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

Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

drugpolicy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 242 posts

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#171

Post by 0xffff2 »

pacifist wrote: post #167
0xffff2 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Police officers always have discretion. It would be impossible to legislate that away. It's been a while since I read the law (I'm an Oregon resident, so I read it before I voted for it), but I'd imagine that the law doesn't give any particular discretion in enforcement, but in the real world an officer can always choose not to issue a ticket/make an arrest.

Really? How about in the case of armed robbery? Or murder? Can they choose not to arrest? Yes, but there will be serious consequences. BTW I voted for it too.

If a single officer is the only witness to a murder, what consequences will there be if the officer chooses not to make an arrest? Yes, there's nuance and as soon as multiple people are involved there's the risk of public outcry, but as far as I know, there's not a legal obligation for a peace officer to make an arrest just because they have witnessed a crime. Whether there is a social obligation to make an arrest is highly situational and depends on not only the crime but the surrounding circumstances.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#172

Post by gedy »

cjaybo wrote: post #132
Noos wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, can you blame them? The petty crimes fueled by drug use don't go away if you decriminalize it. We keep throwing money at homelessness but it doesn't seem to work at all because a lot of the problem homeless really need to be involuntarily committed for long term treatment of mental illness or addiction. Not many people want to go down that route, because we still don't really trust or are comfortable wi…

> when policies make it easier for people to rob others. Which policies are those?

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_47,_Reduced_P...

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#173

Post by triceratops »

umvi wrote: post #153
valuearb wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drug “trafficking” should absolutely be legal. While Decriminalization is laudatory and beneficial, it solves far fewer problems than outright legalization. With decriminalization: 1) drug users will still not know what they are actually consuming. They can very easily invest drugs heavily mixed with other drugs, or dangerous chemicals. This will lead to far higher levels of accidental overdoses and is a path to more…

Whenever I see these discussions I only ever see the drawbacks of restricting drug manufacturing and distribution and never the drawbacks of legalization. An honest analysis would acknowledge the drawbacks of legalization too. It's difficult to tell exactly what the long term consequences of complete drug legalization are, and I guarantee there are some negative consequences. For example, legalization might reduce th…

> If heroin were instead legal...

It would be so cheap your friend from high school could afford it with a standard burger flipping job. He'd have no need to resort to violent crimes to afford heroin.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#174

Post by klyrs »

netizen-9748 wrote: post #152
ogre_codes wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly agree. I think a lot of drugs should be legalized. Some which I think are addictive/ destructive enough where they should be kept illegal. Bath salts, crack cocaine, are good examples of the latter. I also think we should be deliberate in how we tread this path.

What compound is 'bath salts'? Is there more than one? Do they do different things?

Apparently, synthetic compounds analogous to those found in Khat. From what I gather, there are several compounds that qualify as "cathinones" and I expect they have varied effects. Drugs often have different effects on different people, too (see alcohol intolerance). Also, with any home-cooked organic chemistry, there will be a lot of variance in the product. Also, with any street supply, you never know what it's cut with (even if it appears to be beautiful dank nugs).

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/synthetic-c...

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#175

Post by umvi »

triceratops wrote: post #173
umvi wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever I see these discussions I only ever see the drawbacks of restricting drug manufacturing and distribution and never the drawbacks of legalization. An honest analysis would acknowledge the drawbacks of legalization too. It's difficult to tell exactly what the long term consequences of complete drug legalization are, and I guarantee there are some negative consequences. For example, legalization might reduce th…

> If heroin were instead legal... It would be so cheap your friend from high school could afford it with a standard burger flipping job. He'd have no need to resort to violent crimes to afford heroin.

How much are we talking? Is this pre or post taxes? Cigarettes are super cheap pre-taxes, but post-taxes they can be extremely expensive, especially in places like NYC.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#176

Post by TylerE »

umvi wrote: post #153
valuearb wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drug “trafficking” should absolutely be legal. While Decriminalization is laudatory and beneficial, it solves far fewer problems than outright legalization. With decriminalization: 1) drug users will still not know what they are actually consuming. They can very easily invest drugs heavily mixed with other drugs, or dangerous chemicals. This will lead to far higher levels of accidental overdoses and is a path to more…

Whenever I see these discussions I only ever see the drawbacks of restricting drug manufacturing and distribution and never the drawbacks of legalization. An honest analysis would acknowledge the drawbacks of legalization too. It's difficult to tell exactly what the long term consequences of complete drug legalization are, and I guarantee there are some negative consequences. For example, legalization might reduce th…

> highly taxed drugs will likely result in an increase in related crimes like theft.

