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

201–210 of 1001 posts

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

#201

Post by huytersd »

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…

Not all addictions are the same. Nicotine is extremely addictive but you will never have a total breakdown of your life which is essentially a guarantee with heroin, whether you get it legally or not. There is no such thing as a functional heroin addict (outside of extremely rare cases). Even if they received very pure heroin for free they would be dead within the next decade or two.

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

#202

Post by grecy »

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…

You should watch what is happening in British Colombia, Canada right now.

They have decriminalized possessing less than 2.5 grams of

- Opioids (such as heroin, morphine, and fentanyl)

- Crack and powder cocaine

- Methamphetamine (Meth)

- MDMA (Ecstasy)

It's a trial basis from Jan 31 2023 until Jan 31 2026, so we should get a good amount of data and evidence to see if this leads to better or worse outcomes for people and society as a whole.

[1] https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/overdose/decriminalizatio...

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

#203

Post by skyyler »

Eumenes wrote: post #178
skyyler wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither of you are posting sources, so you're both just talking about your opinions.

The source is my personal experience dealing with individuals involved in addiction. No amount of "experts" claiming we need to legalize hardcore drugs is going to change my opinion, thats for sure.

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.

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

#204

Post by stillwithit »

kruft wrote: post #192
stillwithit wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? Then they’re out of the way. One or way or another, none of us are getting out of this alive. Not sure where the religious conviction we must save all souls comes from or has any value.

By that logic, we should remove any suicide prevention or other mental health support as well. Allowing, even encouraging, people to suffer when the very nature of their disease destroys their agency should be repugnant to everyone. Religion is a red herring here.

[flagged]

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

#205

Post by babyshake »

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.

The only time I've ever been on fentanyl was in a hospital, and the nurse described it to me as the "Michael Jackson drug". I actually enjoyed the gallows humor of the nurses, as I felt it brought down the tension in an otherwise serious environment.

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

#206

Post by nomel »

stillwithit wrote: post #152
xenospn wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the actual problem is people can’t seem to just use enough to stay functional. Given the legal opportunity to purchase heroin, most people will absolutely overdo it.

So? Then they’re out of the way. One or way or another, none of us are getting out of this alive. Not sure where the religious conviction we must save all souls comes from or has any value.

> Then they’re out of the way.

What are your thoughts on the death penalty in Singapore?

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

#207

Post by drewg123 »

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.

Its very different, in that I can walk in off the street and buy alcohol. As far as I know, there is noplace I can legally buy fentanyl without a prescription.

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

#208

Post by astrodust »

xenospn wrote: post #134
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 think the actual problem is people can’t seem to just use enough to stay functional. Given the legal opportunity to purchase heroin, most people will absolutely overdo it.

There are people with substance abuse problems and addictive behaviour that goes way beyond any particular drug. It's often a condition that needs treatment.

"Given the legal opportunity to purchase X, some people will absolutely overdo it." This goes for some ridiculous things like Pokemon cards or collectible shoes as well. Should we ban those?

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

#209

Post by Consultant32452 »

coffeecloud wrote: post #149
Consultant32452 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It’s just hard to enforce that when people don’t have a private place to use in. The problem is feeling like you owe it to addicts to provide them with a place to use. Privatize all the public spaces: parks, sidewalks, etc. Grant strong property rights to those spaces.

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.

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

#210

Post by nomel »

stillwithit wrote: post #187
WillPostForFood wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if one ascribes to this nihilist POV, it isn't an answer. We see the negative effects on communities, families, and people around addicts. Even if you don't care that people are destroying themselves, when they take out the surrounding area it is a problem we share.

Yeah and humans have seen it for centuries and failed to stop it Who is to say any progress we make won’t be undid by another pandemic we cannot predict, or some nutter launching the nukes We have political agents hell bent on war and subjugating undesirables, rather than pushback against them let’s focus on some people who don’t want to live? Why not ask Oceangate how the war against physics is going. It will always…

> failed to stop it

I don't think that's the goal. The goal is to attempt to reduce harm of something that removes freedom. Try asking a drug addict if they want to keep taking drugs. I suspect you'll be surprised at the answer. Stopping drugs would be like achieving abstinence as the primary form of contraceptive. Both are impossible because they work on the same soup of chemicals, but one has evolved with some form of continuation in mind. The other is a direct injection, orders of magnitude stronger, that just fucks up all the machinery of the brain.

Post reply on HN