PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Libertarian solution to drug issue has been "resounding success" in Portugal


Taco John
09-14-2010, 03:13 AM
Found this:

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l8go9c1RZL1qcc9roo1_500.jpg




"Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success," says Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research. "It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html#ixzz0zUPywcnE

Jenson71
09-14-2010, 09:13 AM
"Under Portugal's new regime, people found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent to a panel consisting of a psychologist, social worker and legal adviser for appropriate treatment (which may be refused without criminal punishment), instead of jail."

I can definitely be on board with this up to a certain point (depending on what "small amount of drugs" is).

ClevelandBronco
09-14-2010, 10:38 AM
I'd rather see something closer to this:

Mandatory outpatient education/treatment upon conviction on the first or second charge in the case of small-amount possession of a drug other than marijuana (alone or in conjunction with another misdemeanor). The offender would be fully or partly responsible for the expense of treatment according to his ability to pay. The court could choose to accept treatment in a program of the patient's choosing if treatment is initiated prior to sentencing. The court could also choose to reject that treatment and set its own conditions at sentencing. Education/treatment could be accomplished concurrently with any sentence for separate misdemeanors.

Mandatory inpatient treatment upon conviction on the third or fourth charge in the case of small-amount possession alone or in conjunction with a misdemeanor. The first of these inpatient treatments would be for no less than 28 days. The second inpatient treatment would be for no less than 90 days. Treatment would be accomplished separately from any jail or prison sentence.

Mandatory inpatient treatment for conviction on the first or second charge in the case of small-amount possession in conjunction with a felony. Again, treatment would be accomplished separately from any jail or prison sentence.

The fifth time in the case of possession alone (or in conjunction with a misdemeanor) or the third time in conjunction with a felony we give up and treat you like any other criminal.

I'd decriminalized marijuana that tests negative for any added substance, even though I recognize that a relatively small fraction of the population is going to have problems with marijuana abuse. As long as the user is staying out of trouble otherwise I see no need for intervention on the part of the government.

I'm sure that there are a plenty of holes in this sketch of a plan. I know that what we're doing is failing. My mind is open.

BucEyedPea
09-14-2010, 10:44 AM
Mmmmm....I have a bit of a problem with using govt psychologists and sociologists. Do they actually do the job?

BIG_DADDY
09-14-2010, 11:24 AM
I'd rather see something closer to this:

Mandatory outpatient education/treatment upon conviction on the first or second charge in the case of small-amount possession of a drug other than marijuana (alone or in conjunction with another misdemeanor). The offender would be fully or partly responsible for the expense of treatment according to his ability to pay. The court could choose to accept treatment in a program of the patient's choosing if treatment is initiated prior to sentencing. The court could also choose to reject that treatment and set its own conditions at sentencing. Education/treatment could be accomplished concurrently with any sentence for separate misdemeanors.

Mandatory inpatient treatment upon conviction on the third or fourth charge in the case of small-amount possession alone or in conjunction with a misdemeanor. The first of these inpatient treatments would be for no less than 28 days. The second inpatient treatment would be for no less than 90 days. Treatment would be accomplished separately from any jail or prison sentence.

Mandatory inpatient treatment for conviction on the first or second charge in the case of small-amount possession in conjunction with a felony. Again, treatment would be accomplished separately from any jail or prison sentence.

The fifth time in the case of possession alone (or in conjunction with a misdemeanor) or the third time in conjunction with a felony we give up and treat you like any other criminal.

I'd decriminalized marijuana that tests negative for any added substance, even though I recognize that a relatively small fraction of the population is going to have problems with marijuana abuse. As long as the user is staying out of trouble otherwise I see no need for intervention on the part of the government.

I'm sure that there are a plenty of holes in this sketch of a plan. I know that what we're doing is failing. My mind is open.

Groovy, you pay for it then.

Jenson71
09-14-2010, 11:37 AM
Mmmmm....I have a bit of a problem with using govt psychologists and sociologists. Do they actually do the job?

No, they are trained robots who attempt to warp the mind towards American-fascism. If they come to your door, kill them.

BucEyedPea
09-14-2010, 11:42 AM
Groovy, you pay for it then.

Yep! :thumb:


But he claims to be a libertarian.

ClevelandBronco
09-14-2010, 11:53 AM
Yep! :thumb:


But he claims to be a libertarian.

No he doesn't, you stupid cunt.

ClevelandBronco
09-14-2010, 11:54 AM
Groovy, you pay for it then.

We already pay for it.

AustinChief
09-14-2010, 12:03 PM
I am all for a new system instead of the horribly flawed one we have... BUT what works in Portugal may not work at all here... it's the same argument with gun laws... Making guns illegal in Belgium may work to reduce crime... but it simply won't work in the US. There are too many MASSIVE cultural differences.

On the whole, Europeans are far far far more temperate than we are... they tend to self regulate... we don't.

there is also the issue of what you do with prescription drugs... do you make them all legal as well? Can you imagine the abuses and problems that would cause?

BucEyedPea
09-14-2010, 12:09 PM
We already pay for it.

So let's not.

BucEyedPea
09-14-2010, 12:10 PM
I am all for a new system instead of the horribly flawed one we have... BUT what works in Portugal may not work at all here... it's the same argument with gun laws... Making guns illegal in Belgium may work to reduce crime... but it simply won't work in the US. There are too many MASSIVE cultural differences.

