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
    5
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    8 months ago

    110 was a massive failure that needs to be un-done, any issues with less problematic drugs can be handled on a one by one basis like we did with marijuana.

    • hudson@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      110 failed because it was never fully-implemented. The intent was to have support systems in place that were never funded and set up. As a result, this is what happened.

        • hudson@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          What support? There was no support. Even the article you posted goes into detail how the state never followed through with it plans to provide the critical infrastructure needed for treatment, for alternatives to jail or prison, or anything else that 110 promised. They just made drugs legal and called it a day.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            8 months ago

            Again, you need the support systems if people actually sought treatment, but they never did seek treatment.

            We didn’t have long lines of people waiting for non-existent treatment centers, out of 16,000 people ticketed under 110, less than 150 sought treatment, which was well within current capacity.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                8 months ago

                There is existing help, 110 was to provide ADDITIONAL funding, presumably to assist with what was expected to be a mass influx of new patients.

                That influx never happened, because treatment was 100% optional.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    Better, I read it and I’ve been living in the middle of it since it took effect in 2021.

                    We have always had addiction services, those haven’t gone anywhere. 110 was to provide additional funding for them, again, under the presumption that more dollars would be needed because more people would seek treatment.

                    Funding which, surprise, wasn’t needed because people would rather get high than get clean.

                    Causing a MASSIVE increase in overdose calls:

                    https://www.opb.org/article/2024/01/28/data-show-overdoses-deaths-rising-in-oregon/

                    “In 2019, 280 people died of a drug overdose in Oregon. Fatalities rose every year after, more than tripling by 2022, when 956 died. And last year, even more people died, according to preliminary data. Each month the number has been higher than the previous year, reaching 628 in June. The state is still compiling data for 2023, but if the trends continue, the total would reach 1,250 deaths from an overdose.”

                    So, again, keep in mind, 110 kicked in in 2021. 2019 was under the old rules.

                    Those are Oregon numbers as a whole, and just deaths, not emergency calls for overdoses. Portlabd had over 7,000 overdose calls in 2023 by itself:

                    https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/portland-fire-launches-overdose-response-program/283-5911d3f5-54f0-4c6b-9e01-0e0f1566c2b2o

                    “Last year, Portland Fire & Rescue responded to nearly 7,000 overdose calls. A third of them happened in the downtown core, according to the bureau.”

        • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          People continually seize upon this 1% figure. The subtext, and explicitly your’s, is “addicts are addicts and they won’t get help if you don’t force them.” The reality is much more complicated and individual than that. It varies from individual to individual and where they are in the addiction and recovery events. Addicts are often in the grips of multiple, complicating issues include mental health and trauma. They usually lack the education and framing to see that clearly and the addiction can be the way they cope. Many want help, want to change, don’t know how to, don’t believe they can, and when do, them moment passes all too quickly.

          The solution, of course, is to make them go to treatment. But this does not work and continued thinking that it will is a mixture of hopeful naivete and willful ignorance.

          Then, of course, the subtext continues. “People who don’t realize that addicts need to be forced are naive and waste money and time being too gentle with these addicts.”

          You cited an article from OPB published in 2022. Here is a more recent article from OPB exactly 2 year later. From the article:

          The Legislature, the court system and the bureaucracy under two governors ignored or rejected proposed solutions as seemingly straightforward as designing a specialized ticket to highlight treatment information. They declined to fund a proposed $50,000 online course that would have instructed police officers on how to better use the new law. They took no action on recommendations to get police, whose leaders campaigned against the ballot measure, talking with treatment providers after decriminalization passed.

          Police hit the streets with the old traffic citation that said nothing about treatment making the ticket disappear.

          Oregon has made it’s decision. I, for one, think it’s for the worse.

    • ShepherdPie
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      If this were accurate then why have meth and heroin been such a problem for decades prior to this law passing? How does sticking someone in jail for a couple months keep a homeless drug addict from going right back to it when they get out?

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        The problem EXPLODED after 110 passed with a massive increase in overdose calls. See the stats elsewhere in the thread.

        • ShepherdPie
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          During COVID when the rest of the population was losing their minds over toilet paper?

          Can you point to a source showing the problems in Portland, Salem, and Eugene outpaced those of other comparable cities?

          Can you explain how jail is going to fix the problem when that was the default ‘solution’ during the 100 years prior to M110 passing?