Is there any policy that pro(re)gressives support that makes any sense? I am having trouble thinking of one. In fact, most make people’s lives far worse–result in higher taxes, higher prices, less public safety, worse education, worse infrastructure, more division among the citizenry; in general a lowering of living standards and quality of life. Here is a great example, which follow-up research finds that as usual the policy didn’t meet its goals, in fact made the situation worse. Let’s legalize all personal use of drugs. In fact, let’s set up safe spaces where we encourage people to use drugs. That will reduce crime, keep people out of jail, avoid overdoses, etc.
So Oregon and Washington states, which are about as whacked as California, went down that road. A new study finds that the results were not quite what the pro(re)gressives claimed they would be. The study focussed only on whether decriminalization would result in fewer overall crimes. I don’t know what kind of dumb-ass you have to be to think that making addictive drugs legal would mean there would be fewer addicts or that the addicts would not be just as desperate to steal to support their habits. And so of course crime rates rose in those states, primarily in Seattle and Portland, when compared to other jurisdictions that did not legalize drug use. Totally predictable to anyone with a common sense approach to what would happen.
This research just looked at the impact on crime. What is really depressing is that those states just gave up on people struggling with drug use. They allowed mostly young people to just devolve their lives into nothingness–high likelihood of death or serious disease, no ability to work, to form serious relationships. Just let that important part of the population focus their whole lives around drugs. That is an enormous loss for society; all the contributions that those young people could have made. But that is the story with every whacked pro(re)gressive policy; they don’t really care about people’s welfare. (Drug Study)
Kevin, as a native Portlander and a long-term migrant to Seattle, I can tell you that the problem is even worse than you describe in your post. While it’s true that crime is up, in large part due to these insane policies, the statistics don’t show the true magnitude of that increase. Why? Crime is chronically under-reported in those crazy blue towns. The numbers are suppressed by the powers that be to help prove the wisdom of their policies. They don’t arrest for any crime they decide is minor. They don’t aggressively prosecute perpetrators of crimes that do warrant an arrest, giving slaps on the wrist if at all. Don’t even get me started on no bail treatment even for serial offenders. So crime stats are suppressed at the bureaucratic level for both policy and political reasons. But it doesn’t stop there. With all the reticence about doing anything to punish crime or to present criminals with a disincentive to commit crimes, the victims censor themselves and in many cases don’t bother to report crimes anymore. Why take that step if nothing is going to happen to the criminal? Why should the victims put their lives and bodies at risk of retribution if the criminal doesn’t get put away but is instead free to continue to commit crimes anymore at will? In the major towns of the PNW, the system is broken and there is no end in sight to the evil perpetrated by the leaders of those towns. Lawlessness and complete disregard for the lives and livelihoods of their citizens— including citizens hopelessly addicted to drugs and in need of intervention and treatment—prevail. Voters in those cities need to wake up and see what you have so eloquently laid out, namely that leaving addicts to their own devices is not a humanitarian gesture, but a death sentence for the addicts and the communities they haunt.
I use to go to both cities quite a lot, they were lovely to visit, but not anymore, just not safe. Thanks for the detail about how bad it has gotten there.