On the whole, Europeans are far far far more temperate than we are... they tend to self regulate... we don't.

there is also the issue of what you do with prescription drugs... do you make them all legal as well? Can you imagine the abuses and problems that would cause?

I don't know about that. They have drug addition issues and other ones that aren't so temperate. I agree it may not work here though.

ClevelandBronco
09-14-2010, 12:11 PM
So let's not.

That's not an option that will be on the table in your worthless lifetime.

BucEyedPea
09-14-2010, 12:42 PM
*snicker*

Taco John
09-14-2010, 01:17 PM
there is also the issue of what you do with prescription drugs... do you make them all legal as well? Can you imagine the abuses and problems that would cause?

For a short time, yeah. But once Darwin was done putting in his overtime, things would stabilize.

Reaper16
09-14-2010, 01:31 PM
I'd rather see something closer to this:

Mandatory outpatient education/treatment upon conviction on the first or second charge in the case of small-amount possession of a drug other than marijuana (alone or in conjunction with another misdemeanor). The offender would be fully or partly responsible for the expense of treatment according to his ability to pay. The court could choose to accept treatment in a program of the patient's choosing if treatment is initiated prior to sentencing. The court could also choose to reject that treatment and set its own conditions at sentencing. Education/treatment could be accomplished concurrently with any sentence for separate misdemeanors.

Mandatory inpatient treatment upon conviction on the third or fourth charge in the case of small-amount possession alone or in conjunction with a misdemeanor. The first of these inpatient treatments would be for no less than 28 days. The second inpatient treatment would be for no less than 90 days. Treatment would be accomplished separately from any jail or prison sentence.

Mandatory inpatient treatment for conviction on the first or second charge in the case of small-amount possession in conjunction with a felony. Again, treatment would be accomplished separately from any jail or prison sentence.

The fifth time in the case of possession alone (or in conjunction with a misdemeanor) or the third time in conjunction with a felony we give up and treat you like any other criminal.

I'd decriminalized marijuana that tests negative for any added substance, even though I recognize that a relatively small fraction of the population is going to have problems with marijuana abuse. As long as the user is staying out of trouble otherwise I see no need for intervention on the part of the government.

I'm sure that there are a plenty of holes in this sketch of a plan. I know that what we're doing is failing. My mind is open.
Would treatment centers stop having their funding slashed away from them under your plan, considering the new mandates?

AustinChief
09-14-2010, 01:32 PM
For a short time, yeah. But once Darwin was done putting in his overtime, things would stabilize.

Agreed, but the BIG issue is how it would affect the industry... it would take a fairly gradual transition to not cause MAJOR economic impact.

ClevelandBronco
09-14-2010, 02:16 PM
Would treatment centers stop having their funding slashed away from them under your plan, considering the new mandates?

Converting our drug problem from primarily a law enforcement problem to primarily a health problem would necessarily suggest that treatment center funding would have to be increased substantially.

Taco John
09-14-2010, 04:11 PM
Agreed, but the BIG issue is how it would affect the industry... it would take a fairly gradual transition to not cause MAJOR economic impact.


Hmmmm... I'm not so sure I agree that the economic impact would ultimately be a negative one.

Reaper16
09-14-2010, 05:11 PM
Converting our drug problem from primarily a law enforcement problem to primarily a health problem would necessarily suggest that treatment center funding would have to be increased substantially.
Good. Hell, they need increased funding now. Desperately. I worked in the field for over a year recently and, in the state of MO at least, things are dire.

Chocolate Hog
09-14-2010, 05:13 PM
Cleveland Bronco is part of a failed drug experiment.

ClevelandBronco
09-14-2010, 05:15 PM
Cleveland Bronco is part of a failed drug experiment.

I was only supposed to be phase one, but when they saw what happened they called that shit off immediately.

Chocolate Hog
09-14-2010, 05:19 PM
I was only supposed to be phase one, but when they saw what happened they called that shit off immediately.

I hope you still got paid.

Fishpicker
09-14-2010, 05:40 PM
George Clinton tells the deal on dope

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EX1foEFWHUo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EX1foEFWHUo?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

There's more profit in pretending that we're stopping it
...than selling it

bevischief
09-15-2010, 01:20 PM
For a short time, yeah. But once Darwin was done putting in his overtime, things would stabilize.

This.

bevischief
09-15-2010, 01:22 PM
Be nice to sell drugs in the open...

KC native
09-15-2010, 02:29 PM
I am all for a new system instead of the horribly flawed one we have... BUT what works in Portugal may not work at all here... it's the same argument with gun laws... Making guns illegal in Belgium may work to reduce crime... but it simply won't work in the US. There are too many MASSIVE cultural differences.

On the whole, Europeans are far far far more temperate than we are... they tend to self regulate... we don't.

there is also the issue of what you do with prescription drugs... do you make them all legal as well? Can you imagine the abuses and problems that would cause?

A) Prescription drugs are legal and regulated. There's no need to change the system we have for them now.

B) What we have now isn't working. Drugs are more pure, cheaper, and more plentiful than when we started the drug war. All the drug war has done is enrich the wrong type of people.

Portugal's success is yet another example of how monumentally flawed the drug war is.

Rain Man
09-15-2010, 03:05 PM
If decriminalization made drug use go down, drug users should be against decriminalization.

go bowe
09-15-2010, 06:36 PM
If decriminalization made drug use go down, drug users should be against decriminalization.why yes, i'm against decriminalization...





not... :bong: :bong: :bong: