The Governor of Oregon has signed a bill that ends a short-lived liberal policy that decriminalized the possession of small amounts of certain drugs following a surge in overdose deaths.
I support decriminalization of drugs but this is not how to do it. Oregon failed hard on this topic.
But Oregon’s Department of Public Safety Standards and Training, which trains law enforcement, confirmed in February that it has offered police no instruction on how Measure 110 works other than to update information for new recruits on when drug possession is a violation, misdemeanor or felony. https://www.propublica.org/article/oregon-leaders-hampered-drug-decriminalization-effort
Not sure who is making that claim. I sat in on the training and one of my friends produced training for 110. I haven’t met an officer who wasn’t trained on 110.
I can’t find an official verified statement that no training was provided. It’s seem that’s propaganda against the police police since this article claims there was no training then list the training they were given
Departments simply received a simple question-and-answer guide from the state and officers were unclear about how best to handle situations involving drug possession and leading to additional frustration
That is training. When a law changes, that typically what you receive for training and it’s what I saw when I sat in on the training.
So while people are trying to blame the police, they were trained.
So everyone received training but somehow between you and me we found two sources that say there wasn’t training.
I think you’re just re-defining the word “training” to something other than what an average person would consider “training” to mean, and claiming you’re right. Just like the Reagan administration redefining ketchup as a vegetable in order to cut costs on children’s nutrition funding. Oh sneaky republicans.
Be real: if officers were unclear on how to handle situations- then they clearly didn’t receive as much instruction as they needed. Not receiving enough instruction = untrained. A Q&A pamphlet does not constitute training. It doesn’t matter if that’s what typically happens or if this is officially referred to as training, this is not what is normally meant by the word, or what a reasonable person would expect of “training”- especially when the health and safety of officers and the general public are at stake.
And I don’t think anyone is blaming police. It seems they were as frustrated as anyone with the lack of clarity, resolve and commitment from state and local government to address drug addiction’s terrible burden on communities, families, and individuals. Like they did in Portugal.
Anyway, you can have the last word, I’m done here.
Be real: if officers were unclear on how to handle situations- then they clearly didn’t receive as much instruction as they needed. Not receiving enough instruction = untrained.
We have a biased article saying officers were confused. I haven’t heard that from officers. Officers were clear on the measure 110. Article after article talks about measure 110 with officers stating their opinion of it and none said they were confused.
It seems they were as frustrated as anyone with the lack of clarity, resolve and commitment from state and local government to address drug addiction’s terrible burden on communities, families, and individuals
Can’t find a single article with the police saying they co can find articles where the police were mad they couldn’t arrest.
Nope I didn’t make that claim.
Published in February 2024
Not sure who is making that claim. I sat in on the training and one of my friends produced training for 110. I haven’t met an officer who wasn’t trained on 110.
I can’t find an official verified statement that no training was provided. It’s seem that’s propaganda against the police police since this article claims there was no training then list the training they were given
https://www.wweek.com/news/2023/06/23/researchers-release-second-round-on-findings-on-measure-110-police-dont-like-it/
That is training. When a law changes, that typically what you receive for training and it’s what I saw when I sat in on the training.
So while people are trying to blame the police, they were trained.
When you leave off the beginning of the quote it seems misleading:
So everyone received training but somehow between you and me we found two sources that say there wasn’t training.
I think you’re just re-defining the word “training” to something other than what an average person would consider “training” to mean, and claiming you’re right. Just like the Reagan administration redefining ketchup as a vegetable in order to cut costs on children’s nutrition funding. Oh sneaky republicans.
Be real: if officers were unclear on how to handle situations- then they clearly didn’t receive as much instruction as they needed. Not receiving enough instruction = untrained. A Q&A pamphlet does not constitute training. It doesn’t matter if that’s what typically happens or if this is officially referred to as training, this is not what is normally meant by the word, or what a reasonable person would expect of “training”- especially when the health and safety of officers and the general public are at stake.
And I don’t think anyone is blaming police. It seems they were as frustrated as anyone with the lack of clarity, resolve and commitment from state and local government to address drug addiction’s terrible burden on communities, families, and individuals. Like they did in Portugal.
Anyway, you can have the last word, I’m done here.
We have a biased article saying officers were confused. I haven’t heard that from officers. Officers were clear on the measure 110. Article after article talks about measure 110 with officers stating their opinion of it and none said they were confused.
Can’t find a single article with the police saying they co can find articles where the police were mad they couldn’t arrest.
https://www.wweek.com/news/2023/06/23/researchers-release-second-round-on-findings-on-measure-110-police-dont-like-it/
Not some random police were confused. Real quotes with real names attached to it. That’s a cite.