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
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    The toll free number WAS available and 15,863 of those ticketed DID NOT CALL THE NUMBER.

    All they had to do was call it. They never made it that far. The number was active, it was funded, it was ready to direct people to services.

    137 out of 16,000 actually called it.

    That is NOT an insurmountable number for what is already available:

    https://www.oregon.gov/oha/hsd/amh/pages/addictions.aspx

    • hudson@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Because they knew that there was no real help available.

      The more you keep relying on that single point, the more you prove that you have no understanding of this bill, what it was supposed to do, and how it failed the people.

      All you’re doing is using circular logic based off your own ignorance, and you have already cited sources and I have already cited sources that debunk your one and only claim.

      You can keep asserting this false claim over and over, but all it does is prove that you’re both wrong and ignorant of the matter at hand.