|
Thank you for your try, but I think that your understanding of the state of addiction is lacking - but for realsies, thanks for trying, it was a good try, and well meant. I don't think I have that much better of an understanding, but still: Addiction seems to be predominately a coping mechanism, not a recreation. AFAIK, you don't see "the drug makes me feel good" nearly as much as you see "the drug makes the pain go away". AFAIK, most addiction in the US is for painkillers that are or were originally prescribed by a doctor. Addiction happens when you don't experience a choice (you have one, but are unable to take it). AFAIK, that's what makes it an addiction - so thinking in terms of "decided to take a hit" or "choose not to do the drugs" misses the reality. I know a few people who've kicked addictions basically by reclaiming and then exercising that choice. That all said, I'm pretty sure you're right that such policies are about the potential users / addicts, not the ones already there. Reality indicates that this is ineffective (I'll dig up stats if you want em). > The case against punitive policy's isn't as cut and dry as your comment might make it out to be, and unfortunately our understanding is still evolving You are absolutely correct, and unfortunately, the US's (and, alas, most of the world's) understanding is far behind... ehh not "academia", but, "the people with the most understanding". Portugal is a good example. |
Punishment isn't the right solution, but neither is enabling. Portugal isn't some drug free utopia, they have just shown that society's response to drug additions isn't linear