Unable to load image

:marseystims: r/neoliberal: Joe Biden is too timid. It is time to legalise cocaine :!marseydarkbrandon:

https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/y2fm75/joe_biden_is_too_timid_it_is_time_to_legalise?sort=controversial

600+ comment thread: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/y2kmv1/it_is_time_to_legalise_cocaine_the_costs_of/?sort=controversial

:#marseystimspat:

"It makes no sense," said Joe Biden on October 6th, as he pardoned the 6,000 or so Americans convicted of possessing a small amount of marijuana. Although cannabis is fully legal in 19 American states, at the federal level it is still deemed to be as dangerous as heroin and more so than fentanyl, two drugs that contributed to more than 100,000 Americans dying of opioid overdoses last year. But the president's admission applies to drug policy more broadly. Prohibition is not working---and that can be seen most strikingly with cocaine, not cannabis.

Since Richard Nixon launched the "war on drugs" half a century ago, the flow of cocaine into the United States has surged. Global production hit a record of 1,982 tonnes in 2020, according to the latest data, though that is likely to be an underestimate. That record high is despite decades of strenuous and costly efforts to cut off the supply. Between 2000 and 2020 the United States ploughed $10bn into Colombia to suppress production, paying the local armed forces to spray coca plantations with herbicide from the air or to yank up bushes by hand. To no avail: when coca is eradicated on one hillside, it shifts to another.

The worst harm falls on producing and trafficking countries, where drug profits fuel violence. Murder in Colombia is three times more common than in the United States; in Mexico, four times. In some areas, drug gangs are so wealthy and well-armed that they rival the state, giving cops and officials the choice of plata o plomo (silver or lead): be corrupted or be killed. Prohibition also sucks children out of school, as drug gangs favour recruits who are too young to be prosecuted.

Two presidents, Gustavo Petro of Colombia and Pedro Castillo of Peru, are clamouring for change. Mr Petro has suggested steering the police away from coca farmers by decriminalising coca leaf production and allowing Colombians to consume cocaine safely. These are all good ideas, but the cocaine gangs will remain powerful so long as their product is illegal in the rich countries that consume most of it, such as the United States.

Half-measures, such as not prosecuting cocaine users, are not enough. If producing the stuff is still illegal, it will be criminals who produce it, and decriminalisation of consumption will probably increase demand and boost their profits. The real answer is full legalisation, allowing non-criminals to produce a strictly regulated, highly taxed product, just as whisky- and cigarette-makers do. (Advertising it should be banned.)

Legal cocaine would be less dangerous, since legitimate producers would not adulterate it with other white powders and dosage would be clearly labelled, as it is on whisky bottles. Cocaine-related deaths have risen fivefold in America since 2010, mostly because gangs are cutting it with fentanyl, a cheaper and more lethal drug.

Legalisation would thereby defang the gangs. Obviously, some would find other revenues but the loss of cocaine profits would help curb their power to recruit, buy top-end weapons and corrupt officials. This would reduce drug-related violence everywhere, but most of all in the worst-affected region, Latin America.

If cocaine were legal, more people would take it. For some, this will be a choice: snorting a substance they know is unhealthy because it gives them pleasure. But cocaine is addictive. A paucity of research makes it hard to know how it compares with alcohol or tobacco on this score. More study is needed, as are greater efforts to treat addiction. This could be funded (and then some) by the money saved if the "war" were wound down.

In private, many officials understand that prohibition is not working any better than it did in Al Capone's day. Just now full legalisation seems politically impossible: few politicians want to be called "soft on drugs". But proponents must keep pressing their case. The benefits---safer cocaine, safer streets and greater political stability in the Americas---far outweigh the costs.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/10/12/joe-biden-is-too-timid-it-is-time-to-legalise-cocaine

65
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

neoliberalism?

