Was prohibition actually a failure? Wikipedia claims that based on liver cancer rates, alcohol usage nearly halved.
It seems that this failure myth was invented by the alcohol industry.
>>869555
How do you mean by failure?
If it was successful, wouldn't we still have it today?
>>869569
>implying politics is about what works and what doesn't instead or what is popular
>>869555
When your goal is eliminating all alcohol use, only managing half is a failure yes.
>>869555
>based on liver cancer rates
wat
since when was this a common way of measuring alcohol usage
>>869555
Well, if you consider forcefeeding business to crime cartels all over the country a decent price for lowering liver cancer rates, then sure it was a success. I myself doubt that the crime wave the prohibition caused was worth the benefits.
>>869555
Why do women ruin everything?
>that picture
Yet another BULLSHIT law pushed in by the eternal female.
>>869555
i guess if you prefer getting ventilated by some wop over dying from liver failure, it was a success
>allowed to own guns
>but not to own alcohol
wew
>>869886
Wasn't that period big on disarmament too? I remember there being one of the first anti machine gun laws somewhen in the 30s.
>>869843
It's in their nature.
>>869886
funnily enough, the prohibitions effect on crime lead to the firstwidepread gun regulations.
>>869555
>implying ANY of the women pictured would get dogged by any man
This is poetry, its like the 30s version of tumblr landwhales posting "NOT ASKING FOR IT".
How do we redo prohibition and make it work?
>>869951
Why?
Even if, it never would take hold, right now people are even for legalizing weed.
>>869951
Why should we bother? Prohibitionism never ever achieved anything other than taking all market control off the government's hands.
>>869967
I get being contrarian makes you feel special, but there's a limit.
>>869951
Nigga Humans have been drinking Alcohol for thousands of years, you can't just ban it and hope people just stop.
>>869967
How do we determine which dangerous substances should be prohibited or not? It would annoy me if alcohol became prohibited
>>869967
A lot of things are dangerous and poisonous. Alcohol isn't in normal doses. It wouldn't make sense.
![TigT6EU[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/0fVKvn9.jpg "TigT6EU[1].jpg")
>>869967
>That's why I ask how we do it _successfully_.
You don't. The very concept of it is fallacious unless you can somehow manage to seize all means of production (pro tip: you can't). The closest you can get is funding a massive propaganda effort rife with scare ploys (misinformation, poisoning some sources, etc) while silencing all voices of reason. All this while keeping the stuff legal btw, so it's easier to control.
>>869974
Obligatory pic.
>>869978
yes, holding an opinion that the majority of humans don't share in an effort to be noticed does indeed make you contrarian.
>>869951
Define make it work. You're not going to prevent people from drinking alcohol without going into ludicrous, Orwellian level totalitarian control scenarios.
Alcohol is stupid easy to make, there's a reason the shit is everywhere and old.
>>869986
>you will never be yang wenli
It honestly hurts to breathe desu
>>870012
Make it work as in make it succeed and prevent it from devolving into an organized crime racket.
>>870005
>claiming to know the motivations of others
When will this meme argument die?
>>870019
>you will never be a depressed alcoholic man whose choice of career is denied to him and who is forced into another that he despises deeply, while seeing the society he cares for and his friends die all around him while your superiors do nothing but try to hamper you at every turn
>you'll never see the love of your life snatched away from you by your best friend, just to see him die in the war, and then her die too after she kept denying you even while alone; you'll nver trap your underling into a romantic relationship that is completely one sided and closer to adoration vs loneliness than it is to actual love
>you'll never die of blood loss after being shot like a dog due to the shit tier security afforded to you in spite of being the literal key man of your country's bellic effort, yet further proof of how your society despises you and is bound to fall
Whew, I think I'm fine never ever going to be him, thank you very fucking much.
>>870046
Prohibition is the real meme.
wouldn't it be just as likely drinking related health issues were covered up during that period as well as the drinking itself?
>>870047
Stop talking about anime. Please stop talking about anime.
