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

Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 1001 posts

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#421

Post by gochi »

dan_mctree wrote: post #336
anon84873628 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly the prohibition on drugs is not preventing those people from accessing them. Obviously rehabilitation would be ideal. But all else being equal, it would be better if the drugs were cheaper and safer.

Can we all just be honest and just agree that prohibitions do in fact make access to the prohibited thing harder and reduce the prevalence of it. This is true whether your topic of choice is drugs, guns, abortions, alcohol, some form of sex, vpn access or whatever you want to talk about. Sometimes the prohibition can make obtaining illegal things more difficult and risky, and many of us are too lazy or risk avoidant…

Why do you want prohibitions to be viewed as very effective? Their side effects seem to always be far more disastrous than the core incident.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#422

Post by ikrenji »

wonderwonder wrote: post #325
ikrenji wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

problem with this kind of reasoning is that there is very little real data on a world where drugs are decriminalised / legal. while the things you listed could all be negative consequences of such a world, since it was never tried we don't know and its just a conjecture...

There's also a genie out of the bottle problem. Once you decriminalize drugs and people start using them it's very hard to flip a switch and make them stop. To get the data could very well require a massive sacrifice if it turns out to be a very bad idea

Possibly. On the other hand - all drugs started out decriminalised and the reasons for the criminalisation were not always or even usually out of concern for the well being of the user, but racism against the chinese (opium) and black people (marijuana)

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#423

Post by culopatin »

VerminOctopus1 wrote: post #353
brightlancer wrote: post #186

Rubbish. Folks made the exact same arguments about alcohol and marijuana. Specifically with alcohol, anyone can walk into a treatment center without fear that they'll be arrested for the mere _use_ of a substance. (Marijuana has very low risk and rates of addiction, physical or psychological.) If "hard" drugs are legalized, then they will likely be treated the same as alcohol and pot and tobacco: highly regulated, so…

It’s amazing you can log onto this website and spout utter bullshit like “assault and theft have been decriminalized in California”. It’s a totally laughable thing to say and I don’t know why no one else has called this poster out for this blatant lie.

But you can’t ignore the struggle to enforce in the Bay Area.

Just moved here and I feel like an idiot paying for the Bart when most people just jump the gates in and out.

Take your dick out and just pee while you walk. No worries. Cross the street naked throwing stuff around, normal. Dogs in parks? Leash optional, right under the sign that says “dogs must be on a leash”. Break into cars, no one cares. Steal a Kia, doubt you’ll get caught.

Yet there are rules like no eating in the Bart. What? $250 fine if you drink something in the train? Who comes up with that crap?

I come from a red state and I can tell you that the conservatives out there don’t want “th government telling them what to do” but they are more tightly controlled than the people in the bay. People in the bay experience real freedom, almost to the point of anarchy by far.

Red state: Back into your driveway? Tag can’t be seen from the street = ticket. Look aggressive in the street or take your dick out? Arrested, if not shot. Break into a car in a public space? I wanna see that one go as smoothly as in the bay.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#424

Post by theGeatZhopa »

stouset wrote: post #322
dmode wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But doesn't alcohol trigger a wildly different reaction than hard drugs ? Which alcohol triggers schizophrenia, psychosis, hallucination and make you violent ? And these are triggered very very easily by using a small amount of meth or fentanyl. To get to a comparable state with alcohol, you would have to drink copious amount, but then you are more likely to be passed out than exhibit violent behavior. I agree with y…

Are we just ignoring the whole thing about violent drunks right now? Alcohol and violence are highly correlated.

I thinking to stop drinking, but I still sway

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#425

Post by pas »

dan_mctree wrote: post #336
anon84873628 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly the prohibition on drugs is not preventing those people from accessing them. Obviously rehabilitation would be ideal. But all else being equal, it would be better if the drugs were cheaper and safer.

