Trump Opioid Policy: Step Up War on Drugs, Not Treatment

[Prutfis]

Nah, the Drug War does work. The problem is you can't half-ass it like we've been doing. You either have extremely draconian punishments like this or you legalize. Half-way in between like we've been doing just doesn't work.

 

[superpunch]

Countries with lenient drug laws and no corruption -- Europe, America, etc. -- have drug problems.

Countries with strict drug laws and corruption have drug problems.

Countries with lenient drug laws and corruption also have drug problems.

Countries that have strict drug laws and no corruption to avoid those laws have no drug problems. Japan, South Korea, Singapore, etc.

 

[Prutfis]

Countries with lenient drug laws and no corruption -- Europe, America, etc. -- have drug problems.

Countries with strict drug laws and corruption have drug problems.

Countries with lenient drug laws and corruption also have drug problems.

Countries that have strict drug laws and no corruption to avoid those laws have no drug problems. Japan, South Korea, Singapore, etc.

Thats as much a cultural thing. The war on drugs has failed massively and harsher punishments certainly don´t work. Even with the death penalty it wouldn´t help much.
That´s why Portugal is so interesting.

And Japans drug problem is rising extremely rapidly. Especially amphetamines so don´t know what you are talking about there.

 

[trolololol]

I'm fine with stepping up the punishments for dealers and users of opioids right in line with the punishments for crack and cocaine.

Alcohol is a disgusting scourge on society that's perfectly legal and advertised on television, and yet you want to increase jail time simply for someone using cocaine or opioids?



Years ago I was charged with possession of half a gram of weed. No big deal, right? I'll never forget the smug look on that cop's face, "You are being charged with half a gram of marijuana!!!"

Now imagine if that was a half gram of coke instead. I was 23 years old at the time, working and in school.

How would society be better if I was locked up, and with the taxpayers footing the bill?

 

[bufetadanacara]

Works fine in Portugal. Education is key. Just because something is legal doesn´t mean all of a sudden everyone is going nuts. See MJ legalization.

The words "education" and "America" seldomly collide together in the same sentence.


Obviously policing the drug the way they have been isn't working.

Treat users like patients and have more vigilance over those who are distributing and prescribing the drugs.

 

[bufetadanacara]

I'm fine with stepping up the punishments for dealers and users of opioids right in line with the punishments for crack and cocaine.

Or in reducing the punishments for all of the drug related offenses. I'm not a fan of cherry picking which ones get treated with rehab money and which ones which just keep getting more prison time.

What is wrong with cocaine?

How many of your friends regularly use cocaine? I have many friends who partake at least monthly. All of them are good mothers and fathers, they all have great jobs, are active in the community and overall great people. None have criminal records, it just so happens that they like to party once in a while.


I'd rather see a ban on artificial food ingredients before a ban on cocaine.


Seriously, what experience do you have with it?

 

[GriftyMcGrift]

i strongly recommend yall checking out the trade

takes a pretty unprecedented look, they have almost full access to a poppy growing town in guerrero




this series alone is pretty good indicator of a few things


1. cant stop the flow of drugs
2. cant stop people taking drugs
3. law enforcement is always a step behind on multiple levels

 

[panamaican]

What is wrong with cocaine?

How many of your friends regularly use cocaine? I have many friends who partake at least monthly. All of them are good mothers and fathers, they all have great jobs, are active in the community and overall great people. None have criminal records, it just so happens that they like to party once in a while.


I'd rather see a ban on artificial food ingredients before a ban on cocaine.


Seriously, what experience do you have with it?

What in the 9 hells does your post have to do with mine? Please re-read my post and then explain to me what my personal experience with cocaine adds to the content of my post.

 

[panamaican]

Alcohol is a disgusting scourge on society that's perfectly legal and advertised on television, and yet you want to increase jail time simply for someone using cocaine or opioids?



Years ago I was charged with possession of half a gram of weed. No big deal, right? I'll never forget the smug look on that cop's face, "You are being charged with half a gram of marijuana!!!"

Now imagine if that was a half gram of coke instead. I was 23 years old at the time, working and in school.

How would society be better if I was locked up, and with the taxpayers footing the bill?

I don't know - maybe you're a reprobate.

But my point is that consistency across the drugs should be the mantra. As it currently stands, people want to legalize mj, get treatment options for opioids, continue to incarcerate crack and cocaine. Yet, they're all the same general type of drug offense. Different drugs but part of the same drug culture.

 

[bufetadanacara]

What in the 9 hells does your post have to do with mine? Please re-read my post and then explain to me what my personal experience with cocaine adds to the content of my post.

I thought you were advocating for stronger penalties for dealers.

 

[panamaican]

I thought you were advocating for stronger penalties for dealers.

I was. I was advocating the option (among other options) of increasing punishment on opioid dealers to bring it in line with that of crack cocaine dealers. What would anyone's personal experience with cocaine have to do with that?

 

[bufetadanacara]

I was. I was advocating the option (among other options) of increasing punishment on opioid dealers to bring it in line with that of crack cocaine dealers. What would anyone's personal experience with cocaine have to do with that?

I was mistaken it must be experience with opioids that you have. Otherwise, I doubt you'd have a valid opinion.