>>870128
Dude, two things:
1. We're on fucking 4chan, get a grip
2. We're in /his/, LotGH is the local equivalent of /k/'s girls und panzer
That said, I'll stop because Yang Wen-li is too fucking depressing.
>>870128
You have to go back to r*ddit
>>869951
>How do we redo prohibition and make it work?
lol, see if you can do that with even one drug that's even 1% as popular as alcohol.
Maybe then see if you can ban alcohol.
>>870128
>>870036
Given how easy alcohol is to make, and how difficult it is to keep drugs even out of high security places like prisons (there are always human errors to exploit, a guard who wouldn't mind a few extra hundred bucks on the side to compliment his shit wages), it just doesn't seem possible, even with an Orwellian police state. These places are never sustainable for more than a generation or two, while all your attempts to suppress what is basically a primal human urge inevitably fall apart when people get sick of maintaining the hypocrisy of living in a society where they pretend to care.
>>869843
These temperance movement women were well intentioned but misguided, calling attention to a real social issue: the fact that working class men were spending their entire wage on booze, many times blowing it in a single evening, leaving their wife and children in desperate situations. These Italian, Irish, and German men were paid so little that even a small cursory celebration of their culture, which was centered around alcohol consumption, left them destitute.
And the temperance movement was supported just as eagerly as evangelical Christians who saw liquor as the devil's drink leading to declining morals, so it's not like temperance was a pure SJW movement, it was a bipartisan one.
Pic unrelated
nice thread. I'm not going to wade through all the responses
show people this pic to trigger them. Now, joking aside, there obviously was a use rate between polling. It's simply that, unless you're a libertarian CATO institute hack who claims liquor use doubled overnight there does seem to be a drop in consumption rates. I also want to point out that prohibition seems to be handled by sympathetic authors, so outside of earlier said institute withe their faggotry the data might be getting cooked
But anyways. Why the decline in use? Because the drinking institutions and culture of saloons pubs etc endemic to the working class laborer got shut down. Alcohol simply had a less prominent position in society after it got reinstated
>>870224
temperance was not a female-only movement. I've heard they were sort of a veneer
>>869951
prohibition is entirely feasible when the laws are ruthless and enforced by a clean administration. Look at singapore- death penalties and their use rate is tiny. Sweden is (memes aside) apparently a leader in restrictive policies from a social angle also, which appear to have effected a lower use rate
how to maintain prohibtion?
1) arrest all internet provocateurs and public demonstrators. Censor pro-drug literature and information, music and culture
2) execute dealers outright. Force addicts into treatment programs instead of jail. three strike-type law on penalty of death for failure to stay clean
3) scrap charter of rights type restrictions on police power
4) institute mandatory drug testing for all work.
5) dramaticaly overhaul the propaganda war to be less sensationalist
6) (in countries with an existing drug problem) bug and surveil all dispensaries prior to extensive roundup operations
over time the issue will stabilize and disappear. There's always going to be a certain level of corruption/use in a society, the trick is to prevent it from metastasizing. Drug culture is how the modern trend is spreading - memes basically
The only way prohibition would work would be by making people no longer want alchohol. Like the cigarette ad campaigns. Otherwise people would be super pissed and this is a democracy. In fact victorian morals are what prohibition is based on and there are even less of that today.
It would never really work.
You could maaaaybe raise the drinking age or intensify punishments for underage drinking and alcohol related charges but I doubt that would be popular either.
>>870378
yes, the early drug war was led by racism, prejudice, and initially hysteria in north america. Nixon did use the War on drugs as an excuse to correlatively attack his primary opposition. That's just solid politics
why shouldn't the government attack opposition parties on the basis of their degeneration?
hysteria is a bad tactic because the long half life only raises the interest in use. the 80's war on drugs actually increased drug use due to programs like DARE going around popularizing drugs as a cultural alternative. It is more important to maintain a low profile and have credible threat. I suggest executions only to ease up judicial pressures on the system
nice thread anyways.
