enforcement? punishment? This measure is smoke and mirrors!
How many lives ruined in the experiment?
The drug addicts would either die out, or they would get tired of life in the gutter and be motivated to get off the drugs. Meanwhile, future potential drug addicts would look at them and have a higher chance of never trying drugs.
I don't know if that would work with today's drugs being more addictive than drugs from before the welfare state. But there's no chance of decriminalizing drugs working today as long as our welfare state removes some of the natural consequences of being an addict.
Way too late, Oregon.
All the toothpaste is out of that nasty tube.
Just throw @#$T against the wall and see if it sticks. Fools.....children.
A government on DRUGS Decriminalizing Hard Drugs in the first place
> I’ve learned is that leftists do not learn from failure… <
And that’s because every leftist believes “This time it will be different.”
Of course they can’t explain how it will be different. Because it won’t be.
It’s the room temperature IQ people who actually think that decriminalizing something that is addictive will make crime go down.
To be perfectly honest, I bought this argument when I was younger, so obviously I’m no genius. derp.
The idea is that you take the profit incentive away from organized crime. The problem is, the state has to take control, and what does that mean? The state competes with street dealers, and they still need law enforcement in order to try to protect their monopoly.
If you don’t have ‘dispensaries’ on every corner, then junkies will go to the most convenient local source. If you do have them on every corner, then you have junkies standing around on every corner lighting up (or cooking, or snorting, etc), and people in stupor on the sidewalk. Either way, you have people desperate for their next fix without a source income, and that’s a bad combination when you also have a no-cash-bail and a minimum larceny threshold.
Enabling doesn’t work.
It’s just human nature common sense.
Anyone who would do that has not only a brain of mush but morals to match it.
The benevolent, intelligent, and wise people of the world are sick and tired of the intellectually and morally confused and their influences. Such people and their defective cognizance should not be taken seriously or have any serious influence.
With a stroke of the pen, the addiction goes away?
Negative. Fake news.
They did NOT restore criminal penalties.
The article suggests some sanity has come to Oregon demoncrats; this couldn’t be farther from the truth.
still a practicing dyke like her predecessor
wtf OR?!!
Likely they will simply stop enforcing the law or selectively do so
Didn’t they learn from the failed experiment in Amsterdam?
....... one thing I’ve learned is that leftists do not learn
from failure and keep pushing the same failed ideas.......
Tina tampon fails again!
When will they end the “experiment” of not really enforcing the law anyway?
How many more people died of overdoses 8n those years that it,was legal to burn their brains out with drugs?
How much did crime increase? How many more victims were created by the law? How many more innocent people were murdered beczuse druggies needed $$?
Who is gonna be held accountable for the increased death and misery,caused by the asinine decriminalization of drugs? (Rhetorical)
The world has gone freaking insane!
Just the hard drugs, right? Meth, cocaine and heroin are still okay, right?
The voters could repeal this with another ballot measure.
Which wouldn’t surprise me, knowing the idiots who live in this state.