Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ChefboyOG 2080 days ago
This is the epitome of a straw man argument.

The original commenter was suggesting that incarceration for consuming cannabis is irrational, not that citizens shouldn't be responsible at some level for the collective good of their society.

Additionally, the implied causal chain you've laid out is fallacious. Ignoring the vagueness of what "troubled" means exactly here, if it is "troubled-ness" that makes someone prone to both crime and cannabis use, then clearly it is the troubled-ness, not the cannabis use, that causes the criminality. And if the goal is to reduce criminality, as is implied in your post, then whatever causes people to become troubled must be addressed—which, again, isn't cannabis, as it seems being troubled is a prerequisite to using it.

This is akin to the classic example of banning ice cream to reduce the murder rate. Ice cream sales and murder rates increase in a correlated manner—but only because both increase in the summer.

Also, as a final point, the fact that drugs like cannabis are criminalized turns any connection between cannabis and crime into a self-fulfilling prophecy. The real societal cost to the criminalization of cannabis comes via the violence and destruction associated with any criminal marketplace. The last time we saw massive organized violence between criminal organizations over alcohol, for instance, was the last time it was criminalized—i.e. during prohibition.

But yeah, something something libertarians something something cultural decay.

2 comments

Please do not post ideological flamewar comments to HN. It's not what this site is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

No one will ever be convinced by such autistic data crunching.

Human intuition is responsible for things like criminalizing drugs.

People feel uncomfortable around drug-addled lechers, so they want them imprisoned.

That's all the justification needed.

Please don't post ideological flamewar comments to HN. Particularly please don't post name-calling or personal attacks. We ban such accounts.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

There is no name-calling or personal attacking in that comment. The one qualifier that could possibly be interpreted as "an attack" is referring to an inanimate subject (data crunching) not to any given participant in the conversation. Learn to read.
Using 'autistic' like that is both name-calling and a personal attack.