That's not entirely true. Singapore definitely has very few drug problems, but there are still drugs (and violent addicts). Drug arrests make the news at least once a month.
To be clear, I'm 100% behind Singapore's drug laws. Not having to deal with psychotic methheads is my #1 thing about this place (compared with Australia).
But I do wonder if their laws would work elsewhere (i.e. some place that's not a tiny island with a culturally conservative population).
Not saying I agree with Singapore's methodology. But their calculus is that one drug trafficker will bring in enough drugs to kill 5 people. Therefore, the murder of one person is saving 5 others.
Once again, I'm not endorsing or condoning this, just trying to show you how they conceptualize their form of justice.
If extreme penalties for illicit drug use were the part of the equation that worked, then why does Saudi Arabia's drug problem continue to get worse? They've had a marked increase in the abuse of amphetamines, cocaine, and opioids over the last two decades.
Maybe stop cherry picking the parts that you like and pretending like they're the parts that worked?
If Singapore's economic and social policies were successful, surely people would want to move there? Perhaps skepticism is warranted from teh evil republicanz - the subject of this submission, decriminalization of drug use, was touted largely by left-wingers based on a few similar, seemingly-successful, small-scale efforts in Europe. Now we know how that turned out.
To be clear, I'm 100% behind Singapore's drug laws. Not having to deal with psychotic methheads is my #1 thing about this place (compared with Australia).
But I do wonder if their laws would work elsewhere (i.e. some place that's not a tiny island with a culturally conservative population).