I rewatched an old but good video on the war on drugs. And it reminded me, that tlaw enforcement is AT BEST 1 step ahead of some criminals. But that the criminal element is always rapidly adapting, and the best thing we can do against drugs and crime is to focus on the demand side.
We legalized the drugs, but didn’t do the more important half of that solution, treatment and services for the drug users.
So, why aren’t we doing more? Who dropped the ball? Are we doomed to just keep throwing more law enforcement at the problem?
You must log in or register to comment.
There was a 2 year delay between decrim and OHA pumping out millions of dollars for treatment and harm reduction. That money started coming out this year and now providers are scrambling to hire and implement programs. They’re running into workforce shortages, but those will resolve over the next year. Probably right around the time that Max Williams and Betsy Johnson get a repeal of m110 and we go back to our old failed policies.
How is this not a more common talking point? This seems like a pretty clear explanation for the severity of the situation, maybe that money will be all the difference. Maybe not, but if it was part of the original plan… we got to give the original plan a chance to work.
Dude, I have no idea. It’s pretty frustrating to watch this debate.
We haven’t changed any of the inputs but have analyzed the outputs and things keep getting worse!
-
The “war on drugs” was always a front for corruption and criminality from its very conception, and never were any of the consequences “unintended” as the narrator suggests. Furthermore, a “world without drugs” is such an outright stupid statement that it all but entirely devalues the rest of the video, and that was only 43 seconds in.
-
Law enforcement in Portland is >82% non-local, and the leadership has been quoted admitting on-record that presence and response were decreased in order to show the city government that the police force “deserves more money”. Yes, that is correct: our own police bureau attempted to shake down the very community they’re employed to work in.
-
Instead of passing the buck and whining, ask yourself these questions. Why aren’t you doing more? When’s the last time you personally sought out organizations to volunteer with? What have you looked up in your local library, etc. to educate yourself on the topic recently? Are we doomed to continue shaking our fists at the sky from the safety of our fenced yards?
GTFO here with this inflammatory cowardice. Engage with your community, stop acting like a terrified Republican stooge.
- We’re on the same page about the war on drugs being a sham from the beginning.
- I’m aware of all of that. Not sure what you’re trying to say with that statement.
- I’ve been here for 5 months, I’m still getting a lay of the land in many respects, and especially with regard to how I can go about helping the community.
3.1Why aren't you doing more?I don’t know where my time/energy/money is going to have reasonable impact. Part of the reason for this post was to seek out information and encourage discussion.
3.2volunteerI think getting involved with Code for PDX is a reasonable first step for a developer new to the area.
3.3educateI’m more of a computer person, so… here I am. I haven’t come across any research papers on how to stop drug use in Portland Oregon, but I’ll direct my future readings based on what I can learn about the Portland specific issues.
Not sure how I was being inflammatory, I was just stating some things that I believe to be true, and asking questions about Portland’s struggles. Theres lot of evidence that criminalization and law enforcement aren’t effective ways of dealing with drug problems. And theres evidence that decriminalization can work, when paired with sufficient services and harm reduction.
So, based on what I know (and feel free to correct, or further enlighten me), it seems clear that more needs to be done in the way of harm reduction and services for those with drug problems. But this city really seems to care, to want to do good things… so I ask why aren’t we doing more. What is the reason that the services aren’t there?
Maybe there’s something I can do that will make an impact. If more volunteers are needed, then I’ll volunteer. If policy just isn’t where it needs to be, i’ll advocate, or hell maybe run for office.
This is a way in which I engage with my community. And I am not terrified, nor republican, nor a stooge. I’m not even sure how you came to the conclusion that I’m republican. I’m hoping that we don’t keep trying to solve this problem with law enforcement (Like Kotek is focusing on right now) and instead focus more on the treatment of the drug users (which seems like an afterthought from what I can tell)
I rewatched an old but good video on the war on drugs.
It’s not “good”, it’s rife with insinuation, mischaracterization, and propaganda. It did not age well.
And it reminded me… the best thing we can do against drugs and crime is to focus on the demand side.
According to what authority/study, exactly?
We legalized the drugs, but didn’t do the more important half of that solution, treatment and services for the drug users.
Citation needed.
So, why aren’t we doing more?
Who is “we” and when did you acquire the finger-pointing position?
Who dropped the ball?
Unsupported insinuation.
Are we doomed to just keep throwing more law enforcement at the problem?
“Doomed”? Really? And, no one “throws” police at any problem around here that the pigs don’t want to be “legally” beating the shit out of/shooting at already. See: aforementioned interview.
Downvote all you want, neighbors. Get out there and DO something instead of whinging online.
??
Why respond to my post twice, but not my reply to your first comment?
It’s called clarification, my apologies.
-
We made treatment voluntary, addicts aren’t choosing it.
110 made treatment optional and surprise! Addicts don’t volunteer for treatment.
As someone who’s been working with addicts for decades, yes they do.
Then you have to explain why, when 16,000 people got $100 tickets under measure 110, less than 1% of them called a toll free treatment hotline to eliminate the ticket.
"While the newly released data has limitations, it gives an idea of how the program’s initial round of grants — for $31.4 million in all — is being spent.
What it shows is that while Measure 110 was pitched to voters as a way to expand access to addiction treatment and recovery, the early spending has only led to about 136 people entering treatment — and that’s out of hundreds of thousands in Oregon who need but are not receiving treatment for substance use."
“Pitched to voters?” It was a measure put on the ballot and passed by voters. Why are you referring to it as if this is something the legislature passed on their own and then bungled?
The toll free hotline was not the only way to access treatment. The hotline has certainly been a failure. Thousands of people have already accessed services through other avenues though.
It was just the easiest point of entry, but you notice while I mentioned the hotline, the quote simply says “entered treatment”.
136/16,000 = 0.85%
People are lining up for the free needle exchange, or the free narcan, they AREN’T trying to get treatment.
It’s not even close to the easiest. The easiest is working with the peer mentors that are meeting you in the emergency room when you have an abscess or the people you talk to all the time at the needle exchange.
People go to treatment from needle exchanges all the time. You have no clue what you’re talking about.
