4 ms·

The problem of course is that it's not strictly about one's own body, in this case. "Bodily autonomy" doesn't cover the petty crimes addicts often commit to get

by wk_end 3y ago

The problem of course is that it's not strictly about one's own body, in this case. "Bodily autonomy" doesn't cover the petty crimes addicts often commit to get money to buy drugs - the impossibility of biking anywhere knowing your vehicle is almost guaranteed to get stolen, the economic deserts created because businesses can't operate in certain areas due to theft and safety, the property damage that needs to be paid for over and over; the cost - of shelters, food banks, etc. - of supporting those who, in the depths of their addiction, can no longer support themselves; the public spaces damaged and deprived to others by the homeless encampments that flood parks and obstruct sidewalks; the danger of used needles lying around; the trauma experienced by people who have to see dead bodies littering the streets. In an ideal world, I guess these things would all be prevented and/or prosecuted, rather than the drugs themselves, of course, so as best to preserve bodily autonomy. I think you can make the case that the Oregon experiment is showing how in practice that doesn't happen.

cronix 3y ago
It also doesn't cover the cost in terms of tying up a major resource: Paramedics, Police and Fire. Overdoses are at an all time high in Portland. The entity that responds usually gives the person overdosing Narcan, addiction help is then offered for those who recover and 99% of those offered recovery options refuse. https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2023/08/01/overdose-911-calls-have-spiked-in-multnomah-county-this-summer/ https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2023/08/01/overdose-911-call... Firefighters (and others) are quitting due to the trauma of responding to these calls over and over and over, with no concrete progress. It takes it's toll mentally to respond these calls which are taking up and increasing percentage of the calls they have to respond to. https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/portland-downtown-firefighter-overdose-calls-narcan-deaths/283-a37b7402-c199-40ce-a120-bb6aec149365 https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/portland-do... The main failure of this experiment, imho, is the missing component of forcing detox/rehab/etc when x amount of drug related crimes are committed. The measure explicitly said the addict has to seek the help on their own volition. That might work for alcohol and cannabis, but the vast majority of opioid based drugs are so addictive they can't even fathom not getting their next high or life without it.
- magicalist 3y ago
  > Overdoses are at an all time high in Portland. Also in many many places that aren't Portland, so not sure why that's relevant?
  - waldothedog 3y ago
    Guessing that the comment author lives there, and it’s the major city in the state referenced in the article?
    - saurik 3y ago
      But if overdoses are peaking in a lot of places outside of Oregon than pointing out that overdoses are going up quickly in Portland is being deceptive. (Note that I do not myself have any clue as to what the truth here is, but if magicalist is correct it certainly undermines this part of cronix's argument, which--whether it was intended to or not <- that is kind of irrelevant, as the interpretation is in the readers--seems to be using that as part of the rhetoric.)
      - coding123 3y ago
        What typically happens when something goes recreational in one area is the following: 1) Drug runners drive to Oregon (or wherever - but it's always going to be Oregon first) and pick things up and take them back to their home state. 2) When the first state goes recreational - people expect that things are generally becoming more LAX and eventually it will be allowed there too. And often that LAX expectation is what literally pushes that state to go there too, voters gonna vote. But I'm definitely guessing the pandemic in general was just a huge event that has pushed probably millions (potentially billions worldwide) of people into general depression.
  - 100110011001 3y ago
    They were giving a specific example... It doesn't preclude other places having overdoses...
- 3y ago
1lint 3y ago
If the justification for criminalizing a drug is its propensity to cause societal damage, then by far the most important drug to ban is alcohol. Heroin addiction may promote theft and property damage, but that doesn't even come close to the mayhem, permanent injury and death caused by drunk driving accidents (as well as the social service costs of managing our country's subpopulation of alcoholics). Because alcohol remains legal, I believe less harmful drugs, including many if not all of the drugs decriminalized by Oregon, should be legal as well. >> "I guess these things would all be prevented and/or prosecuted, rather than the drugs themselves" I agree with this statement. Criminalizing hard drug use simply because it is associated with behaviour causing societal damage is not only inconsistent with the legality of alcohol use, it is also a slippery slope to justifying far more insidious laws. For example, a similar justification could be used to criminalize violent tv shows/movies/video games if the government believes consumption of such media is associated with societal harm. The obvious solution is to simply criminalize the acts, such as theft and property damage, that actually harm others/society, rather than indirect upstream actions such as drug use. This "Oregon experiment" involves far more than just decriminalizing drug use, but also (effectively) decriminalizing many other domains of crime such as retail theft, daylight robbery, urban camping, property damage, etc. not unlike what we have here in SF.
- DiggyJohnson 3y ago
  Crack, heroine, meth, and opioids are demonstrably more damaging to the individual than alcohol. You're conflating total magnitude (individual harm * number of users) with individual harm.

