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

61–70 of 1001 posts

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

#61

Post by gspencley »

It's working just fine.

I guess if you want drug use to go down, or to reduce deaths etc. if those specific metrics are you goals, and nothing else matters, that's one thing. Maybe it is not "working" by those standards.

But I don't want a government having any opinion on what people put into their own bodies. It is a health/medical issue and, in a broader context, a liberty issue. It is not a legal issue in my opinion. Regardless of drug use statistics, no one belongs in jail or with a criminal record for no reason other than possessing and/or consuming an intoxicant. I don't even care if drug use goes up with decrminalization or legalization. In my opinion it is simply outside of the proper moral scope of a government to concern itself with such matters. Feel free to disagree. This is my personal political view.

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

#63

Post by _blz2 »

The HN/reddit stance on "war on drugs" and drugs in general is proof education and common sense don't have as much correlation as is commonly thought of. These forums kept bringing up Portugal for more than a decade and when finally the results were seen, the new favorite psyop they're shilling is "the govt isn't doing enough" and "we must do more". Lol.

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

#64

Post by anon291 »

kelnos wrote: post #5

https://archive.is/rznQr We've plainly seen over the past several decades that the War on Drugs is an abject failure. All it's done is increase incarceration rates (without solving the problems of drug use and addiction), and many people caught in the system are just drug users, not distributors/traffickers. This really doesn't help much of anything. > State leaders have acknowledged faults with the policy’s implemen…

> We've plainly seen over the past several decades that the War on Drugs is an abject failure. All it's done is increase incarceration rates (without solving the problems of drug use and addiction), and many people caught in the system are just drug users, not distributors/traffickers. This really doesn't help much of anything.

Given that Oregon stopped its war on drugs and has had a terrible experience, I don't see how anyone can honestly believe that the war on drugs did not reduce the rates of drug use and addiction. This is not a political issue. Come to Portland and see. It's not like any other city. People engage in drugs freely and with impugnity. Correspondingly, people overdose continuously.

It seems obvious to me the war on drugs kept addiction rates and usage rates at a much more acceptable level. At least, it ensured the dangers of drug use didn't spill onto the streets (needles in public parks; drug users in public restrooms... places kids go).

Thus, it correspondingly seems obvious to me that the higher incarceration rate is worth it.

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

#65

Post by vondur »

Demotooodo wrote: post #35
Alupis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> though I'm not convinced this is as large a problem as you might think it is Several states have legalized marijuana, and surprise, marijuana usage is at an all-time high (no pun intended). People who would have never tried it before now do so because the stigma is gone, and it's trivial to get. This part is always lost on the "legalize everything" crowd. While marijuana might be relatively benign, other drugs are…

It's a novelty right now. In Amsterdam when you go to a music festival you will not see a lot of pod heads. I was one of the few and I'm a German! Look at Portugals drug history. Legalization saved that country!

It looks like Portugal is having some serious issues with decriminalization.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-dru...

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

#66

Post by anon291 »

kelnos wrote: post #18
lotsofpulp wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it possible the probability of success of treating the use of certain brain altering chemicals is untenably low, even if treatment was "properly" funded?

I don't think so. Portugal was famously very successful at drug decriminalization, at least until they slashed funding to rehabilitation programs. If you have data that suggests some drugs just make rehabilitation impossible or unlikely, I'd be interested to see it, though.

I went to Portugal during this supposed 'golden' era and it was just as depressing then as Portland is now. I have no idea how anyone can say it was a success. The despair on the street was palpable.

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

#67

Post by _blz2 »

gspencley wrote: post #61

It's working just fine. I guess if you want drug use to go down, or to reduce deaths etc. if those specific metrics are you goals, and nothing else matters, that's one thing. Maybe it is not "working" by those standards. But I don't want a government having any opinion on what people put into their own bodies. It is a health/medical issue and, in a broader context, a liberty issue. It is not a legal issue in my opini…

Why do you think everyone should get voting rights if there is a section of the society who want to actively harm themselves. What are their votes reflective of?

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

#68

Post by retrac »

NegativeLatency wrote: post #60
kepler1 wrote: post #47

I maintain now (as I did when Measure 110 passed in Oregon, and in the discussions here in HN) that decriminalizing drugs would lead the state, and especially Portland of course, to a terrible and predictable outcome. Many supporters of the measure believed that it was the objectively right choice. Decriminalize, and get people to treatment instead of locking them up. The sad thing is that you can make all the piecew…

> your city is unlivable and your block is terrorized by drug addicts This is hyperbole, I live in one of the rougher neighborhoods. The city gov especially the mayor and his cronies have done nothing to actually fix problems, they just do expensive sweeps and cleanup without addressing root causes.

I'm not sure about in the United States, but here in Canada, we barely even have "good" and "bad" neighbourhoods. My city is quite well-mixed together economically. Somehow, despite that, the recent dysfunction of society -- the sharp increase in the number of homeless and the number of publicly intoxicated people -- seems to fall entirely on the poor as a consequence. They're the ones suffering it day to day. A relative's apartment building is a 10 minute walk away. He is dealing with people passed out in vomit in the stairwells, smashing the first and second floor windows regularly, pulling the fire alarms and setting small fires regularly. All of this is quite new. And it's so absent from my upper-middle-class community half a kilometre away -- we're so insulated -- that a lot of my peers seem to be unaware there's even anything going on. None of that is happening on my street.

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

#69

Post by agentofoblivion »

kelnos wrote: post #5

https://archive.is/rznQr We've plainly seen over the past several decades that the War on Drugs is an abject failure. All it's done is increase incarceration rates (without solving the problems of drug use and addiction), and many people caught in the system are just drug users, not distributors/traffickers. This really doesn't help much of anything. > State leaders have acknowledged faults with the policy’s implemen…

a.k.a., "that's not real communism".

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

#70

Post by anon291 »

jeffbee wrote: post #4

This article has severe methodological errors. It fails to consider the Oregon stats in the context of other states. Oregon's change in OD rates have not been exceptional, and have more or less followed the trend of other states, while being greatly better compared to states like W. Virginia. As always, states that are "tough on drugs" get a free pass regardless of how bad their outcomes are, and states that legalize…

> while being greatly better compared to states like W. Virginia.

Typical Oregon response comparing Oregon, a fairly rich state, with West Virginia, one of the poorest states. If you can't do better than a poor state with your high taxes and high median incomes... that's not a good reflection on the state. Yet, most Oregonians seem to get some satisfaction that they do better than Mississippi, Alabama, and West Virginia, even if they're #49 in the ranking. It's gross.

I mean, Oregon has Intel, Nike, Adidas, a well-developed tech sector, etc, and West Virginia has coal mining, yet we're actually comparing ourselves to them.

I really wish people in this state would strive for something actually better.

Post reply on HN