
Magic mushrooms should be decriminalised - JumpCrisscross
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/06/06/magic-mushrooms-should-be-decriminalised
======
oxide
I suffer from chronic migraines.

Psilocybin mushrooms, and other psychedelics are one of the few things that
truly alleviate the suffering, which for me is now over 25 days a month. With
my prescriptions covering half of that timeframe on a good month.

I might have shot myself if it wasn't for discovering this application for
psychedelics after developing the condition.

For my sake, and for the sake of others suffering migraines, please educate
yourself on this use case. Regardless of your opinion on psychedlic
decriminalization, I absolutely implore you.

~~~
djakjxnanjak
Out of curiosity, have you tried the triptan class of drugs? They are migraine
pills that have some similarities to the tryptamines but are not psychoactive.

~~~
oxide
Yes. I get about 9 tablets a month covered by insurance. 9 tablets willl last
me maybe 4 or 5 days. My doctor prescribes two different triptans as well as
fioricet to help bridge the gap.

Imitrex has largely the same effect on my migraines as psilocybin.

------
dmitryminkovsky
I wish people would stop calling them magic mushrooms. The forces against
legalization take every opportunity to refer to "magic mushrooms." There is
nothing magical about them. Hallucinogens are awesome chemicals and can affect
profound positive and negatives effects on us. They should be treated with
care and afforded serious dignity, especially in calls for legalization.

------
andrewstuart
So should LSD and ectasy/MDMA, cocaine and heroin.

I don't use these drugs but it's a good thing for our society if they are
available cheap and clean to people who want/need them.

They should be sold behind the counter from pharmacies and not allowed to be
advertised, same as cigarettes in Australia.

When drugs are illegal it results in crime and health issues.

~~~
IMTDb
The article talks about decriminalization, not legalization.

Decriminalization means that you are still not allowed to sell the product in
a legitimate business. If you get caught with it, instead of going in front of
a judge - possibly getting a criminal record and jail time - you will get a
fine and no record. This lowers the priority for the police and prosecutor to
track you down.

I think the US should really start thinking about decriminalizing the use of
_all_ drugs. It's crazy to destroy live for use of psychoactive substances.
But legalization is a whole other story, the opioid crisis would look pale in
comparison to the aftermath of selling high quality MDMA/Cocaine/Heroin with a
doctors note.

~~~
tathougies
> It's crazy to destroy live for use of psychoactive substances

No, it's not. Those who purchase drugs directly fund illegal gangs and
cartels, who kill, maim, and torture people. Over the course of years of drug
use, drug users have likely funded dozens of murders, mutilations, wars, etc,
for nothing other than personal pleasure.

It's fine to think drugs should be decriminalized, but to claim it's a
victimless crime or isn't destructive, is simply ignoring reality.

~~~
tempguy9999
>> It's crazy to destroy live for use of psychoactive substances

>No, it's not.

So it's acceptable to destroy lives for use of psychoactive substances?

I don't think you meant that exactly, I guess.

> Those who purchase drugs directly fund illegal gangs and cartels

If the problem is their illegality then _perhaps_ legalising drugs will ergo
stop funding them.

Just crying 'illegal' means nothing _if_ their very illegality is the problem,
that the laws are unjust, such as the all-too-legal apartheid in south africa.

If it is then legalise. If there's more that's causing the problem then we
need to pin that down, but 'illegal' alone is not - IMO - enough.

~~~
tathougies
If by 'destroy lives' you mean duly punish those who willingly and materially
support murder, torture, and lawlessness for the sake of their addiction, yes.

> If the problem is their illegality then perhaps legalising drugs will ergo
> stop funding them.

I used to believe this, but California's experience in Marijuana legalization
and the subsequent wave of terror in Humuboldt county indicate that gangs are
not interested in becoming legitimate businesses. Two things happen: real
businesses set up and are threatened by gang violence and gangs set up
seemingly legitimate fronts that continue to funnel money.

> Just crying 'illegal' means nothing if their very illegality is the problem,
> that the laws are unjust, such as the all-too-legal apartheid in south
> africa.

But the laws are not unjust, it is a well accepted legal reality that
governments the world over have a right to control substances, especially
drugs. There are many drugs you cannot receive without a prescription and most
people believe this is not only ethically sound but ethically necessary.