Unless you're one of those people who seems to know what is better for everyone else.



I am for legalizing drugs.

People are doing it anyways.
It would ensure a better quality, cleaner drug which would be safer for the consumer.

And, if it were no longer illegal, we could take all that drug fighting money and start to help people with addiction instead of locking them up.






What I don't want is more government involvement. I don't want them to be the only distributors nor manufacturer.

There needs to be fewer people telling others what they are allowed and not allowed to do.

 

[panamaican]

I was mistaken it must be experience with opioids that you have. Otherwise, I doubt you'd have a valid opinion.

Unless you're one of those people who seems to know what is better for everyone else.



I am for legalizing drugs.

People are doing it anyways.
It would ensure a better quality, cleaner drug which would be safer for the consumer.

And, if it were no longer illegal, we could take all that drug fighting money and start to help people with addiction instead of locking them up.






What I don't want is more government involvement. I don't want them to be the only distributors nor manufacturer.

There needs to be fewer people telling others what they are allowed and not allowed to do.

Then you missed the point I was making. I'm fine with upping the penalties for one type of drug to match the penalties for other drugs. I'm not fine with treating the various drugs differently. If you're going to reduce penalties for one type of illegal narcotic then reduce the penalties for all of them.

 

[bufetadanacara]

Then you missed the point I was making. I'm fine with upping the penalties for one type of drug to match the penalties for other drugs. I'm not fine with treating the various drugs differently. If you're going to reduce penalties for one type of illegal narcotic then reduce the penalties for all of them.

Would you be fine with legalizing them completely?

 

[panamaican]

Would you be fine with legalizing them completely?

I don't think so. I think the downside risk is too great.

 

[K1levelgrappler]

Then you missed the point I was making. I'm fine with upping the penalties for one type of drug to match the penalties for other drugs. I'm not fine with treating the various drugs differently. If you're going to reduce penalties for one type of illegal narcotic then reduce the penalties for all of them.

Why? They are different and vary widely in terms of their health effects and cost to society. What makes consistency inherently desirable here?

 

[panamaican]

Why? They are different and vary widely in terms of their health effects and cost to society. What makes consistency inherently desirable here?

Then punish them in line with their health effects. Quantify it and proceed. When crack and cocaine were the biggest problem on the block, no one wanted intervention. They wanted more incarceration and tougher sentences. Now opioids are the biggest problem on the block. That would suggest that they now need more incarceration and tougher sentences. And if the response is that we should be taking a more humane stance on the biggest problem then we should definitely taking a more humane stance on the smaller issues, like crack and cocaine.

What doesn't make sense is saying that when a drug outpaces another drug in terms of negative effect on society, we should reduce the penalties on the drug issue that's growing. That implies that the goal is not to actually tackle the problem logically but to enforce some bizarre drug caste system of responsiveness. Crack and cocaine are drugs that should be treated with incarceration because of their negative impact on society but a drug that is causing more deaths requires an alternative form of response? That makes no sense since it's the same social issue.

But maybe I'm missing something - what's the difference between them other than scale of use that justifies such disparate social responses?

 

[Cake4Breakfast]

I was mistaken it must be experience with opioids that you have. Otherwise, I doubt you'd have a valid opinion.

Unless you're one of those people who seems to know what is better for everyone else.



I am for legalizing drugs.

People are doing it anyways.
It would ensure a better quality, cleaner drug which would be safer for the consumer.

And, if it were no longer illegal, we could take all that drug fighting money and start to help people with addiction instead of locking them up.






What I don't want is more government involvement. I don't want them to be the only distributors nor manufacturer.

There needs to be fewer people telling others what they are allowed and not allowed to do.

Criminalizing addiction and abuse is a horrible idea, but allowing physically addictive drugs like opiates and cocaine, etc., to be freely sold like cigarettes is a horrible idea too. You will not find one legitimate public health or mental health expert that would agree with your position. Look at what opium did to China in the 1800's.

 

[trolololol]

Nah, the Drug War does work. The problem is you can't half-ass it like we've been doing.

Billions being spent over decades is half-assing it?

 

[K1levelgrappler]

Then punish them in line with their health effects. Quantify it and proceed. When crack and cocaine were the biggest problem on the block, no one wanted intervention. They wanted more incarceration and tougher sentences. Now opioids are the biggest problem on the block. That would suggest that they now need more incarceration and tougher sentences. And if the response is that we should be taking a more humane stance on the biggest problem then we should definitely taking a more humane stance on the smaller issues, like crack and cocaine.

What doesn't make sense is saying that when a drug outpaces another drug in terms of negative effect on society, we should reduce the penalties on the drug issue that's growing. That implies that the goal is not to actually tackle the problem logically but to enforce some bizarre drug caste system of responsiveness. Crack and cocaine are drugs that should be treated with incarceration because of their negative impact on society but a drug that is causing more deaths requires an alternative form of response? That makes no sense since it's the same social issue.

But maybe I'm missing something - what's the difference between them other than scale of use that justifies such disparate social responses?

I'd like to see a more humane, health based approach across the board but this is America so the best I can hope for is the justice system occasionally taking a break from crushing pot smokers or opioid addicts. I see where you're coming though.