Needle Disposal

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Because beating your wife is harming someone other than yourself.
Clearly that isn't the case. This debate is about how someone was put at risk becasue of a behaviour that he says there should be sanctioned sites for. Besides that, there is the inherant lifestlye that comes with the sort of people that would be using these sites. Mostly homeless and people who are willing to comit crimes to do them. If you can clean up the drug problems, you can clear up these problems, which are at least on par with someone hitting their wives. Sure it's not a direct affect, but I'd wager it's overall detriment to society is much greater. Is doing away with safe injection sites going to do anything about the drug problem? Probably not. But I can guarantee that having sites where drug use is condoned, does absolutley nothing to help the problem. Sure it may make things a little clearner, but it does nothing to fix the fundamental problem. And in my eyes makeing it easier for people to engage in this activity, is likely making the problem worse.


Either way, the comparision I was making is that these are both illegal activities, and making arrangments to say that it is okay to do it in one places sets a dangerous precedent. To me the seem like the same thing. "Doing drugs is horrible, and shouldn't be tolerated.....unless you do it somewhere I can't see you". To me that is no different than "You can't hit your wife in the street like that....take her home and hit her". The similarity is not in who it affects, but the fact that crime is being tolerated as long as it is out of sight.

I think you're missing the point. These sites aren't there to condone these illegal actions, they're there to make sure that there's less of a risk to the general public during and after the illegal actions are performed. I don't think that's really comparable with domestic abuse.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Dion

Until a better solution comes alomg safe injection sites are the best alternative we've got. Those that use drugs are going to do it anyway so why not provide a safe place that is away from public areas. Imagine if a child found that needle in the phone booth and he pricked himself with it?

Ah yes, the emotional child arguement.

I'll give it a go.
What message does it send to that same child when he sees people shooting up heroin with the cops standing by doing nothing?
Sure it's not in the middle of the street, but the message being sent is that it's okay to do drugs, as long as we don't see you doing them.

Seriously, when was the last time you hear about a kid getting pricked by a needle? I've NEVER heard a story like that, and I'm fairly certain there would be major uproar about something like that. I think it would be hard to miss. (I may have missed it, i don't know).

Now, how many kids get hooked on drugs each day?

You tell me what should be our priority? Making sure kids don't get pricked by needles, or making sure kids don't think using drugs is okay?

I'd say that the chances of each of these events being signifigantly reduced by either allowing or doing away with these sites is pretty small, but the scale of one is much larger than the other, so I'd rather err no that side.

[jar_e]

To answer the OP's question...the fire department will pick it up...give them a call at 911 or 264 1022 and they'll pick it up...it's a pretty common call.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think you're missing the point. These sites aren't there to condone these illegal actions, they're there to make sure that there's less of a risk to the general public during and after the illegal actions are performed. I don't think that's really comparable with domestic abuse.

Fair enough, you will likely reduce the physical danger to society by a small degree.
But to me, allowing a place for this activity to happen is only making it easier for the people doing it (They won't get busted), so who knows what impact you might be having on the overall problem?

Gangs shoot at each other on crowded streets, and that is a danger to the public. They're going to do it anyway, so why not let them go out into the woods and shoot at each other there? Same thing isn't it?

Drunk drivers on the highways are really dangerous, and people are gonna drink and drive anyway, so maybe if we tell them that as long as they stick to residential roads, it's okay, because then they won't be going as fast.

The best way to reduce risk to the public is to reduce the activity itself, not to move it out of sight.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by fotze

But with drugs they seem to be at a complete loss on how to reduce the activity. It is pretty much admitting a failure and now shifting priorities into mitigating damages (to the non-drug users only).

Its like drilling a well and having a blowout. The original well and its upside are now gone, now how to get out of the mess as cheaply as possible.

Exactly. It's about limiting the damage at this point. The "War on Drugs" will see about as much success in our lifetimes as the "War on Terror".

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

The best way to reduce risk to the public is to reduce the activity itself, not to move it out of sight.

This is part of the solution. The people doing drugs are people too. Safe injection sites, drop boxes and giving away clean needles to help stop the spread of infectious disease. This is for the benefit of these people. The mentality is that these people are going to do the drugs anyways, so we will either provide support to get them off of the drugs, or we will make it safer for them to do those drugs.

What do you suppose? Lock them up prison? That isn't going to solve anything. That will just cost more money and solve nothing.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Ah yes, the emotional child arguement.

I'll give it a go.
What message does it send to that same child when he sees people shooting up heroin with the cops standing by doing nothing?
Sure it's not in the middle of the street, but the message being sent is that it's okay to do drugs, as long as we don't see you doing them.

I'm not suggesting this as a permanent solution. I want drug use off the streets and away from public places. Is it a perfect solution? Of course not. And does it send a bad message? Probably yes when you put it that way.

Seriously, when was the last time you hear about a kid getting pricked by a needle? I've NEVER heard a story like that, and I'm fairly certain there would be major uproar about something like that. I think it would be hard to miss. (I may have missed it, i don't know).

I haven't heard any myself but the possibilty still exists. It's an event I want there to be some proactive action before something like this does happen.

Now, how many kids get hooked on drugs each day?

You tell me what should be our priority? Making sure kids don't get pricked by needles, or making sure kids don't think using drugs is okay?

I'd say that the chances of each of these events being signifigantly reduced by either allowing or doing away with these sites is pretty small, but the scale of one is much larger than the other, so I'd rather err no that side.

Personaly I don't want kids or adults for that matter getting pricked by needles. Nor do I want kids thinking drug use is okay. Maybe your right, leave things. To me there is no easy solution to this problem. It's just that i'm willing to try any methods to get drug use away from the public areas.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Dion

I'm not suggesting this as a permanent solution. I want drug use off the streets and away from public places. Is it a perfect solution? Of course not. And does it send a bad message? Probably yes when you put it that way.



I haven't heard any myself but the possibilty still exists. It's an event I want there to be some proactive action before something like this does happen.



Personaly I don't want kids or adults for that matter getting pricked by needles. Nor do I want kids thinking drug use is okay. Maybe your right, leave things. To me there is no easy solution to this problem. It's just that i'm willing to try any methods to get drug use away from the public areas.

See that is the mentality that I'm getting at.
I think everyone will agree that more should be done to curb drug use. Unfortunately the resources aren't there, or aren't being allocated, to stop the problem. Where I have a problem is when people say "we aren't going to stop it so we might as well let them do it".

Think you didn't say that? To me "I want it off the streets and away from public places" is exactly the same thing. What you might have meant to say was "I think drug use is horrible, and we should do everything to stop it", but what came out sounds more like "I don't care as long as i can't see it". In this case it really is how something can be interpreted that has potential to cause major problems.

Safe injection sites may be set up for the purpose of stopping or curbing the problem, but the message that they send is exactly the opposite, they say "Just don't do it in front of me", and I think that has the potential to do more damage than good.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

See that is the mentality that I'm getting at.
I think everyone will agree that more should be done to curb drug use. Unfortunately the resources aren't there, or aren't being allocated, to stop the problem. Where I have a problem is when people say "we aren't going to stop it so we might as well let them do it".

Think you didn't say that? To me "I want it off the streets and away from public places" is exactly the same thing. What you might have meant to say was "I think drug use is horrible, and we should do everything to stop it", but what came out sounds more like "I don't care as long as i can't see it". In this case it really is how something can be interpreted that has potential to cause major problems.

Safe injection sites may be set up for the purpose of stopping or curbing the problem, but the message that they send is exactly the opposite, they say "Just don't do it in front of me", and I think that has the potential to do more damage than good.

No it's not the same thing. And no i'm not suggesting we can't stop it.

I want if off the street not because I won't have to see it, but more of a health and safety issue. Preventing someone from being pricked by accident is a good thing in my books as it prevents the transfer of AID's and other diseases to some unknown victim.

Safe injection sites also, as mentioned by another poster, offers free clean needles to drug users. This will help the spread of diseases such as AID's and Hepititus.

[kipperfan]

I think it would be pretty funny if they set up a "safe injection" site somewhere in Calgary and operated for a few months, lulling all the addicts and bums into a false sense of security...and then one day start putting plainclothed cops outside the facility and start nabbing every single person who walks in the door, of course they would all be carrying, and would still be technically outside the "safe injection" site so it would be fair game......a giant sting on the desolate and despondant amongst us.

That was a joke(kind of...meh not really) but honestly screw this safe injection site nonsense....I think solving the drug problem is pretty easy, the problem is it requires the legislators and law makers to grow a pair. Up the penalties tenfold for possesion of hard drugs(crack, needle drugs...etc) and double the street patrol in our countries inner cities.

Jiri had a a good point in saying hard drugs usage is not isolated to just the homeless and poverty stricken folks...but lets call a spade a spade..they make up the lions share of the problem. Billy Buisnessman with a smack addiction isnt huddling behind the Cecil Hotel shooting up and throwing his needles on the streets....more then likely the white collar drug users go to the farthest lengths to hide their problem from the world.

My point is....if we ramp up the jail time for drug possesion and up the police presence within our inner cities...it would make it a hell of a lot harder for the drugies to effect everyday society the way they do today.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

I think it would be pretty funny if they set up a "safe injection" site somewhere in Calgary and operated for a few months, lulling all the addicts and bums into a false sense of security...and then one day start putting plainclothed cops outside the facility and start nabbing every single person who walks in the door, of course they would all be carrying, and would still be technically outside the "safe injection" site so it would be fair game......a giant sting on the desolate and despondant amongst us.

That was a joke(kind of...meh not really) but honestly screw this safe injection site nonsense....I think solving the drug problem is pretty easy, the problem is it requires the legislators and law makers to grow a pair. Up the penalties tenfold for possesion of hard drugs(crack, needle drugs...etc) and double the street patrol in our countries inner cities.

Jiri had a a good point in saying hard drugs usage is not isolated to just the homeless and poverty stricken folks...but lets call a spade a spade..they make up the lions share of the problem. Billy Buisnessman with a smack addiction isnt huddling behind the Cecil Hotel shooting up and throwing his needles on the streets....more then likely the white collar drug users go to the farthest lengths to hide their problem from the world.

My point is....if we ramp up the jail time for drug possesion and up the police presence within our inner cities...it would make it a hell of a lot harder for the drugies to effect everyday society the way they do today.

And also cost the gov't billions of dollars... Trust me I live in Texas they did all this it didn't work instead ridiculous amounts of money got funnelled away from education to pay for the prison system. Where is the money in Calgary going to come from?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

I think it would be pretty funny if they set up a "safe injection" site somewhere in Calgary and operated for a few months, lulling all the addicts and bums into a false sense of security...and then one day start putting plainclothed cops outside the facility and start nabbing every single person who walks in the door, of course they would all be carrying, and would still be technically outside the "safe injection" site so it would be fair game......a giant sting on the desolate and despondant amongst us.

That was a joke(kind of...meh not really) but honestly screw this safe injection site nonsense....I think solving the drug problem is pretty easy, the problem is it requires the legislators and law makers to grow a pair. Up the penalties tenfold for possesion of hard drugs(crack, needle drugs...etc) and double the street patrol in our countries inner cities.

Jiri had a a good point in saying hard drugs usage is not isolated to just the homeless and poverty stricken folks...but lets call a spade a spade..they make up the lions share of the problem. Billy Buisnessman with a smack addiction isnt huddling behind the Cecil Hotel shooting up and throwing his needles on the streets....more then likely the white collar drug users go to the farthest lengths to hide their problem from the world.

My point is....if we ramp up the jail time for drug possesion and up the police presence within our inner cities...it would make it a hell of a lot harder for the drugies to effect everyday society the way they do today.

In other words, continue the War on Drugs approach that we all know doesn't work, but make it more harsh? No thanks. And do we really want to pay for some guy to rot in prison for 30 years because he got caught with some crack in his pocket? I'm not too keen on doubling the size of the police force either.

We might as well try to focus on prevention, treatment and minimizing harm. Arresting and incarcerating them doesn't work. If it did, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all because there wouldn't be a problem today.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Sowa

Trust me I live in Texas they did all this it didn't work instead ridiculous amounts of money got funnelled away from education to pay for the prison system.

