151
submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Oregon’s first-in-the-nation law that decriminalized the possession of small amounts of heroin, cocaine and other illicit drugs in favor of an emphasis on addiction treatment is facing strong headwinds in the progressive state after an explosion of public drug use fueled by the proliferation of fentanyl and a surge in deaths from opioids, including those of children.

“The inability for people to live their day-to-day life without encountering open-air drug use is so pressing on urban folks’ minds,” said John Horvick, vice president of polling firm DHM Research. “That has very much changed people’s perspective about what they think Measure 110 is.”

When the law was approved by 58% of Oregon voters three years ago, supporters championed Measure 110 as a revolutionary approach that would transform addiction by minimizing penalties for drug use and investing instead in recovery.

But even top Democratic lawmakers who backed the law, which will likely dominate the upcoming legislative session, say they’re now open to revisiting it after the biggest increase in synthetic opioid deaths among states that have reported their numbers.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 105 points 10 months ago

And of course nobody even contemplating the idea that they underfunded the resources invested in recovery and that's the change they need to make.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 51 points 10 months ago

Oregonian here. And... Yep. That's it exactly.

[-] themadcodger@kbin.social 20 points 10 months ago

Second Oregonian here, and also yup. We decriminalized but then decided not to require treatment (Portugal method), and then didn't fund treatment anyway.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Portugal doesn't require treatment. I don't know where this idea came from, but this isn't the first time I've seen this misinformation.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Hider9k@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago

Yeah fucking right. I work in downtown Salem. It doesn’t matter if half these people have “resources.” They’re here because they can get their fix without being harassed.

You need repercussions in order for addicts to want to get clean. We don’t have any.

[-] nyar@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago

Sick, love to see a fascist thinking about criminalizing those who need help, not punishment, the most.

[-] Hider9k@lemm.ee 6 points 10 months ago

Massive leap, but typical for a shit for brains. I just work and pay taxes here, but yeah no I’m a fascist because I think people shouldn’t be tweaking on P2P meth in broad daylight in front of our businesses and fucking children.

Are you from Oregon? Do you live here? Do you see it? If not, shut your ignorant fucking mouth. Repercussions include mandatory treatment. I’m not saying we should lock people away in solitary, but the current system of ZERO repercussions whatsoever is not working. Doesn’t make me a fascist to point it out. Go fuck yourself.

[-] themadcodger@kbin.social 7 points 10 months ago

You're going to need to cite your sources that repercussions do anything meaningful for addicts to get clean, as opposed to decriminalized but mandatory treatment (a la Portugal).

[-] Hider9k@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

Source: I live and work here, I voted for the law initially and I have seen it fail. IMO this trumps your “a l portugal” source, you ignorant fucking dunce.

Come live and work in our communities and you will see as virtually everyone here does that the measure has failed because there is ZERO INCENTIVE for anyone selling or using these drugs to do anything but continue to sell and use. As I said in a previous comment, repercussions include mandatory treatment. You people are detached and moronic.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Also severe police shortage amidst nationwide increase in crimes. I don't think any of the drug users are getting cited for public drug use at all unless they have to be taken to the hospital.

Edit: I DIDN'T SAY DEFUND. Portland has a massive police shortage. They also STATE that they don't prioritize nonviolent drug use because they don't have manpower.

[-] nyar@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago

There isn't a nationwide increase in crime, and there haven't been defundings of the police.

What reality do you live in?

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

What the fuck happened here?

Portland has had a police shortage since 2020. I never said anything about defunding. Portland Police also have wait times and aren't responding to non violent drug use calls unless life is in danger.

Crimes are also up Only murder went "down" because it was extremely high post pandemic and hasn't gotten down to prepandemic.

No need to be an asshole about it

[-] gramathy@lemmy.ml 13 points 10 months ago

Have the police tried just working harder, or perhaps pulling themselves up by their bootstraps

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] buffaloboobs@lemmy.world 66 points 10 months ago

so, Oregon had "the biggest increase in synthetic opioid deaths among states" 😱

"...that have reported their numbers."

I feel like that last phrase is doing a lot of work. I'm not going to put in the work to figure out the numbers, but it's a weird place to end the article.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 28 points 10 months ago

Same with homeless and gun activity. Some states, exclusively red states, don't share their statistics or just don't want to pay to track them.

[-] ZephyrXero@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago
[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 66 points 10 months ago

I mean, if the people are willing to risk their lives with an overdose, I don't think a criminal penalty is going to scare them very much. So, yeah, more resources for treatment are probably necessary.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

It's not that the penalty is effective, it lets law enforcement remove them from the public places.

[-] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 55 points 10 months ago

"go die someplace else. I'm trying to civilized society over here"

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

One solution's been tried and it didn't work we should just give up.

