• 🇺🇸󠁿 🇧🇷 🇨🇦 🇦🇷 🇲🇽 🇹🇹 🇨🇺
    The Americas
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • NSADD Moderators: deficiT | Jen

Oregon decriminalizing Hard Drugs

Are you surprised Oregon decriminalized hard drugs?


  • Total voters
    38
My body my choice should also include whatever you want to put into it. And no fear of jail. It's crazy that some people i don't know can pass laws telling me what i can put in my body legally.
We need more access to rehabs and more mental health professionals, that should be the top priority . Not jailing someone for having a gram of dope on them.
 

Don’t Blame Drug Decriminalization for What the Housing Crisis Has Caused​

Corporate media outlets like The New York Times are misleading the public on drug decriminalization in Oregon.

By Morgan Godvin , TRUTHOUT
PublishedAugust 12, 2023

National media outlets have trained their sights on Portland, Oregon, releasing hit piece after piece. The New York Times published no fewer than three articles about the state’s drug decriminalization in a single week. “Oregon’s experiment to curb overdoses by decriminalizing small amounts of illicit drugs is in its third year, and life has changed for most everyone in the city of Portland,” reads the subheadline of one. The mischaracterizations begin before the article does, starting out with the assertion the primary goal was to curb overdoses, reaching a fever pitch by the final clause, “and life has changed for most everyone…”

Jan Hoffman’s New York Times piece profiles Jennifer Myrle, a worker at a downtown coffee shop who recently saw a woman performing oral sex on a man in broad daylight on the street. What that has to do with drug decriminalization, no one knows. (Opioids cause impotence, if anyone is wondering.) Myrle says her downtown area can feel like “dealer central,” but that “there’s no point in calling the cops.” Though The New York Times is spuriously implying drug peddlers have free reign in the city, unpacking why Myrle sees no point in calling the police is worthy of a few sentences. [...]

read more:

 
Last edited:

Don’t Blame Drug Decriminalization for What the Housing Crisis Has Caused​

Corporate media outlets like The New York Times are misleading the public on drug decriminalization in Oregon.

By Morgan Godvin , TRUTHOUT
PublishedAugust 12, 2023

National media outlets have trained their sights on Portland, Oregon, releasing hit piece after piece. The New York Times published no fewer than three articles about the state’s drug decriminalization in a single week. “Oregon’s experiment to curb overdoses by decriminalizing small amounts of illicit drugs is in its third year, and life has changed for most everyone in the city of Portland,” reads the subheadline of one. The mischaracterizations begin before the article does, starting out with the assertion the primary goal was to curb overdoses, reaching a fever pitch by the final clause, “and life has changed for most everyone…”

Jan Hoffman’s New York Times piece profiles Jennifer Myrle, a worker at a downtown coffee shop who recently saw a woman performing oral sex on a man in broad daylight on the street. What that has to do with drug decriminalization, no one knows. (Opioids cause impotence, if anyone is wondering.) Myrle says her downtown area can feel like “dealer central,” but that “there’s no point in calling the cops.” Though The New York Times is spuriously implying drug peddlers have free reign in the city, unpacking why Myrle sees no point in calling the police is worthy of a few sentences. [...]

read more:

Good article thanks for sharing
 
same author

Portland, Portugal and the Lessons of Decriminalization​

MORGAN GODVIN​

DECEMBER 13, 2023​


An honest look at the promise and pitfalls of decriminalization

In November 2020, Oregon voters passed Ballot Measure 110 by a large margin, decriminalizing all personal possession of all drugs, moving the offense from a misdemeanor to a civil violation with a maximum fine of $100. It was the single largest reduction in the criminal justice footprint in Oregon history. The measure reallocated cannabis tax revenue to the tune of $100 million per year, which was used to stand up a substance use treatment system, and its provisions dealt with people struggling with addiction far more humanely than the criminal justice system typically does.

Now, a mere three years later, the tides have shifted. Voters of the state are mulling possible ballot measures to recriminalize drugs. It’s not hard for media outlets to find someone to quote who is opposed to drug decriminalization, sometimes even people who voted for the measure.


What happened? Ask some, and they’ll tell you that decriminalization brought problems; ask others, and issues arrived at the same time as decriminalization, but not because of it. My response — as a pro-decriminalization advocate — is that it’s more complicated than either of those two answers allows.

Read More -
 
Current Oregon resident, born and raised. Went thru heavy addiction the past 5 years, currently trying to figure out sobriety, but here is what I have seen and know...

