upvote
Can you elaborate?

Do you mean that drug dependence has become more visible? That petty crime has increased?

One fun thing about harm reduction policies is that, as a result of fewer people dying, more people are on the street. So while you don’t see people in the morgue on your daily commute, you do see them down the alleyway. This side effect may be more unpleasant for you, but that’s only because you’re not personally inconvenienced by the corpse sitting in the freezer at the coroner.

reply
"controlled" is key. Seattle decriminalized drug use. That's a tiny part of a larger solution rooted in harm reduction.
reply
Singapore kills drug dealers. That works much better.
reply
Idk, if the number of people executed increases over time, maybe it doesn't.

https://www.afr.com/world/asia/singapore-executions-touch-22...

This article cites Singapore saying the existing laws mostly get low-level users and not kingpins because kingpins operate outside of the country.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/singapore-drug-executions/

Decriminalization of drug use doesn't have to mean decriminalization of anything else. Thieves and murderers should be prosecuted regardless of any state induced by the voluntary ingestion chemicals.

reply
Decriminalization without legalization is something I can't support. If it's not illegal for me to have and use a drug, them why should I be forced to buy it from criminals? Either legalize it, or go whole hog on criminalizing it. Execute the dealers and put users into mandatory rehab, or let people buy it in shops. Any of these half measures are intolerable, they exist to make sure the situation is in a constant state of tension, to nobody's benefit but the governments.

Ideally we would pick one or the other on a drug by drug basis. Executing people for selling weed isn't something I actually want, but neither do I want them simply imprisoned or fined either. But with shit like fent? Trying to find a single policy to fit both drugs is inane.

reply
There's a significant number of people who want their life micromanaged and a significant number of people who want to micromanage other people's lives. The need to have a sense of control and therefore safety manifests itself in weird ways in various populations and can't be contained without a lot of sustained, continuous effort, just like the other base desires of humankind. I just wish the federal government didn't have a hand in it, and then all the people who want to execute weed smokers can do so in their own states and leave the other states alone.
reply
Neighbouring countries including Thailand and Indonesia also have the death penalty for drug trafficking. It is almost impossible to visit parts of those countries without being receiving unsolicited offers of drugs...
reply
I can’t tell if this is sarcastic or not.

Anyway: Capital punishment is an elegant solution.

reply
If we're having a serious conversation about effective drug policies, it would be remise to not discuss Singapore. For some reason the conversation online is always about America and European countries, as if the rest of the world doesn't exist.
reply
I think it usually doesn’t come up because Singapore is a very complicated country, perhaps the most “outlier” country on the planet. Most people in the US (even well-educated ones) don’t know nearly enough about the social, cultural, and historical dynamics to speak on it intelligently, let alone compare and contrast it to a country like the United States.

Might as well talk about drug policy in South Sudan to be honest.

Edit: I will say I do have one Singaporean expat friend who finds capital punishment for drug possession vile, and cites it as one of the reasons she no longer lives there. Along with the crushing wealth disparity between the servant class and the working class. Not that it adds much to the conversation except personal flavor.

reply
Decriminalizing public intoxication didn't turn out to be a good idea.
reply