Even if taxed at 100%, I have a really hard time believing that will result in most in drugs being more expensive.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#177

Post by encoderer »

ogre_codes wrote: post #66
GuB-42 wrote: post #46

Just to make things clear, decriminalization is not legalization. Drugs are still illegal, and users risk a $100 fine, especially if they are uncooperative. The difference is that it is now a civil violation instead of a crime, so no record, no jail time, kind of like a parking ticket. Drug trafficking is still a crime.

> Drug trafficking is still a crime. Which is how this should be for many drugs. Though I would like a clean source for the occasional dose of LSD. Just... you know once a month or so.

A few doses of LSD likely saved my marriage. Things were very frozen and the drug let us really talk for the first time in a year+ (having kids is hard lol)

It’s insane to me that doctors can’t prescribe this stuff. If there was any justice in the world you could go to your doctor for a safe dose of anything on your birthday.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#178

Post by umvi »

TylerE wrote: post #176
umvi wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever I see these discussions I only ever see the drawbacks of restricting drug manufacturing and distribution and never the drawbacks of legalization. An honest analysis would acknowledge the drawbacks of legalization too. It's difficult to tell exactly what the long term consequences of complete drug legalization are, and I guarantee there are some negative consequences. For example, legalization might reduce th…

> highly taxed drugs will likely result in an increase in related crimes like theft. Even if taxed at 100%, I have a really hard time believing that will result in most in drugs being more expensive .

Depends on the location. Using cigarettes as an analogue... they are really cheap to manufacture, but some places like NYC tax at a rate even greater than 100% (nearly $6/pack flat tax last I checked, which means once you add in margin and vendor costs you are looking at $10+/pack which is brutal for an impoverished pack-a-day addict). So as a result there is a massive bootleg market where cigarettes are smuggled in from low or no-tax areas and sold illicitly.

I'm not super familiar with street prices of drugs, but if politicians tax drugs the way they tax cigarettes and alcohol, it will be burdensome for drug addicts and cause increased theft and bootleg operations that have some (but not all) of the same problems as drug trafficking.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#179

Post by S_A_P »

ben_w wrote: post #128
ogre_codes wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends if it's piss-water or a quality stout or IPA.

Despite not being a beer drinker, this feels like the right time to mention BrewDog and their ongoing battle to sell the strongest beer in the world. I first heard of this with Tactical Nuclear Penguin (32%); their latest HD Strength In Numbers, which is 57.8% . https://www.brewdog.com/eu_en/brewdog-vs-schorschbrau-streng...

I feel like they "cold brewing" process they use(at least that was what they were doing a few years ago when I read up on it) has more in common to distillation than finding high ABV tolerant yeast strains and actually brewing high gravity beer. I have taken apple cider and done a similar process to make Applejack. Its just a matter of freezing out the water/other non alcohol components. I mean, its interesting and all, but I dont really feel like its beer at that point.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#180

Post by travbrack »

notJim wrote: post #127
throwaway2121bx wrote: post #68

I'm a proponent for legalizing drugs. But I believe there will be negative long-term consequences from drug use becoming normalized and so easy to obtain. People who wouldn't otherwise use drugs could be forgiven (after reading about legalization in the binary and positive way it is often reported, or from walking around a city with an upmarket weed shop every few blocks) for believing it can't be that bad for you an…

I used to favor full legalization, but now I think it's a bad idea. If you can simply go to a store to buy heroin (like you can with weed in many places now), I think we will inevitably have more heroin addicts. People will get addicting just trying it out, and get addicted because they are self-medicating. There are middle-grounds between full legalization and full prohibition. It seems obvious that prohibition has…

Don't you think most people who would be interested in buying heroin in the store can already get it?
Post reply on HN