This is the fallacy that the majority of people suffer from: if I don't see it, it doesn't happen.
There are tons of functional, contributing people using drugs, but you don't know about it. All you saw are the people who have hit rock bottom and developed serious issues with them, and you've assumed they must be the only ones using dreugs and that drugs inevitably lead to that. It's a common error, but a big one nonetheless that leads to wildly unscientific conclusions. To then make or support policy based on those conclusions is extremely irresponsible.
>This is the fallacy that the majority of people suffer from: if I don't see it, it doesn't happen.
My reply will be brutish. I know it happens. I just don't want to see it. I don't want to watch mothers with toddlers be solicited for change in the checkout line at drug stores, or young couples be harassed outside a coffee shop. I hate that I can't eat a meal a terrace without some drugged out beggar trying to hustle me for change.
I don't care who or what does drugs. I don't care about the functional or dysfunctional drug users. It's mental gymnastics at this point. I just don't want to see them.
Whatever you do in the privacy of your own home that's fine. But that's not happening. We just can't have nice things.
What you are essentially saying is that the right of certain people to access public spaces should be curtailed because they annoy you. Begging is a right und German law and does not have to happen silently. If that annoys you, how about you contribute to a solution that leads to less people having to beg, instead of advocating for the (clearly illegal and amoral) "solution" of confining people "out of sight"?
So you’re saying it’s a fallacy because Singapore and Taiwan are filled with high functioning heroin users?
Draw a line on a bellcurve, the people on the right can use drugs safely without destroying their lives the people on the left cannot. GP is saying that for hard drugs, that line is a little to far to the right to sustain a clean and safe society so we should ban them all together. That might not be a reasonable option for western countries but lets not act like acknowledging that is a fallacy.
> So you’re saying it’s a fallacy because Singapore and Taiwan are filled with high functioning heroin users?
No, I'm not saying that at all. I have no idea the makeup of Singapore and Taiwan.
I am saying that you can't take a heavily biased sample and make conclusions about the entire population. This is a well accepted reality in statistics. It's deeply unscientific and can lead to horrendously incorrect conclusions. Then making policies on those conclusions that can lead to death and/or imprisonment of people is at best grossly irresponsible.
There are tons of functional, contributing people using drugs, but you don't know about it. All you saw are the people who have hit rock bottom and developed serious issues with them, and you've assumed they must be the only ones using dreugs and that drugs inevitably lead to that. It's a common error, but a big one nonetheless that leads to wildly unscientific conclusions. To then make or support policy based on those conclusions is extremely irresponsible.