5 ms·

One particular example might be Oregon’s decision to decriminalize all drugs[0] during a time when overdoses are at an all time high[1] and increasing over 40%

One particular example might be Oregon’s decision to decriminalize all drugs[0] during a time when overdoses are at an all time high[1] and increasing over 40% in just the last year. You might say the political party who calls the war on drugs “cruel and inhumane” is acting on emotion rather than reason in spite of all the statistics. [0]: https://drugpolicy.org/press-release/2021/02/drug-decriminalization-oregon-officially-begins-today https://drugpolicy.org/press-release/2021/02/drug-decriminal... [1]: https://www.oregon.gov/oha/ERD/Pages/Oregon-trends-with-U.S.-in-accelerated-drug-overdoses.aspx https://www.oregon.gov/oha/ERD/Pages/Oregon-trends-with-U.S....

35fbe7d3d5b9 5y ago
Is there evidence that criminalizing drugs decreases the incidence of addiction/overdose?
listless 5y ago
Another _could_ be letting people in Portland tear the city apart with impunity.
- yesBoot 5y ago
  For most folks in Portland, pandemic aside, it’s been life as usual. I have yet to encounter lefties in my SE hood terrorizing anyone. Plenty of Trump caravans last year, waking us up, shooting guns. All from outside the city. Sure violence is up but it’s up all over. A side effect of a nation coddling old wealth, leaving the masses to rot.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - listless 5y ago
    Then the media is utterly and in conspiracy theory fashion lying about the situation on a daily basis. I’m not saying that’s not the case, just that it’s not the message the rest of us are getting, maybe and including these counties wanting out.
    - yesBoot 5y ago
      Of course the media is. They’re in cahoots with the political apparatus to massage public opinion in the direction of more police intervention. I’d argue it’s not even a conspiracy. They don’t hide it. The public just doesn’t think of it that way. There’s nothing going on in Portland you can’t find in large cities across the country. 52 homicides in Portland last year. 700+ in Chicago. But we’re used to hearing about it in Chicago. The media’s job is to attract viewers. They’ll waste no opportunity to dramatize what is, unfortunately, routine human tragedy to that end. The US government spent tons of money on propaganda programs during the World Wars and it all made its way to university advertising, journalism, and marketing programs. I’m not going all deep state since it’s public record. And it’s not as if grandstanding to gain public support is new.
    - sunshineforever 5y ago
      Yes they are obviously lying.
yesBoot 5y ago
The war on drugs put people in prison for emotional belief those people were morally inferior. It rightly so should be abolished. To be replaced with trained medical help, detox programs, and a conversation about morality not tethered to superstition, or black and white judgments. But the fundies, acting out of emotion, prefer boxes. It’s all emotion since humans are motivated by such. It’s the outcome that should be judged.
- buzzert 5y ago
  > To be replaced with trained medical help, detox programs, and a conversation about morality not tethered to superstition, or black and white judgments Why can’t these programs exist while also having drugs be illegal? Also it doesn’t help your position by using childish words like “fundies”, FYI. Keep that on Reddit please.
  - joshka 5y ago
    > Why can’t these programs exist while also having drugs be illegal? How would you make that work? Consider if drugs are illegal, then getting medical help / detox requires admission of guilt. This seems like a fifth amendment problem.
    - buzzert 5y ago
      Why should you have to admit anything to get treatment? Is that some kind of medical requirement I’m unaware of?
      - joshka 5y ago
        I'm talking just human nature here. If something is forbidden , illegal, subjectively immoral, etc. then it's difficult to both admit and seek help with that thing. I don't have any data to hand to back my assertion that criminalization negatively affects treatment, however if such data exists, then it would be less surprising (to me) than the inverse (criminalization makes it easier to get treatment).
      - 5y ago
rurp 5y ago
Except that the evidence mostly points towards harsh drug laws having a net negative effect on people's lives. The logic of "drugs are bad" -> "we should outlaw drugs" without looking at the real world effects is the more emotion based argument.
standardUser 5y ago
Anyone who genuinely wants fewer people to die from drug use will support drug legalization.
ncallaway 5y ago
If drugs have been criminalized for decades, and that has led to overdoses being at an all time high, isn’t that just a pretty strong point of evidence that criminalizing drugs isn’t an effective means to prevent overdoses? We tried that strategy for many decades. It has failed as a strategy for decades. I don’t think that’s necessarily evidence that decriminalization will work, but it seems like...maybe we should at least try something else?
- buzzert 5y ago
  “Try something else”, as in the complete polar opposite of what we were trying before? I cannot rationalize such a decision.
  - joshka 5y ago
    What would you do instead?
    - buzzert 5y ago
      In my city (San Francisco), the Tenderloin is nationally famous for having an "open-air drug market", which means a place you can go to _buy_ drugs with impunity. It also happens to be one of the most dystopian parts of the city, rampent with crime, overdoses, unsanitary conditions, and needles everywhere. It seems like any rational person could see the connection between drugs and the dystopian aspects of the Tenderloin. What I would do instead is precisely what I would do if my children were addicted to drugs; tough love. I would make it impossible for them to acquire drugs and deal with the consequences of withdrawl. Japan and Singapore are examples of countries that are extremely tough on drugs. I believe it is no coincidence that these places also turned out to be essentially the opposite of the Tenderloin with regards to public safety and heigene.
      - klyrs 5y ago
        > I would make it impossible for them to acquire drugs and deal with the consequences of withdrawl. Depending on the drug and the severity of their addiction, that could kill them. Would you take it that far?
snypher 5y ago
This is why we can't have a rational conversation; your very first point was to link two statistics in a misleading way. You immediately imply that enforcement of drug laws is connected to the number of overdoses. However anyone can see that both overdose and enforcement have increased over time.
joshka 5y ago
The idea that treating drug problems with criminal punishment rather than medical care is effective for solving the drug overdose problem without data to back that viewpoint sounds more emotionally driven than the converse view. I'd anticipate that we would both agree that the former has provably not worked, it's time to give the latter a chance.
alpaca128 5y ago
So the current system with drugs being illegal leads to an all time high of overdoses, but you suggest a switch to a different approach is timed badly? Yes, I do think going the opposite route of the one causing record levels of overdoses is a good start. I have a hard time following your line of thought.
cratermoon 5y ago
> decriminalize all drugs[0] during a time when overdoses are at an all time high[1] and increasing over 40% in just the last year. You're assuming overdose rates are negatively correlated with criminalization of drugs. Have you considered the possibility that it's exactly the opposite, then when drugs are decriminalized, people can have access to better information and health care? If you're a professional and you have alcoholism, you can get care and treatment, and it may even be paid for by your employer's health care plant. If you're addicted to cocaine, OxyContin, hydrocodone, or amphetamines, then maybe one day you OD because you never talk about it and you don't see a doctor about it, for fear of being convicted of a crime, losing your job, your health care, and ending up in prison or homeless.
- rhacker 5y ago
  I've never heard of a company accepting and paying for alcohol treatment? It's 100% fire rate in my opinion.
  - cratermoon 5y ago
    Most health plans will cover at least a portion of substance abuse treatment. Things like HIPAA are there to keep your employer out of your business. You might be surprised how many of your co-workers have been through some kind of substance abuse program.
- d110af5ccf 5y ago
  > then maybe one day you OD because you never talk about it And also because the substances you're consuming aren't subject to the vast array of safety mechanisms that exist for all other pharmaceuticals. You don't have anywhere near the same level of quality guarantees. Compared to the synthesis and purification of complex organics, the distillation of ethanol is difficult to mess up. People still died of poisoning during prohibition though.
kbelder 5y ago
I don't think decriminalizing drug use was a strictly liberal policy. That had support from large parts of the right. Where the right and left differed was in all the programs treating drug addiction that were brought in at the same time. Pamper the poor darlings vs Let them rot in the gutter.