As previous comments have mentioned, the new law Measure 110 has decriminalized, not legalized. Meaning that being in possession of drugs in "personal" amounts (which are actually fairly reasonable amounts) and having the police find them means that you will only be written a ticket for a $100 fine, or you can choose to ask for help from the legal system and enter into a drug treatment program and not have the fine and ticket on your record.

Generally the biggest thing this means is that a possession is no longer a CRIMINAL issue, so a background check for a job or whatever will not turn up with you having a drug possession charge. It's like getting a traffic citation, or a parking ticket, or citation for not having your fishing license.

The thing to keep in mind is that drugs/druggie behavior/purchasing/carrying and the tolerance thereof can only really be considered from two points, you're either in Multnomah County, which is where most of Portland, the largest city in the State is located or you are somewhere else. Oregon is a very large state comparatively. 300 miles from north to south border, 400 miles west to east. The largest county in Oregon is Harney county and has something like 7,500 residents. It is slightly larger than the US state Maryland, which has 6,200,000 residents.

If you are in Portland, you will almost never have a reason to be getting searched by the Police and end up having your drugs found. The Police force has been reduced so low that petty crime has become so common the population is actually starting to drop in the city. Murders are up as well but generally confined to the Black population, the very low socioeconomic homeless and/or criminal-types downtown and a mix of hispanic, white, asian and black drug users on the far east side. The entire city is generally quite safe, regardless of what people will say, mostly because they have never lived in an actually dangerous city. Having lived in Washington DC for three years, copped my first bags of H in Kensington (entirely skipping b'more and their bullshit scramble thankyouverymuch) I feel like I can make the previous statement with some authority.

Drug use and truly drug ABUSE is rampant in Portland. I would hazard to guess that 10% of the residents are using hard drugs daily, and another 20-30% are smoking weed or drinking disgusting fucking IPA beer in a manner which could be considered substance abuse. Portland has a long history of excessive drinking and glamorized drug culture and problems that go with it, but things have been elevated to some next level shit, and the effects are really starting to show.

I've personally saved three people who OD'd on fent right in front of me, either thru CPR and sternum rubs for 60+ minutes, or calling emergency services and doing CPR until they got there. I have also seen lately that often emergency services won't even show up, and that narcan often doesn't do shit. All three of those people are now dead from fent overdosing while they were alone.

Getting drugs in Portland is fairly easy, getting good drugs reliably at a good price takes a little bit of effort. The problem stems mostly from the fact that the easiest way to score is asking for a connect from another user, but often those people are going to steal your money, tax your purchase, buy the cheap shit or simply not have access to good shit. Your average fentanyl user might be OK with whatever random pills they can get their hands on, but the people who've developed bigger habits are constantly chasing down the strongest fent powder they can find. Meth is a little easier because it is cheaper and people don't fiend on it quite so much so they will likely be willing to give it up easier.


Prices start to go up and quality starts to go down the very minute you step foot out of Multnomah County / City of Portland.

As for the rest of Oregon, as people have mentioned in the thread, it is mostly backwoods, podunk, redneck, druggie hating little towns outside of Bend, Eugene and Medford/Ashland (fuck Salem). All of these places are basically Large Cities and drugs can absolutely be found and acquired, but the possibility of getting fucked with by the Police definitely increases, but I couldn't say exactly how much. If you're passing thru or visiting for a few days/few weeks and are not doing stupid shit and have a vehicle that doesn't say "PULL ME OVER I'M A POOR STUPID DRUGGIE" you will not have any problems. I cannot attest to the quality or availability or ease of acquisition in these cities.

The rest of the state, you better watch your ass boy. The cops are bored as fuck, know the make model and license plate of every vehicle that is owned by a local resident and the face that should be driving it, and anyone else is automatically a target for being pulled over and fucked with if anything looks the slightest bit out of order.

There are many more nuances to the Portland metro area and its adjacent counties, all of which are quite large. Washington County/Beaverton/Hillsboro/Tigard, Clackamas County and it's outlying cities, Vancouver across the river in Washington State and even Yamhill, Columbia and Marion counties all have similar access, amounts and prices simply from being close to Portland but an entirely different approach to policing.

Hopefully this helps give an impression of what the current situation is for the state concerning "hard" drug decriminalization. There is some history of pre-decrim of the Portland drug scene I could write up if anyone cares. This whole post is fairly street drug focused, and the all-time champions of Heroin/Fentanyl and Meth but I do know a little bit about what the situation is with crack, powder cocaine, MDMA, DMT, mushrooms, etc and will write up some of that info if anyone would like to see it.

