Hacker News Reader

Comment by arjie | Hacker News Reader

Right instinct for the criminal, wrong tool to search. You have to let some number of meth dealers kill people. It is the price of a free society. The ideal amount of meth in a society is not zero.

View on HN

I think the ideal amount of meth in a society is zero. Surely you wouldnt mind consenting to a daily cavity search to accomplish that, now would you? Your not some kind of meth dealer right?

> Right instinct for the criminal

Nothing to do with instinct, just low-hanging fruit from dragnet surveillance

Obviously the ideal amount of meth is zero but there's an equilibrium where getting rid of more meth requires increasingly authoritarian measures which is not acceptable. Of course the most effective ways would be longer societal improvements.

They are making a statement similar to "the ideal level of fraud is non-zero," making the point you yourself are making to justify it. In an ideal world we all get what we want, in the real world there are tradeoffs.

It is likely a reference to a similar argument about fraud from patio11, somewhat famous on HN: https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fra...

How many people has this cop pulled over under similar pretenses and it went nowhere?

If your solution to stopping meth is traffic stops you stumble upon, you are a failed police force and a non-functioning society.

We can stop meth fast by using the electric chair for meth dealers.

Or, legalize it, so there's no incentive for anyone to drive 90 kilos of meth across the country. People don't do meth because they want to, they do it because they feel like there's no other options. If we as a society spent half as much money helping people as we do punishing them, then everyone would be much better off.

Has legalizing hard drugs ever worked?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com