Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Monday October 01 2018, @04:20AM   Printer-friendly
from the prohibition-always-works dept.

Canada signs on to U.S.-led renewal of war on drugs

Canada was rebuked on Monday by a group of world leaders and experts on drug policy for endorsing a Trump-led declaration renewing the "war on drugs" and for passing up a critical moment to provide global leadership on drug regulation.

The Trudeau government's decision to sign on to the declaration, released by the White House on the sidelines of U.S. President Donald Trump's first attendance at the United Nations General Assembly in New York, contradicts Ottawa's previous skepticism of Washington's drugs war at home and abroad, and comes just weeks before cannabis legalization in Canada.

Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark said she believed that both Canada and Mexico − which also signed the declaration even though president-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has repeatedly said that the "war on drugs" has failed and he will pursue new policy − likely have signed on reluctantly, held hostage by the North American free-trade agreement talks in Washington, over which a critical deadline looms.

Countries that signed the "Global Call to Action on the World Drug Problem" were promised an invitation for their leader to attend a kick-off event with Mr. Trump in New York. The statement was not drafted in the usual multilateral process of a declaration from the UN and the wording was presented as non-negotiable. One hundred and thirty countries signed but 63 did not; the dissenters include major U.S. allies such as Germany, Norway and Spain.

Previously: Canada Becomes the Second Nation to Legalize Cannabis

Related: WP says Marijuana Legalization Makes World a Better Place


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by pipedwho on Monday October 01 2018, @05:02AM (13 children)

    by pipedwho (2032) on Monday October 01 2018, @05:02AM (#742237)

    Yes, "the world drug problem". Has nothing to do with people taking/selling drugs. It is caused simply due to the legal framework enabling the militarisation and police state activity that escalated a drug trade into something far far worse. The concept of 'drug war' only exists because the authoritarian state makes it a war. Proper regulation and 'legalisation', of something that should have never been illegal in the first place, would go far to solving the problem as it exists. See prohibition of alcohol for examples.

    Sadly, I'm guessing there are huge vested interests that would lose a great deal of income should the government no longer need its excessively militarised police force, and the prison industrial complex no longer needed to provide free board, feed and supervision for a continual influx of 'casualties' of said 'war'.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Informative=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @05:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @05:04AM (#742238)

    See the first post, Trump would end the drug war if politically convenient for him.

  • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @05:49AM (11 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @05:49AM (#742245)

    Yes, Fentanyl cocktails for everyone!

    Not that I particularly care when people off themselves, I just hate dealing with the collateral damage. Sometimes you must deprive some people some freedom for their own good, and that of the society. That is the main job of the government.

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Monday October 01 2018, @06:05AM (2 children)

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Monday October 01 2018, @06:05AM (#742246) Journal

      1. Most people aren't choosing to use fentanyl. They are choosing heroin, but getting "whatever".

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentanyl#Recreational_use [wikipedia.org]

      Some heroin dealers mix fentanyl powder with heroin to increase potency or compensate for low-quality heroin. In 2006, illegally manufactured, non-pharmaceutical fentanyl often mixed with cocaine or heroin caused an outbreak of overdose deaths in the United States and Canada, heavily concentrated in the cities of Dayton, Ohio; Chicago; Detroit; and Philadelphia.

      Likewise, people who want MDMA or other substances often get "whatever" instead. Legalize or at least decriminalize everything, and more people will be getting what they want instead of something made in the trailer park, or low-quality stuff mixed with chemicals that could kill an elephant.

      Heroin, Fentanyl? Meh: Carfentanil is the Latest Killer Opioid [soylentnews.org]

      Legalize cannabis, and people won't bother with K2/spice [wikipedia.org]. And they can get organic cannabis grown by hippies instead of low-grade, pesticide-drenched cannabis.

      2. The main issue for now is cannabis, and legalizing cannabis has shown to result in lower opioid use rates:

      Two More Studies Link Access to Cannabis to Lower Use of Opioids [soylentnews.org]

      Plenty of people fall into heroin use after legitimate use of opioid painkillers causes them to become addicted. Big Pharma knows how to create real gateway drugs.

      The War on Drugs isn't just trampling on people's freedoms. It's also expensive, counter-productive, kills more people, funds criminals instead of government, spreads misinformation by lumping dissimilar drugs together, and doesn't lower drug use.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @09:55AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @09:55AM (#742272)

        funds criminals instead of government

        Instead of? More criminals = more funding for government agencies fighting those criminals. The worst thing that could happen to such an agency is a substantial reduction of crime.

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @06:05AM (6 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @06:05AM (#742247)

      Yes, Fentanyl cocktails for everyone!

      False dichotomy. There are more choices than just 'fully legalize every drug in existence for recreational use' and 'fight a war on drugs.'

      I just hate dealing with the collateral damage.

      Go after the specific people who cause collateral damage and no one else.

      That is the main job of the government.

      No, that's the main job of authoritarians. The government should ideally respect people's liberties.

      • (Score: 2) by Subsentient on Monday October 01 2018, @07:45AM (5 children)

        by Subsentient (1111) on Monday October 01 2018, @07:45AM (#742262) Homepage Journal

        The government should ideally respect people's liberties.

        What government do you know of that has actually done a good job of that, in the entirety of human history? Now don't get me wrong, I'm no anarchist. Life without government is usually much worse than life with it, at least if the government is relatively westernized. However, the sad truth is, by the very nature of its charge, government is primarily tasked with *restricting* freedoms. Like the freedom to broadcast radio long distances without a license, or the freedom to drive without a license.

        There is no true freedom, and there never was. I don't think there ever will be. Perhaps in death.
        There can never be true freedom, because everything humanity touches turns into a festering pile of garbage.

        --
        "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 01 2018, @04:59PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 01 2018, @04:59PM (#742359) Journal

          There is no true freedom

          What's not true about your freedom? Just because it's not absolutely pure and free of constraint or consequence doesn't mean it's fake freedom.

          There can never be true freedom, because everything humanity touches turns into a festering pile of garbage.

          Except, of course, when that doesn't happen.

        • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Virindi on Monday October 01 2018, @05:08PM (3 children)

          by Virindi (3484) on Monday October 01 2018, @05:08PM (#742361)

          There is no true freedom, and there never was. I don't think there ever will be. Perhaps in death.
          There can never be true freedom, because everything humanity touches turns into a festering pile of garbage.

          There is often freedom on the 'frontier'. Over time a 'frontier' goes through a transition period and during that time residents are accustomed to not having to follow rules, and resources are still limited, so law enforcement is restricted to only pursuing the egregious cases. Over time as the population rises and resources increase, people become used to having to follow millions of rules and get approval for everything they do.

          But during that middle time between anarchy and bureaucracy, there can be a happy medium of relative safety and also the practical liberty to go about your life without having to get someone else's approval.

          Historical examples are plenty. Modern Alaska probably qualifies as in that middle ground. And, of course, the eastern US during the founding of the country (which likely has a lot to do with the attitude of the country's original laws). Thomas Jefferson thought that this attribute of the frontier was so important that the then-broke US should pay $573 billion 2016 dollars to buy more of it in 1803.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @07:59PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @07:59PM (#742442)

            There is often freedom on the 'frontier'.

            Freedom to die! Bushwacked, Dry-gulched, ambushed. And/or eaten. As Moses said, "There is no freedom without the law!" Or has somebody been watching too many "Firefly" episodes on Nexflac?

            • (Score: 2) by Virindi on Tuesday October 02 2018, @12:31AM

              by Virindi (3484) on Tuesday October 02 2018, @12:31AM (#742561)

              That is why I am talking about the period of time when the frontier transitions towards civilization. Sheesh, why does every comment on this site these days sound angry?

          • (Score: 2) by dry on Tuesday October 02 2018, @01:50AM

            by dry (223) on Tuesday October 02 2018, @01:50AM (#742590) Journal

            Freedom on the frontier is usually freedom to infringe on other peoples rights. I'm not too up on Alaska but the American war of secession was largely about infringing on others rights. From the anger at the Royal Proclamation of 1763 (the tyrant declared all his subjects were equal and even allowed Papists to join government) to a revolt that saw fellow colonists tared and feathered and their stuff stolen. There was also a good chunk of the colonies whose lifestyle revolved in others having zero rights based on the colour of their skin.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 01 2018, @06:19AM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 01 2018, @06:19AM (#742250) Journal
      Yes, we must put this wood up your ass for the good of the world. A classic K5 concept.