the american war on drugs has problems because they failed to specifically target and SOLVE (as opposed to jail) the problem of users. By restricting demand you just make buyers pay more increasing black market activity, AND making users more likely to agitate for legalization AND create a social culture of "drugs r cool" which spreads this bullshit even more. Also, yanks totally undercut their own antidrug efforts for a long time with the CIA laundering for black bag operations. Cocaine was totally used to make black power weakened
to succeed in the drug war, you must target the users. You must make it low profile because you can't expect to indefinitely "win a war" on a continual human tendency. Keep mr big around because cartels make crime organized and controllable. Utmost, there must be an effort to raise the control rating of the police. Most of their budget can be appropriated from gangsters coincidentally- it's the quality of their work often more than the quantity
decriminalization was a failure. Legalization is going to increase demand. Marijuana is not inevitable, it's a fucking meme anecdote the hippies made trendy on tier with absinthe. We have a solid body of evidence showing that it is harmful to ingest or smoke. Fuck the hedonist
>>869555
maybe it worked at public health level, but it created an organized crime problem
>>870394
Pretty much this. I don't even think it's that much of a stretch; the anti-smoking campaign is based on facts but uses rhetoric to shock people. The percentage of smokers who actually develop lung cancer is only about 10%, so while it is demonstrably bad for you I don't think the risk justifies the hype. You could probably make an equally compelling case against drinking if you sliced the numbers correctly. As they say, 'there are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.'
>>870415
I hope you've seen Sicario because on a filmic level it pretty much echoes your post. As cinema it's solid too.
>>870425
never, but /k/ gloats about it all the time. Time for the digital jew...
>>870415
>We have a solid body of evidence showing that it is harmful to ingest or smoke
its basically harmless when compared to alcohol or tobacco
its ridiculous to keep it illegal when its one of the safest drugs ever and is much safer then alcohol and tobacco. If states want to legalize it there is no reason why they shouldn't, it helps to bring in a lot of tax revenue that would otherwise be stuffed into mattress.
>>870417
This, Addictions are a public health problem, not a police matter.
Prohibition leads to mobster money flowing into politics and police abusing their power
>>870434
I am for the prohibition of tobacco (we already have a large black market for it), and the restriction of alcohol to pubs only until the population is ready for straight prohibition
this is the classic LEGALIZE argument, when you're in essence arguing for a voluntarily unhealthy society. The sort of thing on paper nobody wants. Do not lie and say such things are inevitable, they are memes reinforced by populations of users and that is it
"magic money" is the biggest lie of advocates to date. This money does not appear out of nowhere. In fact, it was already in the economy. By reducing use, we reduce the proportion of buyers and the profits. Even with the drug trade in existence, this money was always still being spent. If you want a higher tax rate increase taxes, that's it
>>870446
>and the restriction of alcohol to pubs only until the population is ready for straight prohibition
It would never happen though, bread and circus is far to important.
>>870452
not nearly as hard to believe as you would think. The majority of alcohol use happens when people have private access to beer.
Stop selling it in bottles, make pubs the sole provider. Now the bar industry has an incentive to maintain the status quo, and most people go out to drink anyways so the bars would be much more livelier.
Sure, some people would bottle or home brew. This would not be most. These types can be dealt with as most dealer networks are (they're social connections much more easy to trace than many would believe. All you've got to do is interrogate under pressure one set of nodes until you reach the higher one. If the government has sufficient power to defang gangs, there is less pressure on the individual to squeak)
>>870459
*mis-use
>>870459
You are an idiot. Prisoners are known to ferment fruit in bottles to produce nasty ass liqour. Everyone would be cranking out moonshine and hard cider in their back yard or closet.
Trying to force your puritanical ideals on everyone else is moronic.
>>870479
I'm not American. The future is declining use no matter what the retards do in the short term. I am convinced marijuana is destined to become the new smoking after idiot hedonists stop being important social movers
>>870482
>muh prisoners make alcohol, so everybody drinks it
this is the type of faggotry pro cherrypicking response I'm talking about. Don't you realize that when only a minority is making the product, the use rate declines as the price increases? That's entirely the the point
>but moonshine is gonna be everywhere
so run more breathalyzer tests. I seriously doubt black market liquor would blossom when there's a legal outlet much safer at the pub all these fags like to hang out at anyways
>>870492
>we need to turn into a draconian society where everyone is constantly under scrutiny in order to ban things I don't like
K
>>870492
>that obvious /pol/ pic.
arguments disregarded
>>870500
the future is totalitarian whether you like it or not. Do you think the increasingly intrusive technology we have is going to sit idle forever because an excitable public appealing to emotion hates to think about the implications forever. 20th century mass movements were just the overture really
>>870505
I made it. All the studies check out, in fact I have more tightly focused information demonstrating IQ/intelligence is harmed by marijuana if you would like
>but that twin study paper!
which also highlights twins who smoke have lower IQ and users have lower functional memory AKA a critical component of IQ. Your move faggot
>>870510
>I made it
argument disregarded
>>870352
The problem is, any implementation such as you suggest stomps directly over Constitutionally protected rights.
> need to pass an amendment to criminalize alcohol
>dont pass an amendment to criminalize any other drugs
the fuck?
>>870516
>bias confirmed
hello. Do you not know that marijuana users:
>have poorer quality sperm liable to cause genetic defects
>have poorer memory recall due to ingesting a hippocampal neurotoxin
>are liable to trigger otherwise destined to be unactivated mental illnesses including schizophrenia and anxiety disorder
>inherently causes anxiety and panic attacks due to the paranoid inducing function of THC
>induces heart problems due to the stress
>alters dopaminergic functioning leading to a chemical dependence
>is almost certainly smoked and liable to cause lung and body cancers due to the method of delivery
>have been demonstrated to have lower academic performance as a result of use
>can PERMANENTLY reduce IQ of kids who take it prior to a fully formed (24) brain, and impairs intelligence of those who take it thereafter anyways
>are cryhard meming bias confirming faggots whose only effective retort to this is "i liek it" like your pathetic sad sack self?
l
m
a
o
>>870517
I'd like to toss out most constitutional rights anyways. There's so much bullshit that goes on under their premises and you can't even foresee the unintended consequences of these lawsuits. The only functional purpose of rights are to make the government too weak to do a damn thing people expect of it
also. I cite captain sweden as an example of a country that is doing okay despite not having judge dredd tier approaches to public order. A soft social strategy of helping poverty and mental illness is obviously going to help out reducing drugs
>>870533
What do you think of Paul Erdős
>His colleague Alfréd Rényi said, "a mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems",[15] and Erdős drank copious quantities (this quotation is often attributed incorrectly to Erdős,[16] but Erdős himself ascribed it to Rényi[17]). After 1971 he also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of whom (Ron Graham) bet him $500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month.[18] Erdős won the bet, but complained that during his abstinence, mathematics had been set back by a month: "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." After he won the bet, he promptly resumed his amphetamine use.
>Erdős was one of the most prolific publishers of papers in mathematical history, comparable only with Leonhard Euler; Erdős published more papers, mostly in collaboration with other mathematicians, while Euler published more pages, mostly by himself.[29] Erdős wrote around 1,525 mathematical articles in his lifetime,[30] mostly with co-authors. He strongly believed in and practiced mathematics as a social activity,[31] having 511 different collaborators in his lifetime.
>>870525
In case you haven't noticed, America has gotten a lot less willing to defend their rights over the last century or so.
>>870544
Or the use of psychedelics to treat depression and alcoholism?
>>870544
he's the anecdote faggots like yourself constantly cite
>going on an excitatory drug, might plausibly increase intellectual capacity at risk of addiction and almost certainly health consequences
yep. If we wanted everybody pumped and had no care for life we'd get all the factory workers and laborers wired, put the secretaries on meth so they stay up all night, issue everyone Ritalin, and end up with a massive train wreck of a healthcare system where everyone dies past age 20 but that's life right. A genius is going to produce work regardless of what they're on, and there's no need to burn through a population like rubber just because they'll work harder. In combat circumstance I'm 100% for drugging all the Poor bloody infantry but that's really different.
