That's not going to help their junkie problem.
This just more updates the law to reflect police practices.
It’s still illegal to sell drugs and users are stuck injecting dirty random substances into their veins.
I might add that at the same time they should have access to the help they need to fight their addiction.
I looked up info on Portugal and this is what I found:
> The reality is that Portugal’s drug situation has improved significantly in several key areas... However, such improvements are not solely the result of the decriminalization policy; Portugal’s shift towards a more health-centered approach to drugs, as well as wider health and social policy changes, are equally, if not more, responsible for the positive changes observed. Drawing on the most up-to-date evidence, this briefing clarifies the extent of Portugal’s achievement, and debunks some of the erroneous claims made about the country’s innovative approach to drugs.
> Portugal decriminalized the personal possession of all drugs in 2001. This means that, while it is no longer a criminal offence to possess drugs for personal use, it is still an administrative violation, punishable by penalties such as fines or community service.
So it seems that there are certainly indicators that decriminalization has certain positive outcomes, but it's not entirely due to decriminalization, and as they allege may be more impacted by changes to social health policies and perspectives. And further, they have not completely removed consequence from drug use. There are still civil penalties and other consequences.
To me that strikes a sort of balance and seems preferable to cart-blanche decriminalization.
https://transformdrugs.org/drug-decriminalisation-in-portuga...
It looks like that is true for Oregon as well. They just downgraded misdemeanor drug possessions to infractions and downgraded felony possession to misdemeanor.
Decriminalization brings on a greater opportunity for rehabilitation without entering the legal system (which lots of people never escape from). Keeping more people in the legal system should not be the goal.
I think the government should legalize all drugs so they can control the drug markets and take them away from violent criminal organizations. They can also ensure the drug supplies are safe (devoid of contaminants) as well as tax them to fund social services.
There’s always going to be a market for illegal drugs. It gets bigger as time goes on. Better to have it under the control of government and taxed/regulated than underground under the control of cartels
So, can you point to something showing how decriminalization doesn’t increase the availability, and therefore the suffering of the addicts? Also have you ever been an addict? Are you talking out of experience? If not, then kindly sit down and shut up.
Responding to a request for source without a source is great.
> So, can you point to something showing how decriminalization doesn’t increase the availability
Ignoring a request for source and then asking for source.
> Also have you ever been an addict? Are you talking out of experience? If not, then kindly sit down and shut up.
This is a garbage response and shouldn't be welcome on this site.
edit Your response is also junk because decriminalization is not the same as legalization, and decriminalization is not the same as allowing dispensaries (medical or otherwise). So your point just kind doesn't make sense with the subject matter and scenario we're talking about.
And yes, cannabis use did go up with legalization. Those that have troubles with addictions are in trouble.
Yes, me. I chose not to use now because I am concerned with the legality (or rather the effects of illegality).
- When I'm somewhere with legal cannabis I'll go to a shop and buy 5mg Indica pills.
- I won't go to a weed dealer where cannabis is illegal and get something that's of dubious quality, potentially washed with something nasty, not tested and hard to dose correctly, and potentially funding violence in my community.
Have this though experiment. If the obese would get as much hate as junkies (junkies steal vs obese make health care insurance expensive, etc), would that help them?
There is almost no anti-obesity stigma in the US. Everyone’s fat, so nobody cares.
If being obese was stigmatized I bet people would care a lot more about avoiding the stigma.
That said, the stigma against obesity is absolutely less severe than the stigma against drug addiction. Personally, I think that’s appropriate.
The problem in this comparison is that addiction has a very broad scale (e.g. coffee to crack) similar to body weight. Obesity already entails the person well over-weight (in terms of drug use that'd be "daily crack use" or smth).
I personally would rather be in a relation with a coffee addict than someone suffering from obesity.
“It funnels millions in marijuana tax revenue toward what it calls Addiction Recovery Centers, where people can be screened and directed to treatment options. Those tax dollars will also go to a Drug Treatment and Recovery Services Fund overseen by the state that could be used to pay for treatment, housing or other programs designed to address addiction.”
[1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/112...