Can we all just be honest and just agree that prohibitions do in fact make access to the prohibited thing harder and reduce the prevalence of it. This is true whether your topic of choice is drugs, guns, abortions, alcohol, some form of sex, vpn access or whatever you want to talk about. Sometimes the prohibition can make obtaining illegal things more difficult and risky, and many of us are too lazy or risk avoidant…

well, drug use is on the rise in many places with prohibition. so maybe that general statement needs some serious qualifiers, no?

prohibition as a concept works, and prohibition when implemented has an effect, but that effect might be small compared to society's overall demand changes.

yes, of course, draconian measures have significant effects, usually the side-effects are bigger though

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#426

Post by RoyalHenOil »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #286
anon84873628 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then make sure you also vote for the people who want to build more housing.

More single family homes? Sure. Low income housing? Nah

So you want more homelessness then? Got it.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#427

Post by ecshafer »

mike00632 wrote: post #222
ecshafer wrote: post #149

Supporting legalization / decriminalization of hard drugs is a luxury belief. If you’re in a nice rich circle it’s easy to believe it doesn’t harm anyone except yourself. If you are around people that become drug addicts, it becomes apparent that it drastically harms everyone around them, themselves probably not the most. You can only see so many addict parents throw away the money for kids food, or pawn of their kid…

Doesn't the same apply to alcohol?

Sure. I wouldn’t be against a ban on alcohol also, with the same prohibitions.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#428

Post by cmilton »

unethical_ban wrote: post #371
GeoAtreides wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to strongly support people getting fat. I thought: this is a free country, you should be able to do what you want. But what I've seen in the US has made me think differently. Most people who get fat eventually end up not being able to live like normal adults. And no one willingly goes to get help or treatment. The problem will stick around because politicians care more about how things look. They'll say the nu…

Is your attempt at satire trying to say "being against legal hard drugs is like being against legal obesity"? Are you saying that trying to curb hard drug use is as immoral in a free society as trying to curb unhealthy eating?

I interpreted it as:

We shouldn’t treat the addictions all that differently.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#429

Post by ecshafer »

epolanski wrote: post #296
ecshafer wrote: post #149

Supporting legalization / decriminalization of hard drugs is a luxury belief. If you’re in a nice rich circle it’s easy to believe it doesn’t harm anyone except yourself. If you are around people that become drug addicts, it becomes apparent that it drastically harms everyone around them, themselves probably not the most. You can only see so many addict parents throw away the money for kids food, or pawn of their kid…

Delusional. The drug that kills and ruins most lives on the planet is alcohol followed by food (diabetes). And the abuse of alcohol and food has the same root that drug abuse does: mental health and education. And let's not even start talking about the damage of legal drugs (medicines) on society at all age tiers.

Great. Let’s ban alcohol and sugar too. I am totally fine with taking the idea of something being harmful to society and it being banned. Though for sugar, I haven’t personally seen people pawn off their childrens possession or rob people to get a fix, so it might not be as bad as drugs. But it’s subsidization should stop.

Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging

#430

Post by P_I_Staker »

tlogan wrote: post #121

I used to strongly support making drugs legal. I thought: this is a free country, you should be able to do what you want. But what I've seen in San Francisco has made me think differently. Most people who use drugs eventually end up not being able to live like normal adults. And no one willingly goes to get help or treatment. The problem will stick around because politicians care more about how things look. They'll s…

With a more controlled supply, softer drug options, and social supports, it’s not a stretch to say there’s are important options being neglected.

Lots of people get pushed into harder options, when it becomes a race to the bottom. Meth and hard opioids are massive problems in the US.

AFAIK most similar counties have lower usage of meth, and fent, though I’m sure opioids are in the picture. Don’t underestimate how many of these cases are deaths of despair, due to our cultural issues, not just poverty. I suspect we’re seeing the costs of our toxic culture, income inequality, and lack of safety nets.

Oregon IMO was set up for failure. Decrime is overrated. In some ways it may be the worst of both worlds. Even moreso when you do it during a drug poisoning pandemic… that’s a really good time to start distributing verified product.

Post reply on HN