Its a really difficult topic, one where a whole lot of nuance is indicated.
I think it is important to start with respect for that drugs are not all created equal, particularly regarding addictive potential. Also, different populations will respond differently to the same policy as this stuff is really complex. What works for Portugal mig…
Its a really difficult topic, one where a whole lot of nuance is indicated.
I think it is important to start with respect for that drugs are not all created equal, particularly regarding addictive potential. Also, different populations will respond differently to the same policy as this stuff is really complex. What works for Portugal might not for Portland of course. There are different values and demographics at work.
I tend to believe that from a civil liberties perspective, that no drug should be made wholly unavailable. This is not just “pursuit of happiness” issue but it is that too. Mind altering substances are spiritual aids in many traditions and therefore there is a religious/spiritual freedom component here also. Sacremental wine is the blood of Christ. Peyote is a sacrament of the Native American Church. Ganja in Rastafarianism. Countless magical mind-bending substances are revered in countless shamanic traditions.
Dealers preying on addiction should absolutely be punished harshly imo. But users that don’t harm others should be treated with compassion. Locking people up for harming only themselves, is well, a costly way to do something that seems counterproductive.
Good point regarding dealers - and a hard distinction to make. In a society that values liberty on the contingent that there is no harm to others, how does one handle someone potentially enabling a person to harm themself? There is no set rules either - one person may suffer from a small amount of alcohol, for instance, while another can be perfectly fine with that amount.
Its a really difficult topic, one where a whole lot of nuance is indicated.
I think it is important to start with respect for that drugs are not all created equal, particularly regarding addictive potential. Also, different populations will respond differently to the same policy as this stuff is really complex. What works for Portugal might not for Portland of course. There are different values and demographics at work.
I tend to believe that from a civil liberties perspective, that no drug should be made wholly unavailable. This is not just “pursuit of happiness” issue but it is that too. Mind altering substances are spiritual aids in many traditions and therefore there is a religious/spiritual freedom component here also. Sacremental wine is the blood of Christ. Peyote is a sacrament of the Native American Church. Ganja in Rastafarianism. Countless magical mind-bending substances are revered in countless shamanic traditions.
Dealers preying on addiction should absolutely be punished harshly imo. But users that don’t harm others should be treated with compassion. Locking people up for harming only themselves, is well, a costly way to do something that seems counterproductive.
Good point regarding dealers - and a hard distinction to make. In a society that values liberty on the contingent that there is no harm to others, how does one handle someone potentially enabling a person to harm themself? There is no set rules either - one person may suffer from a small amount of alcohol, for instance, while another can be perfectly fine with that amount.