[mbrumlow]

You should be worried that any system they required government intervention was a good idea.

The entire idea is insane. Let’s make drugs legal and provide treatment for the problem we created.

It’s the same of saying hey! Lawn darts are now legal, don’t worry we will increase our EMS staff during the summer.

[beej71]

> You should be worried that any system they required government intervention was a good idea.

Like having drugs be illegal?

[scheeseman486]

Should lawn darts be illegal? There's a good argument to say it shouldn't be sold as a toy for children, but in terms of it's danger to the public there's a whole host of adult activities that cause considerably more capacity for harm that are considered acceptable and legal.

[wombatpm]

My family plays horseshoes. 16 oz metal ‘U’ shapes being tossed through the air while drinking beer. One could argue that the problem with lawn darts was that they were too light, allowing children without proper sense to throw them too far.

[CraigRo]

Lawn darts used to be sharp and had fins. A horseshoe is blunt

[leetcrew]

so what? for one thing, children can legally play with (though not necessarily "own") guns, bows, model rockets, etc in most states. those all seem as dangerous, if not more so, than lawn darts.

I don't think children should be going anywhere near such things without adult supervision, but completely banning sale seems like a wildly disproportionate response.

[CraigRo]

The lawn darts were sharp and a bit hard to control. Basically like throwing a giant knife up in the air. Guns and bows have fairly well established training and safety regimes (i.e don't point them at someone), and model rockets get ignited 30' away

But throwing a dart high in the air and hitting a wandering 2 year old actually did happen, and there was no real attempt to only their the darts in one direction

[jasonboyd]

I haven't touched a lawn dart since 1989.

I was a nine years old and I tossed it as high and as far as I could. I realized it was coming dangerously close to a friend. Everybody had their backs to me. I yelled, but nobody heard me.

In my memory it landed inches from them, but that could be because I was young and scared shitless. Maybe it landed fifteen feet behind them. All I know is it scared me enough that I have never touched a lawn dart after that.

[unethical_ban]

Drugs were already being used. Some of the drugs that were decriminalized are not causing issues. Some do cause issues.

The "issue" drugs and their users existed no matter what, and decriminalization of them (I suspect) hasn't caused a spike in users of the bad drugs.

I for one, will not try meth or heroin no matter how accessible it is.

Decriminalization says "okay we don't want this stuff on the shelf at Walgreens, but trying to jail people for it isn't working, so let's try something else".

Jailing costs money. Treatment costs money. The question is which tool is better for society and each citizen?

[lazide]

Using treatment as the option when there is no treatment available (let alone any with signs of real efficacy) is a bit odd though?

[unethical_ban]

This the argument that the failure here is not the decriminalization as a concept, but the lack of a replacement for removing users of the "bad drugs" off the streets.

[lazide]

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, mind restating?

[unethical_ban]

That according to the article, it is a failure of implementation, not of concept.

[lazide]

Sure, but that can be said of pretty much anything?

Communism works great on paper too, shame no one ever tried it, amirite?

This does seem to be a particularly terrible ‘implementation’ though.

The problem near as I can tell is that people are ignoring the very real needs of the majority to not be miserable, and actively guilting the majority (you’re not allowed to not like these things because that would mean you’re a bad person) and that is winding the spring for an authoritarian backlash which we’ve already seen get very scary.

People care about their emotions, and when pressed will do almost anything to protect them. Including having people March ‘bad people’ off to ovens as long as they can pretend they’re awesome in the process.

Trump gets so much traction for this very reason, and it’s going to get worse before it gets better.

[ajmurmann]

You would be correct if we could simply declare drugs illegal and then they all just vanish. But that's not how it works unfortunately.

[jwestbury]

> You should be worried that any system they required government intervention was a good idea.

You mean like providing basic infrastructure to ensure society and commerce can function?

There are plenty of things which can and should require government intervention. Unless you're a hardline anarchist, there's not a lot of wiggle room on this one.

As for drugs, let's be clear, they weren't made legal, they were made to function like traffic citations, with required treatment instead of prison time. Are you going to argue that we shouldn't have traffic citations, because they require traffic court and the necessary infrastructure to process the fines?

[lazide]

If not one issues the traffic tickets and just ignores it now because none of the actual mechanisms mentioned actually exist, then defacto it was made legal no?

[amanaplanacanal]

Legal and unregulated maybe. Oh they were really legal they would have to be regulated, so when you bought them at the store you would know that the product was unadulterated and of a known dosage. Which is pretty important info for things you are putting in your body.

[foota]

Does enforcing the law not require government intervention?