I can't help it if you're too ******* dense to understand that if there are fewer addicts then there will be fewer people committing crimes to support their addiction.
That would be nice..If it wasn't just a fantasy that you want to desperately believe to support your unfounded claims...
And to that point, unlike you..I can link to a source that shows you to be not 100% correct in your false assumptions..
Like this one..that discusses the flaws in the determination of the stats Portugal is citing to support it's claims of success
16 Years Later: What Happened After Portugal Decriminalized Drugs in 2001? | Leafly
See that part where it says homicides increased by 60% in Portugal in the 6 years after decriminalization? And the part where homicides are still up more than 10% what they were prior to decriminalization?
Also the part where it says that most people caught with hard drugs are no longer consider addicts by the Portuguese government/law enforcement, and all addiction services are voluntary? Hmmm...? Draws into question how Portugal is reporting the stats regarding their drug addiction success stories over there..Don't ya think?
So yeah..give that a read, and see that it shoots holes in the bullshit ship that the Portuguese government are floating. Probably similar situations of BS statistics being propagated in the rest of these European countries that have decriminalized hard drugs, and are vested in trying to prove it works.
Also, many of these European governments are providing addicts with the very drugs (or substitutes) they are craving so badly. Essentially creating a demographic of government funded drug dependents(which I pointed out to you earlier, and you ignored). Are we going to do that in Oregon?
Because like I said initially (the statement that started this whole back and forth), if you aren't going to give addicts free crack and heroin..then where are they going to get it? Methadone doesn't work...I know this for a fact. My sister has been on it for years and still uses heroin regularly, she just gets free methadone now too.
And methadone as a treatment seems to have not curbed the ever increasing numbers of opiate/heroin addicts in the country..
So, not sure why you think offering that to people as an option (when you just made heroin no longer a crime to abuse) is going to suddenly make them consider methadone as treatment?
So again I ask you..who is going to give the criminal addicts their free drugs? And now that it's decriminalized, becoming increasingly acceptable, creating more addicts...What do you think they will do when they aren't getting enough of their free drugs?
You can't just compare European countries to the United States, and what they are doing there, to here. It's not the same.
Lastly, the link provided shows also that just because less people are supposedly being incarcerated for "drug offenses" doesn't necessarily mean there is less drug related crime..
"The criminal landscape has certainly changed, but it doesn’t seem to be growing smaller. Incarcerations have risen slightly from
2001 to
2012 despite the fact that fewer than
half as many people are now incarcerated for drug crimes. Those who are pro-decriminalization often point to this statistic as a sign that police are now unburdened from their duties in persecuting small drug offenses, and are now able to tackle more substantial crime. Others argue that lax drug laws have led to more crime, and back up their claim by referencing the growing underground population reported by undercover agents interviewed in the study
What Can We Learn From the Portuguese Decriminalization of Illicit Drugs?" 
reason.org
www.cbsnews.com
www.npr.org
