- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Supervised injection sites decrease crime, decrease (often eliminate) overdose deaths, and can help people to quit using. People who argue against them are promoting crime and senseless death.
Unironically bring back pay toilets
Users should be provided treatment, dealers should be charged with manslaughter or murder.
UNODC estimates that only 10-15% of drug use is problematic. That means 85-90% of users are in no need of treatment.
That doesn’t speak to my statement. Obviously the meme is geared towards the aforementioned 10-15% of users of any substance.
My statement speaks to the fact that those problematic users should receive help, and that drug dealers are parasitical entities which are committing acts akin to murder or genocide.
meme is geared towards the aforementioned 10-15% of users of any substance
I’d say that’s arguable but even so, your statement wasn’t geared that way. You said “users” without qualification, not “problematic users”. I’m simply pointing out that there’s distinction between the two and one should not throw the baby out with the bathwater by assuming that all drug users are problematic drug users and then creating laws based on that very flawed assumption.
drug dealers are parasitical entities which are committing acts akin to murder or genocide
Some are. Some are decent and are helping people out because the government has chosen to put the mutli-billion dollar industry into the hands of criminal gangs (the parasitical entities). Again, don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. When society eventually pulls its head out of its ass and legalises and regulates drugs, I’ll bet a large proportion of the people staffing the specialist pharmacies will be those same drug dealers doing what they always did, just in a legalised context: not only supplying but offering advice and guidance to keep people safe.
At least some countries like Portugal are getting there.
What works versus what seems right.
Classic liberal vs conservative conundrum.
I’d say that doing what actually works regardless of how surprising or weird it seems is, in one word, scientific. I evaluate the results of scientific experiments all the time and you’ve just got to let go of your expectations and follow the data. Data says the opposite of what you thought? Change the way you think. Didn’t get the result you wanted? There a reason why that you’re missing. But follow the data, always. Otherwise what’s the point: just create a theocracy based on what you feel is right and watch it devolve around you. But hey, at least you’ll still be “right!”
what seems right
A punitive approach to drugs only seems right to the wilfully ignorant. Religion seems to overwhelmingly be the source of that will.
I mean I agree but it’s hard to argue that we’re being punitive by not dedicating a safe space wherein to do drugs. The punitive stuff is everything else.
it’s hard to argue that we’re being punitive by not dedicating a safe space wherein to do drugs
I would argue that this is very much in line with the punitive approach of criminalisation, it comes from the same feelings of revulsion and delusions of moral superiority as criminalisation. It’s simply another form of punishment: unnecessary, forced suffering.
