Safe Injection Sites approved for edm, Cgy announcement tba

[you&me]

I'm going to post this, despite being sure that I'll be ridiculed... And I ask this as someone with no personal experience with drug addiction, heavy drug use, petty crime, etc :

Is there any way to the users of the safe injection site could be "better neighbours"?

The basis of this is something Peter12 mentioned earlier, which I don't feel is entirely true... I feel the vast majority of people are in favour of helping "street-entrenched and vulnerable people to actually receive dignified care". If there was a way to reduce and minimize the effects of the users of the safe injection site on the surrounding community, I believe opposition would fall off a cliff.

Imagine a safe injection site where addicts get their fix, but there are no needles littered around the community and no property crimes perpetrated by those same addicts... Is that possible? What would be required? Or are the addicts just "too far gone" to respond to basic decency - pick up after yourself and don't steal? Is it impractical to expect a drug user to have the wherewithal to properly dispose of a needle once the drugs take effect? Would this require something more structured as far as a space to for the actual administration of the drugs? Would the only reasonable way to reduce thefts be to supply the drugs, or at least supplement the costs? Is this all pointless because the costs to implement such a program are prohibitive?

Surely there must be a better way...

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Shawn_Cronin44

Exaggerating? Lol. Silly suburbanites.

I've never lived in the suburbs.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Shawn_Cronin44

Is it really over the top? Try leaving the burbs and come visit me for a weekend and you can experience all the benefits of living within 250m of the SIS. We'll park your car on the street so it can be broken into. You can walk my dog at 11pm and be asked for smokes and money and then be threatened as you pass by for not giving them either. Maybe you'll even get to experience someone overdosing in real life and get to call 911. These are the perks of having an SIS set up in your neighborhood.

I'm at least sympathetic to the fact that the SIS makes people uncomfortable and there's no reason to want them in your community specifically, but stuff like this that paints this behaviour as some common, everyday picture is why people think it's over the top.

I spend the better part of my day, 5-6 days a week, within 250m of the SIS. I'll be asked for a smoke or some change regularly, but outside of that not one of those situations has happened to me regardless of the time of day. Whether it's over my lunch hour, on a random break, after work, or after drinks in the area. Never been threatened, never come back to a broken into car, never had to call 911.

The strongest likelihood is that NONE of these things will happen to you. Hundreds of days and well over 100 late nights within 250m of the site, and I remain unscathed. Yet you suggest you experience it all in a weekend. Be honest.

If the picture you paint were true, the statistics would be significantly higher than they are. This is the issue with the "NIMBY" crowd. Not that you should love having the SIS in your community, because you shouldn't, it is in no way ideal for the average non-drug user to have that in their neighborhood, but that it's suddenly turned the area into some wasteland. It's bull####. Get some perspective.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I'm at least sympathetic to the fact that the SIS makes people uncomfortable and there's no reason to want them in your community specifically, but stuff like this that paints this behaviour as some common, everyday picture is why people think it's over the top.

I spend the better part of my day, 5-6 days a week, within 250m of the SIS. I'll be asked for a smoke or some change regularly, but outside of that not one of those situations has happened to me regardless of the time of day. Whether it's over my lunch hour, on a random break, after work, or after drinks in the area. Never been threatened, never come back to a broken into car, never had to call 911.

The strongest likelihood is that NONE of these things will happen to you. Hundreds of days and well over 100 late nights within 250m of the site, and I remain unscathed. Yet you suggest you experience it all in a weekend. Be honest.

If the picture you paint were true, the statistics would be significantly higher than they are. This is the issue with the "NIMBY" crowd. Not that you should love having the SIS in your community, because you shouldn't, it is in no way ideal for the average non-drug user to have that in their neighborhood, but that it's suddenly turned the area into some wasteland. It's bull####. Get some perspective.

And just to be totally clear. The Beltline has always been a place for street-entrenched people to gather, use drugs/drink, solicit, panhandle...

I can remember calling the cops a few times because of things I witnessed from my balcony on 14th Ave and 5th Street.

People are acting like a bomb dropped.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by peter12

"Willingly."

We could have a philosophical debate about the extent to which individuals are responsible for their own circumstances, or you could actually address the thesis of my post. Why should the health and safety of a small group of people engaging in an irresponsible, childish lifestyle be prioritized at the expense of the general public?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by you&me

I'm going to post this, despite being sure that I'll be ridiculed... And I ask this as someone with no personal experience with drug addiction, heavy drug use, petty crime, etc :

Is there any way to the users of the safe injection site could be "better neighbours"?

