We have this tendency to not see mental health as a disease. so for most of us we never realize these sorts of connections. But it is vital we change how we look at these things for everyone's sake.

@freemo Nothing says you can't both help them with it and attack drugs. Imprison addicts and once they're in and can't run away, have professionals treat them. They won't do it on their own.

@nerthos Sure we could. We could also put people witht he flu in prison then while they are there force them to take the treatment we want.

The notion that they "wont do it on their own" is nonsense though. Like with any disease some people get better after many attempts of treatment, some never do. Most drug addicts I know have been voluntarily in and out of rehab more times than I can count, they very clearly do treat it on their own, those treatments just also tend to fail. It doesnt help that treatment is often tens of thousands of dollars they dont have and health insurance is unlike to cure.

Here is an idea, instead of wasting an insane amount of money on sticking them in prison with worse results, why not just actually provide for them good affordable rehab on their own.

@freemo I'm proposing both rehab and punishment for doing something they've known it's illegal since they're kids. Both are needed.

The war on drugs is an ineffective, massive waste of money because the guns are aimed at the links of the chain that can protect themselves. If you try to go for a druglord without cutting off its source of money the druglord will just throw some money at a judge or friend in the police and get out free. Addicts don't have such resources, and without addicts to buy, druglords don't have the money to escape prosecution either.

In any siege the goal is to weaken the defender through denial of basic resources.

@nerthos the idea that someone needs punishment simply because something is illegal is absurdity at its finest. If you want to make the argument that someone should be put in jail for something arguing ont he basis of legality is a circular argument. You have to show that it is justified for the act to be illegal in the first place.

Simply put, as far as im concerned the idea of outlawing a persons right to decide what can or can not go into their own body is the epitome of bad law, unjust law, in every regard.

I've seen both sorts of systems at play. I've seen shitholes like america where they outlaw drugs and everyone suffers for it. I've seen other countries like the netherlands where despite what the technical law may be no one is ever arrested for it, and that waste of money is directed towards excellent affordable drug rehab programs.

Guess what, I have yet to meet a single person in the netherlands with a heroin addiction and I can think of more people than i could count on both hands who have it in america.

Funny how that works, one actually solves a problem, the other wastes money and doesnt. But yea lets hold onto the idea of sticking to failed policy just because it was already illegal. Thats like saying we have to stick to failed policy because failed policy already exists and they knew it.

@freemo @nerthos Didn't the drug war kinda succeed in east-asia and singapore and stuff though?
@ayy @freemo It did, because the side that was against drugs didn't handicap themselves.
You can't fight mafia by being humanitarian towards them.

@nerthos
there is a HUGE difference between discussing fighting the users vs fighting the producers.
@ayy

@freemo @ayy As I said before, the easiest way to attack the producers is to cut off their income. They'll start fighting among themselves over debts, making for easy pickings after expending their resources in producer-dealer fights.

@nerthos
Sure, and the best way to cut off their income is to make it legal.

@ayy

@freemo @ayy "Let's cut their income by allowing them to keep their business in a way they can't be prosecuted for it"

@nerthos
that makes no sense. If its legal they can keep their business in any sense. They would be beholden to actual good business practices. Meaning they can't sell on a street, cant import the drugs, cant make it out a bath tub. You have taxes, regulations, age limits, and limits on who how and why you can sell.

They would have to go out of business in their current form and be replaced with clean legal alternatives with whatever regulatory warnings or procedures you want.

In an ideal world I'd say all drugs should be legal and provided via regulated production from stores. However the stipulation is if you go in and buy it you must first have a free session with a medical professional who would provide you warnings, advice on how to be safe, and strongly encourage you to seek free rehab.

since the vast majority of addicts who cant keep their life in order actively seek out help and rehab its reasonable to think this would have a huge impact. In fact when we look at other countries that take the rehabilitation approach the results have been amazing.

@ayy

@freemo @ayy You regulate them, but the business is still there. The war on drugs is lost because drugs are now legal and you can't fight them.

Legalization is not winning the war on drugs, it's capitulation.

