Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Aurornis 336 days ago
> People who want to misuse the medication are going to be the ones most willing and able to jump through the bureaucratic hoops

This thinking seems correct to people who grew up knowing about the dark web, Silk Road, and who believe they could access any substance they want if they wanted it.

It is not accurate for the majority of the population. For the average person, misuse of drugs isn’t a calculated decision. It’s one of convenience and opportunity.

> In 1920, 1970, and now, heroin was legal, illegal with minimal enforcement, and illegal with harsh enforcement (except in SF), and the same percentage of the population was addicted at each time.

This is a very misleading statistic for multiple reasons, as if it was engineered for the purpose of obscuring the problem.

Why pick 3 separate dates and limit only to 1 drug? There is a massive opioid epidemic that was fueled by increased availability of different forms of opioids beyond heroin. In the 1920s and 1970s they didn’t have OxyContin being diverted, Fentanyl flowing into drug distribution networks, or even Kratom products available at the local gas station. The availability and convenience of these different opioids has unquestionably increased opioid addictions.

Even more recently, the widespread legalization of marijuana has led to an increase in the number of daily users and the doses that people consume, even thought the libertarian arguments maintained that no such thing would happen.

At this point I can’t buy any arguments that claim that availability of drugs has no impact on misuse or addiction.

2 comments

≥At this point I can’t buy any arguments that claim that availability of drugs has no impact on misuse or addiction.

I don't much care whether more people are addicted or not. When alcohol was illegal, booze dealers had machine gun fights in broad daylight on Main Street over it. When's the last time you heard about machine gun fights over whiskey?

Legalize it all. Heroin, cocaine, meth... sell it retail out of liquor stores in plain wholesale packaging. Manufactured by pharmaceutical companies, supervised by pharmaceutical engineers, unadulterated by poisons, measured doses, and include a dose of the antidote in the box. Make the junkies pay a deposit on a red plastic sharps container for their disposable needles.

I do not care how bad you think things will get... they're already that bad, but right now you're able to pretend that they're not. For every soccer mom addicted to oxy that you save, ten undesirables are dying of overdoses of fent in some filthy truck stop restroom somewhere. And we're spending half a trillion every year to do it, too.

> The availability and convenience of these different opioids has unquestionably increased opioid addictions.

You are making my point for me. The harsh restrictions on opioids haven't actually decreased the availability for addicts who are willing to go to black markets and risk dangerous injectibles and fent laced street drugs. All the restrictions have done is make it much more difficult for legitimate users like me. I broke my collar bone a few years back and was barely given any pills and had to live with a lot more pain than I should have. And the justification is that these harsh restrictions make it harder for addicts to get it, but as you pointed out, it actually doesn't even do that.

As for marijuana I would bet that the increase in the number of users has been more due to the decrease in public perception of how harmful it is rather than from its legalization. Is the usage increase limited to the states where it has been legalized? Furthermore, it doesn't matter if the usage increases, only if the problematic usage increases. Is there any indication that this increase corresponds to more serious potheads or just more casual smokers?