4 ms·

I have no love for the old system either, but I think that a lot of misinformation is getting shared around to encourage decriminalization in other places, and

I have no love for the old system either, but I think that a lot of misinformation is getting shared around to encourage decriminalization in other places, and I think people should understand what kind of consequences they can expect if they choose to go down that path. When the ballot measure was announced in Oregon, it presented the case for decriminalization in optimistic terms. I think a lot of people, including myself, voted for it believing that it would make things better for everyone, but it didn’t. For most people who aren’t drug users, things got much worse, especially in Portland. The negative externalities of drug use are much more present in the average citizen’s everyday life than they were before decriminalization was enacted. For some people, decriminalization is still a net positive, because it aligns with their principles and values. I get the impression that you may be in this group. Not everyone shares the view that people should have an unassailable right to take drugs, regardless of the consequences. I would count myself in the latter group. I’m not sure I can agree with your assertion that this system is better than what came before. Perhaps for those who would have been likely to face jail time under the previous system, and maybe that makes the trade off in worse living conditions for the rest of us worthwhile, but I can’t say for sure that if I had to vote for decriminalization over again, knowing what I do now. that I would make the same choice I did the last time.

beej71 4y ago
I don't live in PDX--I'm in Bend, so it's different. I voted for decriminalization because the existing expensive system didn't work and was actively harmful in many ways. You're saying that it kinda worked before, and you're seeing some things that are worse now. I don't disagree. But I think we can fix those things. I feel that what we had before was a local maximum. We have to take a step down to get to a better place. (Well, we probably didn't _have_ to take a step down, but just taking a first step is politically difficult, let alone getting a complete solution in place.) But I was under no illusion that this was going to be a magical cure-all right away. I think in some ways things are better already, and in some ways they are worse. But this is just the first step in a long process of fixing this mess. If I said we should put alcoholics in jail for possession of a beer, most people would rightly look at me like I were mad. But we live in a world where we do exactly this with drug addicts. And for the last 50 years we've had Al Capone wannabes all over the place... It's just not working. We fixed this before. We can fix it again. As for the right to take drugs, well, we can get philosophical fast. But practically speaking, people _did_ take drugs and they were easy to get. Their "right" to take drugs wasn't a factor. So if there's a problem with addicts on the streets, copy a program that's had success. (We used to put them in jail, but there were always addicts on the streets--jail didn't do anything.) If there's a problem with gang crime, remove their motivation and their sources of funding. Under the War on Drugs, Americans demanded drugs in gigantic quantities. What is the right way to handle this demand?

beej71 4y ago

I don't live in PDX--I'm in Bend, so it's different. I voted for decriminalization because the existing expensive system didn't work and was actively harmful in many ways. You're saying that it kinda worked before, and you're seeing some things that are worse now. I don't disagree. But I think we can fix those things. I feel that what we had before was a local maximum. We have to take a step down to get to a better place. (Well, we probably didn't _have_ to take a step down, but just taking a first step is politically difficult, let alone getting a complete solution in place.) But I was under no illusion that this was going to be a magical cure-all right away. I think in some ways things are better already, and in some ways they are worse. But this is just the first step in a long process of fixing this mess. If I said we should put alcoholics in jail for possession of a beer, most people would rightly look at me like I were mad. But we live in a world where we do exactly this with drug addicts. And for the last 50 years we've had Al Capone wannabes all over the place... It's just not working. We fixed this before. We can fix it again. As for the right to take drugs, well, we can get philosophical fast. But practically speaking, people _did_ take drugs and they were easy to get. Their "right" to take drugs wasn't a factor. So if there's a problem with addicts on the streets, copy a program that's had success. (We used to put them in jail, but there were always addicts on the streets--jail didn't do anything.) If there's a problem with gang crime, remove their motivation and their sources of funding. Under the War on Drugs, Americans demanded drugs in gigantic quantities. What is the right way to handle this demand?