4 ms·

The idealist in me wants to agree, but drug use does often hurt others by way of crime, social disfunction and destroying family relationships/unity (which is

by aksss 6y ago

The idealist in me wants to agree, but drug use does often hurt others by way of crime, social disfunction and destroying family relationships/unity (which is a hurt that can affect a subsequent generation at least). Not always, but often. The self-contained, highly functional, occasional heroin user is real but there are plenty that do not live up to the expectation of being responsible drug users. Prison works as a stand in for involuntary rehab, and a very poor one. But While thinking Oregon is over correcting, I will watch from afar with an open mind to see the outcome.

ogre_codes 6y ago
Just keep in mind, we're not legalizing drugs. Possessing small quantities is no longer a crime. The state can still crack down on dealers and supply chains. They can also prosecute for related crimes. We've had this weird state for a long time where it is legal to own and abuse anti-depressants and opioids, but you can go to prison for a long time for owning small quantities of far less destructive/ addictive drugs like LSD. This brings things back into a bit of parity.
AmericanChopper 6y ago
Drug use is very harmful to society, and people who deny that just fall into the opposite end of the reality-denial spectrum opposed to those who deny that mass incarceration is harmful. Aside from all of the antisocial behaviour associated with drug use, having a large group of people who are a drain on society’s resources is certainly a harm to society as a whole. Which may sound callous, but it’s a very real consequence of large scale drug dependency. I still think this is likely a good law though, because the justice systems current approach to drug crimes creates such a tremendous harm to society, there has to be some rather obvious benefits to curtailing that. If you look at how relatively minor drug convictions can affect people’s lives, it’s beyond any measure of proportionality. It’s just a harm easier to ignore because it mostly affects societal out-groups.

by aksss 6y ago

ogre_codes 6y ago

Just keep in mind, we're not legalizing drugs. Possessing small quantities is no longer a crime. The state can still crack down on dealers and supply chains. They can also prosecute for related crimes. We've had this weird state for a long time where it is legal to own and abuse anti-depressants and opioids, but you can go to prison for a long time for owning small quantities of far less destructive/ addictive drugs like LSD. This brings things back into a bit of parity.

AmericanChopper 6y ago

Drug use is very harmful to society, and people who deny that just fall into the opposite end of the reality-denial spectrum opposed to those who deny that mass incarceration is harmful. Aside from all of the antisocial behaviour associated with drug use, having a large group of people who are a drain on society’s resources is certainly a harm to society as a whole. Which may sound callous, but it’s a very real consequence of large scale drug dependency. I still think this is likely a good law though, because the justice systems current approach to drug crimes creates such a tremendous harm to society, there has to be some rather obvious benefits to curtailing that. If you look at how relatively minor drug convictions can affect people’s lives, it’s beyond any measure of proportionality. It’s just a harm easier to ignore because it mostly affects societal out-groups.