← Back to context

Comment by gaiagraphia

25 days ago

I've bounced between viewpoints so many times in life regarding legalisation of drugs. It's a fascinating argument.

Something which has always grounded my beliefs is the comparison to alcohol.

Imagine we walked into bars and were presented with unmarked bottle of clear liquid, and had to order "1 alcohol, please!", where the alcohol % and quality of the drink was totally random. It'd be fucking chaos.

I think I've settled on the "drugs should be legal" but heeavvviillyyy regulated and marked. I wouldn't mind going to a bar and ordering a very weak MDMA drink, or going to a shisha cafe with weakened opium, weed, crack, etc.

Also, it seems the way drugs are punished criminally is totally wrong. Why not lock people up for false advertising rather than 'strength'? I.e if you're heavily cutting drugs, you should be strung up for manslaughter. It would put pressure on the manufacturers to label and regulate themselves.

I believe harm reduction is the answer. There are people who will be curious to try substances no matter what you do -- and no matter for what reason.

Here is some of what the US has been doing ever since the "war on drugs" started:

- Ban the sale of such substances, forcing users to resort to the black market.

- Lock up anyone who uses or possesses such substances, training users that there is no help for them.

- Lock up anyone who helps or intends to help anyone else use or possess such substances, training users that there is no helping others.

- Censor information on how to reduce the risks of substance use, forcing users to put themselves in more danger. (Contrary to apparent popular belief, this does not dissuade users, only harm them.)

- Censor information on how to produce or obtain such substances, preventing the discovery of reliable sources.

- Engage in relentless fearmongering about how terrible and bad such substances are, encouraging users to entirely disregard all warnings about substance use.

In my opinion, here is what one should actually do:

- Regulate the production and sale of such substances. Don't force users to resort to the black market.

- Encourage harm reduction and responsibility towards substance use. Don't train users that there is no help for them.

- Warn only of the real risks and concerns about substance use. Don't train users to disregard very real dangers by flooding them with fake ones.

- Offer reliable sources for such substances. Don't force users to resort to dubious leads.

Recent research into psilocybin therapy, for instance, is very exciting. I've been using psychedelics at home for years, and I dream of a world where known quantities and potencies of such things can be reliably sourced over-the-counter for such use. I don't know if I'll live to see the day.

Also note that none of this prevents helping users who genuinely need it -- users with less self-control, for instance, or harmful dependency. But forcing them all into terrible shame, withdrawal and eventually an utterly preventable death, is the same kind of bullshit that looked at building more homes and then invented anti-homeless architecture instead.