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

191–200 of 501 posts

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

#191

Post by autokad »

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 see people shooting up in public places, people walking around naked, doing wheelies on a wheelchair on high traffic roads, drug needles laying on the side walk, etc.

I think enforcing these laws would make Seattle safer and an overall better place to live.

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

#192

Post by xenocyon »

refurb wrote: post #178
xenocyon wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least part of the cause of the visible squalor we see in Seattle is that the tough-on-crime crowd has consistently opposed safe injection, harm reduction, trash pickup, housing-first, and other evidence-based policies in favor of expensive, inhumane, and pointless measures like sweeps and incarceration. Any measure the city government takes that is not overtly cruel gets slammed as coddling the homeless or "attrac…

Tough on crimes folks oppose trash pick-up? Really?

Yep, the argument I've heard is that it legitimizes encampments. Additionally I suspect people are outraged by the notion that homeless people could get trash pickup for free from the city when housed people have to pay for theirs - even though it would be a lot cheaper than sweeps.

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

#193

Post by [deleted] »

dcolkitt wrote: post #75

I fully support legalizing all drugs, but don't understand why the latest wave of criminal justice reform tolerates property crimes. Crimes like smash and grabs, purse snatching, bike thefts, vandalism, littering, and shoplifting clearly have defined victims and lower the quality of life for everyone. It's perfectly possible to be a heroin addict and an upstanding citizen at the same time. The same cannot be said of…

[deleted]

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

#194

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

sprafa wrote: post #2

So same as Portugal has been doing for decades - decriminalise small use and treat it as a public health problem instead of making average citizens into criminals. Portugal has a lot of bad things to it, but having no war on drugs has made it into one of the most peaceful countries on earth. And marijuana usage is pretty low, Last I checked. Why? Probably because it’s not a special thing. I’ve always pondered why the…

Is it the same thing?

The article is about just not enforcing the law. Portugal changed their laws.

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

#195

Post by pnw_hazor »

downandout wrote: post #146
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…

Eventually a junkie will commit a serious crime against one of the tech luminaries that live in and around Seattle. I’m guessing that the lax enforcement environment will be gone within about a day of that incident. Seattle is playing with fire here. I wouldn’t set foot in a city where hard drug use is tolerated, and seemingly celebrated, by many of the people that live there. Junkies will do whatever is necessary to…

I dunno, may be you are right -- that the "right" person hasn't been assaulted, raped or killed yet.

Certainly, the high profile stabbing in front of Nordstroms didn't do much. Nor, did much change when the homeless guy was stopped from throwing a women on her way to work off an I-5 overpass. Or the lady who was raped by the homeless guy at the U-district car dealership after dropping her car off for an oil change on her way to work in the morning.

I assume it would have to be someone connected to the local government. It took about five seconds to change the 2nd Ave bike lanes when a city employee was killed riding her bike down there.

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

#196

Post by rayiner »

xenocyon wrote: post #173
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…

At least part of the cause of the visible squalor we see in Seattle is that the tough-on-crime crowd has consistently opposed safe injection, harm reduction, trash pickup, housing-first, and other evidence-based policies in favor of expensive, inhumane, and pointless measures like sweeps and incarceration. Any measure the city government takes that is not overtly cruel gets slammed as coddling the homeless or "attrac…

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 associated with such incarceration."

(The above is from a study conducted by a prominent U Chicago economist and another economist who is now at Princeton.)

It’s really very complicated. One of the macro trends over the last few decades is a massive increase in crime from the late 1960s to the mid 1990s, then a decrease since then. Incarceration started increasing in the 1970s and 1980s as a response to that increase in crime. When crime started coming down in the 1990s, incarceration started coming down about ten years behind that in the 2000s.

Nobody really knows why crime started dropping in the 1990s. Some people think that the reduction is attributable to the banning of leaded gasoline. Maybe. But I don’t think studied have ruled out the notion that the reduction is attributable to putting a large number of people in prison. See: https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdf/10.1257/089533004773563485

> Crime fell sharply and unexpectedly in the 1990s. Four factors appear to explain the drop in crime: increased incarceration, more police, the decline of crack and legalized abortion.

It’s not an area where you can point to a definitive consensus, and everyone interprets the data to fit their own political views.

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

#197

Post by sukilot »

thomascgalvin wrote: post #8

> In effect, Seattle is decriminalizing the use of hard drugs. It is relying less on the criminal justice toolbox to deal with hard drugs and more on the public health toolbox. America's puritanical urges result in more self-harm than anything else. So much of the way our nation is structured is based on some ancient idea that you have to live clean and work hard in order to get to heaven. That is combined with a sen…

The War of Drugs, like most things, is abused by the rich and powerful.

But would you seriously look a Black mother or father in their face and tell her that her child is dead (and they are broke) because he freed himself from the oppressive Puritanical culture and enjoyed drugging himself to death and stealing their resources to feed his addiction?

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

#198

Post by taurath »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #147
tjr225 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I mean, without statistics his anecdotes are meaningless. It's a common thing to complain here in Seattle, but having lived in the Midwest for most of my life I know what true violence looks like and feels like. I don't hear guns every night like I did in KC. There aren't 600 murders a year like in Chicago. I'm not saying Seattle is perfect but I've never felt safer. And I live in the Central District, which is…

It wasn’t this bad in the 90s or 80s, when crime was higher everywhere else. Relatively speaking, Seattle is worse off than it was before, which is a bit sad for the non transplants.

Every stat on violent crime I’ve seen is that the 80s were a peak tho?

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

#199

Post by cheriot »

awakeasleep wrote: post #104
notus wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solving community problems come with community sacrifices. I'm a big proponent of housing first, drug rehab second. It is exponentially harder to get clean without housing and a support network. Decriminalizing drug addiction is a good step in that direction IMO. I think another side of this coin though is we need to bring back institutionalization of mental health care. Implemented today it would be vastly different…

Housing first is effective for people who want our idea of a 'normal lifestyle' I think people in this thread are asking you to question your assumption- do you think every drug addict on the west coast wants to hold down a job and live our normal life?

> do you think every drug addict on the west coast wants to hold down a job and live our normal life?

That's not the relevant question. Is it better for the rest of us if that drug addict is on the side walk or living inside? In the latter case, there's a better chance of treatment success, but it's also better when they remain addicts.

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

#200

Post by vkou »

timdev2 wrote: post #172
vkou wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well that's a gross misrepresentation of what I said, No, it's not. What you said, in response to the article was: > I am just astounded that this is being spun in such a positive light. The implication here is that redirecting non-violent addicts off the addiction --> prison pipeline was a policy mistake. I ask why you think that non-violent addicts should be put into prison. You tell me I'm grossly misrepresentin…

You replied to a post complaining that the policy also seemed to be giving violent individuals a pass, and accused them of "think[ing] that non-violent addicts should be put into prison". Which was neither said nor (as you claim) implied. The comment was explicitly bemoaning a perceived plague of "repeat violent drug addicts"

The policy being shilled by the article in question is about non-violent addicts.

Whatever problems the commenter in question has with violent criminals has absolutely nothing to do with it - but they chose to attack the non-violent policy (And then get defensive about how their points are being misconstrued. What are those points, then? Violent crime is bad, and should be dealt with? I don't think anyone disagrees with that one. What does it have to do with a diversion of non-violent addicts?)

It's like complaining that standards on organically-grown produce aren't preventing contaminated meat from ending up at your grocery store. Whatever problems you have with contaminated meat have nothing to do with the produce policy.

Post reply on HN