>>870552
psychedelics might have a legit application. Personally I think it's probably bullshit hype - wizchan has dozens of anecdotes talking about how it had no effect whatsoever. Sounds like placebo basically. Not to mention the "therapeutic use" is basically crapshoot voodoo tier actual control over what is going on in the drug interactions. Most people aren't seriously depressed enough to need this and there are better methods available for those who are.
>>870552
Pic related is the connectivity between regions of you're brain when you are on mushrooms compared to normal. Even if you are completely against recreational use, you can't deny that drugs have a lot of medical and research potential.
>>870557
>he's the anecdote faggots like yourself constantly cite
I only did because you were citing anecdotes yourself m8.
>>870557
>Personally I think it's probably bullshit hype
It's really not, there's quite a few studies showing amazing results, and the side effects are minimal compared to other antidepressants and anti-anxiety drugs (Benzo's).
This is just the first one I found.
>https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151210181635.htm
>>870394
Smoking as a habit is offensive and difficult to hide.
An easy target
>>870558
people mistake openness as a trait (which psychs typical permanently increase) with gullibility, which is what the extreme end of the spectrum is treading towards. Most people don't need to increase this attribute, and the mysticism associated with it is nonsense only making us dumber.
>associating connectivity with all neurons regardless of actual association isn't going to lead to garbage connections
mckenna the guru is on record saying psychs are restricted because they would dissolve public opinion, and he's honestly right
>>870559
I'm positive if I were to catalog the posts on r9k by drug content there would be a very large pool of addicts discernible from the content. That place is a fucking mess
>>870572
most of the depressed population will recover of their own accord within 1-2 years time without any outside treatment. With therapy and antidepressants the rate raises to like 60-70%. Not even bringing in the transcranial wand thing we've developed. I'm open-minded about psychs in mental health, but until the practical results come back my stance is critical. Also, what many of these studies fail to take into account are nonsensical perceptions induced by the drug use - not mental illness which many do look for, but nonsensical intellectual positions as anecdotally comes up time and time again from advocate-users.
also; If you're chemically depressed LSD isn't going to help you, implanting electrodes in the brain however will.
>>870572
Here's a couple of studies.
http://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/article/S0006-3223(14)00275-3/abstract
http://search.proquest.com/openview/7d6101ef0333bf549ae1b2eed1ded9ab/1?pq-origsite=gscholar
>>870579
>implanting electrodes in the brain however will
Does that also really fuck with your memory pretty much every single time?
>>870585
>fuck with memory
I think you're talking about the transcranial stimulation bit. To my understanding, the electrodes do not seem to produce that effect but I do not claim to be 100% educated in the subject
>>870542
>Toss out rights
>Become Sweden
GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY COUNTRY, YOU LITERAL SHITBAG.
>>870542
>I'd like to toss out most constitutional rights anyways
gb2china
>>870510
>the future is totalitarian whether you like it or not.
A more or less continual prediction for the past 150 years which never seems to pan out.
>>870594
sweden is the option short of singapore for the liberal-leftists too squeamish to follow through on their own polices
prohibition has always been a "progressive" ideology in reaction to the harmful effects of drugs in society. It is ironic that the conservatives are now saddled with following through an essentially left wing project after they flutter off to nonsense issues
>>870597
constitutionalism is an intellectual fraud which revolves around frightening citizens into such paranoia of their own government that they would rather a broken system than an efficient because an industrial accident MIGHT happen. Bull fucking shit, were any of these countries legit tyrannies prior to the constitution (not most) and if they were has the constitution changed any damn thing (nope)
it's a piece of paper to castrate lawful governments and that is fucking it. You can't see the implications of the laws set in motion, and the government becomes a big gimmie dat welfare bank for every fucking minority to get oppressed by until they get infinite magic rights and money. Fuck the constitution
>>870600
the modern era distinguishes itself by the rise of totalitarian organizations of all stripes (communist, fascist, an emergent liberal one as we speak). The era of democracy is well on it's way to be eclipsed and over - a product of expanding markets and a virgin north america allowing social mobility which otherwise would not exist. As the economic stagnation sets in, the class system does also. As the class system sets, democracy dies. And the future of technology we have invented becomes real
passing off as "just like old" when we have new technology is for kids.
