3 ms·

How do we define "working" here? Does "working" mean it prevents people from using drugs? In that case, throwing millions of people into prison must be a great

How do we define "working" here? Does "working" mean it prevents people from using drugs? In that case, throwing millions of people into prison must be a great idea! I call bullshit. We need to be explicit about our goals! The goal I support is treatment. Yes, decriminalization is failing to provide treatment. Of course it is! That wasn't its intended purpose in the first place. The purpose was to stop punishing victims with incarceration and felony conviction. We still need to replace the broken system with a useful one. That means regulated production and distribution of drugs instead of turning a blind eye to the black market. That means programs that heavily encourage treatment, not just "I gave them a ticket to go if they feel like it". Just imagine if our society put half the effort we put into getting people to drink Coca-Cola into getting people healthcare.

foxyv 3y ago
Judging by the way drug laws have been enforced in the past. Working means arbitrarily suppressing Americans right to vote, speak, protest, and participate in our economy. So yeah, it's not working because it isn't doing that anymore.
paulddraper 3y ago
> How do we define "working" here? You could read the article. "People sprawled on sidewalks and using fentanyl with no fear of consequence have become a common sight in cities such as Eugene and Portland. Business owners and local leaders are upset, but so are liberal voters who hoped decriminalization would lead to more people getting help. In reality, few drug users are taking advantage of new state-funded rehabilitation programs."
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  I did read the article. Did you read my comment?
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    Yes. I even quoted it.
    - thomastjeffery 3y ago
      > Yes, decriminalization is failing to provide treatment. Of course it is! That wasn't its intended purpose in the first place. The purpose was to stop punishing victims with incarceration and felony conviction. I think that's the bit you are missing.
comte7092 3y ago
>Yes, decriminalization is failing to provide treatment. Of course it is! That wasn't its intended purpose in the first place. Gonna have to correct you here. Measure 110 was supposed to bring decriminalization and treatment. The treatment just never really materialized.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  OK, so decriminalization and treatment are separate avenues that were combined into one measure. The first materialized, and the second did not. You have reiterated my point.
  - comte7092 3y ago
    I mean if you completely re characterize the measure to mean what you want it to mean, then yes. The measure linked the two, they were not treated as separate.
    - thomastjeffery 3y ago
      ...and yet, here we are: the decriminalization part was successfully implemented, and the treatment part was not. It doesn't matter how or why the treatment aspect of that measure failed: it only matters that it did. The reality, as clearly laid out by the article, then reiterated by me, then by you, is that drugs were decriminalized and people addicted to those drugs did not receive treatment. We are on the same page here. What needs to happen now is to resolve the treatment failure.
ericmcer 3y ago
Can you force them to undergo treatment? Do most drug users want to get clean but they don't have the resources? I watch a lot of youtube interviews with homeless people (so I am an expert lol), but a common occurrence is a persons community, friends, family and entire way of life revolve around homelessness and drugs. It is way more complicated than just assuming they all want to be clean but society isn't willing to help them. How can the government provide an entire new lifestyle complete with work/friends/etc. for someone. "Just imagine if our society put half the effort we put into getting people to drink Coca-Cola into getting people healthcare." Healthcare is our #1 expense and growing bigger every year. We 100% put way more effort and money into it than any other problem our society faces.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  > Do most drug users want to get clean but they don't have the resources? That's the problem: the way our healthcare system is currently structured, patients must actively pursue care. I have not seen even an attempt at resolving this problem. This isn't unique to addiction, either: I would have taken ADHD meds this morning, except that I need to find a new prescriber before I can get any; and to do that, I must overcome the primary symptom of ADHD (executive dysfunction) to even start looking for care. Somehow, being aware of this catch-22 situation only makes it worse. We already know that people suffering from addiction are the least likely to advocate for change; yet we haven't even bothered to give anyone else the job. --- > Healthcare is our #1 expense and growing bigger every year. We already know that the United States wastes an incredible proportion of its healthcare spending. Some comparisons estimate a 20% overhead relative to other countries. Get rid of the insurance model, and we will be in a much stronger financial position. That doesn't even begin to factor in the added costs of incarceration (which itself includes mandatory healthcare), let alone the secondary costs of an untreated populace who are addicted and impoverished.