If you are looking at Oregon as a place to move so you can continue your functional addict lifestyle, I would only advise it if you have a very good skillset or are financially independent, even then it's a big gamble. The economic situation is Oregon is dire, always has been. When people post very bitter, hateful posts about their time living in Oregon after moving here for whatever reason, it hurts because I love the state, but I can absolutely understand what they are saying. Lots of history there but it's not really well known that Oregon is almost the lowest ranking state for all sorts of important measures of livability. Often below all the stereotyped Southern states and Rustbelt states. Poor and ignorant and usually with pride, but also lots of crazies, rebels, artists, hermits and a big history of very hard working, hard living type of folks.

If you want somewhere to visit for a bit so you can indulge in drugs without fear of legal entanglement, by all means visit Portland and have a plan.

If you want somewhere to be homeless, live in your unregistered, uninsured barely running vehicle, steal and scam and beg for your dope money, deal with the often seemingly unending grey skies and rain for 9 months of the year, and generally throw away anything you ever loved in the pursuit of serious drug addiction without fear of being fucked with by the cops, Portland is the place to do it. Anywhere else in the state you are going to be run out town or jailed eventually.

If you think you can pursue a serious drug addiction and maintain a semi-normal lifestyle, I have yet to see anyone manage to do it successfully. Something about street drugs just pulls you into the gutter, slowly but surely. You might be able to pull it off in Eugene or Bend, but it will be twice as expensive and harder to maintain than doing it in Portland.

Possession amounts:
  • Less than 1 gram of heroin
  • Less than 1 gram, or less than 5 pills, of MDMA
  • Less than 2 grams of methamphetamine
  • Less than 40 units of LSD
  • Less than 12 grams of psilocybin
  • Less than 40 units of methadone
  • Less than 40 pills of oxycodone
  • Less than 2 grams of cocaine
 
Last edited:
If you want somewhere to visit for a bit so you can indulge in drugs without fear of legal entanglement, by all means visit Portland and have a plan.
This is terrible advice.

Also, pre-110 drug use was pretty bad. Now we don’t have a justice system that is swamped with minor drug offenses that won’t ever get charged.
 
Because filling the prison system with non violent drug offenders and ruining people's whole lives over substance use has been going so well
The states have been going to far, ignoring federal law, except when it comes to pain patients and writing scripts for pain patients. They( the feds)have been terrorizing doctors and arresting them for writing the same scripts they had been writing before new legislation. I guess illegal fentanayl, crack, cocaine, illegal amphetamines are ok, but pain patients on legal but scheduled drugs will get doctors thrown in prison for writing scripts is , ok. This country is fucked up, that it sickening, literally. As far as illegal drugs go there has to be a middle ground for people not selling or manufacturing illegal drugs. Small time possession and addicts should not be dealt with as harshly but states should respect federal law and people should be shown more compassion, but still face some sort of punishment, that is how a lot of people get sober and are detered from use. They are going after doctors while in 2023 over 112,000 people died from illegal fentanyl. Imagine what that number would be without many states giving out Narcan. My state completely ignores the federal laws on pot and cultivation but terrorizes doctors, and I suffer, my doctor even said he would put me on more but can't and law makes it so I can only get 1/8 the maximum daily recommended dose of oxycodone. This country is fucked up. There has to be a serious review of the drug laws, but prescription drug laws being so heavily enforced my life gets less worth living everyday because I should be dead, but am not and my tolerance has grown over 7-8 years or so. But maybe that is the point, thin the heard so to speak. More people died last year than from illegal fentanyl than died in Vietnam(our soldiers) and the Korean War( our soldiers) combined.
Something needs to be done but I agree that heavy handed legalization is not the answer for small time possession by users and addicts. And terrorizing doctors with arbitrary dose limits that don't take into account many factors, sure as hell is an even worse answer. But the same politicians who look the other way as states ignore illegal drug decriminalization in violation of federal law are going after doctors. The government wants pain patients to suffer and wants illegal drug addicts to die. There should be some punishment but not as harsh, and states can not pick and choose which Federal laws they want to follow.

What if Texas said we are going to ignore the legislation Ronald Reagan signed into federal law limiting the number of machine guns to only those registered by 1986 and not allowing anymore to be in civilian hands. And they said we are going to ignore it. And made it legal to manufacture and sell new m134 6 barreled 30 caliber(7.62×51mm or basically a 308 round) electric motor driven canons( mini guns) remember Terminator 2 which fires either 50 or 100 rounds per second( selector switch) or it's big brother the one the military calls the Vulcan it is a 20mm and there is even a variant that fires 110 rounds a second. They use them as anti aircraft guns on military ships and in some fighter planes. Would that be ok? Can states pick and choose what laws they want to follow? What about RPG's,( yes I know launchers are legal in many states but getting the explosive RPG's is very very regulated and controlled and very limited. Should states be allowed to ignore those highly highly restrictive laws if they said fuck it let's let anyone build and sell these? ( yes this is all hypothetical but where does it stop?
 
Last edited:
The states have been going to far, ignoring federal law, except when it comes to pain patients and writing scripts for pain patients. They( the feds)have been terrorizing doctors and arresting them for writing the same scripts they had been writing before new legislation. I guess illegal fentanayl, crack, cocaine, illegal amphetamines are ok, but pain patients on legal but scheduled drugs will get doctors thrown in prison for writing scripts is , ok. This country is fucked up, that it sickening, literally. As far as illegal drugs go there has to be a middle ground for people not selling or manufacturing illegal drugs. Small time possession and addicts should not be dealt with as harshly but states should respect federal law and people should be shown more compassion, but still face some sort of punishment, that is how a lot of people get sober and are detered from use. They are going after doctors while in 2023 over 112,000 people died from illegal fentanyl. Imagine what that number would be without many states giving out Narcan. My state completely ignores the federal laws on pot and cultivation but terrorizes doctors, and I suffer, my doctor even said he would put me on more but can't and law makes it so I can only get 1/8 the maximum daily recommended dose of oxycodone. This country is fucked up. There has to be a serious review of the drug laws, but prescription drug laws being so heavily enforced my life gets less worth living everyday because I should be dead, but am not and my tolerance has grown over 7-8 years or so. But maybe that is the point, thin the heard so to speak. More people died last year than from illegal fentanyl than died in Vietnam(our soldiers) and the Korean War( our soldiers) combined.
Something needs to be done but I agree that heavy handed legalization is not the answer for small time possession by users and addicts. And terrorizing doctors with arbitrary dose limits that don't take into account many factors, sure as hell is an even worse answer. But the same politicians who look the other way as states ignore illegal drug decriminalization in violation of federal law are going after doctors. The government wants pain patients to suffer and wants illegal drug addicts to die. There should be some punishment but not as harsh, and states can not pick and choose which Federal laws they want to follow.

What if Texas said we are going to ignore the legislation Ronald Reagan signed into federal law limiting the number of machine guns to only those registered by 1986 and not allowing anymore to be in civilian hands. And they said we are going to ignore it. And made it legal to manufacture and sell new m134 6 barreled 30 caliber(7.62×51mm or basically a 308 round) electric motor driven canons( mini guns) remember Terminator 2 which fires either 50 or 100 rounds per second( selector switch) or it's big brother the one the military calls the Vulcan it is a 20mm and there is even a variant that fires 110 rounds a second. They use them as anti aircraft guns on military ships and in some fighter planes. Would that be ok? Can states pick and choose what laws they want to follow? What about RPG's,( yes I know launchers are legal in many states but getting the explosive RPG's is very very regulated and controlled and very limited. Should states be allowed to ignore those highly highly restrictive laws if they said fuck it let's let anyone build and sell these? ( yes this is all hypothetical but where does it stop?
The government shouldn't be terrorizing doctors either. That's a huge part of the problem. These ideas are not mutually exclusive, in fact they both play a role in making drug use safer for the average person.

That's the world we live in, unfortunately. A lot of it is the governments fault. People wouldn't be selling/buying fentanyl nearly as much, if people had access to legitimate, unadulterated opioids.
 
My body my choice should also include whatever you want to put into it. And no fear of jail. It's crazy that some people i don't know can pass laws telling me what i can put in my body legally.
We need more access to rehabs and more mental health professionals, that should be the top priority . Not jailing someone for having a gram of dope on them.
Absolutely agree with this, decriminalise like Portugal has and fund addiction prevention programs instead.
 
I don't 'care how much pain I am in, I am not going to make a turn out of my nice safe middle class neighborhood and go down below 8 mile and cold cop bags of fentanyl and it isn't because I am scared of Detroit. It is because I am not gonna mess with fentanyl or whatever crap they are selling in place of smack and even if there was real dope(heroin) I still wouldn't mess with it.
 
Absolutely agree with this, decriminalise like Portugal has and fund addiction prevention programs instead.
I think you are right the people in Canada are under taxed. Massive tax increases would be necessary, say 25% sales tax and 1/2 less take home pay, that should cover it and I am sure every Canadian would be behind that. To pay for the constant trips to rehabs and the free drugs, free shelter and free counseling, free food, free drug supplies, free clothes, free everything for drug addicts. A nice warm bed and are nice and comfortable place to live and get high, while everyone else takes care of them. I am sure that would go over nicely. Lol
 
I don't 'care how much pain I am in, I am not going to make a turn out of my nice safe middle class neighborhood and go down below 8 mile and cold cop bags of fentanyl and it isn't because I am scared of Detroit. It is because I am not gonna mess with fentanyl or whatever crap they are selling in place of smack and even if there was real dope(heroin) I still wouldn't mess with it.
Ok that's your experience. You don't speak for everyone with chronic pain or everyone that uses opioids.

I think you are right the people in Canada are under taxed. Massive tax increases would be necessary, say 25% sales tax and 1/2 less take home pay, that should cover it and I am sure every Canadian would be behind that. To pay for the constant trips to rehabs and the free drugs, free shelter and free counseling, free food, free drug supplies, free clothes, free everything for drug addicts. A nice warm bed and are nice and comfortable place to live and get high, while everyone else takes care of them. I am sure that would go over nicely. Lol
Not pumping millions every year into criminalizing drugs would save enough to help fund rehab for people that need it as well as other resources. Easily.

And do you know where you're at right now? This is a harm reduction website, plenty of people here ARE drug addicts that have had to live in these places and access resources like this. Despite what this boomer ass, dated mentality tends to believe, none of that = an easy, cushy life.

The judgemental bullshit is neither necessary or desired around here. You need to open your eyes to the fact that not everyone lives some white picket, middle class, 1950s life. Especially here. I'm sure there's some muscle car forum you can hang out and bitch about drug addicts in. You'll probably have a lot of fans.
 
Wow, I’ve heard about this but wasn’t sure it actually stuck. What does this mean for parents getting their kids taken away for being drug addict and stuff like that? I wonder.
 
I think you are right the people in Canada are under taxed. Massive tax increases would be necessary, say 25% sales tax and 1/2 less take home pay, that should cover it and I am sure every Canadian would be behind that. To pay for the constant trips to rehabs and the free drugs, free shelter and free counseling, free food, free drug supplies, free clothes, free everything for drug addicts. A nice warm bed and are nice and comfortable place to live and get high, while everyone else takes care of them. I am sure that would go over nicely. Lol
We are taxed to death. 18% sales tax in some provinces. Rehabs and housing is what we need. Instead we basically wrote a blank cheque to Ukraine.
I'd much rather my tax dollars help Canadians then corporations and if I had to pay a bit more tax to help the people who really need it I wouldn't complain.
 
We pay for ambulances heath care etc... if people could get into rehabs with no wait time and less od's from street fentanyl by giving pharma fentanyl it's worth it.
A room here is $1000 and it's gotten so bad that I've seen people renting out 1/2 a room for 5-700. That should be illegal.
For every 4 people immigrating to Canada 1 house is built.
We desperately need housing.
If I was homeless and knew the chances of getting safe housing was near impossible I would probably give up and slowly die from street fentanyl.
My country is dying a slow death
 
This may very well will end up in Federal Court, depending upon who the the Attorney General is and depending upon the political fallout, and who is the president in the future. But this could go any which way. But considering I live in a Blue state and the ridiculous limits on opiods for pain patients, that have happened under a Democrat governor and President. That could not last, but maybe a lawsuit could be brought up that could help people like me.
Also to answer your question, I am pretty sure they can take kids away from parents who are serious alcoholics. If I was a parent and/or had a wife or girlfriend and we as parents, were hopeless drunks like I was before; I literally got allergic to booze. They could easily take the kids away. Alcohol is legal, and I was such a bad drunk that I couldn't even be responsible enough too take care of a gold fish( fortunately I never had any pet fish) I was no where near capable of taking care of myself, let alone a child or children. The same logic could be used depending on the level of use and/or addiction. Also, it depends on the state and how nosey family, neighbors,teachers, friends, ect.... are. Also it could depend on the state laws as mentioned and the individual social worker.
By the way congratulations on the birth on your child. I hope and pray this doesn't become an issue for you.
If your name, that you use; "SoCalShordie" if that is an indication of where you live, California, that still could be a hugh problem. From what I have seen the powers that be their; have a tendency to be authoritarian, and overzealous in these the type of matters.
I hope and pray, that this never becomes an issue for you. I wish the best for you and your family. Good luck.🙏😊
 
Last edited:
Top