Oregon becomes the first state to decriminalize hard drugs like cocaine and heroin

asp3 said:
I find your closing line to be rather cruel. Are you saying that you wish people who are able to successfully be part time users to get hooked and have their lives fall apart?
Click to expand...
Thank you I could not have said it better.
 

This is not a topic I can debate, I feel it’s a surrender to the criminals instead of keeping on trying to rid the state of them and their lethal wares. Starts with slacking off on enforcing the laws already on the books.
 
Geezerette said:
This is not a topic I can debate, I feel it’s a surrender to the criminals instead of keeping on trying to rid the state of them and their lethal wares. Starts with slacking off on enforcing the laws already on the books.
Click to expand...
I guess you assume that people that use cocaine and other drugs are automatically criminals maybe you might think about that.
 
jerry old said:
I always thought the population of Oregon and Washington State were decent, law-abiding people.
I'm sure the current influx of ''Freaks" is not representative of these two states. (Hopefully)
Click to expand...
It's gettin' bad, Jerry
Mostly the Portland area
Ten/fifteen years ago, Portland was a pretty decent place to abide
No more
 
AnnieA said:
Decriminalizing for small amounts to take a burden off the court system makes perfect sense. Then sentence dealers and pimps to the maximum.
Click to expand...
That does make sense.
The good thing, whether prosecuted or not, the dealers will suffer financially
If the hard drugs are made easier to get, the lack of demand will lower the price
 
How easily people overlook what they do on a daily basis and demonize someone doing the same thing. One guy's smoking a joint in his back yard while his neighbors working on a six pack. Both enjoying themselves.

Just down the block another guy's injecting himself on a regular basis, while his neighbor is drinking himself into his daily stupor. Both are ruining their marriages and families.

From what I read here, the drinker will not be a problem as he can control himself at any time while the druggie is hopelessly lost in lala land.

One guy bought his stuff from a shady character while the other bought his (legally) from the local package store.

Anyone see any hypocrisy here? Some folks maybe and others see no similarity whatever. Amazing, how blind we can be about our own habits compared to those around us.
 
Many years ago alcohol was criminalized and people put in jail for it. Look at it now. Cocaine used to be sold over the counter in the USA earlier in its history. We take drugs every day to alleviate symptoms. What if those too were criminalized?

Why should people be put in jail for enjoying the recreational drug of their choice? To each their own I say.

Other countries have decriminalized many drugs and drug isn't always a bad word.
 
Back in the 1920's, alcohol was prohibited, and all that did was allow the Mafia to become powerful and rich. With today's drug laws, the street gangs rule large parts of our cities, and the Mexican drug lords have become millionaires. Back in the 1800's, Laudanum (cocaine) was widely used as cough medicine and pain killer.
People have, and always will, find some means to "soften" their personal worries. The trick is to find some way to supply that need without it being taken over by the criminals.
 
It's perfectly OK with me. If drug addicts are able to legally buy whatever drugs they want, maybe they won't have to commit robberies of businesses & homes to get things to fence for drug money. And it might prevent home invasion robberies.
That will save me money on ammunition as well as costs of replacing carpeting & re-plastering & re-painting.
 
DaveA said:
How easily people overlook what they do on a daily basis and demonize someone doing the same thing. One guy's smoking a joint in his back yard while his neighbors working on a six pack. Both enjoying themselves.

Just down the block another guy's injecting himself on a regular basis, while his neighbor is drinking himself into his daily stupor. Both are ruining their marriages and families.

From what I read here, the drinker will not be a problem as he can control himself at any time while the druggie is hopelessly lost in lala land.

One guy bought his stuff from a shady character while the other bought his (legally) from the local package store.

Anyone see any hypocrisy here? Some folks maybe and others see no similarity whatever. Amazing, how blind we can be about our own habits compared to those around us.
Click to expand...

No "hypocrisy" at all; one is ILLEGAL and the other is not. Get it now?
 
asp3 said:
I think that the word decriminalize is misleading. It makes posession more like a traffic ticket with a $100 fine and required attendance in an addiction recovery program.

So to me it means that people processing small amounts of these drugs will not have to go through the court system. This will save the state money in both the court system and the jail system. It also forces them into a program that may help them deal with their addiction or drug use.

It's not as if they are let off without their drugs being confiscated, it just means they won't have to go to court unless they want to fight the charges or to jail.

Here's that text from the article:

The Oregon drug initiative will allow people arrested with small amounts of hard drugs to avoid going to trial, and possible jail time, by paying a $100 fine and attending an addiction recovery program. The treatment centers will be funded by revenues from legalized marijuana, which was approved in Oregon several years ago.
Click to expand...
AnnieA said:
Decriminalizing for small amounts to take a burden off the court system makes perfect sense. Then sentence dealers and pimps to the maximum.
Click to expand...

Yes, a lot of people mistake "decriminalizing" for "legalizing." The two terms mean vastly different things.
 
C'est Moi said:
No "hypocrisy" at all; one is ILLEGAL and the other is not. Get it now?
Click to expand...
Oh yea, true-but, but, but hypocrisy is a cultural norm.
I'm a law-abiding citizen🤔 most of the time
.
I'm not going to purchase any illegal drugs, but if you offer to deliver a
brand new riding lawn mower to my home for three hundred dollars, it puts me in a quandary.😉

Whether I bought this stolen lawn mower is not the point: the point is I Considered It!
That makes me a hypocrite yes, no, what?
 
Don M. said:
Back in the 1920's, alcohol was prohibited, and all that did was allow the Mafia to become powerful and rich. With today's drug laws, the street gangs rule large parts of our cities, and the Mexican drug lords have become millionaires. Back in the 1800's, Laudanum (cocaine) was widely used as cough medicine and pain killer.
People have, and always will, find some means to "soften" their personal worries. The trick is to find some way to supply that need without it being taken over by the criminals.
Click to expand...
Laudanum is a type of opium. I only heard of it when I watched "The Shootist." James Stewart prescribed it to John Wayne.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauda... of,alkaloids, including morphine and codeine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 911
Serious question - what is the difference between legalized vs decriminalized? Does it boil down to basically getting a fine instead of jail time? Similar to getting a speeding ticket?

Decriminalization seems like the first step towards legalizing it.
 
Gardenlover said:
Serious question - what is the difference between legalized vs decriminalized? Does it boil down to basically getting a fine instead of jail time? Similar to getting a speeding ticket?

Decriminalization seems like the first step towards legalizing it.
Click to expand...

That's a good description of it. According to the article I read about the measure that passed there is now a $100 fine and mandatory participation in an addiction recovery program. I posted the same information near the start of the thread.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top