wish to ingest is right or wrong for you. While I do agree that some choices do have societal consequences, a "one size fits all" approach with prohibition is complete bullshit.

I do agree that measures should be taken to protect myself from others, when my actions actually do affect them. Take DUI laws for example. There's clear evidence driving while intoxicated can lead to incredible lapses of judgment. Does it mean every time you're behind the wheel with any blood alcohol count you're gonna kill someone? No but there's a severely increased chance. Yet even then I may be able to handle a higher blood alcohol content than you, so this argument is also brittle.

I guess my main point is other countries have legalized a spectrum of substances at a much less threshold of pain than we have. Its as if they seen what a colossal waste of time, energy, and resources it produces. Yet in America we let our pride get in the way of every fucking thing. We'll continue this "war on drugs" and equally our "war on terror" until we're no longer a nation. Both have pushed us close to oblivion because consistently no one is seeing any positive results. The rest of the world recognizes our folly, repeatedly calls us out on it and what? We continue business as usual? I'm sorry, I don't wish to be labeled as that incredibly dense, stupid, moronic, retarded, juvenile, or whatever other petty words I can come up with. I think we're smarter than that but if you (and by you I mean second person you all) wish to continue this farcical charade, knock yourselves out.

As the example of Germany shows, your optimistic claims in the first paragraph seems to be untrue:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-traffickin...

I'll agree to my optimism and it being a claim. Its untrue in Germany due according to the article but is the problem legalization or the laws trying to promote said legalization?

Criminal organizations seek out areas of gratification like this and once in their clutches it seems next to impossible to remove completely. Prohibition patently isn't working but instead of seeking any possible alternative, we stick our head in the sand and continue business as usual.

My problem is I see inefficiency. The war on drugs or terror are both incredibly, woefully inefficient and nothing is changing for the better, only the worse.

Look, you can walk around those places and come back the same conclusion for Alcohol. If you walk around those places, you'll find more uneducated people, more addicts, more violence, more decay, and so on. It's very easy to conclude 'it must be the drugs', or 'these people are more violent', or 'dumber', but those would be very shallow conclusions. Drugs are a very simple way to hide from ones bleak reality. Getting rid of drugs to deal with this problem would be the same as building more houses to eliminate homelessness.

Louis Ck bit, very funny and sad for it's truth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agVmmw2C0Hw

> Getting rid of drugs to deal with this problem would be the same as building more houses to eliminate homelessness.

This is an excellent thought experiment. I think everyone would be basically on board with the idea that if there were suddenly more houses (for free), that would be a good thing. It would be a huge benefit to people renting or buying housing, but I agree with you that the cost of housing is unlikely to drop to zero no matter how much suddenly appears.

So, in the analogy, do we think homeless people are being priced out of the market, or do we think they're homeless for other reasons?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com