Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 501 posts

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#341

Post by leftyted »

I think the ultimate source of Seattle's wishy-washy attitude toward serious crime is summed up nicely by an excerpt from something written by Ilhan Omar:

> The desire to commit violence is not inherent to people — it is the consequence of systematic alienation; people seek violent solutions when the process established for enacting change is inaccessible to them. Fueled by disaffection turned to malice, if the guilty were willing to kill and be killed fighting perceived injustice, imagine the consequence of them hearing, “I believe you can be rehabilitated. I want you to become part of my community, and together we will thrive.” We use this form of distributive justice for patients with chemical dependencies; treatment and societal reintegration. The most effective penance is making these men ambassadors of reform.

Basically, criminals are protestors against the inequity of society. This is a very old idea. Dostoevsky talks about it in Crime and Punishment.

My sense is that, no, people committing crimes are not "protestors" and treating them as such simply doesn't work. Tough love works. Punishment works.

I just hope that, when the pendulum swings back on this nonsense, it doesn't swing back too far the other way. I think it probably will, though.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#342

Post by proverbialbunny »

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #256
just_lurkin wrote: post #17

The reporters designation of "figured out" seems to stem more from the fact that the solution fits his own view than any actual real evidence. There is mention of the difficulties such lax policies has brought to the city, but they are waved away as being "growing pains" toward a new utopia. I can't say, living here, that I feel that the problem is solved. I view the needles outside my apartment as evidence to the co…

I've heard that it's not legal to force people into rehab. But I can't see why this can't be done under something like the Baker Act. If you're physically addicted to drugs, you are to some extent not capable of making rational choices, and this means you are a threat to yourself and to those around you. Could this not be a legal pretext to detain someone (humanely) and bring them to rehab treatment? Seems like a bet…

Usually how it works is if you break the law (eg, steal something) and get caught, you are arrested, then you get to see a judge. At that point it is up to the judge to push rehab as a punishment or prison. This depends on the laws of the area, the offense, and if this is a repeat offense.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#343

Post by shados »

chrisrogers wrote: post #153
CPLX wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people write responses like this I wonder if they’ve ever been to New York City. We don’t really have comparable problems. For me visiting LA, SF or Seattle is jaw dropping. I totally reject this idea that these situations are just inevitable.

Or Tokyo, for that matter. That's about as urban as you can get on Earth, with none of the 'grittiness' that so many West coast city-dwellers seem to think is inherent to cities. And in a comparable democracy, no less.

This is a pretty important point. Everything wrong with big American cities is normalized. If you don't like it, you're told to just go to the suburb. But it's all solvable and are usually consequences of policies as well as cultural problems. Many cities in the world just don't have these problems.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#344

Post by shados »

nikanj wrote: post #49
empath75 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people say things like this, I do have to wonder if they've ever lived in a city before. Seattle's crime rate, like most American cities, has been steadily declining since the 1980s. There is just a certain amount of crime and drug use that will always exist in the big city. No amount of 'tough on crime' policing will make it go away.

In the 80s people actually reported petty crime, and expected something to come out of it.

Don't only do they no longer do, you're considered crazy, awful or entitled for even considering it.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#345

Post by malandrew »

ndarwincorn wrote: post #162
coryrc wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a big problem for those of us still here that would prefer enforcement; our fellow-minded voters have (probably rightly) chosen defect and left the city, rather than stay to vote for change. Suburb living also has twice the greenhouse gas impact as well.

Those of us still here that prefer empathy would rather you follow your 'fellow-minded' folks and just leave. Seattle's had this tension between the left and the liberals for a century. Traditionally you lived on the outskirts. You're welcome to go back if the city offends your sensibilities.

Time and time again, empathy leads to bad counterproductive policies with good intentions.

Compassion is a much better path.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#346

Post by vehementi »

jyrkesh wrote: post #292
tehjoker wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like the framing of this premise that you need to "contribute to society" in order to not be exposed to the elements and have a safe place to retreat. Do people working on ads contribute to society? What about middle managers of middle managers? What about the people on golf courses that basically spend money to make other people do shit for them? Furthermore, we cannot dehumanize our fellow humans even if th…

You know, I actually paused after those words because I was afraid of a response like this, but I didn't rephrase because I just figured "they'll get what I mean". In the context of my response, I really just meant it as shorthand for "not doing any of the negative stuff that Seattleites deal with on an everyday basis". Lots of homeless people are already doing that--namely, not putting the general public at risk wit…

Yes, nobody says that just putting people into housing will magically fix them. That's why there's 30 other things on the list. Someone in housing is more likely to begin on their road to recovery than someone who has to live on the streets and have their stuff stolen all the time.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#347

Post by anaisbetts »

lacker wrote: post #282
rayiner wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm anti-incarceration for moral reasons, but it's not clear to me that there is a definitive consensus that incarceration does not work. See: https://www.nber.org/digest/jan02/w8489.html > "Annual expenditures of approximately $10 billion on drug incarceration almost pay for themselves through reductions in health care costs and lost productivity attributable to illegal drug use, even ignoring any crime reductions a…

I'm anti-incarceration for moral reasons There is also a middle ground, where you can think that drugs should generally be legalized, but incarcerating people for non-drug crimes is a good idea. The problem isn't really people doing drugs. It's people breaking into cars, damaging property left in public, trespassing, assaulting other people, leaving big public piles of trash, things that fall into the "harming other…

At the end of the day though, the people breaking into cars are usually doing so because they have no other reasonable means to sustain themselves, or they are compelled to do so because of drug addiction. The long-term _solution_, is to remove these obstacles.

In other words, middle-class employed people who are safe in their environment don't really commit crimes - why would they? The best way to solve crime In General is to make more people like that.

Now granted, there are some people that would _still_ commit crimes even though they don't need to - this is the place where punitive solutions are appropriate, to make it not worth their while.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#348

Post by IronWolve »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #331
rdtwo wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If my neighbor beat his wife, damaged my car and pissed on my house I would do exactly what ever good neighbor should- call the cops and make sure they have enough evidence to send his ass to jail. The problem is when the cops don’t come then what do you do?

If the police don't come, it's a breakdown of civilization. Buy a gun.

Seattle has no gun stores anymore, they ran them off with continuous passed anti-gun laws.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#349

Post by frankus »

sempron64 wrote: post #321
leetcrew wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are you sure you aren't letting your kids near "active drug users" when you take them to family gatherings?

Active as in currently shooting up.

I think he was alluding to non-injected drug use, like drinking beer or smoking weed.

Of course by the time injecting street drugs into your veins seems like your least-bad option, you're in a pretty desperate place and maybe not someone that kids should be around while you're using.

Re: In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs

#350

Post by ndarwincorn »

malandrew wrote: post #345
ndarwincorn wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those of us still here that prefer empathy would rather you follow your 'fellow-minded' folks and just leave. Seattle's had this tension between the left and the liberals for a century. Traditionally you lived on the outskirts. You're welcome to go back if the city offends your sensibilities.

Time and time again, empathy leads to bad counterproductive policies with good intentions. Compassion is a much better path.

I didn't think empathy had much to do with the tough on crime policies that are bearing this fruit today, or the dehumanizing rhetoric rampant in this thread that justifies doubling down on those failed policies.

Time and time again, fear leads to bad counterproductive policies with debateably good intentions.

I'm ignoring the meaningless/unspoken distinction between compassion and empathy in your comment.

Post reply on HN