The problem is that once such a thing fails, it gives massive ammunition to future naysayers that get to conveniently ignore all the implementation failures because campaigning for/against will ultimately boil down to bullet points.
I disagree to an extent. Oregons drug decriminalization failed because of a few reasons that are plain to see:
- The people who wrote the measure did not prescribe how it should be done, just what it should achieve.
- The measure demanded changes be immediate, which didn't jive with a very slow running, heavy bureaucracy like Oregons government. More importantly, time was not given for the social services pipelines to fill with cash and plans.
- The law did not also ban public drug use, it depended on the legislature doing this - which they never did. This was the big tipping point. You don't forget the smell of meth or fent, especially outside your grocery store or kids school.
This was a master class in when head in the clouds thinking meets legislative elites who are outright insulted when the people flex their voice.
I do think we'll revisit this again in the future, but hopefully next time we at least ban public drug use.
Yeah, I'm saddened that everyone is jumping on the "whelp, back to the war on drugs" band wagon...
This is a thing we can do and make work, plenty of other places have had success with it, we just keep doing things in the most Kafka-esque way possible.
Not only that, people (well, mammals) want to get high. Alchohol is so much more destructive than weed or MDMA, on both a personal or societal scale. If you’d ban alcohol, people will just sniff glue or start brewing their own bathtub hooch.
Legalization + proper harm reduction + strict enforcement on public (ab)use is ultimately the way. You get a triple win of tax income, freed up police resources and less pressure on the healthcare system.
I think I get what you're saying, but you're not being super clear with that quote.
Ideally before we ban public drug use with punitive measures we solve free housing for the homeless. It is a known problem, specifically in Portland, that people come here to be homeless. That is a problem in itself because our tiny city can't shoulder the nations burdens. I was mainly speaking directly to what backfired with our approach to substances. Public drug use, whether it be alcohol or otherwise, should not be on the general public to deal with.
How many times have any of us created a PoC that gets deployed into production? Things fall down, and are attempted to be improved like changing a tire on car driving 60mph down the highway without pulling over.
Do you stop the car, take a look at everything, make changes, and then put the car back on the road? Do you pull into pit row, change the tires in <10s with top off of the tank, and then get back in the race? Do you take advantage of the run flat tires you chose in advance anticipating the this would be the likely outcome while hoping the other 3 tires stay inflated?
If the current situation isn't work, the worst thing to do is nothing. Paralysis by analysis can be deadly
Just remember this is the same guy who told the Proud Boys to "stand back and stand by." And they in fact did rise up on Jan 6.
That he was defending people at all associated with the unite the right protest that went all neo Nazi is crazy. Why bother trying to point out that there were “good” and “fine” people protesting the statue when we all know what was going on at that event? It minimizes what happened, and reduces the blame on the literal Nazis marching and driving into crowds.
It wasn’t a “hoax”, but it was choice editing. But if you look at the spirit and context, it’s effectively what happened.
“Choice editing” is another way to put it. Which is precisely what i was alluding to. It is a feature of the US system. Professional media including the so called papers of the record excel in it.