35fbe7d3d5b9 5y ago

Is there evidence that criminalizing drugs decreases the incidence of addiction/overdose?

listless 5y ago

Another _could_ be letting people in Portland tear the city apart with impunity.

yesBoot 5y ago
For most folks in Portland, pandemic aside, it’s been life as usual. I have yet to encounter lefties in my SE hood terrorizing anyone. Plenty of Trump caravans last year, waking us up, shooting guns. All from outside the city. Sure violence is up but it’s up all over. A side effect of a nation coddling old wealth, leaving the masses to rot.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- listless 5y ago
  Then the media is utterly and in conspiracy theory fashion lying about the situation on a daily basis. I’m not saying that’s not the case, just that it’s not the message the rest of us are getting, maybe and including these counties wanting out.
  - yesBoot 5y ago
    Of course the media is. They’re in cahoots with the political apparatus to massage public opinion in the direction of more police intervention. I’d argue it’s not even a conspiracy. They don’t hide it. The public just doesn’t think of it that way. There’s nothing going on in Portland you can’t find in large cities across the country. 52 homicides in Portland last year. 700+ in Chicago. But we’re used to hearing about it in Chicago. The media’s job is to attract viewers. They’ll waste no opportunity to dramatize what is, unfortunately, routine human tragedy to that end. The US government spent tons of money on propaganda programs during the World Wars and it all made its way to university advertising, journalism, and marketing programs. I’m not going all deep state since it’s public record. And it’s not as if grandstanding to gain public support is new.
  - sunshineforever 5y ago
    Yes they are obviously lying.

yesBoot 5y ago

The war on drugs put people in prison for emotional belief those people were morally inferior. It rightly so should be abolished. To be replaced with trained medical help, detox programs, and a conversation about morality not tethered to superstition, or black and white judgments. But the fundies, acting out of emotion, prefer boxes. It’s all emotion since humans are motivated by such. It’s the outcome that should be judged.

