1y ago

With Oregon facing rampant public drug use, lawmakers backpedal on pioneering decriminalization law

Democratic lawmakers in Oregon on Tuesday unveiled a sweeping new bill that would undo a key part of the state’s first-in-the-nation drug decriminalization law, a recognition that public opinion has soured on the measure amid rampant public drug use during the fentanyl crisis.

The bill would recriminalize the possession of small amounts of drugs as a low-level misdemeanor, enabling police to confiscate them and crack down on their use on sidewalks and in parks, its authors said. It also aims to make it easier to prosecute dealers, to access addiction treatment medication, and to obtain and keep housing without facing discrimination for using that medication.

53 comments

End the failed war on drugs already.
- B- but then people might use drugs more openly and be more forthright in admitting they have an addiction, and I'll have to look at them! We had better just throw them all in jail instead. That always works.
  
  Do you think kids should be subjected to people shooting up drugs when playing outside or when going to school?
  I am anti drug war personally but if any situation led to it being easier for kids to be subjected to that, that seems like a worse world.
I mean im all for legalization but im also fine restricting it from public places and allowing property owners to determine usage at their location. I mean that is how alchohol works. At least here you can't be drinking in parks unless its a festival with a license.
- And even when it's allowed in, it doesn't mean allowing people to just do whatever. There's plenty of places around the world where you can have a drink outdoors, but there's still laws against loitering, being a nuisance, picking fights, etc.
  There's a whole wide world between "nobody can do drugs ever" and "we must tolerate fucked up people fucking up everything everywhere."
  
  yeah where im at they legalized weed and im annoyed they did not allow grow but I actually would like more restriction on advertising. The whole point of legalization is to gain some control of the situation.
"Possession of under a gram of heroin, for example, is only subject to a ticket and a maximum fine of $100.
Those caught with small amounts can have the citation dismissed by calling a 24-hour hotline to complete an addiction screening within 45 days, but those who don’t do a screening are not penalized for failing to pay the fine."
As was heavily pointed out at the time, there is no downside to ignoring all of it, so it turns out the vast majority of people ignore all of it and do what they want. The proponents live in a fantasy world where everybody wants to get clean. All of them ignore that their poster child Portugal still has penalties, just not criminal charges; jail is not the only stick (although Portugul also has a growing drug and program funding problem).
- How do you get clean in a for-profit healthcare system when you're a poor junkie?
  
  Did you... not read the article? Oregon is sitting on a shit ton of money for treatment.
- The proponents live in a fantasy world where everybody wants to get clean.
  Absolutely false. I live in a fantasy world where my leaders are required to watch Demolition Man on repeat until they understand that people have the inalienable right to choose to make themselves miserable. That's why we also allow casinos.
  
  Unless you're native you're gonna have a hard time opening a casino in Oregon.
  People should absolutely be able to make themselves miserable however they want, and if they limited it to making themselves miserable that'd be fine and dandy. Let me know when Portland public transit stops testing positive for fentanyl and meth. So far no casino nor old lady at the slots has stolen my catalytic converter.
  The goals are great, the legislation was poorly thought shit based on aspirational thinking that had predictable results. Criminalizing simple possession isn't the solution either but we live in a ridiculously black and white society where that's all they can think of.
  
  But do the leaders know how to use the three seashells?
- Possession of under a gram of heroin, for example, is only subject to a ticket and a maximum fine of $100.
  Fines like this are just taxes for the poor.
  
  I'm poor and I'm an (ex)addict. If a fine like that came with penalties, I wouldn't do drugs in public... Because I wouldn't want to pay the fine. Poor people aren't stupid and most of us aren't in the habit of throwing away money..
- Oregons problem is money mismanagement
- There needs to be a complete paradigm shift. Lots of people in this thread can't seem to wrap their heads around the concept of "decriminalization." That's why people aren't being penalized. Because it's no longer illegal to possess. It's really that simple.
  
