happy 420 ^~^

Discussion in 'Off-topic Discussion' started by BravelyKegger, Apr 20, 2019.

  1. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    436
    1,638
    123
    ...and it won't happen in the future either. As long as there are humans on earth, there will be criminal behavior. Period.
     
    Deleted Account likes this.
  2. Whether justice should be punitive or rehabilitative is a good question. I'd say the former is more important. When someone commits a crime the system has already failed. Prevention should be the goal. The argument that we're not very good at it so we should stop trying is something I can't agree with. The 'scaring' doesn't work so well perhaps because the punishment is mentally too far away. I remember that while shoplifting as a kid I was much more worried about the shopkeeper than the cops.

    The idea that introducing drugs into your system doesn't hurt anyone but you is false. No man is an island and whatever happens to you affects others too. If one becomes an addict who cannot take care of him/herself then their family, friends and even people s/he had never met suffer for it to some degree. We're all living in a densely connected social fabric and if we fail to become good citizens others pay the price.
     
    Deleted Account likes this.
  3. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    436
    1,638
    123
    Prevention should be the goal, indeed. But you don't prevent crimes by punishment. In fact, nothing is as criminogenic as imprisonment. Prevention builds on knowledge and social structures, not on prisons.

    We clearly have a misunderstanding then: Of course we should not stop trying to prevent crimes (and drug use). What I say is, that punishment does the opposite of prevention. Criminologic studies showed this pretty clearly. The reason why we still punish people (and will keep doing it) is the revenge motive (maybe paired with the "trust in justice and law"-part). We like to believe, that high penalties for a certain behavior result in less of this behavior, but that's not how stuff works. The behavior keeps existing regardless.
    So, if we apply these finding on drugs, we see, that it is not a good idea: We can't stop people doing drugs by law. Ain't gonna happen. By trying it this way, we create more and more people without a perspective. This leads to higher rates of crimes within these people.

    So, if you want people to not do drugs, you have to educate them about the effects. Punishing users for using will not result in less consumption.

    Yes, that's exactly the reason. But you don't bring it closer mentally by increasing the penalties. Criminology showed this very clearly. High penalties only work, when the criminal thinks he will be caught most likely. But people, who go to prison, do not think that way generally speaking.

    True, but these are not "victims" in a criminal justice sense. It's not the job of criminal law to solve this kind of problems. Also, what you said applies to literally every problematic (e.g. addictive) behavior. Just think about gambling, drinking, etc. All of these are not criminal behaviors, but they destroy lifes every day. It still wouldn't be wise to criminalize these behaviors. Also, criminalization influences the people around you just as much, if not more. For reason, see my earlier post.
     
    Deleted Account likes this.
  4. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    436
    1,638
    123
    These labels and pictures can hardly be called education. Also the fact that "smoking is bad for your health" can't be called education either. When I say education, I mean deep understanding for the effects. I'm not sure how such an educational programm should look like, but I can certainly say, that the education measures, which exist today are a total joke. If you keep in mind, what I said in my ealier posts, it is not really crazy, that they're legal.

    Is it really that much different? I doubt it to be honest. But even if we assume it is, it doesn't change the point I'm making.

    Like i said: Education & social structures. Punishment doesn't work like you want it to. Never has, never will.

    I have several problems with these assumptions:
    1) As I pointed out above, these labels can hardly be called education. Of course, they are pretty much useless.

    2) I doubt, that most people truely understand the effects of drugs. Most people only know "drugs are bad for you", but do not understand why or how. However, that must be the goal, if you want people to stop using them.

    3) People now don't seek help, because they are scared of getting in trouble. If you get rid of that fear (i.e. decriminalizing), more people would seek help earlier.

    You make it sound like I would want cocaine being available in every supermarket to everybody. That's not even close. One approach would be to give the drugs to pharmacies, make the experts there explain everything before they sell it, make the prices high, etc. etc.

    Decriminalisation/legalization isn't as simple as "drugs for everyone".
     
  5. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    436
    1,638
    123
    I agree. If the education measures stay the same, bad stuff might happen. That's why not only need a radical change in drug policies but also in education strategies. Should be managable to change them both though. Portugal did quite a good job on that matter for example.

    I doubt that alcohol, cigarettes or any other legal drug is less addictive than say weed.

    ...and then add another layer of fear on top of that...Criminalisation doesn't help in the least.

    No. Just walk in and buy some. You don't need prescriptions for everything, that gets sold at a pharmacy. Make the pharmacists explain the drug of choice and it's effects, make the drug expensive, include high taxes, set an age limit and you'll be far better off.

    Yea, it's important to discuss different variants of legalisation. It's not even that important how the process of legalisation gets done in the end. The point, that matters the most is: Criminalisation is disasterous. So let's get rid of it.
     

Share This Page