• Kusuriya@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    If Biden ended the war on drugs it would nearly completely clench at least his party’s re-election, probably swing the congress on over too.

      • jayrhacker@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Honestly, people being able to get tested known doses of various drugs of choice would save a lot of lives and create a lot of opportunity to intervene and help people recover. Making drugs illegal just causes miser and funds crime.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Maybe for weed, but I don’t think that would be so clear cut for other substances. Even here San Francisco, the public is only willing to go so far with decriminalizing.

      I would wager that weed, and maybe certain hallucinations would be bump in the polls, but for narcotics and opioids, ending the war on that stuff would hurt him. But maybe I’m wrong.

      • Kusuriya@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Ending it would involve more than lel drugs are legal have fun. It would be a shift to focus on treatment, rehabilitation, and prevention by treating social deficits that tend to breed addiction, those are proven consistently effective treatments. If prohibition ever worked we wouldn’t have weed, alcohol, and coke would sell completely caffeine free beverages.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’m not necessarily against legalizing other drugs, but I would need a lot of time to research it and understand what studies have been done. There’s some substances which are outright harmful and people shouldn’t take, and I don’t think criminalization is the solution. But, I also don’t know that complete legalization is.

        Off the cuff, I think I’d support decriminalized possession, but the material is still confiscated. Manufacturing however should remain illegal (other than for weed) because it’s way too easy to make snake oil and impurities. I’d favor official govt meth versus making manufacturing it legal.

        • kbotc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          You know that there’s government legal meth, right?

          Its brand name is Desoxyn.

            • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Desoxyn is literally a brand name for methamphetamine, so you’re not saying anything different.

              • DanVctr@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Wow I just went down a rabbit hole… I feel (pray) so many things would have to fail for you to actually get that Rx filled tho

                • nBodyProblem@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  It’s a very effective medicine, though. For example, in small doses it’s more effective than adderall or Ritalin for ADHD. It’s less common than either of those drugs because there is a higher abuse potential, but there is nothing really wrong with it either.

                  The key here is small doses taken orally. Taking it in a medical context is a very different animal than recreational methamphetamine.

              • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Hm? Widen your scope of semantic salience my friend, I do say something different, but that’s just academia, don’t take it too seriously it’s not a challenge.

          • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Our air force crews are often given one of these during combat missions. I imagine other military units use them when necessary, too. They also prescribe it to people with severe narcolepsy.

        • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          I mean we know people will do it regardless, no matter the substance. Substances are being thoroughly tested, and finally seeing serious academic and clinical research on their therapeutic uses, so that is actually going pretty great and showing awesome results (yeyy drugs!!), and I will never get over the argument that prohibition only strengthens the mafia.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yeah you really cut out the leg from cartels if you get rid of prohibition.

            I think as long as we can positively ID a substance as coming from a safe manufacturer, it’s fine. Street products cooked up in a trailer are what need to go away. That probably means the government subsidizes drug companies to provide them at low cost.

            • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Fuck it manufacture it in government labs, make it taxable. How could that possibly ever be worse than the street wars we have right now?

                • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Look, we can’t be adjusting our ideas to take morons into account, one has to have a clear image before one’s eyes want one want to achieve, or it ain’t gonna get beyond the idea stage.

                  Is this what we want? Is this what I want? Fuck yes, so we can fight for that, it is well defined and without bullshit, that’s a platform easy to defend, you know what I mean? Don’t give a shit what some would think or say, wars are not won by appeasing the enemy.

                  • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Oh I agree completely, I’m just saying the first battle in the war is triumphing over the GOP. It’s more a logical first step than a necessary one. We don’t have to give any quarter, just recognize which battles we need to face and what milestones we need to achieve.

        • Kusuriya@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          you know all of those “illegal” drugs are legal if you have enough money? There isn’t a single “illegal” drug that you cant get as long as someone slaps like a Pfizer, Novo Nordisk, or Bayer label on it and signs their name to say you can have it. Prohibition doesn’t work, we have a lot of history to show that, we also have a lot of history to know that treatment, rehabilitation, and social safety nets go a really long way towards stopping addiction and substance abuse.

        • 31337@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, I think I mostly agree. Don’t think material should be confiscated though, that could cause people to avoid official harm reduction resources. But, I wouldn’t want to see private business, like gas stations, liquor stores, or “dispensaries” making profit from selling and pushing fentanyl, tranq, krokodil and stuff like that. I do think more drugs with low addiction and harm potential should be legalized such as shrooms, LSD, and probably most psychedelics.

          All that being said all legalization and decriminalization must coincide with massive investment in addiction treatment, harm reduction, and probably housing. Ideally, the root causes of the drug epidemic should be addressed, such as poverty, lack of adequate healthcare such as therapy, people generally feeling hopeless because of their material conditions, etc.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Completely agree on everything except confiscation – which I agree is tricky. I think you confiscate anything that’s “off brand” to keep them off the streets, but that’s it. I don’t want some shitty chemist making impure drugs that cause serious harm. Those need to go. We’d need a free certified container program.

        • skrufimonki@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          All you need to do is look at Portland Oregon. We decriminalized possession with Measure 110 and everyone rejoiced. Now most people are done with it. Used paraphernalia every where, homelessness everywhere. (Yeah I know housing prices is the major factor). Crime… Fuck me. The amount of people that have been “assisted” with their drug habits are dismal. In part due to government hindering the financial support. The major part is the lack of desire from users wanting to be saved. ( This is the alternative to jailing of persons) Decriminalization of possession of hard drugs was/is a major fail here. Just my anecdotal “research”.

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I can’t even fathom the rationalization process going on with you folks with the fent and other substances, it really looks like a dystopian Ridley Scott shot when you look at it from the other side of the Atlantic…

        Edit: I mean, we’re feeling with you homie

      • beardown@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        would be bump in the polls

        Yeah and Biden could really use a bump

        But enough about Hunter

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m voting for Hunter Biden for president, because he is the politician that I support.

          • beardown@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            You’re right, it was wrong to make fun of an incredibly comic figure. Doing so clearly means that I’ve never voted for a Democrat and that I want Biden to lose. Certainly can’t be that I’ve consistently voted for dems in every election since turning 18 yet think their failures still deserve to be mocked. Good insight 👏

    • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      And lose the +Police demographic. Imagine how many other demographic groups that spans. Not to mention, the voters who would go for that are in most part disenfranchised and can’t vote due to prior convictions. Which is a human rights scandal in itself, but that is neither here nor there. Except it is there.