Re: Bicycle outing with happy ending

On 5/24/2025 8:03 AM, Shadow wrote:

On Fri, 23 May 2025 22:48:21 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
 

On 5/23/2025 7:45 PM, AMuzi wrote:

....

But the numbers are not decreasing by themselves:
>
https://ktla.com/news/california/a-southern-california-mayor-says-he-
wants-to-give-homeless-people-all-the-fentanyl-they-want/

>
Andrew, I remember you arguing in favor of legalizing drugs. Am I mistaken?

  Cannabis should be legalized. It's practically harmless.
People should be allowed to grow it at home, like they are in Uruguay.
Most American States just "legalized" the Mafia, and profits finance
other crimes. In Uruguay there is no profit involved, so it is no
longer a problem.
  Opioids prescriptions OTOH should be severely controlled. Most
addicts start off taking someone's "back pain medicine".
There are practically no opioid addicts in Brazil, because any
doctor that prescribes has to justify WHY he prescribed it. Cancer
usually  gets a pass, but temporary pains like kidney stones,
fractures etc do NOT. Expect to lose your license for prescribing in
these cases( a couple of doses is admissible, but not a week
prescription)
Trafficking opiates should be punished with life imprisonment.
Pity most of it is done by military and para-military groups that went
to Afghanistan, they are practically above the law in the US. The
brunt of police oppression is on users and small dealers. When was the
last time they intercepted a multi-ton shipment?
  Cocaine and its derivatives (crack)should also be combated.
It's not addictive, people that use it do so because law enforcement
either does not take it seriously, or is involved in the distribution.
Tha DEA is famous in Brazil for pressuring judges to release the
really big drug lords. Bolsonaro was using the presidential plane to
traffic it, and the far-right wing PSDB party was practically financed
by cocaine trafficking.
My take on drugs ...
The drug that kills more than any other is alcohol. But nobody
says that. Bad for business. And too many addicts.
[]'s

I'm mostly with you  (with some quibbles on details) but for the past century no lack of effort, expense or suffering, with many able creative minds across most nations has resulted in ... nothing.
A few simple charts on that:
https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/econ-101-hayek-and-why-we-are-losing-the-war-against-drugs/7464990
My Libertarian streak leans toward no regulation at all, along Hayek's famous comment that we all can see the harm a man can do to himself with dangerous drugs. But once we limit that, can a man not harm himself more with bad ideas, bad books, bad plays? Once we enter that area, there is no limit to the assault on liberty.
(I paraphrase because I could not find a link readily)
Even so far as cannabis, I am conflicted. Yes, probably like you, I know people who have made a small habit of smoking for many years with no obvious downside.  That said, relaxation of enforcement has also created a generation of adolescent and even preteen stoners whose development has been severely limited and the most recent (last 5 years or so) turn has been to extremely powerful synthetics and concentrated natural THC products with severe outcomes including death.
[Although cannabis of my youth was absolutely impossible to smoke to a medically serious level, hybridization, concentration in products and synthetics have crossed that line.]
Those are some of my thoughts on why both bans and abdication are imperfect policy.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971