189
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
189 points (98.0% liked)
News
23409 readers
1808 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
110 was NEVER going to work because, unlike the Portugal model, it never mandated treatment.
Here's a $100 fine, call the number to make it go away.
Your average addicts response?
https://youtu.be/dz4HEEiJuGo#t=1m46s
What we needed to do was what they ACTUALLY do in Portugal:
https://www.opb.org/article/2023/09/18/oregon-measure-110-portugal/
"In Portugal, drug users must appear before a commission that determines whether the person needs treatment or should pay a civil penalty.
“They don’t just assume that everybody will pop into treatment on their own,” Humphreys said.
And the system includes other measures that don’t exist in Oregon. For example, the commission could suspend the driver’s license of a cab driver until after treatment, he said, giving state officials leverage over users.
In Oregon, police officers write $100 citations that are not criminal penalties. Drug users are supposed to pay the fine or call a hotline to be assessed for treatment. But addicts often ignore the citation and don’t follow up with treatment, according to news reports."
Except that the Portugal model works, and especially because they actually provide the support that 110 was supposed to but failed to implement
Portugal works because they also have universal health care. :)
True, but they also have specific support systems for drug users that were set up to handle the sudden influx when they legalized drugs. Of course, the universal healthcare definitely helps!
But you’re kinda making my point for me. Oregon simply didn’t follow through with the “support” part of 110. If they had set all of that up and made it available when they actually made all the drugs legal, the outcome would’ve been very different.
Edit: this The Daily podcast from March 12 breaks it all down in great detail. I encourage you to give it a listen. I think you’ll find it in enlightening.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-daily/id1200361736?i=1000648884958
And, again, Oregon ALREADY HAS support for addicts. The additional money was for the NEW volume that never materialized.
We don't need to spend millions and millions of dollars for what turned out to be the 137 people who called the hotline. That can be easily absorbed by the infrastructure we alreaady have.
The problem is NOT "well, thousands of people want help and can't get it." The problem is "thousands of people don't want help."
NO IT DOESN’T
Oregon hardly has enough support to handle the volume for the pre-legalization need. 110 was supposed to build out a massive infrastructure to deal with the existing need and more, including legal off-ramps for those who do get arrested, and a lot more. NONE of this got implemented as it was supposed to be. And there was a massive increase in need. Of course nobody asked for it— IT WASNT AVAILABLE. What about this is so hard for you to understand?
Yet, you keep pretending like it already existed before, and that none of it being implemented had zero effect on the outcome. This is a flat out misrepresentation of the facts.
Saying that nobody wanted help is just a flat out lie. You can’t ask for help that isn’t there. And no, there isn’t help available if no one implements the systems. All you have to offer is circular logic, and I’ve laid out the facts. Even your own article proves you wrong. I’ve linked a podcast that explains it very simply for you to understand. At this point, you have known to blame but yourself for ignoring the truth.
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
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.
There IS real help available, and if they had actually bothered calling the number, they would have been directed to it.
The facts prove you’re wrong. Your own links prove you’re wrong. The link I provided prove you’re wrong.
At this point either you’re completely diluted or you’re lying. At least lying to yourself. Frankly, you seem to be the one who needs help.
I’m blocking you. So don’t bother replying.
Again, help IS available. All they had to do was call the number.
See here:
https://www.oregon.gov/oha/hsd/amh/pages/addictions.aspx
Portugal never mandated treatment. It require a hearing by a local board made of experts including medical personelle. The quote you cited is clear about this, but you state otherwise. And the quote correctly notes that Oregon does have this or some of the other additional measure.
More importantly, what is missing from the quote, is the boards rarely ever forced people into treatment. The article you quote goes on to state the following:
If that quote didn't drive home the central principles, this one should:
We didn't do that. Forcing people into treatment was never the solution.