Not-Such-Better-Living Through Chemistry

Re:Not-Such-Better-Living Through Chemistry by nobody9999 on Saturday January 07, 2023 @05:03PM (#34293393)

>HN is full of smart people who (wrongly I think) assume that because they have the self-control and discipline to either avoid drugs or to use them relatively safely that the rest of the population does too. This does not seem true in my experience. I forget the exact stats but roughly 1 in 20 Americans is an alcoholic, and that's with a drug that humans have been consuming for thousands of years and that has established social rituals around consumption. It seems likely to me that increasing access to and decreasing stigma of highly addictive drugs like opioids or amphetamines will lead to substantial increases in addiction rates.

IMHO, that's a little reductive. The primary issue isn't use/abuse of such substances. Rather, it's the criminalization of use/abuse that's the biggest problem.

I say that because putting someone in jail because they have a problem with substance abuse doesn't make any sense. I'd add that providing comprehensive treatment for those who have such issues would be less than half the cost of interdiction, enforcement and incarceration.

What's more, both the substance abuse and legal issues/incarceration limits the economic potential of those who have resolved their issues due to stigmatization of those with criminal records.

I'll go even farther and say that drug prohibition (as we saw with the 18th Amendment[0]) creates black markets, and since there are no legal avenues to address disputes, and begets violence on a wide scale, further depressing economic output and social cohesion.

I don't disagree that substance abuse brings misery to many -- but penalizing those who use such substances without them negatively impacting their lives with legal issues and potential violence seems way too extreme.

If we invested USD$10-15 billion a year (as compared with ~USD$50 billion on "drug enforcement") into the resources required to provide treatment for anyone who wants/needs it, and legalize/regulate all "drugs", will save money, increase economic output and improve social cohesion.

It's a win/win/win if you ask me.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Not-Such-Better-Living Through Chemistry by jeffreyrogers on Monday January 09, 2023 @05:51PM (#34317640)

> If we invested USD$10-15 billion a year (as compared with ~USD$50 billion on "drug enforcement") into the resources required to provide treatment for anyone who wants/needs it, and legalize/regulate all "drugs", will save money, increase economic output and improve social cohesion.

I don't think there is much evidence for that (nor against it). One country that has tried something like that is Portugal and from what I can tell it has worked moderately but not spectacularly well. The problem with assuming that the US would have the same outcome is that the US shares a porous border with a part of the world heavily involved in drug trafficking and the US is a much larger country and larger consumer of narcotics, so the demand effects are hard to compare with Portugal.

[ Parent | on HN ]