111–120 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Just curious if you'd include alcohol in that list? What about prescription pain-killers? Just curious where you draw the line on what's criminal, and what's not. Personally, I'd rather criminalize the negative behavior, rather than the drugs themselves. Like DUI laws, for example.
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…
This is such a hard problem to solve. I work with drug and alcohol addicts regularly and addiction is such a damned nightmare. And every homeless person hates shelters. They have way more rules than prisons and all of the drama. I don't know what the solutions are :(
Is this really a hard problem to solve? I can certainly buy the argument that criminalizing homelessness doesn't make sense when the "criminal" has no other options. But if someone has a viable option for not living on the street, I'm considerably less sympathetic given the downsides to everyone else involved.
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…
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…
Edit: to clarify, not trying to be an asshole, I have no idea what the answer is here, would be very interested to find out
The root cause in both instances isn't drugs and so infinite spending or (de)criminalization won't matter. The core issue is hope. In the absence of work for the abled and care for the disabled and housing, there isn't much hope and so crimes, habits, and deaths of despair take hold. Without holistic and comprehensive betterment of people who feel ignored and cheated, there isn't much for this growing sector of socie…
This assessment contradicts all evidence we have on the homelessness in the US. Unemployment rate is very low in the US, shelters are very often half-empty. Drug-addicts and homeless people refuse help (unless it's cash or free drugs). The idea that we just need to invest more and more into this extremely corrupt industry has no merit.
Caveat: unemployment statistics don't count people who aren't seeking work. Which chronically homeless and/or drug addicted people usually do not.
> The unemployment rate measures the share of workers in the labor force who do not currently have a job but are actively looking for work. People who have not looked for work in the past four weeks are not included in this measure.
https://www.epi.org/newsroom/useful_definitions/
Basically what unemployment rate tells us is that USA has enough jobs for people who want to work. It says nothing about people who have given up looking.
Criminalization works, even without sniffing dogs and modern surveillance, when the crime is also a sin . See Islam. To this day I know no relative or close friend of mine who ever drank any alcohol, nor one which used any drugs. But ofc this is the unthinkable for West. Downvote, pass.
It's really frustrating to see this headline. The officials decriminalized drugs, wiped their hands and backed off from any follow-up legislation to keep it working correctly. It reminds me a lot of the ACA. Officials got the bill passed and have collectively stopped making updates to the program to keep it healthy, but then constantly criticize its faults. American politics are sad in that it's hard to celebrate any…
I still don't see how "Drugs should be decriminalized because taking drugs is a victimless crime" and "Society needs to sync a lot of resources in tackling drug abuse" are compatible positions to hold at the same time. Either let people do drugs and let them worry about the consequences, or, if society is going to be on the hook for the consequences, don't. There is no feasible way to hold both positions at the same…
If I may try to thread this needle:
- drug use has serious consequences for users directly and for society
- imprisonment is not effective at curbing drug use in individuals or systemically, because illicit drugs will always be available, see prohibition for the strongest case here
- illicit drug trafficking increases other criminal elements like gang violence, petty theft, etc, incurring high costs on society
- it is believed that addressing the causes for hardcore drug use as a mental and physical health issue may actually reduce drug use
- that work may be expensive today, but is expected to become a net positive over time as drug use declines
The idea is literally investing to fix a problem properly, rather than slapping on ever more expensive band-aid solutions as the problem gets worse.
If you don't believe health care can reduce drug use, that may be a sound position to hold, but if you believe it is effective it is absolutely not at odds to both desire investment in it and to seek decriminalization.