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

To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 1001 posts

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#231

Post by margalabargala »

legitster wrote: post #78
jdminhbg wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Portland did everything! They invested huge sums in shelters, treatment programs, counsellors, etc. Huge sums were collected, but they haven't really been spent. As noted elsewhere in this thread, the first detox center built with M110 money only opened two months ago, and only has 16 beds: https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/homeless/new-se-portl...

While this is true, there were a lot of programs that existed before M110, and part of the bill of goods that was sold with M110 was that it was going to make it easier for people to access existing resources without fear of law enforcement. And again, literally written into M110 is the idea that treatment is supposed to be cheaper than incarceration. Perhaps it's due to really bad red tape, but the treatment program…

> Perhaps it's due to really bad red tape, but the treatment programs are not looking terribly cheap or effective.

The treatment programs implemented so far have been incredibly cheap, in the sense that we simply haven't spent any money on them.

M110 has been more expensive than expected, because by not spending money on treatment programs, we caused an assortment of other issues.

M110's effect on society is confounded by its coexistence with a statewide housing crisis that is pushing people into homelessness, and from there it's easy to fall into drug use.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#232

Post by tiahura »

vore wrote: post #75
kepler1 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what about the value of making clear to people that in case they fall over that edge and start using drugs, they will be punished? Police being able to arrest people and caution them, rather than being told to actively ignore it? In order to stop them from tempted to try it or go further, and prevent more people from joining that group? Or the people who deal drugs? Which decriminalization basically removed any…

The material problem is that their lives are often so miserable that feeling good from doing drugs even under threat of incarceration overrides most punishments you could dish out.

Rubber hoses used to be a pretty good deterrent.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#233

Post by skyyler »

gretch wrote: post #220
skyyler wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're not even interested in hearing people that actually have done research, you're just going to run with your assumptions? That's a rather emotional place to make an argument, in my opinion.

>you're just going to run with your assumptions? They're not assumptions if they are his/her lived experiences.

They're assumptions based on anecdotes.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#234

Post by nine_k »

davesque wrote: post #189
drewg123 wrote: post #110

Nowhere in these comments have I see anybody take the position that decriminalization is not enough; drugs need to be legalized and regulated. I have a close friend whose relative is a heroin addict. According to her, a lot of overdoses are due to almost no "heroin" actually being heroin, rather its fentanyl cut to varying degrees of strength. Not knowing what you're taking, and not knowing how strong it is, can lead…

I mean, I remember how things were before fentanyl came around (as an outside observer, not as a user) and heroin was a horrible, life-destroying drug addiction back then as well. And I think it was and is convincingly argued that it is much more addictive than alcohol.

Opioids keep the top spot of addictiveness. The second place firmly belongs to nicotine. It's way more addictive than. say, cocaine.

Why not ban nicotine, by the same logic as heroin?

The key difference is that nicotine is a mere stimulant, while heroin alters your perception, it literally changes the way you see good and bad, because it's the ultimate feel-good substance. I have zero qualms about legalizing LSD, psilocybin, ketamine, etc. Likely even cocaine. But legalization of opioids would require a lot of preliminary work, to somehow allow the addicts function in a socially compatible way when badly wanting a dose.

It must be noted that a physiological addiction to opiates does not form from a first dose, and not even from the first ten doses, so infrequent recreational use is possible, given a right psychological preparation. This is similar to alcohol.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#235

Post by coffeecloud »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #209
coffeecloud wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get all high and mighty about who deserves what, or you can actually solve the problem and give people housing for free (or throw them in jail.) Would you rather be right, or live in a city without homelessness?

> give people housing for free (or throw them in jail.) This is a false choice. >Would you rather be right, or live in a city without homelessness? I can be right and also live in a city without homelessness. I'll just ship them to wherever you live, because you're so nice that you are volunteering to take care of the problem.

What option is there besides give people housing, let them lived unhoused, or jail them for not acquiring housing?

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#236

Post by anon291 »

legitster wrote: post #57

Drug legalization is something I have come 180 on (or at least, 90 degrees). Portland did everything! They invested huge sums in shelters, treatment programs, counsellors, etc. ODs have more than doubled, and the shelters are half empty! They are not one more social program away from cleaning out the streets. I think the experiment has radically failed and I'm ready to say I was wrong. While I don't want to go back t…

[flagged]

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#237

Post by 23B1 »

drewg123 wrote: post #110

Nowhere in these comments have I see anybody take the position that decriminalization is not enough; drugs need to be legalized and regulated. I have a close friend whose relative is a heroin addict. According to her, a lot of overdoses are due to almost no "heroin" actually being heroin, rather its fentanyl cut to varying degrees of strength. Not knowing what you're taking, and not knowing how strong it is, can lead…

Feel free to experiment with this in your own city, ideally in your own neighborhood.

Sincerely, Portland Native

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#238

Post by anon291 »

ratg13 wrote: post #164
jmcphers wrote: post #82

I live in the Seattle area, which is struggling with public drug use just like Portland. Like Portland, we've lived for decades with very progressive politicians who have lead successful decriminalization efforts and spent huge sums of public funds on treatment and harm reduction programs. After several decades and many, many millions of dollars spent, the problem is, by every measure, absolutely the worst it's ever…

I think other cities bussing and flying homeless people out west outweighs every possible policy change. We’ll never know if any of these policies stood a chance due to the USA viewing the west coast as a dumping ground for homeless people. Next time you’re passing by these people, ask them where they are from originally. Locals are like 20% of the problem.

West coast should bus them back then.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#239

Post by acchow »

xkjyeah wrote: post #185
drewg123 wrote: post #110

Nowhere in these comments have I see anybody take the position that decriminalization is not enough; drugs need to be legalized and regulated. I have a close friend whose relative is a heroin addict. According to her, a lot of overdoses are due to almost no "heroin" actually being heroin, rather its fentanyl cut to varying degrees of strength. Not knowing what you're taking, and not knowing how strong it is, can lead…

Literally, fentanyl is legal and regulated. It's used as an anaesthetic.

But heroin is not. In gp comment, they are trying to get heroin and getting fentanyl instead.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#240

Post by anon291 »

hifreq wrote: post #126
afarrell wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have come to the conclusion that lots of humans have a religion-shaped hole in their psyche. It is far better to fill it with a stable, local, hope-giving religion. Hymns are a better opiate of the masses than fentanyl.

While I agree that the reduction in the role of religion in the US is partially to blame for the increase in severe cases of drug addition, the idea that we need to bring religion back essentially to control people is extremely patronizing. Basically, we are saying that some people are too stupid to live productively if they are not controlled by fairy tales. This is the same approach as we are seeing in the "far lef…

It's not fairy tales. Its human need for attachment to something greater. America has not filled that with anything else. The previous flag waving civic nationalism has become demonized so now there's nothing.
Post reply on HN