>>869849
While women were the driving anti alcohol force of the time, I'm pretty sure that picture was a parody, putting ugly and old women there to mock the temperance movement. At least I'm sure I read that somewhere
>>870613
>and if they were has the constitution changed any damn thing (nope)
Brah, the English Bill of Rights is literally one of the most important events in human history.
I'd put it well beyond the moon landing, and about on par with the invention of the Printing Press.
It is not a coincidence that the one part of the world that consistently put legal limitations on their government is the one that dominates the planet.
>>870621
there's the rights of parliament, then there's the rights of individuals. In canada we had a separate expansion of the charter to bring in this RIGHTS REVOLUTION, and around the world I suspect it's much the same
>but the western democracy is all 'cuz of the charter i swear to gott
absolute drivel. It was industrialization that rose the western powers and aggressive adaptation of capitalism which forwarded it's sphere of influence not the superficial document worshiped by idiots and broken by every effective government once in power
>>870633
further: there is a difference between TRANSITION FROM MONARCHY and GIVE THE PEOPLE EVERY RIGHT. Keep the charter if you'd like, strike all the generalizing unpredictable clauses
>>870633
>people think political liberalization was caused by the industrial revolution and not the other way around
>people think it's a coincidence that areas with secure property rights and workable contract law developed huge trade empires and booming economies
>>870639
brb eta 1 hour
>>870613
>we are moving towards totalitarian regimes all over the globe, hail our new overlords!
>constitutionalism is an intellectual fraud which revolves around frightening citizens into such paranoia of their own government that they would rather a broken system
Pick one. Unlike you, most people are not bootlickers that want their government to tell them what they can and cannot do at all times. Constitutions exist to prevent governments from growing too powerful.
>>870352
Before Singapore was even Singapore, humans have been drinking alcohol. We have also been using marijuana and opium in the same time frame.
You don't just stop that part of humanity. Even the proponents tend to be the biggest users behind closed doors, and law enforcement always is corrupt. Just hang around some Saudis for a great example.
Prohibition is just a meme.
>>870754
It's even found in other species. You can't stop curiosity.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140528-do-animals-take-drugs
>>869555
Drugs should be legal and regulated, people have the right to duck up their lives.
Alcohol is super easy to make and transport, and millions of people wanted to keep using it.
There's no way to stop it.
>>869555
>"the [x] industry did it"
>>870639
>implying constitutionalism is the only thing keeping property rights and contract law in order forever
lmao
>>870712
freedom in north america has eclipsed and is fading and the economy stagnates. You kids can get dragged kicking and screaming if that's what you want. It's a weak timid liberalism that is afraid of letting the state function and have real power
>>870754
hey guess what, people have been murdering each other forever too! I guess we better #legalize homicide...
>>870765
>some animals sometimes take drugs
>therefore, we MUST let everybody take drugs
even by that bullshit naturalistic crap, that's false
>>870809
use declined during prohibition, not increased. You're a faggot
>>870795
>people have the RIGHT
>IE people are going to get fucked because of my shitty policy decision but I'm chemically dependent so it doesn't matter
this is why we can't have democracy making decisions
turning a minor social/criminal problem, into a huge criminal problem; is not how you solve thing.
Drug Prohibition has had no effect. Addiction rates remain steady despite the exponential increase anti drug enforcement spending.
>>870881
>some animals sometimes take drugs
>therefore, we MUST let everybody take drugs
I didn't say that, I implied that the curiosity towards substances which is even seen in a variety of animals, would seem to suggest that you're efforts will be futile.
But hey, why not just twist words to suit your own agenda?
>>870908
the only relevant implication of what you were saying is that large numbers of people inevitably use drugs. That's false. A lot of people also stick their hands in electrical outlets, that's "human nature" but most of us do not
the hedonist takes a piece of sand slightly off from the beach, magnifies it as if it were a massive social issue, and then claims this small difference is enough to invalidate the beach. That's bullshit
>>870881
>use declined during prohibition, not increased
And how long did prohibition last?
Has anything similar to prohibition occurred in other countries (excluding those using religious justification like muslim countries).
My question is did usage spike after alcohol was once again legalized?
>>870913
But large numbers of people do inevitably use drugs, and the vast majority of them remain no threat to anyone else. You're just a meddling piece of shit.
>>870967
it did not spike. Usage seems to have declined and later peaks well into the 80's
what I think is happening is that the drinking/pub culture that was greatly impaired by prohibition has managed to make a comeback. I'm aware culture is often used for bullshit reasons, but you've only to see how closely substance use is tied to social events to see how it is entirely a cultural thing. In time drinking is often expected or pressured, and it then goes into excess
15% of the population uses marijuana. Harder drugs is even smaller. That's a clear minority, and they are a health concern that should be fixed. Your feelings are misplaced- drug users are statistically stupid pieces of shit with poor impulse control. There is a small countergroup of high IQ types who experiment, but given the costs involved this is only a greater reason to keep them from using to begin with
>>870983
But you can't keep these people from using, nor should you. If usage increases or decreases primarily due to cultural reasons, than that should be your focus. But we have handily demonstrated at this point that the usage of forceful coercion has not done anything to inhibit users, and in fact drugs have only increased in abundance and quality, and decreased in price since the war on drugs began.
Stupid pieces of shit will always be stupid pieces of shit, and curious sorts will always experiment.
Aside from the pragmatic concerns, there's the simple moralistic concerns, in which we consider the fact that as a society we value bodily autonomy, yet inconsistently apply this principle. If we're to use force to violate this for whatever socially convenient ends we seek, why not for others? Why not have public health enforcers subject you to regular checks to make sure you're taking good enough care of yourself? The answer is simple: because it's not their fucking place.
>>870983
What do you think about the prevalence of obesity? Do you think high sugar content and fatty foods should be banned or restricted? Or that exercise should be made mandatory?
>>870983
>but given the costs involved this is only a greater reason to keep them from using to begin with
The costs meaning the billions spent on a drug war that has failed to achieve anything? The same drug war which has caused an insane amount of violence due to ruthless criminals capitalizing on the illegal market?
Yeah, clearly we need to put you in charge. Everyone else (including the Chinese) just doesn't know what they're doing. I'm sure that you'll be able to eliminate drug use once and for all with your genius policies.
>>869809
this. I'm sure with prohibition, lots of people drank less, as it was harder to come by for folks not in the "know." A good part of that half may very well be due to a decreased intake, versus a total cessation.
Based American police chiefs
>>870995
>you can't do that
but the state can and should. Just look at the figures- prohibition works
now riddle me this. What kind of politics would campaign for health, go after vices aggressively, but ignore the ones closest to home? our modern lefty
stupid pieces of shit can and should be culled. It's the buildup of sediment in a system that ruins it. In davos, the mayor runs death squads and crime in one of the most formerly violent cities in the world has dropped to the point of it turning into a tourist city. Fancy that- when the state has ultimate power, the job is done
>>870996
I'd progressively restrict and ban unhealthy foods and fund programs, yes. The trick is that sudden prohibition of commonly used items (like alcohol which 80% of the population drank) will produce a social backlash which causes problems. It's important to establish a social coercion against the substance before banning. Drugs are already under wraps so it is a mitigation strategy now
>>871007
a police force with more powers and free ability to confiscate dealer property- a judiciary with far less money spent on deliberation fluff. That is cost effective and efficient. By a larger police presence there is spillover benefits and we are targeting a worthless segment of the population that is better off gone anyways
>>871047
>Just look at the figures- prohibition works
Except it doesn't. Usage declined at the time, but there's no actual evidence to suggest it was prohibition and the fact usage didn't spike afterwards suggests it had nothing to do with it.
>our modern lefty
I don't give a fat rat's ass about the left and don't consider myself on either side of the spectrum.