Regardless, buying drugs from people who you know will use the money for drug
wars (pretty much every illegal drug today) is still morally wrong,
independent of the state of the law. If you chose to buy your hamburgers from
drug lords, I'd think you guilty of the same thing.

~~~
tempguy9999
> If by 'destroy lives' you mean duly punish those who willingly and
> materially support murder, torture, and lawlessness for the sake of their
> addiction, yes.

To your eyes it's one thing. To mine it might be another. I have a strong
feeling the government is to blame for creating this.

> and the subsequent wave of terror in Humuboldt county

If you wish to say this at least post some links. The ones I've found do
support what you say up to a point eg
<[https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/califor...](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/california-
marijuana-crime/576391/>). But it is an unstable situation at the moment as
the story indicates, and it also says "found that after medical marijuana was
legalized in California, violent crime fell 15 percent." (but temporarily it
seems)

> But the laws are not unjust, it is a well accepted legal reality that
> governments the world over have a right to control substances

There we disagree utterly. Please see an earlier post of mine
<[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20165080>](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20165080>).

And 'well accepted' isn't justified here. And 'have a right' I don't
automatically accept.

> most people believe this is not only ethically sound but ethically necessary

Sigh. Justify 'most'

> Regardless, buying drugs from people who you know will use the money for
> drug wars (pretty much every illegal drug today) is still morally wrong

Yep. I would like to buy from a source that is well regulated and does not
feed crime. We agree.

> If you chose to buy your hamburgers from drug lords, I'd think you guilty of
> the same thing.

Yep. Difference is, I have a choice not to.

I think we're so far apart we can't possibly agree here.

~~~
tathougies
> To your eyes it's one thing. To mine it might be another. I have a strong
> feeling the government is to blame for creating this.

I actually agree the government is to blame for the ability of gangs to
control the drug market, by making them illegal. However, I choose to pursue
policy decisions based on the situation right now, not the situation that
could have been. Decriminalization will not magically make this issue go away,
anymore than withdrawing from the Middle East will mean America never has to
deal with that part of the world again.

> Yep. I would like to buy from a source that is well regulated and does not
> feed crime. We agree.

Certainly, and in the absence of a legal, moral way to acquire them, you
should probably abstain, independent of what you think the government ought to
do. Because the alternative is heinous.

~~~
ramblerman
> Decriminalization will not magically make this issue go away

Perhaps not. It’s complicated either way. But legalizing alcohol did remove
the bootlegging gangs

~~~
tathougies
Indeed, it's complicated. One thing that is interesting to note though is
that, while Prohibition is frequently cast historically as a failure, it did
lead to a significant reduction in alcohol consumption, as seen in the drop in
cirrhosis cases. Thus, legalization also needs to be ready to handle the
inevitably greater public health risks.

------
detritus
One of my greatest regrets from my days [legally] selling Magic Mushrooms here
in the UK many years ago was being on holiday when The Economist called to
interview us (we were essentially 'market leaders'). As an Economist
subscriber back then I would've leapt at the opportunity. As it was (if memory
serves) my partners were reticent to talk to them, presuming they'd take a
more moral stance than I would've expected, and that they took.

Oh well.

------
LocalH
DMT seems to have either cured or greatly minimized my ADHD. Psilocybin is
very close to dimethyltryptamine. I fully support the destigmatization of
psychedelics.

------
htmk
They're legal in Brazil, yet we don't have any treatment for depression based
on them.

------
gamblor956
People that believe psycotropic drugs should be legalized should spend a night
in LAs skid row.

By morning, they'll be very much in favor of keeping that shit as controlled
as possible.

~~~
rashkov
Arguably, a significant percentage of skid row’s residents wouldn’t be there
if they had the option of buying a clean, consistent dose from a pharmacy.
Instead, they have to buy dangerously tainted drugs from professional
criminals, and pay hugely inflated prices for it.

Highly recommend the book Chasing the Scream by Johann Hari if you’re
interested in reading a persuasive version of this viewpoint.

~~~
gamblor956
_Arguably, a significant percentage of skid row’s residents wouldn’t be there
if they had the option of buying a clean, consistent dose from a pharmacy.
Instead, they have to buy dangerously tainted drugs from professional
criminals, and pay hugely inflated prices for it._

This isn't even remotely true. There are plenty of homeless people in Skid Row
that are there even though their drug of choice is alcohol, available cheap
from the nearest liquor store, grocery, etc.

I've read Chasing the Scream and it's not a useful viewpoint on this subject.

