Olympia Feb 8, 2021 at 9:50 am

What we're doing right now isn't working. A new bill offers a better way.

Comments

1

that horrific war on drugs was a war on drug Users and highly Successful if imprisoning and taking shit away from people without good reason was your Goal. tricky dicky Nixon - the trumpfster's Protégé - along with his Neocon psycophants had as their goal of the ridding themselves of all those pesky the Anti-War and Civil Rights protesters/commies, who in their self-declared (and UN-entitled) ENTITLEMENT were somehow Not bowing down to the KKK and the Industrialized War Caucus and that was A Problem, and making casual use of certain Intoxicants illegal was their (for some, Final) 'solution.' to their discredit, it was highly effective but that's a pretty Stupid fucking Reason to keep on keeping it tf around.

Pragmatism rocks. plus
let's DEFUND the Po-po's
thefts of our Freedoms & our
Properties all in 1 Fell schwoop.

2

great article, btw, Rich:

To determine what a "personal-use amount" for each illegal drug would be, the state would convene an advisory committee of health officials, people with lived experience of substance abuse, a bunch of different kinds of scientists, representatives from various levels of law enforcement, prosecutors, public defenders, and others.

This advisory group would also be responsible for drawing up a big-ass plan to create "a robust system to provide rapid access to evidence-based and innovative substance use treatment and comprehensive recovery support services."

By "comprehensive recovery support services," the bill means "housing, education, employment pathways, community connection, and peer support," all of which would need to be "available during and after treatment."

well that’s Brilliant. is there some good (or Any?) reason why we’re not proof-testing ALL of our approaches to running this Society, like right above? and put (at Least) the Least little bit o’ Thought into it? ‘cause so many things we do, seem like someone once rolled some dice and now it’s all ‘Customary’ so we gotta Stick With It? How Stupid is That?

how Stupid are WE?

Rich continues:
But honestly, the least Big Pharma could do for their role in dumping this crisis in our laps is pay the bill for people to get back on their feet. –Rich Smith

yeah they 'dumped it' whilst also maximizing their* ProfitFawkingTeering off It you forgot to say.

*and now they’re Worth BILLIONS more
remember what They say: Crime
doesn’t Pay! peons

5

23 - I think that jail & detox works for some people, but clearly not for most, as shown by the large numbers of people who come out of prison as addicted as they went in. Outpatient treatment works for some people too. Inpatient clinics work for some. But the issue with just tossing people in jail is not so much whether it works for their addictions or not, but how it affects the rest of their lives and how much it costs the rest of us. We've known that prohibition doesn't work since, well, Prohibition. It DOES generate a hell of a lot of crime, though.

This is an approach well worth looking at. The only concern I have is whether or not one or two cities taking a non-punitive approach will indirectly sign up to be the hosts for all of America's addicts. That would not have a good effect on quality of life here. Remains to be seen whether or not that concern is valid. We'll find out. If our Legislature doesn't approve it this year, Portland will be doing the experiment for us.

7

"But that number of filings has gone down since the election of King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg. In 2008, Satterberg started referring for misdemeanors (rather than felonies) anyone caught with less than one gram, five pills, one syringe, or paraphernalia containing only narcotic residue."

Rich, this is one of the many mythical timelines Dan Satterberg likes to invent for himself to create the illusion of having a moral core, but when you look lack these media timelines he invents never match up with reality.

As a long time assistant to Norm Maleng, Dan Satterberg in the criminal division consistently pushed for the harshest penalties on all crime, but especially low level drugs crimes. He was despised by defense attorneys for this as any defense attorney from that time will tell you. He was literally the last person they ever wanted to rise to District Attorney.

What changed was not that he inherited the position from his boss in 2007, but Eric Holder removing federal matching grants for prosecuting low level drug crimes in 2009 and a general public shift away from the war on drug strategy around 2010. That is when Dan Satterberg reimagined himself as a reformer on the topic, embraced the LEAD program he had previously opposed and claimed he was making all these changes on on moral grounds. He rolled out his drug addicted sister for his last campaign to help justify this change without ever explaining why she received treatment when everyone who was black and brown and not related to him received hard prison time.

He went through a similar conversion against the death penalty he had always supported around the time the public decided how grotesque it was. I'm sure he will now tell you he was always against it despite all his statements at the time to the contrary.

Fast forward to 2015 when the federal grant money is rolling in for any sex related crime and Dan Satterberg, without a hint of irony states he has always been against prostitution despite their not being a single statement to that affect on the record for him over a 30 year period until 2015 when the grant money started rolling in.

Prosecutorial discretion in King County is driven by private and public money and a constant craving for media attention for the moral panic of the moment. The fake timelines are invented to create the illusion he is ahead of the curve even though he has consistently been behind it.

9

The problem is not that they are arresting people for possession of drugs. In fact I would wager in this state people are rarely arrested for possession of drugs. No they are usually arrested for offenses brought on by their addiction whether it be stealing to fuel their habit or assault when they are in the throes of an episode. I would agree involuntary detox is rarely a long term solution but as @8 notes at some point it isn't about the user's recovery its about protecting both the public and the user from themselves.

The Professor's notion that decriminalizing drugs is akin to repealing prohibition is trite and misleading. The drugs will still be illegal. Only the federal government can legalize and regulate them. The state of WA like Oregon just won't prosecute. So black market prices will still remain in place and the crime syndicates who make their money from the drug trade will grow richer. I'd wonder if like the gun initiative you could see rural counties just refuse to go along with this and continue arresting and prosecuting offenders.

The only real result of this policy will be to create an even more welcoming space for druggies and their dealers that will continue to fuel the decline of safety and quality of life for residents of the urban areas.

10

Decriminalizing small amounts of illegal drugs will only increase the crime rate, attract more homeless people to Seattle, increasing the homeless rate and shantytown neighborhoods throughout Seattle. It will not stop illegal drug sales. It will only increase violence, prostitution and contagious diseases in the area.

We have decriminalized marijuana in Seattle and all it has brought was an increase in heroin addiction and illegal drug sales, with all the violence associated therewith.

12

There's only one sensible way to resolve this.

A declaration that "drugs" are a medical issue, and NOT a legal issue.

It's already been done lots of other places. It is working, by every report. And it makes common sense.

13

@11: Perhaps, but in this case he's correct and we have real life examples to prove it.

When the US repealed alcohol prohibition crime syndicates collapsed.

In Portugal where they have decriminalized all drugs crime and addiction are both down dramatically.

In New Zealand where they decriminalized sex workers violent crime against not just sex workers, but all women dropped and STD rates declined.

When the US criminalized heroin, it was replaced by the far more dangerous drug fentanyl that kills 10's of thousands per year. Law enforcement created the opioid epidemic just as they once spiked alcohol with wood alcohol to blind illegal drinking and imposed the Nordic model of sex work to ensure cops could rape sex workers with impunity because no one would dare report them lest they face 3rd party pimping prosecution themselves.

The iron law of prohibition is real and those who enforce it know there job is to choose violence over public safety:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Prohibition

The trouble is that both their power base and income depend on choosing violence over public safety. When the violence becomes too grotesque for the public to ignore, they simply celebrate the end of one prohibition war while moving on to the next one.

It's why police should be defunded. They will always choose violence and harm over public safety because they paycheck depends on that. No amount of implicit bias training will stop that fundamental flaw and our jails will always remain full for one reason or another. The reason is not important, the full jails are. That's why they are so quick to declare one war on lifestyle crimes a failure and simply move on to the next. We are currently going through a war on sex work.

It's never about helping to keep the public safe. The only way the police will end the harm cause by the decriminalization of one lifestyle crime is if you give them some other harmless lifestyle crime to keep the prisons full.


Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.