The basis of this is something Peter12 mentioned earlier, which I don't feel is entirely true... I feel the vast majority of people are in favour of helping "street-entrenched and vulnerable people to actually receive dignified care". If there was a way to reduce and minimize the effects of the users of the safe injection site on the surrounding community, I believe opposition would fall off a cliff.

Imagine a safe injection site where addicts get their fix, but there are no needles littered around the community and no property crimes perpetrated by those same addicts... Is that possible? What would be required? Or are the addicts just "too far gone" to respond to basic decency - pick up after yourself and don't steal? Is it impractical to expect a drug user to have the wherewithal to properly dispose of a needle once the drugs take effect? Would this require something more structured as far as a space to for the actual administration of the drugs? Would the only reasonable way to reduce thefts be to supply the drugs, or at least supplement the costs? Is this all pointless because the costs to implement such a program are prohibitive?

Surely there must be a better way...

Lobby your provincial government for more resources - especially ones earmarked towards creating affordable housing.

[Shawn_Cronin44]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I'm at least sympathetic to the fact that the SIS makes people uncomfortable and there's no reason to want them in your community specifically, but stuff like this that paints this behaviour as some common, everyday picture is why people think it's over the top.

I spend the better part of my day, 5-6 days a week, within 250m of the SIS. I'll be asked for a smoke or some change regularly, but outside of that not one of those situations has happened to me regardless of the time of day. Whether it's over my lunch hour, on a random break, after work, or after drinks in the area. Never been threatened, never come back to a broken into car, never had to call 911.

The strongest likelihood is that NONE of these things will happen to you. Hundreds of days and well over 100 late nights within 250m of the site, and I remain unscathed. Yet you suggest you experience it all in a weekend. Be honest.

If the picture you paint were true, the statistics would be significantly higher than they are. This is the issue with the "NIMBY" crowd. Not that you should love having the SIS in your community, because you shouldn't, it is in no way ideal for the average non-drug user to have that in their neighborhood, but that it's suddenly turned the area into some wasteland. It's bull####. Get some perspective.

Are you saying my experiences living and working in the beltline are fabricated? Please tell me more about my life and experiences. The examples in my post are literally pulled from the last two weeks. My building has an assigned CPS liaison officer due to the number of issues. But please tell me more about how I'm exaggerating.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by peter12

Lobby your provincial government for more resources - especially ones earmarked towards creating affordable housing.

But we just raised minimum wage to the highest in the Country....we already solved poverty.

People with low incomes dont need lower-cost housing or more affordable essential goods, they just need more money and we did that already.

You're talking about the NDP Legacy....that problem has already been solved. Move along.

[TheIronMaiden]

I think that it is important to note that safe injection sites are a pathway towards sustainable drug elimination goals. This is because they offer researchers and public health workers access to those who abuse subsistence. Junkies are a hard to reach population and because of that reliable information about their demographics, and habits is difficult to get. This isn't only about finding a place to shoot up, this is about gaining information, and building strategies so that "up-stream" and "down-stream" solutions can be implemented more effectively. It has already been proven that heavy handed law enforcement, and otherwise ignoring this crisis has not worked.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Zarley

We could have a philosophical debate about the extent to which individuals are responsible for their own circumstances, or you could actually address the thesis of my post. Why should the health and safety of a small group of people engaging in an irresponsible, childish lifestyle be prioritized at the expense of the general public?

I'm not sure it's far to say at the expense of the general public. Studies have shown the benefits, including less deaths and less transmission rates. At least with respect to transmission rates the reduction of that is a huge benefit to the 'general public' regardless of your view on addicts. It's the specific public (for lack of better word), those that are located near the safe injection site, that face the detriments.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Shawn_Cronin44

Are you saying my experiences living and working in the beltline are fabricated? Please tell me more about my life and experiences. The examples in my post are literally pulled from the last two weeks. My building has an assigned CPS liaison officer due to the number of issues. But please tell me more about how I'm exaggerating.

No, I'm saying your experiences are not common, and are not representative of how the average person will experience the area. So acting like everyone who doesn't relate to exactly your experience must be some distant suburbanite is silly. Plenty of people are right here in the area with you and are getting on just fine.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Zarley

We could have a philosophical debate about the extent to which individuals are responsible for their own circumstances, or you could actually address the thesis of my post. Why should the health and safety of a small group of people engaging in an irresponsible, childish lifestyle be prioritized at the expense of the general public?

It is fairly well established that Opioid abuse is often the symptom of personal and social problems rather then the cause.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...40547200001562

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

Turns out people don't like getting stabbed with needles in their backyard.

