4 ms·

It would seem that decriminalizing will attract more addicted users to the state. If that happens, does Oregon have plans for expanding social services to assis

It would seem that decriminalizing will attract more addicted users to the state. If that happens, does Oregon have plans for expanding social services to assist addicts and treatment resources to help them back into society? Portugal can provide some insight: https://time.com/longform/portugal-drug-use-decriminalization/ https://time.com/longform/portugal-drug-use-decriminalizatio...

elil17 6y ago
Yes they do have a plan, the measure included additional budgeting for social services.
- j_walter 6y ago
  They have a plan, but for anyone that knows Oregon politics it's doomed to have high overhead costs and government inefficiencies built in. I mean they couldn't adapt to the extra $600/wk federal unemployment or not having a waiting period because their systems were still programmed in COBOL...despite getting $80M set aside for upgrading the system almost a decade ago there has been no progress. Also see: Cover Oregon debacle
ogre_codes 6y ago
> It would seem that decriminalizing will attract more addicted users to the state. I don't think this will be the case. But even if you assume it may, you can't let that possibility be a bugbear and that scares you away from doing what is right.
- unethical_ban 6y ago
  You put up a strawman. The OP wasn't saying they were against the ruling, but asking if the state is ready for the possible effects of it.
HaloZero 6y ago
I'm curious if there was any evidence of people moving to Portugal after they decriminalized things? Or any evidence of people moving to avoid the law when it comes to drugs like this. It probably won't be 1-1 b/c of language barriers. I don't have as much experience with addicted users but my understanding is that they tend to stay closer to their remaining social networks. Moving to a new state just to avoid criminalization seems like a lot.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  Immigration to a new country is a whole lot more onerous than just moving to a different state. If I used hard drugs, I 100% would consider moving to a different state if it meant avoiding jailtime and a record.
  - flukus 6y ago
    > Immigration to a new country is a whole lot more onerous than just moving to a different state. Not within the EU. It's not quite as easy as moving between US states but it's not far off.
    - tluyben2 6y ago
      Yep, I did it many times by now, it takes literally a few hours in the countries I moved between, paperwork wise.
- tluyben2 6y ago
  Portugal did not make much of a difference as you can privately use in many EU countries for a long time already. In the Netherlands, in the 80s, we used to hear about drug tourism and that made us think it was all very strict in neighbouring countries, but when old enough to go there (germany, belgium, france, spain) to campsites etc, we saw it was everywhere and the cops only take action on dealers. In Spain, at least where I always go, almost everyone under 50 smokes weed in public, most drink and many do cocaine in the weekends. There is no violent crime (some break-ins in holiday homes, but those are rare enough that when it happens everyone knows about it) and you can get your fix everywhere even with the Guardia around. Practically, you won’t have too much issues in most of EU so PT did not change much.
someonehere 6y ago
San Francisco has an area (Upper Haight) where a lot of the gutter punks live and hang out. Stanley Roberts (former KRON 4 reporter) did a brief story on them. He found a majority of them in their 20s were from out of state and came to SF because of our lax drug enforcement laws. They said where they were from (most from Midwest) came to get away from the strict drug laws. So it’s possible more drug users will move to Portland for refuge.
totony 6y ago
Yeah, while I 100% support such laws, they are pretty dangerous to implement state-wide vs country-wide. If this attracts problematic drug users to Oregon, people will point at it as an example of why it doesn't work. But it's likely that it will since it is easy to move states.

elil17 6y ago

Yes they do have a plan, the measure included additional budgeting for social services.

j_walter 6y ago
They have a plan, but for anyone that knows Oregon politics it's doomed to have high overhead costs and government inefficiencies built in. I mean they couldn't adapt to the extra $600/wk federal unemployment or not having a waiting period because their systems were still programmed in COBOL...despite getting $80M set aside for upgrading the system almost a decade ago there has been no progress. Also see: Cover Oregon debacle

ogre_codes 6y ago

> It would seem that decriminalizing will attract more addicted users to the state. I don't think this will be the case. But even if you assume it may, you can't let that possibility be a bugbear and that scares you away from doing what is right.

unethical_ban 6y ago
You put up a strawman. The OP wasn't saying they were against the ruling, but asking if the state is ready for the possible effects of it.

HaloZero 6y ago

I'm curious if there was any evidence of people moving to Portugal after they decriminalized things? Or any evidence of people moving to avoid the law when it comes to drugs like this. It probably won't be 1-1 b/c of language barriers. I don't have as much experience with addicted users but my understanding is that they tend to stay closer to their remaining social networks. Moving to a new state just to avoid criminalization seems like a lot.

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
Immigration to a new country is a whole lot more onerous than just moving to a different state. If I used hard drugs, I 100% would consider moving to a different state if it meant avoiding jailtime and a record.
- flukus 6y ago
  > Immigration to a new country is a whole lot more onerous than just moving to a different state. Not within the EU. It's not quite as easy as moving between US states but it's not far off.
  - tluyben2 6y ago
    Yep, I did it many times by now, it takes literally a few hours in the countries I moved between, paperwork wise.
tluyben2 6y ago
Portugal did not make much of a difference as you can privately use in many EU countries for a long time already. In the Netherlands, in the 80s, we used to hear about drug tourism and that made us think it was all very strict in neighbouring countries, but when old enough to go there (germany, belgium, france, spain) to campsites etc, we saw it was everywhere and the cops only take action on dealers. In Spain, at least where I always go, almost everyone under 50 smokes weed in public, most drink and many do cocaine in the weekends. There is no violent crime (some break-ins in holiday homes, but those are rare enough that when it happens everyone knows about it) and you can get your fix everywhere even with the Guardia around. Practically, you won’t have too much issues in most of EU so PT did not change much.

someonehere 6y ago

San Francisco has an area (Upper Haight) where a lot of the gutter punks live and hang out. Stanley Roberts (former KRON 4 reporter) did a brief story on them. He found a majority of them in their 20s were from out of state and came to SF because of our lax drug enforcement laws. They said where they were from (most from Midwest) came to get away from the strict drug laws. So it’s possible more drug users will move to Portland for refuge.

totony 6y ago

Yeah, while I 100% support such laws, they are pretty dangerous to implement state-wide vs country-wide. If this attracts problematic drug users to Oregon, people will point at it as an example of why it doesn't work. But it's likely that it will since it is easy to move states.