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

141–150 of 242 posts

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#141

Post by sandworm101 »

jaywalk wrote: post #135
giantg2 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious where the definition of a class E violation can be found. I didn't find anything through a search. It seems odd to me that the government can charge a fine without a crime being committed. In my mind, this would remove the rights and protections that someone would have under a criminal charge.

What are you talking about? It's a civil violation, like a speeding ticket or almost every other ticket that cops write that don't involve you being hauled off to jail.

Speeding is a crime. If a cop suspect you of speeding they can pull you over, search your car and basically ruin your entire day if they so choose. Proper decriminalization would mean that cops, even with strong suspicions that you are carrying drugs, would not be allowed to stop/search. That would be akin to a parking ticket.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#142

Post by tastyfreeze »

worik wrote: post #104
tastyfreeze wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would probably be helpful to define abuse of drugs as not being able to function in society as a result of use. The clinical definition of using more than the prescribed dose isn't very helpful. Depending on the drug a higher dose can be desirable for different reasons. If somebody wants to check out of society I don't want to stop them. That is their choice. But if they are trying to participate in society and st…

"If somebody wants to check out of society I don't want to stop them" In my world that is not what drug users are doing.

Some, not all. You can see escapist users with nearly all drugs that provide it. I have encountered users that are consuming because they dont want to feel anything at least for a little while, to "check out". But most users of a variety of drugs are doing it for entertainment or experience, to enjoy living.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#143

Post by throwaway2121bx »

rootusrootus wrote: post #110
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…

Sure, there will be some consequences. But think about all of the people who won't enter adulthood already excluded from the (good) job market because they have a criminal record? I feel pretty confident that this law is going to be a net positive.

Full agreement that it's a net positive. Nobody should ever get a criminal record for using. I just hope that the messaging is clear that because its legal/decriminalized doesn't mean its good for you.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#144

Post by giantg2 »

jaywalk wrote: post #135
giantg2 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious where the definition of a class E violation can be found. I didn't find anything through a search. It seems odd to me that the government can charge a fine without a crime being committed. In my mind, this would remove the rights and protections that someone would have under a criminal charge.

What are you talking about? It's a civil violation, like a speeding ticket or almost every other ticket that cops write that don't involve you being hauled off to jail.

An offense doesn't need to result in imprisonment or custody to be criminal. A citation is an arrest without custody - you are promising to appear at court. This is generally how summary offenses are handled in many states. This includes summary traffic citations. If you look at the rules for judicial proceedings they will fall under the criminal proceedings. They will also show up on your record. That's how my state and neighboring states work.

I guess maybe your state is very different. Which is part of what I was asking about. Any offense, civil or criminal, must be defined in statute or code. So can you point me to that?

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#145

Post by LinuxBender »

ogre_codes wrote: post #69
frongpik wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What counts as drug trafficking? Carrying weed across county lines?

It's mostly quantity limits. https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2020/11/here-are-the-dru... The measure makes it a noncriminal violation similar to a traffic ticket to possess the following: Less than 1 gram of heroin Less than 1 gram, or less than 5 pills, of MDMA Less than 2 grams of methamphetamine Less than 40 units of LSD Less than 12 grams of psilocybin Less than 40 units of methadone Less than 40 pills of oxy…

What is a "unit" of LSD? Is that like International Units?

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#146

Post by briffle »

ogre_codes wrote: post #136
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…

I'm not going to argue this because I agree in many (most?) cases. But I do think there is value in taking a measured approach to the problem as opposed to opening the flood gates.

I agree, I see this in many forms: (From IT projects, to dealing with huge homeless problems, to drug crime)

We shouldn't do this, because this doesn't 'solve' the problem in 100% of cases.

That is how nothing ever gets done. I think we should absolutely hit the low hanging fruit.

I mean, a few years ago, Oregon legalized Weed. This last election, they legalized shrooms (in certain clinical settings). Once people see progress being made, they are much more likely to go with the next step.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#147

Post by throwawayboise »

sandworm101 wrote: post #141
jaywalk wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? It's a civil violation, like a speeding ticket or almost every other ticket that cops write that don't involve you being hauled off to jail.

Speeding is a crime. If a cop suspect you of speeding they can pull you over, search your car and basically ruin your entire day if they so choose. Proper decriminalization would mean that cops, even with strong suspicions that you are carrying drugs, would not be allowed to stop/search. That would be akin to a parking ticket.

THey still need cause to search your car. Not that they won't manufacture it if they want to. But I've been pulled over for speeding, expired tags, and other minor traffic issues a few times and have never had my car searched.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#148

Post by ttul »

leakybit wrote: post #139
ttul wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Bath salts" are popular because far better alternatives are illegal... If pure meth, cocaine, heroin, MDMA, and other "hard" drugs were made available in a regulated format, many destructive and dangerous alternatives would no longer have a market.

is meth, heroin, and cocaine supposed to be safe for you?

Absolutely not. Those are very dangerous substances to take. Now add in the additional dangers posed by criminal production. How does a drug user know whether it's really cocaine? Of course, they don't. It's completely unregulated the most extreme manner possible.

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#149

Post by NeutronStar »

leakybit wrote: post #139
ttul wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Bath salts" are popular because far better alternatives are illegal... If pure meth, cocaine, heroin, MDMA, and other "hard" drugs were made available in a regulated format, many destructive and dangerous alternatives would no longer have a market.

is meth, heroin, and cocaine supposed to be safe for you?

Is alcohol and smokes supposed to be safe for you?

Re: Drug decriminalization in Oregon begins today

#150

Post by netizen-9748 »

sandworm101 wrote: post #113
ttul wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly disagree with you. Criminalization of drug production and distribution has been an abject policy failure from the start. Ending the criminalization of drugs and bringing all drugs into a regulatory framework that is guided by health outcomes rather than the one-size-fits-all goal of eradication is the only path that has a hope of reducing the harms associated with the hardest of drugs. You can't stop…

>> bringing all drugs into a regulatory framework that is guided by health outcomes Outcomes for who? The individual or the population? Seriously. Ask a doctor and they would probably agree that, for a particular patient, having access to legal safe alternatives is a good thing. But ask them about drugs as a whole, for the entire population, and the answer will always be "less is better but zero is best." Stemming th…

Why would you ask a doctor? Ask a pharmacologist, the person who researches it.
Post reply on HN