@nerthos
Just mroe absurdity. Youa re "fighting" them because you provide rehabilitation which is actually effective and reduces the numbers of users.. the idea that you cant fight it if you cant threaten a person is just absolutely absurd way of thinking.

@ayy

@freemo @ayy You provide rehabilitation. Users still exist, drugs are safer so more feel comfortable about them. Drugs never go away.

If they're illegal and unsafe, at least you can actively fight them. Attack producers, dealers and users, confiscate their belongings, use that money to rehabilitate captured users. That way you have both effective rehabilitation and eventually no drug market at all.

@nerthos
Except that isnt how it works. It only works that way if you pretend in your head thats how reality works. Most people who know anyone with a legitimate drug problem (cant function in society due to their drugs) know the vast majority are NOT trying to cure themselves because of fear of prison. Most want help because they suffer and dont want to suffer.

Its like suggesting people witht he flu would never never get better unless we make the flu illegal cause everyone would just be comfortable having it.

@ayy

@freemo @ayy People with the flu don't willingly put the flu into their systems.

Legality+rehabilitation doesn't erase drugs, otherwise your previously quoted Netherlands would have 0 drug users.

@nerthos
People who shoot up heroin dont willingly do it either. Usually the people who do are either 1) already severely mentally ill and suffering from other issues they are trying to self medicate or 2)got to where they were medicating physical illness like pain medication or anxiety, usually starting from legally prescribed drugs.

Very few people just wake up one day with a great life and little issue and just go "ya know what, today i think ill try some heroin"

@ayy

@freemo @ayy Sure, that's the case with heavy drugs like heroin. It isn't the case with "recreational" drugs. Legalization means more weed/lsd/whatever consumers and no way to fight those.
Follow

@nerthos
Oh wait your one of those people who sees weed as a drug but not coffee or alcohol or some nonsense. Yea thats just a level of cherry picking your reality i dont really feel like getting into.

@ayy

@freemo @ayy I don't drink coffee and I've never gotten even near buzzed in my entire life. I'm against anything that impairs or alters brain function except when required for medical treatment.

I'm not against people using cannabis oil to treat chronic pain, or people drinking a glass of wine with their beef, or drinking a cup of coffee in the morning because they like the taste and warm feeling.

I'm against people getting stoned, I'm against people getting drunk to the point they can't stand, I'm against people drinking 15 cups of coffee and being as twitchy as a jumping spider.

All of those things, as I mentioned before, undermine human dignity. I believe in the possibility of an elegant, distinguished, clean species that doesn't rely on mind-altering substances.
@nerthos @freemo @ayy imagine having this distorted an understanding of human experience and tradition
@miya @freemo @ayy Don't misunderstand, I don't foolishly think there was a time when people behaved in a completely flawless way. I think it's possible to eventually get there though.

@nerthos
I dont think your view of "flawless" is an objective view of flawless however. anytime someone wants to force others to behave the same as them I am always concerned.

@miya @ayy

@freemo @ayy @miya Well I mean, I'd be fine with having my own little nation with my own values, and letting people in other places do whatever they wanted to do with themselves. But then they don't get to demand I treat them as equals.

@nerthos
I think it speaks more to your own short coming that you need the people around you to behave like you in order for you to enjoy yourself.

Take the netherlands as an example. Weed is legal and plenty of coffee shops where people smoke. Yet the vast majority of dutch people do not smoke weed and generally see it as something to be avoided. But they arent in any way bothered by such stores. They pass them, never give it a second thought and are generally uneffected by the people who go there. Most of the time they will have some friends who smoke, some who dont and no one gives a shit because it really doent matter or have much impact on them.

There is a reason i have so much respect for the dutch. I think this exemplifies maturity.

@ayy @miya

@freemo @miya @ayy Don't misunderstand, it's not that I can't enjoy myself because they exist. I just can't see them in equal terms, and would prefer all people did what they could, by themselves, to elevate themselves away from vice.

I'm not going to stop talking with someone becuase they have beer too often, but I won't consider them as responsible and worthy of praise as someone who doesn't.

@nerthos
For some it is a vice, and yes you should try to overcome it if it is. then again I dont know anyone without some vices so you must not think very many people are equals then if anyone with a vice isnt.