:marseystonetoss:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Legal cocaine would be less dangerous

I'm failing to understand how legalized crack would make me more safe as part of the ~98% of Americans who don't use cocaine.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Distributing crack to communities is an evidence-based approach to enhance security. Just look at black neighborhoods in the 80s and 90s. They were much safer than neighborhoods in war-torn Congo that did not have access to crack.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Would you use cocaine if it was legal?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why wait for it to be legal

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If cocaine becomes cheaper than crack, then you'd get a population riddled with less unhealthy side effects. :marseyshrug:

If they use the pure stuff to make higher quality crack, and similar outcome happens.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Guns can hurt other people. Cocaine can only hurt yourself. Plus with cocaine the likelihood of you shooting sick skate footage goes way up. So win/win

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Guns don't hurt people. Crack fiends hurt people.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

When you do coke you hurt your mother emotionally, b-word

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

lifefuel for wallstreet-cels

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

For those who support criminalization of cociane

google "cartel execution videos"

:#gigachad:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Darn they look like bad people, we should ban them from selling stuff here

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

We should legalize the product whose production they already control. Btw you can only grow it at altitude so these cartels have a real monopoly on production so all of your legal coke money will go to them.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This but unironically


:#capysneedboat2::#capyantischizo::#space:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If I want to inject meth into my eyeballs why should the government tell me no?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Agreed. Nature should run its course

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Think about it though. Imagine how much money there is in a cocaine industry

:marseycapitalistmanlet:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I just wanna larp as scarface, is that so much to ask?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Chiobu are you allowed to post in this hole or do we have to cane you as punishment?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As long as there is money to be made it will probably be ok :marseyjewoftheorientglow:

![](/images/16656483787862499.webp)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Can I cane you anyways? :coomer:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

PLEASE

:#marseynut:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You guys are going to live Brave New World :marseysingaporepat:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yes, and we all know that drug dealers stopped existing in places where marijuana is decriminalized once we institutionalized yet another society eroding intoxicant.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

there never was a drug problem until they got banned

trans lives matter, jew lives don't

:#trumpjaktalking:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think its less about the banning and more about the quantity they were able to move with 50 years of development in logistics systems and technologies

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

wat? there wasn't a measurable addiction problem the bans were based off of? and they didn't even solve the problem of dealings drugs,

they just hampered social evolution that might have happened had we access too the proper tools.

yet we still have so many people rattling off birdbrained excuses for subethical laws.

trans lives matter, jew lives don't

:#trumpjaktalking:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

There was a big problem with drugs until countries in the early 20th century decided to collectively enforce prohibition. They were putting cocaine in everything. The current "opioid pandemic" would be chump change if this was reversed.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

There was a big problem with drugs until countries in the early 20th century decided to collectively enforce prohibition

right 400 cases posted in a medical society, within a society where it was far more freely available, most of them already being treated for opoide addiction, is totally a massive problem. :marseygigaretard:

a bunch of journos in the early 1910s hyped up a few accounts of people with addictive personalities having issues.

probably the same idiots who also tried banning alcohol, which made it far more disastrous than before.

The current "opioid pandemic" would be chump change if this was reversed.

or, instead of a being an r-slured nanny state where a ton of unjustifed nonsense is thrown around because a few people can't handle their shit ... we'd figure out how too utilize the drugs optimally.

and really, u can break addictive potential pretty easily with psychedelics, another tool banned by the literally mentally disabled frickheads who have no idea wtf they are talking about

trans lives matter

:#trumpjaktalking:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

A bunch of journos in the early 1910s hyped up...

Drug addiction was not basically nonexistant. Rates were similar to today. Cocaine, morphine, opium were serious problems. This wasn't even noticed by journos in the early 1910s first.

alcohol

While alcohol wasn't a success story, the abuse of many other drugs plummeted for the first few decades.

where it was far more freely available

Drugs would be even more freely available now if legalised, due to drug culture, drugs that didn't exist back then, better logistics, …

because a few people can't handle their shit

We live in a society where individuals aren't completely atomised just yet. Addiction has effects on families and communities. Public health is also not negligible.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Public health is also not negligible.

@dart200 is sorry did you just ignore the part about how psychedelics are massive mitigation factors in terms of addiction, once we as a society have barely scratched the surface of? ... because it doesn't fit the bs world view ur pushing? yup, u did.

but @dart200 mean, sure you choose a society of enforced sobriety, that doesn't lead too sobriety, leading too a mental health epidemic, totally a bastion of public health you got going on.