foxyv 3y ago

Judging by the way drug laws have been enforced in the past. Working means arbitrarily suppressing Americans right to vote, speak, protest, and participate in our economy. So yeah, it's not working because it isn't doing that anymore.

paulddraper 3y ago

> How do we define "working" here? You could read the article. "People sprawled on sidewalks and using fentanyl with no fear of consequence have become a common sight in cities such as Eugene and Portland. Business owners and local leaders are upset, but so are liberal voters who hoped decriminalization would lead to more people getting help. In reality, few drug users are taking advantage of new state-funded rehabilitation programs."

thomastjeffery 3y ago
I did read the article. Did you read my comment?
- paulddraper 3y ago
  Yes. I even quoted it.
  - thomastjeffery 3y ago
    > Yes, decriminalization is failing to provide treatment. Of course it is! That wasn't its intended purpose in the first place. The purpose was to stop punishing victims with incarceration and felony conviction. I think that's the bit you are missing.

comte7092 3y ago

>Yes, decriminalization is failing to provide treatment. Of course it is! That wasn't its intended purpose in the first place. Gonna have to correct you here. Measure 110 was supposed to bring decriminalization and treatment. The treatment just never really materialized.

thomastjeffery 3y ago
OK, so decriminalization and treatment are separate avenues that were combined into one measure. The first materialized, and the second did not. You have reiterated my point.
- comte7092 3y ago
  I mean if you completely re characterize the measure to mean what you want it to mean, then yes. The measure linked the two, they were not treated as separate.
  - thomastjeffery 3y ago
    ...and yet, here we are: the decriminalization part was successfully implemented, and the treatment part was not. It doesn't matter how or why the treatment aspect of that measure failed: it only matters that it did. The reality, as clearly laid out by the article, then reiterated by me, then by you, is that drugs were decriminalized and people addicted to those drugs did not receive treatment. We are on the same page here. What needs to happen now is to resolve the treatment failure.

ericmcer 3y ago

Can you force them to undergo treatment? Do most drug users want to get clean but they don't have the resources? I watch a lot of youtube interviews with homeless people (so I am an expert lol), but a common occurrence is a persons community, friends, family and entire way of life revolve around homelessness and drugs. It is way more complicated than just assuming they all want to be clean but society isn't willing to help them. How can the government provide an entire new lifestyle complete with work/friends/etc. for someone. "Just imagine if our society put half the effort we put into getting people to drink Coca-Cola into getting people healthcare." Healthcare is our #1 expense and growing bigger every year. We 100% put way more effort and money into it than any other problem our society faces.

thomastjeffery 3y ago
> Do most drug users want to get clean but they don't have the resources? That's the problem: the way our healthcare system is currently structured, patients must actively pursue care. I have not seen even an attempt at resolving this problem. This isn't unique to addiction, either: I would have taken ADHD meds this morning, except that I need to find a new prescriber before I can get any; and to do that, I must overcome the primary symptom of ADHD (executive dysfunction) to even start looking for care. Somehow, being aware of this catch-22 situation only makes it worse. We already know that people suffering from addiction are the least likely to advocate for change; yet we haven't even bothered to give anyone else the job. --- > Healthcare is our #1 expense and growing bigger every year. We already know that the United States wastes an incredible proportion of its healthcare spending. Some comparisons estimate a 20% overhead relative to other countries. Get rid of the insurance model, and we will be in a much stronger financial position. That doesn't even begin to factor in the added costs of incarceration (which itself includes mandatory healthcare), let alone the secondary costs of an untreated populace who are addicted and impoverished.