With that said most people who smoke weed dont have any "vices". They smoke for the same reason someone might drink a cup of tea, or watch an entertaining TV show. specifically, because it is an enjoyable relaxing expiernce with no negative side effects.

@miya @ayy

@freemo @ayy @miya Here's where we differ, to me, enjoying oneself through substances is not a very good thing to do. People should learn to fully enjoy themselves without reliance on any mind altering substance, be it weed, alcohol, or whatever else.

@nerthos
enjoying yourself through a cup of tea, weed, or a tv show, or anything external to yourself is not "reliance".. reliance implies you NEED it to enjoy yourself. No one NEEDS weed to enjoy themselves. It is just one way in which they do. Remove the obvious mistake of "reliance" from your statement and it no longer makes any sense.

@ayy @miya

@freemo @miya @nerthos I know someone who was very smart and full of promise but basically fucked up his life by stoning everyday (to be fair he did other stuff too, but that was more once-in-a-while). It definitely happens. His dad was a functioning (in the sense of keeping down a great job) alcoholic.

Neither of them sought out help to escape.
@freemo @miya @nerthos I do know a lot of people who did stuff without any problems tho

@ayy He may have ruined his life and he may have wasted more time than he needed by getting stoned. I know people like that too. I also know people who did the exact same thing by watching tv all day, playing video games, or any number of things.

I wouldnt say it was accurate that the smoking of weed is what ruined his life anymore so than anything else youd use to take up your idle time when you should be off being productive.

@miya @nerthos

@freemo @ayy @nerthos Degeneracy isn’t decided by substance or substance abuse. It’s decided by what’s harmful to society. If the Dutch can coexist happily with X drug, it’s non degenerate. If X drug results in a situation like 90 NYC’s crack epidemic, it’s harmful to society and whatever factors that are causing it (it’s not simply just the chemical substance) should be mitigated for the greater good.

@miya
Exactly, which is my thinking. Lets see where there is harm and do what we can to eliminate it. To think the mere existance of the substance is the full picture is very naive.

@ayy @nerthos

@freemo @ayy @nerthos the idea that it is inherently degenerate to partake in any kind of mind altering substance is small minded-intensive physical (and even emotional) activities can induce similar states. Natural sicknesses can also induce “drug-like” states of mind, eg fever dreams. It’s all a shared part of the human experience & those experiences are produced by the brain in reaction to the drug, just as all experiences are

@miya
I had the flu once and was hallucinating. I remember I could swear i had really really tiny hands for a hot minute there.

But yea, every thought you have, ever activity you do, every food you eat, literally every time a neuron fires you are altering your brain chemistry. through some means. Experiencing anything is an alteration in your brain chemistry.

@ayy @nerthos

@freemo @nerthos @miya The brain is well-adapted for dealing with these "normal" alterations, but less adapted for dealing with drugs.

But there are adaptions for dealing with alcohol, this is most evident when contrasting with populations that don't have them such as aboriginals, native americans and east asians. And there are adaptions for dealing with smoke (that may be more for dealing with cooking food and eating the cooked food)

@ayy
While that is true of some drugs, particularly those that are associated with clear dysfunction (like heroin), there is no basis to say that for some others. In fact the very idea of what is a drug or what is not is generally a completely arbitrary distinction. Drugs, like food occur in nature, are consumed by humans, have been part of our evolution for time immemorial,and impact our brain chemistry.

the vast majority of things we call "drugs" are no more harmful than a multivitamin. In fact there are many multivitamins that have and do cause significaintly more harm than things we call drugs. For example if you were to compare vitamin K to say weed, it is clear vitamin K has taken far more lives than weed.

@miya @nerthos

@ayy
Im not saying all drugs are harmless mind you. I'm just saying any sweeping statement you can make about "drugs" is going to be false out of the gate since it is such an arbitrary distinction.

I would agree a majority of things we think of when we talk about illegal drugs obviously cant be consumed unchecked, then again you shouldnt induldge in anything unchecked. But many of those drugs also have little to no addictive qualities and some have very few negative side effects too. we simply need to be specific in these discussions to be useful.

@miya @nerthos

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.