Drugs would be even more freely available now if legalese

this is a good thing. in freedom, humanity will be free too actually figure this stuff out, instead of bunch of literally mindfricked idiots shovelling bs down everypony's throats using violence.

While alcohol wasn't a success story, the abuse of many other drugs plummeted for the first few decades.

and then rocketed back up because time proved it not actually a success story.

This wasn't even noticed by journos in the early 1910s first.

wrong: https://sci-hub.ru/https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1993.tb04661.x

could you at least attempt too research before making up bs? seriously, how fking r-slurred r u?

trans lives matter

:#trumpjaktalking:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

psychedelics

I did not ignore it, it just wasn't immediately relevant. I agree the main problem is addictive potential, but it's not free or a cure-all.

a society of enforced sobriety… leading to a mental health epidemic

How?

in freedom, humanity will be free to actually figure this stuff out

How about figuring it out first before causing more problems we know will happen?

then rocketed back up

Yes, affecting many poor communities, due to organised crime. Will this problem simply vanish if we legalise drugs?

wrong

Your own paper says that a great portion of addicts did not seek treatment(How many Americans were addicted to cocaine? This, too, is difficult to determine because the abusers could live with their addiction for 20 to 30 years without being known.), that the first laws limiting use were introduced as earls as 1887(so how is it 1910s journos?), and cocaine was obviously not the only drug that existed. Morphine abuse started after the Civil War, for example. Estimates are that there were many more than just 400 coke addicts. The number of 400 is just people seeking opioid rehab in 1890 in Connecticut.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Estimates are that there were many more than just 400 coke addicts.

this is kind of the problem. there weren't any good stats. apparently the problem wasn't bad enough too do any good stats on. they just made some brazen claims based on some bad cases, many of whom where also opiode addicts.

Will this problem simply vanish if we legalise drugs?

drugs are literally organized crime main source of funds. see, because you committed a sin by banning drugs, that shit situation can't be resolved, cause it's underpinned by the sin of banning drugs. u can only resolve it by removing the sin of a banning drugs. how much violence has been caused, especially outside the country, cause shitheads like u are supported organized crime by trying too control what people ingest? fricking a.

all these kinds of things are connective, but all you are talking from is a compartmentalized perspective completely ignorant of the systemic consequences of what ur preaching.

How about figuring it out first before causing more problems we know will happen?

reductionist principles like isolated controlled experiments by limited authority is not a powerful enough tool too determine that. it just isn't.

the real problem is you have no idea the tragedy ur causing by trying too determine knowledge you don't have the power too determine. how do you banning everything won't cause a bunch of problems? because you assume sobriety is just ok?

lol.

fricking violent twat.

I agree the main problem is addictive potential,

also there was literally never any addictive potential here with psychs, so this ban is beyond unethical, a catastrophe caused by banning things before figuring them out.

but it's not free or a cure-all.

bro LSD is extremely potent, small batches provide millions of doses. it's almost stupid how cheap it would be too produce and test at scale. magic mushrooms grow in jars. and there's a lot more too experiment with that we barely scratched.

>a society of enforced sobriety… leading to a mental health epidemic

because we don't have the tools too build the collective mentality that might actually reform society such that it doesn't lead too an increasingly mentally devastating system. @dart200 is not saying psychs, or drugs in general, are the be-all end-all ... they are tools, but necessary tools. u can't do great things if u are missing necessary parts too a whole.

trans lives matter.

:#trumpjaktalking:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Do not argue with Dart he fricks dogs

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Tbh legalizing cocaine would be far too based for any politician to do it

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Ron paul said this before it was cool and got applause for it at a fox news south xarolina debate

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I did so much coke that I have a perforated septum. Not cool.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

How much coke does that take?

:marseypepsi:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Weird. The US has produced fentanyl and other painkillers within its highly regulated sector of medicine. Then the US gets an opioid crisis, and amazingly all these drugs are sold on the black market. So, if they legalize or decriminalize more drugs, they'll somehow solve the drug problem.

:#marseycontemplate:

There is only one answer, and that is Allah.

:#marseyinshallah:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Someone think of the poor cartels!

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Based Biden

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

yea snappy I know coke is cheaper than a good deck rn

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.