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

Did you mean this to sound like it undermines your argument as much as it does?

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Yeah, sounds like I'm arguing with fascists.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 9 points 10 months ago

It sounds like you have poor reading comprehension and don't know who you're arguing with.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] queue 3 points 10 months ago

I don't think fascists support treating addicted members of society and not exporting them elsewhere via final solution methods. I could be wrong, but I don't think that's what they are famous for, compassion towards a health crisis.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

It's almost as if legalizing the sale of drugs would give a safe place to get drugs that aren't laced with fentanyl.

This helps those with addiction from getting caught up in the prison system, but nothing to make them safer when taking drugs.

[-] You999@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago

Or in some cases you could get Fentanyl but have it correctly labeled, dosed, and administered.

[-] themadcodger@kbin.social 4 points 10 months ago

We didn't legalize them, just decriminalized them. Problem is, we didn't follow the Portugal method and require them to get treatment… just not caught up in the system. So of course this was going to happen.

[-] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 21 points 10 months ago

It's the same dumb approach as it is with the "housing first" model. Yes this models work and they work great!

But you actually have to read more than just the headline of the paper. The decriminalisation of drugs in Portugal for example came with a whole bunch of other new regulations and programs. It wasn't "just" decriminalise drugs and be done with it.

We are approaching Idiocracy status fast...

[-] Jonna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Are you saying "housing first" works or not?

Because just labeling something "housing first" without actually providing housing of course doesn't work and that may be what you're say. But a proper "housing first" DOES WORK to significantly improve people's lives and reduce their engagement with emergency services (ie, cops and hospitals), which is quality of life for the rest of us.

Here's a study from the Lancet (n=1103): https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(22)00117-1/fulltext

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Making treatment optional (unlike Portugal) has been the big disaster here.

16,000 people ticketed under measure 110, less than 1% actively seeking treatment.

https://www.oregonlive.com/health/2022/09/oregons-drug-decriminalization-effort-sends-less-than-1-of-people-to-treatment.html

Meanwhile, drug use is exploding, overdoses are exploding, related thefts and crime are exploding...

https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2022/02/07/oregon-has-worst-drug-addiction-problem-in-the-nation-report-shows/

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."

110 continues to be an utter failure.

[-] ZephyrXero@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

And yet recent studies show overdoses have not gone up as a result, and Fentanyl is a growing problem in all US cities. https://www.opb.org/article/2023/09/27/oregon-drug-decriminalization-measure-110-overdose-deaths/

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Deaths have not, because the fire department is responding with narcan hundreds of times a month.

[-] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 4 points 10 months ago

All your data posted above apart from a single anecdote from a firefighter are from before this law even passed at the end of 2020. Seems like you're arguing the old way wasn't working.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Pirate_lemmy_arrrrR@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 10 months ago

People are probably more likely to call for their help if they don't have to fear being thrown in jail.

[-] Pirate_lemmy_arrrrR@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 10 months ago

You can't force treatment on someone who doesn't want help and expect results. Just like throwing them in jail until they're sober doesn't stop them from using as soon as they get released.

Not ruining people's lives further with jail and criminal records for personal use is better than what we were doing before, even if it's not perfect.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Addicts won't volunteer for help, that's part of the addiction.

[-] Pirate_lemmy_arrrrR@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 10 months ago

Rehab only works if the person wants to get clean. Otherwise it's just incarceration. There needs to be more support for those that want to get clean, but decriminalizing drugs also has to be done so that they can feel safe to seek treatment without fear of punishment.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

We are trying decriminalization, it's not working.

The reason it works in Portugal is a) treatment is not optional and b) Nationalized health care.

Absent those two things, decriminalization is a disaster.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Treatment isn't mandatory in Portugal. Rather, they expanded treatment services, increased point for positive intervention and interactions with healthcare provider and social workers, and focused on harm reduction.

Learn about the practices and not the misinformation. You can read more in the wikipedia entry under regulations.

[T]he suspect is interviewed by a "Commission for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction" (Comissões para a Dissuasão da Toxicodependência – CDT). ... The committees have a broad range of sanctions available to them when ruling on the drug use offence. ... The committee cannot mandate compulsory treatment, although its orientation is to induce addicts to enter and remain in treatment.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago

We do sometimes. The point is to make sure the help is there if and when we decide to.

[-] guacupado@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

It's crass and probably juvenile but honestly just let them filter themselves out.

[-] SeaJ@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

In the first year after the law took effect in February 2021, only 1% of people who received citations for possession sought help via the hotline

This tells me the voluntary approach does not work. I'm going to guess those citations do not get paid either.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023
151 points (100.0% liked)

News

22890 readers
3346 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS