Under the new law, possession of small amounts of drugs such as heroin or methamphetamine will be as a misdemeanor and punishable by up to six months in jail.

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek signed a bill Monday restoring criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of hard drugs, reversing a first-in-the-nation law that advocates had hoped would help quell a deepening addiction and overdose crisis.

Under the new law, the possession of small amounts of drugs such as heroin or methamphetamine will be classified as a misdemeanor and punishable by up to six months in jail.

Drug treatment will be offered as an alternative to criminal penalties.

    • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      77
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Not it’s not. The problem is that Oregon only did half of the work and never invested in public health solutions to handle drug addiction (as the article points out). This is not about being progressive or conservative, it’s about half-assing policies.

      If someone tried to build a house without a roof the problem is not that houses are too progressive but that the guy building the house is an idiot.

      • psvrh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, this. It’s the story the world over when neoliberalism tries to be progressive, because neoliberalism is quite happy to be progressive when it doesn’t cost anything.

        Lax drug enforcement laws were great! You could spend less on police and incarceration, and it’s fine since the fallout from drug related crimes only affects poor people anyway.

        Once it started to affect rich people, though, then the calculus starts, and there’s no way to effectively monetize treatment, mental health care and public housing, so enforcement it is!

        • Melkath@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The part I don’t get is why they were willing to decriminalize it but they weren’t willing to regulate it and allow it in dispensaries.

          THAT is where the money is. America is built on cash crops. People will happily pay taxes out the ass for tobacco, alcohol, weed, acid, cocaine, and shrooms. I also personally think coffee should be added to that list. For the record, I’m not a fan of cocaine or coffee, but some people swing that way, and id rather them swing there than meth.

          Honestly, it feels hypocritical, but I agree that opioids and meth cross the line. I have heard maybe 3 anecdotes of people that can maintain a functioning addiction on heroin and zero for people who can contain themselves with meth.

          Allow the weed, acid, and shrooms (and MAYBE cocaine) in the dispensaries, take the tax money, GIVE IT BACK as housing assistance and universal basic income. Give security, opportunity, and therapy to opioid and meth users. Watch them become productive calm non-violent stoners.

          • teft@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            8 months ago

            The part I don’t get is why they were willing to decriminalize it but they weren’t willing to regulate it and allow it in dispensaries.

            Because they’re not just idiots, they’re puritanical idiots.

          • deranger@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Tons of people have opiate/opioid addictions and function without you ever knowing; same as amphetamine. People in government and high business positions. It’s not just cracked out people who are on heroic doses, you can absolutely be a functioning addict.

            The difference between something like hydrocodone and heroin, or adderall and meth, is much smaller than you think, on a milligram for milligram basis.

            • Melkath@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Fair enough.

              Personally, I have only ever had consistently hostile interactions with meth-heads.

              I do my best to err on the side of the adult choice to have the freedom of a vice. For me its tobacco, weed, and beer, and I am so fucking sick and tired of prohibitionists (generally people who are or were on probation and now want to act like they have the moral high-ground on the subject) trying to take that right away, or at least punish me for opting for it.

          • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            You can’t just dispense hard drugs. It’s federally illegal, and while the feds have adopted a look away policy for marijuana, there’s no guarantee they will for others. There’s also the whole lack of banking access for any money that could be made.

        • psvrh@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          Most of the progressive states in the US, as well as all of Canada, is currently making the half-Portugal mistake: doing the cheap part, but refusing to do the expensive piece because, well, it’s expensive and they’re progressive only when it doesn’t cost them anything.

          The worst part is that the blowback from doing a half-Portugal is going to set actual, helpful health policy back by decades.

      • snooggums@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Right, society wasn’t progressive enough to follow through on the drug treatment part. Now they are back to criminal punishment and still lacking enough drug treatment so it is worse than it was with it decriminalized for society even if it ‘solves’ drug use in public areas.

        The quote is accurate.

        • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          I love that you’re being downvoted for being correct. Drug laws have 0 effect on drug use and legal outcomes are not something a junkie considers pretty much fucking ever.

          ACAB. Fuck the state.

          • Melkath@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Unrelated, I recently tried out Fedia, and I couldn’t understand why my Fedia account was consistently being downvoted into oblivion but my Kbin account is consistently upvoted and rarely ever downvoted. I see dude’s comment as up 2 down 0 on Kbin.

            I think Kbin doesnt register lemmy voting. God I love Kbin.

    • anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I heard they never implemented the corresponding treatment centers because of Covid or something. In any case, this isn’t something that’s going to be fixed without a boatload of money…it’s too bad the Sacklers are so poor, otherwise I would say they should pay for it, on account of how they did this to our communities.