Places that decriminalize drugs need to pour the money they saved on enforcement into health, social programmes and education. The positive effects of decriminalising anything aren't going to be seen until a while after that is done.
Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
891–900 of 1001 posts
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#892The USA and a few other cultures have unfortunately devalued shame to the point where it holds nearly no cultural power. Shame is an important aspect of behaviour moderation, a negative emotion usefully experienced when doing something that breaks the social contract. Devaluing shame instad of targeting the parts of the contract that needed to be changed has cost us a critical tool for self moderation and has created…
shame is what got us casted out from eden
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#893I 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…
I'm not sure SF is a good example. It's not a healthy city, but it's problems go way beyond drug use and it doesn't have the same policies as what Oregon adopted.
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#894Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a terrible example. Most people do not want to murder, even when very angry. You don't need laws to make people not murder. The laws are for what to do when people do. No matter how universal an attribute is it'll never be 100%. Besides, you'll notice the murder rate is highly localized and associated with economic opportunities. You know why talking about gay people _is_ a good example? Because you probably…
You’re either too young to remember or creating a non-existent history of what life was like before same-sex marriage was legalized. This is not a comment on anything to do with gay rights but more just a matter of fact: pre-Obergefell life was VERY similar to life today. Gay people still lived together, still went on dates, and held hands. They weren’t run out of town for being gay. There wasn’t rampant homophobia e…
What?? Yes, there absolutely were people who were run out of town for being gay. There was indeed rampant homophobia. What world were you living in?
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#895Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the 1970s/80s, an hour of minimum wage could afford you about 7 big macs. Now, it will not even buy you one. Real wages have dropped to an all time low, and it is harder than ever to account for yourself as a working class citizen. Circumstances for the average American have devolved to nightmarish levels, and it seems that it is only going to get worse. It has been said that inflation is not a bad thing because m…
> In the 1970s/80s, an hour of minimum wage could afford you about 7 big macs. Now, it will not even buy you one. The cost of a Big Mac in 1986 was $1.6 according to the Economist's Big Mac Index dataset[0]. The minimum wage in 1986 was $3.35[1] according to the US Department of Labor. So you could afford at most two Big Macs in 1986, not seven. Also you can definitely afford one big mac with an hour of minimum wage…
It's good to keep the facts straight here, which is what you're doing. But it should be noted as well that the broader point being made has not been addressed. Even according to these adjusted figures, the ability to buy Big Macs with an hour of labor has decreased. Shouldn't it be increasing, as technology gets better and productivity increases? Where have the additional profits from productivity gain been going?
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#896It'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…
I absolutely want my government to have an opinion on what people put into their bodies. If I go to the store and buy a loaf of bread, and instead I get a loaf with a high concentration of bleach, used to clean the machines at the factory, and it kills me, I think the government should have an opinion on it. I think they should do what it can to prevent that from happening. I do want a government that regulates drugs…
> I absolutely want my government to have an opinion on what people put into their bodies. If I go to the store and buy a loaf of bread, and instead I get a loaf with a high concentration of bleach, used to clean the machines at the factory, and it kills me, I think the government should have an opinion on it.
I don't think you intended it, but this is shifting the goal post.
My position is that I think an individual has the right to choose to kill themselves by any means of their choosing. Which means if someone chooses to drink a cup of bleach, I don't think the law should step in to stop them.
Murdering someone by offering them bleach disguised as something innocuous is a completely different matter that has nothing to do with what I am talking about.
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#897Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're oversimplifying things a little bit. Some people will try e.g. heroin and get hooked due to curiosity. Some people do derail otherwise promising lives with drug and alcohol use.
How many people do you know who work in harm reduction? How many of your friends are regular drug users? I’m speaking from direct experience are you? or are you just making assumptions that make you feel more comfortable?
You could just admit that you are oversimplifying things without trying to dismiss my credentials. I have experience. I haven't posted anything unreasonable in this thread.
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#898What was done in Oregon, based on the successful policy in Portugal, was decriminalising use and possession of very small quantities. Distribution and sale are still just as illegal as before. Basically I think this is the right approach. Drug use at low levels in endemic. I don't think it makes sense for huge swathes of otherwise law abiding citizens to be technically criminals. It ends up with grossly distorted dem…
Portugal also forces people into treatment if they can’t function as a member if society. Oregon will never do that. The treatment is there but people won’t voluntarily go to it. If they continue this policy they’ll see the same degradation of public spaces that I’ve seen living in Portland since this was enacted.
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#899No doubt that the reform isn’t perfect, but this is such a poor, confused attempt at creating a story of causality (or even correlation).
Re: Oregon decriminalized hard drugs – early results aren’t encouraging
#900The USA and a few other cultures have unfortunately devalued shame to the point where it holds nearly no cultural power. Shame is an important aspect of behaviour moderation, a negative emotion usefully experienced when doing something that breaks the social contract. Devaluing shame instad of targeting the parts of the contract that needed to be changed has cost us a critical tool for self moderation and has created…
[dead]