by wk_end 3y ago

cronix 3y ago

It also doesn't cover the cost in terms of tying up a major resource: Paramedics, Police and Fire. Overdoses are at an all time high in Portland. The entity that responds usually gives the person overdosing Narcan, addiction help is then offered for those who recover and 99% of those offered recovery options refuse. https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2023/08/01/overdose-911-calls-have-spiked-in-multnomah-county-this-summer/ https://www.wweek.com/news/city/2023/08/01/overdose-911-call... Firefighters (and others) are quitting due to the trauma of responding to these calls over and over and over, with no concrete progress. It takes it's toll mentally to respond these calls which are taking up and increasing percentage of the calls they have to respond to. https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/portland-downtown-firefighter-overdose-calls-narcan-deaths/283-a37b7402-c199-40ce-a120-bb6aec149365 https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/portland-do... The main failure of this experiment, imho, is the missing component of forcing detox/rehab/etc when x amount of drug related crimes are committed. The measure explicitly said the addict has to seek the help on their own volition. That might work for alcohol and cannabis, but the vast majority of opioid based drugs are so addictive they can't even fathom not getting their next high or life without it.

magicalist 3y ago
> Overdoses are at an all time high in Portland. Also in many many places that aren't Portland, so not sure why that's relevant?
- waldothedog 3y ago
  Guessing that the comment author lives there, and it’s the major city in the state referenced in the article?
  - saurik 3y ago
    But if overdoses are peaking in a lot of places outside of Oregon than pointing out that overdoses are going up quickly in Portland is being deceptive. (Note that I do not myself have any clue as to what the truth here is, but if magicalist is correct it certainly undermines this part of cronix's argument, which--whether it was intended to or not <- that is kind of irrelevant, as the interpretation is in the readers--seems to be using that as part of the rhetoric.)
    - coding123 3y ago
      What typically happens when something goes recreational in one area is the following: 1) Drug runners drive to Oregon (or wherever - but it's always going to be Oregon first) and pick things up and take them back to their home state. 2) When the first state goes recreational - people expect that things are generally becoming more LAX and eventually it will be allowed there too. And often that LAX expectation is what literally pushes that state to go there too, voters gonna vote. But I'm definitely guessing the pandemic in general was just a huge event that has pushed probably millions (potentially billions worldwide) of people into general depression.
- 100110011001 3y ago
  They were giving a specific example... It doesn't preclude other places having overdoses...
3y ago

1lint 3y ago

If the justification for criminalizing a drug is its propensity to cause societal damage, then by far the most important drug to ban is alcohol. Heroin addiction may promote theft and property damage, but that doesn't even come close to the mayhem, permanent injury and death caused by drunk driving accidents (as well as the social service costs of managing our country's subpopulation of alcoholics). Because alcohol remains legal, I believe less harmful drugs, including many if not all of the drugs decriminalized by Oregon, should be legal as well. >> "I guess these things would all be prevented and/or prosecuted, rather than the drugs themselves" I agree with this statement. Criminalizing hard drug use simply because it is associated with behaviour causing societal damage is not only inconsistent with the legality of alcohol use, it is also a slippery slope to justifying far more insidious laws. For example, a similar justification could be used to criminalize violent tv shows/movies/video games if the government believes consumption of such media is associated with societal harm. The obvious solution is to simply criminalize the acts, such as theft and property damage, that actually harm others/society, rather than indirect upstream actions such as drug use. This "Oregon experiment" involves far more than just decriminalizing drug use, but also (effectively) decriminalizing many other domains of crime such as retail theft, daylight robbery, urban camping, property damage, etc. not unlike what we have here in SF.

DiggyJohnson 3y ago
Crack, heroine, meth, and opioids are demonstrably more damaging to the individual than alcohol. You're conflating total magnitude (individual harm * number of users) with individual harm.