Originally Posted by peter12

Has that happened to anyone? Seems like more NIMBY garbage to me.

Yes, yes it has. My boss was jabbed with a needle within the last year. Unless you are trying to argue the semantics of backyard? because no, it wasn't in his backyard, it was the parking lot at work. A secure parking lot too.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Swarly

Yes, yes it has. My boss was jabbed with a needle within the last year. Unless you are trying to argue the semantics of backyard? because no, it wasn't in his backyard, it was the parking lot at work. A secure parking lot too.

I would think getting jabbed with a needle randomly is a very low probability of occurrence unless it was provoked in an confrontation. Being nice and supportive to people who are injecting rarely ever results in this situation in a malicious manner.

[Slava]

I'm generally in favour of these sites, but also a total NIMBY with regard to them. I'm sure that in the long term they have net benefits, but I don't want one in my community or anywhere near it and I don't want my office near one either.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Plenty of people are right here in the area with you and are getting on just fine.

One thing to consider is that what's "just fine" to you and peter12 may be completely unacceptable to many others. It's one thing to experience it from the view point of a young man with street smarts, but if you picture experiencing it from the viewpoint of a senior citizen, a mom with a stroller and two kids, or a tourist to our city, it becomes a different situation.

I think we can all do a better job sympathizing with the plight of these people, but I also don't think normalizing drug use in our streets is something we should just shrug off and accept. No matter how progressive people try to make the situation, an increase of drug use in our streets is not a good thing.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I'll think about this more and respond later. On the surface your original post came off ugly and dehumanizing, but after this maybe there's more to it (like when people are harsher when it affects them personally).

Yes, could be. It's not academic or philosophical for me.

A good portion of junkies have people in their lives trying to hold things together while their loved one is off the rails. You giving my family member easy and free access to needles is not helpful to us. Prolonging the difficulty, expense, energy waste, confusion, and stress for the junkie's family is not beneficial to anyone: not society, not people that are the collateral damage of users and definitely not junkies. Making it easier for them to get high is the biggest a-hole move in the world and a slap in the face to people actually trying to help them.

The City of Calgary should not be in the business of helping hard drug addicts get high. It's preposterous. I'd even be fine with cages and cold turkey before I'd hand someone a free needle and then slap on the defibrillator to keep them going. First step is counselling and sobriety, though. Then only way to do this is to lock them in a facility away from their lives and their junkie friends.

Adding more needles to the City is so stupid. I'd way rather 100 junkies share one needle than give 100 junkies 100 needles for them to only safely dispose of three of them.

[Shawn_Cronin44]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

No, I'm saying your experiences are not common, and are not representative of how the average person will experience the area. So acting like everyone who doesn't relate to exactly your experience must be some distant suburbanite is silly. Plenty of people are right here in the area with you and are getting on just fine.

I can see your side of the conversation. Everyone's experience is different. I spend nearly 100% of my time in the beltline. I live here and work here. My exposure to the side effects of the SIS is possibly more than someone who only works or socializes in the beltline.

I do wonder how you concluded the residents living around the SIS are "getting on just fine" though. What's the baseline for "getting on fine" for someone living near the SIS?

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I would think getting jabbed with a needle randomly is a very low probability of occurrence unless it was provoked in an confrontation. Being nice and supportive to people who are injecting rarely ever results in this situation in a malicious manner.

Well that's assuming rational behaviour, I'm guessing the person who did the needle stabbing wasn't acting all that rational. As someone who lives around this area these addicts are not rational actors, I see and hear them flip out about nothing regularly, especially at night. Example: Last month my car was parked outside and when I returned at 9pm someone had smashed my driver's side window and there was a linear smash to my windshield. When the vendor I was parked in front of pulled the video for the cops he told me a homeless/junky/whatever you want to call it guy came up to my car and took a baseball bat to my windshield and window and then just kept walking. He hit five other cars that night. These people are brain-limited, whether through mental illness or chemical dependencies or both. I don't think it's the ever-plummeting housing costs in Calgary causing this problem, and the cities that have tried to be the most progressive in letting people inject and have free reign (Vancouver, San Fran, LA) have seen the problem get worse and not better.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Zarley

We could have a philosophical debate about the extent to which individuals are responsible for their own circumstances, or you could actually address the thesis of my post. Why should the health and safety of a small group of people engaging in an irresponsible, childish lifestyle be prioritized at the expense of the general public?

You could say that about drivers. Let me throw it back at you. What is the appropriate threshold for which we stop withholding social services?