Please forgive the long post. If I skipped your post and you'd like a response let me know and I'll come back to you.
The Libertarian in me wants all drugs legalized...but then I see pictures and read stories about San Francisco where there is virtually no drug law enforcement. Open use of needles and crack pipes...One article I read interviewed two volunteers who stated they picked up between 300 and 500 used needles EACH DAY from San Fran sidewalks and parks.
They have business owners losing customers due to the homeless defecating on sidewalks and urinating on the shop doors. I don't know what the answer is. I feel pretty confident that continuing to give politicians blank checks and throwing more money at it is not the answer. Hard drug addiction is not something you can talk someone out of. They have to have an internal drive to kick the habit, for some that doesn't come until they are looking up at rock bottom. Again, I don't know the answer. Legalize all drugs and just let them fend for themselves like they seem to do in San Fran? OK, but you have to allow law abiding citizens some protections for their property/livelihood.
I mentioned before but will repeat: Let's not conflate homelessness with drug use. The latest statistics I could find are a little over half a million homeless and 19.7 million with substance abuse disorder as of 2017. Drug use is high among the homeless with estimates of up to 60% of the homeless having a substance abuse disorder. Mental illness is estimated at about 1/3 or more of the homeless. It is difficult to get hard numbers and these are estimates.
Criminality is many cases leads to homelessness. When you are convicted of a drug offense it is literally impossible to get a student loan for the rest of your life in many or most cases. It is difficult to find a job or to find housing. Keeping drug use a crime increases joblessness and homelessness, which causes a further drain on social programs.
We are throwing good money after bad in keeping the status quo. Billions are spent on law enforcement and prisons. That money could instead be spent on mental health and addiction treatment. Allowing people who use drugs to access housing, jobs, and school would be a potential boon for the economy and reduce the parasitic drag caused by the law.
I can live with legalizing pot. But legalizing across the board would be an absolute disaster. I've got two family members that have served multiple prison sentences for not only taking the drugs. But their illegal behavior while tripped out on the drug or their illegal behavior trying to get money to buy the drug. I wonder if those who would be released from the legalizing of all drugs wouldn't end up back in prison for their behavior of being on the drugs? I've witnessed too much destruction within my own family to be be okay with legalizing drugs across the board.
Part of the reason violent and other crimes happen is because of the drug laws. Can't get a job or go to school or find housing because of a previous drug offense? How to make money to buy drugs? Drug laws make these problems far worse. IOW, of course people turn to burglary and such when they can't buy a job.
the problem here is that there is no Libertarian answer (his post you are responding to) as we need both legalization/Decriminalization (Libertarian) and real full mental health care in this country (Socialist) . The majority of these people on the streets on the worst drugs could benefit from both legal safe options and from real care that they are absolutely not getting.
And to compare to San Fran is a miss too as it is widely known that Cities all over the Western half of this country perform "Greyhound therapy" handing out bus tickets to SanFran in their towns to the homeless/addict/in need of mental health care people in their towns. Making SF's issues different than what may happen in a "normal" city
Well balanced post. We used to believe as a nation in taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves. The problem was we didn't have treatment. When medications finally did come along not everyone got treatment and if they improved they were often still kept against their will. There were many other problems (like forced sterilization and putting women in facilities for promiscuity) that doomed inpatient facilities. The states followed the court orders to let people out finally but they did not follow the orders to repurpose the money spent in these facilities on community programs and treatments. For most people it seems mental health issues are present before drug abuse comes about so this is an important issue and must be addressed regardless.
The point about San Fran was more to illustrate that :
A.) They have more billionaires per capita than anywhere in the world along with some of the highest taxes and cost of living...
B). For all intents and purposes, they have a "hands off" Decriminalization" approach to enforcement of drug laws...
C). No sane person would look at their drug/ homeless situation and think that it is a good model.
I agree that the issues are severe, and may not be an apples to apples comparison to what may happen in Tuscaloosa, Al, but I would bet money that if you stopped enforcing drug laws in Birmingham, it would look very similar in a few years.
It is a terrible model and largely caused by current drug laws. See above.
I did read it and THAT makes sense. However, there is A LOT and I mean A LOT more to what they're doing than just decriminalizing it. It's not the decriminalization that's driving the success. It basically admits that in the article. It seems to be a softer, more drawn out, gradual detox process, along with addressing underlying issues that maybe causing the drug use.
However, the detail in that article is rarely used by people in our country that advocate decriminalization.The loudest narrative is decriminalizing is the answer. When according to the article. That is nowhere near the case.
Treatment is a huge part of their solution. We will not see similar results without other changes that must be made anyway if we want a better country. Decriminalization, at the least, is a key component. I am for full legalization but admit that solution is fraught with its own issues regarding regulation and the potential profit motive for both companies selling drugs and the states getting tax dollars from them. Doesn't stop them from allowing tobacco and alcohol, though.
The biggest lift you get in decriminalization is the elimination of the stigma associated with drug use. That is one of the biggest problems. You cannot get people who feel worthless and who are treated like they are garbage into meaningful treatment.
These laws hurt people. Millions of people. Every single day. Decriminalization is not enough by itself, but any program that does not include decriminalization will not work. The proof is out there for anyone who really wants to understand.
Agreed. Try getting a job, housing, or entry into school with a drug conviction on your record. Difficult to do. Who wants to hire a drug addict? Or rent to them? The feds don't allow grants and loans for school to them. Hell, it's enough to make someone want to use more drugs just to escape.
Yes, it is the initial part to allow the components that actually produce the success to work. But when trying to sell the idea to a country and change it's stance. We need to stop making it sound like simply changing the law is going to magically fix anything. Which is what most people hear. Because it won't. It won't "fix" one single person's drug problem. It will just keep them from getting locked up while continuing to do drugs.
There's another component to this problem as well. The system addresses current drug users. But there needs to be something in place to try and keep people from getting to that point of becoming drug users. I do have a question. In decriminalizing all drugs, are we going to allow all drugs to be recreationally sold as marijuana is being sold in some states?
The model changes from punishment to treatment. That is the sell along with the documented success elsewhere at reducing most of the problems associated with drug use - much of which is caused by criminalization itself. We have to change attitudes by showing people that a new way can work better than the old. We have to sell harm reduction, better outcomes, and if possible savings in money spent for those better outcomes across not just law enforcement and prisons but also social welfare programs. The money is simply better spent on treatments and supports with the added benefit of greatly reducing drug related violence.
Yes. It doesn't work otherwise. But the product will be consistent and reliable. It will be so much safer than that sold on the streets as to be incomparable. Also, money made through the sale would fund treatment.
This. So much this. I would settle for decriminalization but believe legalization would be more helpful.
We have come a long way. Most states have laws which allow a judge to sentence people with addiction issue to mandatory rehabilitation. But you are right - we have a long way to go. It has to start with destigmatizing addiction.
As a society we are far more focused on blaming people than helping people.
Amen.