>Fancy that- when the state has ultimate power, the job is done
Do we really need to bring up the countless times states with absolute power have went fucking terribly? Fuck yourself, I hope you never see power and on a petty note, hope all of your dreams go unfulfilled.
>>871076
okay look. it's true that alcohol use was declining prior to prohibition and many states voluntarily went dry
however, to say that as a country the fact that the use rate declining had nothing to do with the prohibition going on at the same time is just bullshit. Use didn't spike upwards dramatically because the cultural basis was dampened (it increased but not dramatically, the point)
>but muh evil government
a clean public administration can and should use power tyrannically without going to the dogs. A body that has no immune system cannot survive a disease. A body politic with no homeostasis has no future
>>870890
>alcohol minor social problem
About 40% of violent crime involves alcohol
>>871090
>however, to say that as a country the fact that the use rate declining had nothing to do with the prohibition going on at the same time is just bullshit.
Not in the slightest. Do you find it not even remotely inconceivable that a nation in which cultural perceptions had changed to the point where alcohol was criminalized would see a decline in usage? Your position is built on sand, and you're an idiot. You'll never see support from me, nor any other person with even a shred of self interest and common sense.
>a clean public administration
No such thing. You might find a clean individual, but there's no way to ensure they'll be the ones in power, and ultimately you're expecting people who are no better than any other to protect you from other people. You're a fool, and you're a garbage human being. Good night.
>>871047
>it's so easy bro
So go to China and fix their methamphetamine problem.
>>871121
>fix the meth problem
nuke north korea. Literally the biggest contributor to that black market bullshit
but seriously. Maoists eliminated a centuries old opium power when they took power. Don't tell me their approach can't be effective
>>871115
>ur built on sand! those statistics don't count!
legit having a hard time seeing your point here. Saloons were a big thing in industrial era western countries. Shutting them down was a big dent and all the historians note this.Why do you think alcohol starts ramping up and peaks in the 80's again? because the social culture had rebuilt itself and the decadence of money had come around to finance it. Prohibition declined the use rate, how can you say otherwise?
>but government is always EVIL cause i played deus ex...
works in singapore. Most western democracies could implement the measures I propose and work them efficiently. There has been a big push to professionalize and monitor police work more than previously
>>871138
>works in singapore.
Except it isn't. Their heroin usage rates have been climbing.
Also, why didn't those saloons just open right up again? The answer is simple: the culture had changed, and had changed before prohibition (even you admitted this, you fucking worthless piece of garbage), and it was this shift in culture that had lead to the decline in usage, not prohibition.
Your argument is built on sand (and you're still an idiot) because you don't realize that under more strict prohibition, drug use has not declined in the slightest and has actually increased.
>>871161
wasn't aware of heroin. I doubt it'll climb high or last long. Heroin is universally acknowledged as the shits
>prohibition, a period of abstinence, did not influence the use rate
it did. Under legalization the use rate increases as culture buoys, under prohibition the use rate increases if demand is not policed- otherwise it is marginal
>>871169
Alright, let's put the ball in your court. Prove conclusively and objectively that it was prohibition.
>I doubt it'll climb high or last long
Can you hear it? That's the sweet sound of cognitive dissonance.
>>871191
>heroin, which is pretty much the least used drug in north america, is going to devastate a country with practically no drug problems whatsoever.
if you show me the data, I can respond. Otherwise I think you're full of shit. Heroin is not going to get out of control in singapore given it's history of successfully controlling literally everything- I can almost guarantee your "rise" is a precentile or less
so:
>prohibition closed the saloons, restricted access to alcohol for 15 years
>the gap in use that coincides with prohibition has nothing in common with it..
unless you've got a clear bias, that's the result of prohibition. Get real
>>869762
>eliminating all alcohol use,
Was that the goal? Or was it eliminating alcohol abuse?
>>871909
Sounds similar to this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma
>>869555
It halved the consumption rate.
But contributed to a good deal of organized crime, and people put in jail over alchohol.
Essentially what our drug war is going.
