• Fal@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    Because the reason there are overdoses is because no one has any idea the strength of any of the drugs they take. Knowing exactly the dose of the drug you’re taking because it’s legally purchased is a gigantic benefit

      • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        A gallon of bleach can kill people, and we sell that in Walmart. People don’t want to die, they want to get high. If you can buy 20, 100 microgram doses, why would you take all 20 at once unless you wanted to die, and if you wanted to die, well, there are more guns than people in the US, trains exist, razors exist… Are we to wrap the entire world in bubble wrap?

        Disclaimer: if we have an aligned AGI I may well be for some version of wrapping the world in bubble wrap, but I’m almost certain alignment includes allowing people who truly want to die, to die, but having very few such people because of treatments for depression, a world that doesn’t suck, etc.

          • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            More than 20 years ago, I seriously contemplated drug use, and I set myself some rules, before I started doing anything. I’ve stuck to them, and I’ve put thousands of dollars over the years into getting high. Yes, I know addicts.

            People, even addicts, are responding to incentives. It’s been shown that making people’s lives less shit severely reduces addiction; I’m willing to bet that said meth capital is not somewhere where life is generally good, is it? That’s the place to intervene, in quality of life, if you want to reduce addiction. It’s also a very good idea to provide doses of a non-lethal size and known purity in a safe, sterile, nonsexy environment. Do you think people would have gotten into it in the same way if there were no dealers because the addicts were getting their doses at the hospital where you went and chilled for your time high, instead of providing an economic incentive for people to produce and sell it out of garages (periodically detonating a residential home in the process)?

            You’re arguing for an older model of addiction that doesn’t resolve the issues, out of a reaction to the fucked up things you’ve seen. Please don’t misunderstand me; I don’t want the world you’ve seen any more than you do. I just think that there are ways to solve this problem that are demonstrated to be better than the criminal model, which is incredibly destructive both on an immediate level, with gangs throwing bullets indiscriminately, cops throwing bullets indiscriminately, and the incentive gradients leading towards worse outcomes for users.

      • Aggravationstation
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        You can buy enough alcohol to kill you in any supermarket here in the UK. Along with other chemicals that could easily kill a person if not used responsibly. Pretty sure you can in the US too. Along with guns if I’m not mistaken, which can also kill if not used responsibly.

        If Fentanyl was sold at retail it would probably be in pre-measured doses, like pills.

        Your reference to a “massive junkie” concerns me. People often think that the second someone uses drugs they become an addict with no self control. Just as the majority of people who use alcohol do so responsibly the majority of people who consume illegal narcotics, including opiates, also do so responsibly. But because of drug laws they have to hide it or they could lose their job, be ostracised by society or arrested. So the only illegal drug users who openly speak about it are the addicts who have lost control and want to quit or mentally ill people, so they’re the only drug users people see.