The entire reason the decriminalization failed was because it had no nuance. It copied something that worked in a much different culture, and didn’t copy the other supports that caused it to work. Nothing to address the other side, the benefits of jailing addicts (i.e. preventing them from committing other crimes).
> After years of economic crisis, Portugal decentralized its drug oversight operation in 2012. A funding drop from 76 million euros ($82.7 million) to 16 million euros ($17.4 million) forced Portugal’s main institution to outsource work previously done by the state to nonprofit groups, including the street teams that engage with people who use drugs. The country is now moving to create a new institute aimed at reinvigorating its drug prevention programs.
> Twenty years ago, “we were quite successful in dealing with the big problem, the epidemic of heroin use and all the related effects,” Goulão said in an interview with The Washington Post. “But we have had a kind of disinvestment, a freezing in our response … and we lost some efficacy.”
Decriminalization is a half-measure that's doomed to fail. The drugs are still the same impure crap that they were before decriminalization, leading to the same overdoses and deaths. And the people selling the drugs are the same violent criminal groups that were selling them before decriminalization, except now they are de facto endorsed by the government (where else are people suppose to buy the drugs they are now allowed to legally posses?). The only difference is that drug use becomes more public, to the benefit of absolutely nobody.
Overdose deaths would decline dramatically. I think those saved lives are enough justification to give it a try, particularly given the ongoing failure of every other approach.
A very tricky situation. On the one hand, I'm very pro-liberty and firmly believe every human has a right to decide what substances to engage with. On the other hand, it may be that the changes in human behavior elicited from consuming some drugs are just fundamentally incompatible with our collective vision of a healthy society.
How can this be reconciled? At the very least, anti-social / anti-societal behavior, eg crime, must be dealt with even or especially if the root cause is drug use. But then you get in the argument, well they're sick and addicted, is it really their fault, do they deserve to be punished for the resultant crime? They made the first decision to act so ultimately they have to be held responsible for the downstream consequences, I guess.
And then, is being homeless a crime? I don't think so. But how about littering, or using public spaces as urinals? We've decided that, for our vision of society, littering is against the law, and so is public urination / defecation. So why not enforce that, maybe especially if you're addicted to drugs?
There are simple, expensive answers: highly diligent social workers focusing on homelessness outreach + massive affordable housing construction that crunches housing prices. Regulate the substances but have them available to addicts, and make sure fentanyl is out of the supply chain, and make selling drugs outside the regulated system a felony.
Not saying you’re wrong in the context of your locale, but there are many places around the world that are not plagued with these problems and have dealt with them in very different ways.
I think one obvious solution is to stop grouping all drugs together. No one is robbing a place to feed their DMT addiction and no one is shooting up psilocybin outside our homes. The criminalization of these types of drugs does far more harm than the drugs themselves. The issue with opioids and speed is more complicated, but I think the options and solutions for the most addictive and harmful drugs will become more clear once we stop muddying the waters by grouping them with party drugs and psychedelics.
I'd agree if our society had figured out any sane way to respond to crime in the first place, but that seems even worse than our barely extant resources for drug addiction in the first place. Somehow we're more willing to pay out the ass to make people feel bad than we are to make them feel better.
I don't really buy into the "is it really their fault" argument if I'm being honest and I think humoring it is what holds a lot of this back. If I start pissing in public, picking fights, and generally behaving like nuisance because I'm drunk I'll still be held accountable for my actions. Especially if I become an alcoholic and establish it as a pattern of behavior.
Ultimately, it's part of why I like regulated legalization more then decriminalization, users could at least be pushed from things like cocaine over towards Adderall or some other pharmaceutical that might not be sexy but at least it won't have a 50/50 chance of being cut with fentanyl like a lot of street drugs these days.
17 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 68.7 ms ] threadThe entire reason the decriminalization failed was because it had no nuance. It copied something that worked in a much different culture, and didn’t copy the other supports that caused it to work. Nothing to address the other side, the benefits of jailing addicts (i.e. preventing them from committing other crimes).
What you're describing is cargo-culting. They missed at least half the picture, that's not a nuance.
Are you talking about Portugal?
Last I read they had a similarly disastrous outcome with the policy, though it took a longer to break down.
On Portugul, it's worth asking why it's failing after many years of being such a success that the model was copied around the world. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/07/portugal-dru...
> After years of economic crisis, Portugal decentralized its drug oversight operation in 2012. A funding drop from 76 million euros ($82.7 million) to 16 million euros ($17.4 million) forced Portugal’s main institution to outsource work previously done by the state to nonprofit groups, including the street teams that engage with people who use drugs. The country is now moving to create a new institute aimed at reinvigorating its drug prevention programs.
> Twenty years ago, “we were quite successful in dealing with the big problem, the epidemic of heroin use and all the related effects,” Goulão said in an interview with The Washington Post. “But we have had a kind of disinvestment, a freezing in our response … and we lost some efficacy.”
How can this be reconciled? At the very least, anti-social / anti-societal behavior, eg crime, must be dealt with even or especially if the root cause is drug use. But then you get in the argument, well they're sick and addicted, is it really their fault, do they deserve to be punished for the resultant crime? They made the first decision to act so ultimately they have to be held responsible for the downstream consequences, I guess.
And then, is being homeless a crime? I don't think so. But how about littering, or using public spaces as urinals? We've decided that, for our vision of society, littering is against the law, and so is public urination / defecation. So why not enforce that, maybe especially if you're addicted to drugs?
We’re just not willing to pay the bills.
The same people that talk talk will pull a NIMBY.
Same with politicians, propose something bold and daring, just not in their lobbyst backyard.
I think one obvious solution is to stop grouping all drugs together. No one is robbing a place to feed their DMT addiction and no one is shooting up psilocybin outside our homes. The criminalization of these types of drugs does far more harm than the drugs themselves. The issue with opioids and speed is more complicated, but I think the options and solutions for the most addictive and harmful drugs will become more clear once we stop muddying the waters by grouping them with party drugs and psychedelics.
Ultimately, it's part of why I like regulated legalization more then decriminalization, users could at least be pushed from things like cocaine over towards Adderall or some other pharmaceutical that might not be sexy but at least it won't have a 50/50 chance of being cut with fentanyl like a lot of street drugs these days.