123
The drug war devastated Black and other minority communities. Is marijuana legalization helping? (apnews.com)
submitted 8 months ago by ptz@dubvee.org to c/news@lemmy.world
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Argument for legalizing the adult use of cannabis was to stop the harm caused by disproportionate enforcement of drug laws in Black, Latino and other minority communities.

all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 29 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Legal challenges over the permitting process in states like New York have slowed implementation.

After settling other cases, New York — which has issued 60% of all cannabis licenses to social equity applicants, according to regulators — is facing another lawsuit. Last month, the libertarian-leaning Pacific Legal Foundation alleged it favors women- and minority-owned applicants in addition to those who can demonstrate harm from the drug war.

It's not going to help minority communities if there are groups hell-bent on never doing anything to help minority communities.

[-] CandleTiger@programming.dev 34 points 8 months ago

I feel like this article is missing the main point. Yes; assholes trying to prevent black and minority success continue to be a thing same as ever.

But getting the police boot lifted off your neck a little has got to be a good thing, right? Tell me about that! Have arrests and hassling gone down or not?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

Agree 100%. You put it much better than I did.

[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

So when do we start talking about all the reparations the US owes for the millions of lives it destroyed with it's decades-long "War On Drugs" terrorism campaign?

[-] taanegl@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago

Don't forget the hippies and socialists. McCarthyism is baked into that as well, because political persecution.

[-] Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

Get fucked prohibitionists.

There will come a time when humanity wins the war on drugs, and everyone has the bodily autonomy to put what drugs they want in their own body.

And when that day happens… will you see drug users persecuting people for not being high?

Will you see prisons built for those who dare stay sober?

Will people be given felonies for being straight edge?

Will drug users militarize the police and erode our constitutional rights in a vain quest to enforce thier way of life on others?

NO

Who would want to do that to someone? Prohibitionists.

And we are NOT them.

Marijuana legalization will not end the worst consequences of the war on drugs.

Full legalization of all drugs is maximum harm reduction.

[-] betz24@lemmynsfw.com -5 points 8 months ago

Idk, look at Portugal. Full drug legalization is not doing too hot.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Really? You care to source that? Because everything I can find has them significantly less burdened by drug problems than other European countries or most US States.

[-] betz24@lemmynsfw.com -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Aside from being there many times and seeing the problem first-hand here are a few articles:

https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-portugals-drug-decriminalization-a-failure-or-success-the-answer-isnt-so-simple/#:~:text=Overdose%20rates%20now%20stand%20at,just%20from%202021%20to%202022.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/25/it-beats-getting-stoned-on-the-street-how-portugal-decriminalised-drugs-as-seen-from-the-shoot-up-centre

The idea that decriminalization leads to less hard drug usage is seen to have an initial positive effect (which could be why you had previously thought it was better) but unfortunately has led to a larger unmaintainable drug problema:

  • locations become drug trafficking epicenters
  • rubber band effect from expiring and unmaintainable government funding
  • number of users growing

The number of Portuguese adults who reported prior use of illicit adult drugs rose from 7.8% in 2001 to 12.8% in 2022 — still below European averages but a significant rise nonetheless. Overdose rates now stand at a 12-year high and have doubled in Lisbon since 2019.

Check Portland, OR. Not going so great now. The drugs nowadays are synthetic and designed to be addictive to most people. Decriminalizing them isn't going to get them off the streets and stop people from getting hooked.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Wharton handwaives the fact that they're still lower than the European average and much lower on hard drug usage. Yes the usage rates in Portugal went up. The entire world's usage rate went up. Turns out bad economic times make people turn to drugs to deal with the grind. And it's not some initial effect either, Portugal did their decriminalization 20 years ago.

As to the effects, the Guardian Article has a great snippet for you-

The real test is among problematic users. Here, the picture is less conclusive. After falling dramatically at first, for instance, drug-induced deaths have begun to climb back up. Even so, the numbers remain small. In 2021, Portugal registered 74 deaths from overdoses (compared with 37 in 2014). In Scotland, by contrast, a country with a population of about half the size, “drug misuse” deaths for 2021 stood at 1,300.

So yeah deaths have gone up but it's from a miniscule number and is still far below other countries, including ours. The US lost 31 per 100,000 people in 2021. Portugal lost .71 people per 100,000 in 2021. Whatever they're doing is far more effective than what we're doing.

Portland did it right before Covid, during the opioid crisis, and never funded the treatment part or took any of the other measures Portugal did. Basically they did it in the worst way possible.

So please attempt to tell me again, without the conservative business school's mud, how Portugal is some kind of failure?

edit - Oh god that Wharton link is worse than I thought, he's flogging a book. No wonder he's doing hot takes. He wants to sell copies.

[-] betz24@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 8 months ago

You originally said that you find Portugal less 'burdened', I am just pointing out that that is not the case. Decriminalization takes significant amount of spending and burden for both Portugal and Portland and isn't showing improvements in the community. If a policy isn't making an impact it's not a working policy: this experiment has been alive in Portugal for over 20 years. Feel free to look at more sources, or provide proof that it does work, I'm all ears.

I have heavy drug users in my family. Giving them access to more supply and mobility to shoot up whenever they want isn't going to help them. They don't think that way.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

I didn't realize providing health care was considered a burden in civilized countries. But you're also mischaracterizing what I said. I Said they were less burdened by drug problems than other countries. So unless you're saying we should just let our friends and family die you're demonstrably wrong. Portugal is vastly improved from where they were and this minor uptick in problems does not negate that.

I did provide proof. Out of your own source that's a respected newspaper. I'm sorry you're dealing with addiction in your family but the evidence has been clear for decades. Decriminalize and treat. Portland forgot the second part and tried to make a large policy change during a pandemic. And instead of course correcting they're throwing the whole thing out and going back to the system that didn't work before.

[-] littlebluespark@lemmy.world -5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Thank fuck they didn't use "decimate" like a dumbass. 🤘🏽

edit: The whingy downvotes here only underline the issue of confident illiteracy, vernacular morphology be damned. Just because some lazy fuck barely remembered the feel/sound/look of "devastate" and settled for the wrong word, doesn't mean you have jump off the bridge too, kiddo. Read a damn book.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

To "decimate" means "to destroy 10%." I agree with you that "decimate" would be inaccurate, in the sense that the destruction wrought by the drug war easily exceeded 10%.

[-] littlebluespark@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I'm well aware of what the term means and its historical usage. I'm also glad to see you know at least half that, and thank you for your support. 🤓

[-] mPony@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

people have been using "decimate" to mean "to remove 90% and leave only 10% remaining." When I was younger I was surprised to learn it didn't mean that.

We already have a different word to indicate "to remove 10%" : tithe.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

That might be your tithe, other places, groups, and organizations have different levels of tithe. Decimate has been to destroy 10 percent since the Romans used the word and killed every tenth man in a legion as punishment. This is not a new thing.

this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2024
123 points (95.6% liked)

News

23627 readers
2511 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world