Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Has any jurisdiction tried free drugs?
Give concentration and volume controlled doses to those that want them and rehab and support services to those that want them and have a housing first policy to eliminate homelessness.
The crime side of this issue is driven by the need to acquire money to acquire drugs. These drugs are all pretty low cost to manufacture so why force the public to pay for black market prices through theft as opposed to an industrial produced lower cost option.
|
This idea is probably the most sane, but ####... how? Is it humane to straight up give someone a substance you know they are addicted to and will make them unable to function, meaning they may have an awfully hard time living anywhere but the street? Isn’t there some huge ethical issue to giving and addict something that is likely contributing to the very lifestyle rehabilitation is trying to pull them out of?
I don’t know any real hardcore drug users, so I ask this question honestly; can someone on meth or heroin function to the point of working an actual job (sweeping a parking lot even) while they’re high? Does an addict have the ability to not get high if they had drugs waiting for them when they wanted?
I’m sure there lots of actual drug users out there who manage to keep it together. But if you were a user, and the option was either go to work to make a pay cheque to pay for rent or go to the centre and score another hit, housing be damned, which would it be?
The notion is great. Less petty crime and theft, no need for violent assaults of drug deals and robberies. But is the trade off having to accept a tremendous amount of people who are just existing to get ####ed up? Who is responsible for providing the housing and care for someone who has had their poison gifted to them?