You fucked up, you trusted us.

TurdBomber said:

MikeDamone said:

TurdBomber said:

MikeDamone said:

Kaepsknee said:

MikeDamone said:

WestlinnDuck said:

Another shocking stat. Who could have seen this coming? This is the sh*t the dazzler votes for because he "cares".

https://instapundit.com/

MYSTIFIED: Overdoses Up 700% After Oregon Decriminalizes Hard Street Drugs. Officials Mystified.

There’s a case to be made for decriminalization, but it involves getting serious about mandator rehab and treatment for mental illness — not just leaving sick people out on the street to “self-medicate” themselves to death.

But that’s what passes for progressive compassion.

I’m very much into decriminalizing drugs. But as usual, the left figures out how to fuck it up.

You already have case studies in Oregon and Washington.

But because you’re afraid Of getting busted with mushrooms, you stay on this stale, misinformed tact.

Sad.

Disagree. Oregon did it but fucked it up. Portugal is actually the correct case study here.

I have never taken an illegal drug in my life.

But I know what the black market is.

I remember the country's prohibition on alcohol phase.

The "war on drugs" has been a costly and catastrophic failure.

Harm Reduction doesn't work either.

We need to acknowledge the obvious: Some people can take drugs without fucking up their lives and burdening society. But too many can't, and they are, and will continue to be, drags on society who consume far too many resources because of their inabilities to handle or manage their addictions. You can appropriately call the war on drugs a failure. But you cannot point to any successes, either.

Read San Fransicko or shit, take a day trip to Vancouver BC to see the proof, first-hand.

People will never stop getting messed up on drugs. They damage can only be contained. Not only did the war on drugs failed, it made things worse. See Portugal for a model of successful controlling the damage. Is the Portugal model scalable to the USA? Oregon tried it, but only did half of it.

If you're dumb enough to get addicted to drugs, I shouldn't have to pay to get you sober. That's on you, druggie.

Some can afford it, some can't. Some steal to afford it. If you can't handle the heat, GTFO of the kitchen. Pretty basic.

PS: Harm reduction policies don't control the damage. They merely hide it, while the damage explodes.

Want proof? Look at the City and County budge requests for "low barrier housing and treatment."

TurdBomber said:

MikeDamone said:

TurdBomber said:

MikeDamone said:

TurdBomber said:

MikeDamone said:

Kaepsknee said:

MikeDamone said:

WestlinnDuck said:

Another shocking stat. Who could have seen this coming? This is the sh*t the dazzler votes for because he "cares".

https://instapundit.com/

MYSTIFIED: Overdoses Up 700% After Oregon Decriminalizes Hard Street Drugs. Officials Mystified.

There’s a case to be made for decriminalization, but it involves getting serious about mandator rehab and treatment for mental illness — not just leaving sick people out on the street to “self-medicate” themselves to death.

But that’s what passes for progressive compassion.

I’m very much into decriminalizing drugs. But as usual, the left figures out how to fuck it up.

You already have case studies in Oregon and Washington.

But because you’re afraid Of getting busted with mushrooms, you stay on this stale, misinformed tact.

Sad.

Disagree. Oregon did it but fucked it up. Portugal is actually the correct case study here.

I have never taken an illegal drug in my life.

But I know what the black market is.

I remember the country's prohibition on alcohol phase.

The "war on drugs" has been a costly and catastrophic failure.

Harm Reduction doesn't work either.

We need to acknowledge the obvious: Some people can take drugs without fucking up their lives and burdening society. But too many can't, and they are, and will continue to be, drags on society who consume far too many resources because of their inabilities to handle or manage their addictions. You can appropriately call the war on drugs a failure. But you cannot point to any successes, either.

Read San Fransicko or shit, take a day trip to Vancouver BC to see the proof, first-hand.

People will never stop getting messed up on drugs. They damage can only be contained. Not only did the war on drugs failed, it made things worse. See Portugal for a model of successful controlling the damage. Is the Portugal model scalable to the USA? Oregon tried it, but only did half of it.

If you're dumb enough to get addicted to drugs, I shouldn't have to pay to get you sober. That's on you, druggie.

Some can afford it, some can't. Some steal to afford it. If you can't handle the heat, GTFO of the kitchen. Pretty basic.

PS: Harm reduction policies don't control the damage. They merely hide it, while the damage explodes.

Want proof? Look at the City and County budge requests for "low barrier housing and treatment."

So you didn’t look into how Portugal does it.

I'm aware of how Portugal does it, yes. But they have a comprehensive system that includes law enforcement keeping that shit out of public display and having addicts ruling it's downtowns. Seattle, Portland and Van BC want the easy parts of do-nothing "harm reduction" but they ignore and avoid the hard parts that instead land upon citizens and tourists who can't walk safely and unmolested through their downtowns.

Sledog said:

Decriminalizing drugs isn't a good play. Making them easier to get just makes more addicts. Some drugs are so highly addictive one use makes addicts. Addicts are not something we need more of. Almost everything you see when looking at the homeless is caused by three things: mental problems, drugs or alcohol.

Where do these free drugs come from?