buzzert 5y ago
> To be replaced with trained medical help, detox programs, and a conversation about morality not tethered to superstition, or black and white judgments Why can’t these programs exist while also having drugs be illegal? Also it doesn’t help your position by using childish words like “fundies”, FYI. Keep that on Reddit please.
- joshka 5y ago
  > Why can’t these programs exist while also having drugs be illegal? How would you make that work? Consider if drugs are illegal, then getting medical help / detox requires admission of guilt. This seems like a fifth amendment problem.
  - buzzert 5y ago
    Why should you have to admit anything to get treatment? Is that some kind of medical requirement I’m unaware of?
    - joshka 5y ago
      I'm talking just human nature here. If something is forbidden , illegal, subjectively immoral, etc. then it's difficult to both admit and seek help with that thing. I don't have any data to hand to back my assertion that criminalization negatively affects treatment, however if such data exists, then it would be less surprising (to me) than the inverse (criminalization makes it easier to get treatment).
    - 5y ago

rurp 5y ago

Except that the evidence mostly points towards harsh drug laws having a net negative effect on people's lives. The logic of "drugs are bad" -> "we should outlaw drugs" without looking at the real world effects is the more emotion based argument.

standardUser 5y ago

Anyone who genuinely wants fewer people to die from drug use will support drug legalization.

ncallaway 5y ago

If drugs have been criminalized for decades, and that has led to overdoses being at an all time high, isn’t that just a pretty strong point of evidence that criminalizing drugs isn’t an effective means to prevent overdoses? We tried that strategy for many decades. It has failed as a strategy for decades. I don’t think that’s necessarily evidence that decriminalization will work, but it seems like...maybe we should at least try something else?

buzzert 5y ago
“Try something else”, as in the complete polar opposite of what we were trying before? I cannot rationalize such a decision.
- joshka 5y ago
  What would you do instead?
  - buzzert 5y ago
    In my city (San Francisco), the Tenderloin is nationally famous for having an "open-air drug market", which means a place you can go to _buy_ drugs with impunity. It also happens to be one of the most dystopian parts of the city, rampent with crime, overdoses, unsanitary conditions, and needles everywhere. It seems like any rational person could see the connection between drugs and the dystopian aspects of the Tenderloin. What I would do instead is precisely what I would do if my children were addicted to drugs; tough love. I would make it impossible for them to acquire drugs and deal with the consequences of withdrawl. Japan and Singapore are examples of countries that are extremely tough on drugs. I believe it is no coincidence that these places also turned out to be essentially the opposite of the Tenderloin with regards to public safety and heigene.
    - klyrs 5y ago
      > I would make it impossible for them to acquire drugs and deal with the consequences of withdrawl. Depending on the drug and the severity of their addiction, that could kill them. Would you take it that far?

snypher 5y ago

This is why we can't have a rational conversation; your very first point was to link two statistics in a misleading way. You immediately imply that enforcement of drug laws is connected to the number of overdoses. However anyone can see that both overdose and enforcement have increased over time.

joshka 5y ago

The idea that treating drug problems with criminal punishment rather than medical care is effective for solving the drug overdose problem without data to back that viewpoint sounds more emotionally driven than the converse view. I'd anticipate that we would both agree that the former has provably not worked, it's time to give the latter a chance.

alpaca128 5y ago

So the current system with drugs being illegal leads to an all time high of overdoses, but you suggest a switch to a different approach is timed badly? Yes, I do think going the opposite route of the one causing record levels of overdoses is a good start. I have a hard time following your line of thought.

cratermoon 5y ago

> decriminalize all drugs[0] during a time when overdoses are at an all time high[1] and increasing over 40% in just the last year. You're assuming overdose rates are negatively correlated with criminalization of drugs. Have you considered the possibility that it's exactly the opposite, then when drugs are decriminalized, people can have access to better information and health care? If you're a professional and you have alcoholism, you can get care and treatment, and it may even be paid for by your employer's health care plant. If you're addicted to cocaine, OxyContin, hydrocodone, or amphetamines, then maybe one day you OD because you never talk about it and you don't see a doctor about it, for fear of being convicted of a crime, losing your job, your health care, and ending up in prison or homeless.

rhacker 5y ago
I've never heard of a company accepting and paying for alcohol treatment? It's 100% fire rate in my opinion.
- cratermoon 5y ago
  Most health plans will cover at least a portion of substance abuse treatment. Things like HIPAA are there to keep your employer out of your business. You might be surprised how many of your co-workers have been through some kind of substance abuse program.
d110af5ccf 5y ago
> then maybe one day you OD because you never talk about it And also because the substances you're consuming aren't subject to the vast array of safety mechanisms that exist for all other pharmaceuticals. You don't have anywhere near the same level of quality guarantees. Compared to the synthesis and purification of complex organics, the distillation of ethanol is difficult to mess up. People still died of poisoning during prohibition though.

kbelder 5y ago

I don't think decriminalizing drug use was a strictly liberal policy. That had support from large parts of the right. Where the right and left differed was in all the programs treating drug addiction that were brought in at the same time. Pamper the poor darlings vs Let them rot in the gutter.