Oregon Poised To Decriminalize Meth, Cocaine And Heroin

[dead0man]

link-daily caller

You must be logged in to read this quote.

great news!

[GGover]

finally

[Santander]

Disgusting.

[pbrower2a]

Mistake. Those drugs are dangerous.

[GoTfan]

It seems like Oregon is determined to be a thorn in Trump's side

[OSR stands with Israel]

This is terrible Meth ,Heroin , and Cocaine is actually dangerous and should not be decriminalized.

[JA]

Mistake. Those drugs are dangerous.

And keeping them criminalized, which results in a black market, competition for territory, lack of adequate treatment, and increased crime is a better policy?

[Sumner 1868]

Won't end well. Expect a wave of migration to WA and the Rockies in the next few years.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Disgusting.

[JA]

Won't end well. Expect a wave of migration to WA and the Rockies in the next few years.

That's the only potential problem with the law. It needs to be applied nationwide, otherwise people will likely migrate there, which could cause a lot of problems.

[Lambsbread]

This is terrible Meth ,Heroin , and Cocaine is actually dangerous and should not be decriminalized.

Well then don't do them.

[American2020]

Mistake. Those drugs are dangerous.

[mvd10]

Won't end well. Expect a wave of migration to WA and the Rockies in the next few years.

That's the only potential problem with the law. It needs to be applied nationwide, otherwise people will likely migrate there, which could cause a lot of problems.

More EV's for the Democrats

Anyway, I'd probably vote for the bill, but you have a point.

[Confused Democrat]

Won't end well. Expect a wave of migration to WA and the Rockies in the next few years.

That's the only potential problem with the law. It needs to be applied nationwide, otherwise people will likely migrate there, which could cause a lot of problems.

Agreed, drug addiction shouldn't be treated as a crime.

[JA]

Won't end well. Expect a wave of migration to WA and the Rockies in the next few years.

That's the only potential problem with the law. It needs to be applied nationwide, otherwise people will likely migrate there, which could cause a lot of problems.

Agreed, drug addiction shouldn't be treated as a crime.

People treat drug addiction as a crime because they moralize it; they view the use/abuse of drugs as a personal moral failing. That may be true in certain instances, but existing social science supports the view that when a social problem like drug abuse is so widespread, it has an underlying societal cause. As such, we must find the cause and eliminate it, while also treating those who abuse drugs, not as criminals, but as victims that deserve social support through an adequate public health response. That means decriminalizing all drugs, investing in and opening public health clinics and rehabilitation centers, and ensuring access to mental health care services. Even then, that's just treating the symptoms of the underlying societal disease, whatever that may be.

Regardless, treating drug addiction as a criminal justice issue has done absolutely nothing but encourage gang violence, push vulnerable people further underground and into dangerous situations, fill our jails and prisons with people who need rehabilitation and mental health care, and cause unnecessary deaths.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/05/why-hardly-anyone-dies-from-a-drug-overdose-in-portugal/?utm_term=.13a91e204fc7

Just gonna leave that there. Marking hard drugs criminal and "evil"(taboo) both makes teens more interested in them and destroys any effectiveness anti-drug campaigns(which need to get a lot more realistic and honest, as well as chill out) could have.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Dealers of these drugs should still be thrown in prison for a long time, and users of these drugs must have mandatory hospitalization and rehabilitation(where they cant leave unless they are rehabilitated)

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Won't end well. Expect a wave of migration to WA and the Rockies in the next few years.

That's the only potential problem with the law. It needs to be applied nationwide, otherwise people will likely migrate there, which could cause a lot of problems.

Agreed, drug addiction shouldn't be treated as a crime.

People treat drug addiction as a crime because they moralize it; they view the use/abuse of drugs as a personal moral failing. That may be true in certain instances, but existing social science supports the view that when a social problem like drug abuse is so widespread, it has an underlying societal cause. As such, we must find the cause and eliminate it, while also treating those who abuse drugs, not as criminals, but as victims that deserve social support through an adequate public health response. That means decriminalizing all drugs, investing in and opening public health clinics and rehabilitation centers, and ensuring access to mental health care services. Even then, that's just treating the symptoms of the underlying societal disease, whatever that may be.

While there might be a language discrepancy between the two points of view, I see no necessary contradiction between them. Most actions, period, have some sort of underlying social cause; most vices, crimes, and sins the same. If a man is a serial adulterer, we have every right to ask what made him this way; the fact remains that he still failed to perform his contractual obligations. Likewise, one is allowed to disapprove of their friend or associate's use of vice--alcohol, marijuana, otherwise--while realizing that there are social reasons that set them apart. That said, the lack of deterrence (I should clarify, deterrence is not a crime control strategy I wholeheartedly endorse by any means; this is an example) may be one of the circumstances that allowed for greater penetration of vices. Availability, the same. That those in the social control community have an interest in reining in poverty, social disintegration, and the like, is something that we can probably agree on, though it is perhaps something that policy-makers have yet to fully embrace.

[Suburbia]

Don't sympathize with dead drug users. They know what they were getting themselves in do.

Drugs is a choice.

[SoLongAtlas]

Don't sympathize with dead drug users. They know what they were getting themselves in do.

Drugs is a choice.

[Dr. Arch]

I definitely don't feel comfortable with this, but it has had success in other countries. We'll see how it works out before taking a hard position on it.

[Virginiá]

What is the point of throwing drug users in jail? What does it accomplish to give them criminal charges? Seriously, we've been doing this for decades. It does not work. I don't even get how this up for debate anymore. No one is saying to accept unfettered drug use. The point is to shift the strategy from throwing people in cages to actually treating them in ways that are more effective, and don't brand them as criminals so its more difficult to integrate into society in the future.

Good for Oregon. It's time to try new things, and most of all, it's time to accept that criminalization is an awful strategy that besides making the enforcers feel like they are being tough and doing "the right thing," actually has little long-term impact on the overall problem.

[pbrower2a]

Mistake. Those drugs are dangerous.

And keeping them criminalized, which results in a black market, competition for territory, lack of adequate treatment, and increased crime is a better policy?

I wouldn't legalize murder-for-hire just to put the deed out in the open, either.

We need to get people off dangerous drugs. Marijuana is one thing. Heroin? Meth? Cocaine?

We should be focusing on rehabilitation in non-penal settings as we can do with alcohol.  Yes, punish the pushers, but lighten up on the addicts.

As for opiates -- most opiate abuse is now the result of misuse of prescriptions. Heroin might be treated the same way.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Meth should NOT be legalized. I can see cocaine and heroin, but meth poses significant harm to those other than the user. Those idiots who cook meth in clandestine labs risk blowing their surroundings to smithereens, so meth is a public safety hazard. Legalizing meth only leads to more potential harm to not only the user but his or her neighbors. Good people should not be subjected to that kind of risk. 

[Virginiá]

Meth should NOT be legalized. I can see cocaine and heroin, but meth poses significant harm to those other than the user. Those idiots who cook meth in clandestine labs risk blowing their surroundings to smithereens, so meth is a public safety hazard. Legalizing meth only leads to more potential harm to not only the user but his or her neighbors. Good people should not be subjected to that kind of risk.  

It's not legalized, though. It's decriminalized, which means people caught in possession of small amounts of the drug will no longer be thrown in jail and branded a criminal. Dealing and manufacturing is still criminalized.

All I know is, I've seen too many friends affected by drug addiction and I come from an area that was beaten pretty bad by it. Jail/prison does not help. It only makes their life a hell of a lot more difficult, which in turn pushes them deeper into drugs in many cases. What they need is proper treatment. Addiction is simply not a criminal justice issue, and the system is not equipped to handle it.