Four years ago, the state decriminalized all drugs. Now it’s trying to course-correct — and might make a mistake in the process.

Four years ago, the state decriminalized all drugs. Now it’s trying to course-correct — and might make a mistake in the process.

In 2020, it looked as though the war on drugs would begin to end in Oregon.

After Measure 110 was passed that year, Oregon became the first state in the US to decriminalize personal possession of all drugs that had been outlawed by the Controlled Substances Act in 1970, ranging from heroin and cocaine to LSD and psychedelic mushrooms. When it went into effect in early 2021, the move was celebrated by drug reform advocates who had long been calling for decriminalization in the wake of President Nixon’s failed war on drugs.

Now, amid a spike in public drug use and overdoses, Oregon is in the process of reeling back its progressive drug laws, with a new billthat aims to reinstate lighter criminal penalties for personal drug possession. And while the target is deadly drugs like fentanyl, the law would also result in banning non-clinical use of psychedelics like MDMA, DMT, or psilocybin — drugs that are unconnected to the current overdose epidemic and the public displays of drug use.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    28·
    8 months ago

    There is existing help, 110 was to provide ADDITIONAL funding, presumably to assist with what was expected to be a mass influx of new patients.

    That influx never happened, because treatment was 100% optional.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        25·
        8 months ago

        Better, I read it and I’ve been living in the middle of it since it took effect in 2021.

        We have always had addiction services, those haven’t gone anywhere. 110 was to provide additional funding for them, again, under the presumption that more dollars would be needed because more people would seek treatment.

        Funding which, surprise, wasn’t needed because people would rather get high than get clean.

        Causing a MASSIVE increase in overdose calls:

        https://www.opb.org/article/2024/01/28/data-show-overdoses-deaths-rising-in-oregon/

        “In 2019, 280 people died of a drug overdose in Oregon. Fatalities rose every year after, more than tripling by 2022, when 956 died. And last year, even more people died, according to preliminary data. Each month the number has been higher than the previous year, reaching 628 in June. The state is still compiling data for 2023, but if the trends continue, the total would reach 1,250 deaths from an overdose.”

        So, again, keep in mind, 110 kicked in in 2021. 2019 was under the old rules.

        Those are Oregon numbers as a whole, and just deaths, not emergency calls for overdoses. Portlabd had over 7,000 overdose calls in 2023 by itself:

        https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/portland-fire-launches-overdose-response-program/283-5911d3f5-54f0-4c6b-9e01-0e0f1566c2b2o

        “Last year, Portland Fire & Rescue responded to nearly 7,000 overdose calls. A third of them happened in the downtown core, according to the bureau.”

        • hudson@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          51·
          8 months ago

          Ah, yes, nothing better than ignoring the facts, cherry-picking data, and blaming the victims to confirm one’s own biases!

          Interesting, however, that in the sources, that you, yourself, provide lies the reality which undermines your own argument. If you weren’t so blinded by your own biases, you’d actually see the reality of the situation.

          It seems that you, too, are another casualty of your own agenda. How predictable.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.world
            24·
            8 months ago

            I’m sorry my lived experience and cited sources don’t meet your expectations.

            Fortunately, the disaster that started when 110 took effect in 2021 has a chance to reverse itself once the repeal takes place.

            Come on out to Portland for a bit and see how “blind” I am.

            • hudson@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              61·
              8 months ago

              You’re not sorry, you’re projecting your denial and pain and frustration and lack of ability to form a coherent argument on me. But the fact remains that your own sources back up what I have been saying and, while I’m sorry for your troubles, they would have been addressed if 110 had been fully realized and it’s your State government that let you down not me. So you should direct your hostility where it belongs— at the government that continues to fail you, not some stranger in the internet that is pointing that out to you.

              I really am sorry for what’s happening in Oregon because the state couldn’t manage to pull off the responsibilities mandated by this bill. I really am. They failed the people of their state and, in failing to prove this bill could work, the whole nation. In theory it was a good bill, but the state just didn’t follow through on all of its commitments they needed to in order to make it work.

              But you ignoring all of that in order to blame the victims is bullshit, and your own sources that you have linked here explain that in great detail.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.world
                23·
                8 months ago

                110 was NEVER going to work because, unlike the Portugal model, it never mandated treatment.

                Here’s a $100 fine, call the number to make it go away.

                Your average addicts response?

                https://youtu.be/dz4HEEiJuGo#t=1m46s

                What we needed to do was what they ACTUALLY do in Portugal:

                https://www.opb.org/article/2023/09/18/oregon-measure-110-portugal/

                "In Portugal, drug users must appear before a commission that determines whether the person needs treatment or should pay a civil penalty.

                “They don’t just assume that everybody will pop into treatment on their own,” Humphreys said.

                And the system includes other measures that don’t exist in Oregon. For example, the commission could suspend the driver’s license of a cab driver until after treatment, he said, giving state officials leverage over users.

                In Oregon, police officers write $100 citations that are not criminal penalties. Drug users are supposed to pay the fine or call a hotline to be assessed for treatment. But addicts often ignore the citation and don’t follow up with treatment, according to news reports."

                • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
                  31·
                  8 months ago

                  Portugal never mandated treatment. It require a hearing by a local board made of experts including medical personelle. The quote you cited is clear about this, but you state otherwise. And the quote correctly notes that Oregon does have this or some of the other additional measure.

                  More importantly, what is missing from the quote, is the boards rarely ever forced people into treatment. The article you quote goes on to state the following:

                  The sites include social workers and mental health professionals to encourage people to enter treatment. The goal is to start people on a path to health — even if they don’t start treatment immediately, said Brendan Saloner, associate professor of health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore.

                  “The entire kind of logic of the rooms is very much designed around: ‘Let’s bring these folks indoors, they’re using drugs. They are here in our community,’” he said.

                  If that quote didn’t drive home the central principles, this one should:

                  “The key innovation of Portugal is having services that people need when they need them,” he said. “And I think that a lot of the bones of that could kind of come together in Oregon, but it’s going to take resources, time and patience.”

                  We didn’t do that. Forcing people into treatment was never the solution.

                • hudson@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  2·
                  8 months ago

                  Except that the Portugal model works, and especially because they actually provide the support that 110 was supposed to but failed to implement