These figures include 'associative crime' as harm. So it apparent counts the cost of buying it as harm, it also counts the tax loss of that expenditure, so IMHO it skews unfavourabley to higher expenditure. But put that aside.

These figures show that all illicit drugs combined are less harmful to society than alcohol, and tautologically the harm is inflated by illegality.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not an expert in Scandinavian drug laws but if you figure them out I'm always curious about new information.

[–] Dave 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Hmm I did some reading but didn't find anything about any countries that have made much progress towards lagalising all drugs.

You seem keen on legalising all drugs, did you have a view on how that would work?

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, you'd start off by legalizing them and use the revenue to put in place a treatment network, regulations and enforcement.

[–] Dave 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What does legalising mean to you compared to decriminalising? Could I buy meth at the local bottle store?

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Legalization typically means you buy it from a government agency or government regulated supplier.

Decriminalization usually means personal possession and use is not illegal but you still buy it through the black market.

I’m sure if you asked around you could buy meth most places now but I’m not sure about your local bottle store.

[–] Dave 3 points 5 months ago

Ah thanks for the clarification. Yes that does sound like a better option, possibly with a Portugal style policy of needing a waiver to allow you access to the government supply.