  Decriminalization and legalization are not the same thing. Possession is still illegal, but there are not criminal penalties, that is why it has a citation and ostensibly a fine. Oregon has legalized marijuana, but not the rest.
  I think there can be confusion because a violation and a crime are not the same thing, legally, even though they are both against the law. A violation does not include jail time, but usually does include other penalties. A traffic infraction is a very common example of a violation. You don't go to jail for running a red light despite it being illegal.
Oregonian here... Measure 110 is an absolute shit show.
Yes, it decriminalized drugs and funded treatment programs, but the problem was the treatment programs were 100% optional.
Here's how it "worked":
Get busted with drugs, it's a $100 fine.
Fine can get waived if you call a toll free number to ask about treatment.
Note: All you had to do was call the number. You didn't have to actually GET treatment.
Initially 16,000 or so people were cited in the first year, 0.85% (~136) sought treatment.
https://www.oregonlive.com/health/2022/09/oregons-drug-decriminalization-effort-sends-less-than-1-of-people-to-treatment.html
The rest were looking for free needle exchanges, free methadone, free naloxone.
There are no real consequences, and unlike booze and pot, there are no laws banning public use of hard drugs.
So we get open air drug markets, run by cartels from Honduras, in this case mere blocks from police HQ:
https://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2023/03/25/whos-running-downtown-portlands-open-air-fentanyl-market/
https://www.koin.com/news/crime/feds-drug-traffickers-using-honduran-nationals-to-funnel-fentanyl-into-portland/
https://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/honduran-man-arrested-portland-trafficking-rainbow-fentanyl-and-firearms-charged-federal
- As those articles you linked point out, it is illegal to sell drugs and the police arrest people who do. What exactly are you recriminalizing? Is this a case where the POLICE do not want to actively solve the drug selling problem because they want to return to the days when the state money was being funneled to them and not treatment programs? We lived with possession being criminalized and nothing working since the 80s. I think we can try decriminalizing possession for long enough to get the treatment programs running.
  Drug use is way up in states that are not Oregon. Fentanyl and Covid have changed the game. The timing is unfortunate sadly to try something new.
  
  Bingo. The state hasn't actually funded any new treatment centers and things like using drugs in a park are already illegal. This is just a way for the state to get off the hook for actually funding treatment centers while throwing a bone to police who are butthurt that they lost one of their easiest, low effort methods to arrest someone. Most of the stats thrown around about drug use in this state were from before this law even passed, so how will going right back to the old system improve anything? Democrats are lucky that Republican legislators are such pieces of trash because otherwise they'd actually be held accountable for being such huge disappointments to the population.
  
  The police don't arrest people who do, that's part of the problem. They can be embarrased into action by the media, they take action if the problem gets "bad enough".
  Meanwhile:
  Overdoses are through the roof:
  https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/portland-downtown-firefighter-overdose-calls-narcan-deaths/283-a37b7402-c199-40ce-a120-bb6aec149365
  "In June alone, firefighters from Station 1 responded to 300 overdoses.
  Portland police data shows that back in 2020 nearly 90 people died from overdoses. The number jumped to 135 in 2021, then to 159 in all of 2022. So far this year there have been 151 deaths, all in less than seven months. Police expect that number to be around 300 by year's end. 
  Portland firefighters are responding to more overdoses than fires — and when they do respond to a fire, it’s often-homeless camp related."
  https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2023/04/pills-petty-crime-despair-a-perfect-storm-batters-heart-of-downtown-portland.html
  Drug related theft is through the roof:
  https://www.koin.com/news/crime/retail-theft-linked-to-drugs-stolen-vehicles-in-portland/
- Why should there be consequences for possessing something that's been decriminalized? Like it seems like you're missing the entire point?
  People looking for safe injection sites and needle exchanges is a good thing, it's called harm reduction. That's a win. That's one of the main things that decriminalization allows us to do; let people use their drug of choice safely and privately.
  
  Guns are legal, but there's still penalties for possession in certain circumstances. Why should drugs be different? There's no reason to be going around in public with a pocket full of meth.
  
  Pot and booze are both legal, but you aren't allowed to get high or wasted in public either.

53 comments