Which will then lead to more drug problems because more people won't get a proper education. It is quite a cycle.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

We all like to think that its only the riff-raf that do drugs. The idea of an high ranking oil executive popping into the bathroom to shoot up isn't something society is comfortable with. Which is why you only see the needle drop boxes in the expected areas of town. Though I'm sure cost is a factor as well. To a degree it only makes sense to put the boxes where there is your highest population of users, but I also think there is an image factor to it all.

Oh yeah, I have no disagreement that all types do drugs. Theirs a lot of suits that do cocaine and other substances. I just wondered why we don't see more drop boxes all over the place.

Of course, those that do use and have jobs and homes are probaby less likely to need to use a drop box than those living on the street or in a safe house. There are a lot of people who use drugs responsibly (or at least a lot less harmfully to society) and probably dispose of them safely on their own. Maybe that's the reason. Not sure. People of all types use, but it's probably a certain cross section that use on the street, etc.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

My point is....if we ramp up the jail time for drug possesion and up the police presence within our inner cities...it would make it a hell of a lot harder for the drugies to effect everyday society the way they do today.

Hmmmm yeah cause the US war on drugs has worked so well. Rehabilitation and saftey in social issues work a lot better as drug policy than criminal sentances.

Drugs are as old as human histroy and will be around forever. Making them illegal or MORE illegal is not going to solve the problem, it'll just drive it underground and make it more dangerous.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

In other words, continue the War on Drugs approach that we all know doesn't work, but make it more harsh? No thanks. And do we really want to pay for some guy to rot in prison for 30 years because he got caught with some crack in his pocket? I'm not too keen on doubling the size of the police force either.

Perhaps we don't need to up the crimes for possesion, what might be plausible is increasing the penalties for dealers. I watch COPS and am shocked to see that you can get a dose of crack for $5. Make it so that the dealers end up having to price themselves out of the market.

Just spitballing here. There has to be some sort of solution.

[RedHot25]

Well I just skimmed this thread so I think this may have been covered. Safe injection sites incorporate the idea of harm reduction - less harm to the user (i.e. not dirty needles, etc etc) and general harm reduction overall - i.e. keeping the activity somewhat more confined to a general area and not out and about.

That said, the high roller as pointed out is quite the druggie. As is the homeless person on the street. As is your next door neighbour . Obviously I am talking hypothetically here, but drugs are persistent across all classes etc. That being said, the point being that that needle could have come from any person - homeless to 5 million dollar person. Or it could have come from a normal drug user for lack of better words, eg insulin etc.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Perhaps we don't need to up the crimes for possesion, what might be plausible is increasing the penalties for dealers. I watch COPS and am shocked to see that you can get a dose of crack for $5. Make it so that the dealers end up having to price themselves out of the market.

Just spitballing here. There has to be some sort of solution.

I agree more with your line of thinking Ken. Frankly I dont think the "liberal" approach of education and rehabilition works....IMO there is a certain element of our society who is always going to be using and abusing hard drugs, no matter what social programs are immplented. IMO we need to punish the users......but I think your idea of coming down alot harder on the dealers is a much more pragmatic approach. Junkies will always be junkies as long as there is someone(dealers) there to exploit them...so maybe immplenting minimum 10 year prison sentence for hard drug trafficking can keep some of the junk.....and the junkies off the streets.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

I agree more with your line of thinking Ken. Frankly I dont think the "liberal" approach of education and rehabilition works....IMO there is a certain element of our society who is always going to be using and abusing hard drugs, no matter what social programs are immplented. IMO we need to punish the users......but I think your idea of coming down alot harder on the dealers is a much more pragmatic approach. Junkies will always be junkies as long as there is someone(dealers) there to exploit them...so maybe immplenting minimum 10 year prison sentence for hard drug trafficking can keep some of the junk.....and the junkies off the streets.

It doesn't work. If harsher sentences and more enforcement worked, there wouldn't be a drug problem (worse than here, I'll bet) in places like Texas or California.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

It doesn't work. If harsher sentences and more enforcement worked, there wouldn't be a drug problem (worse than here, I'll bet) in places like Texas or California.

Well maybe.....but comparing area like Texas and California to Calgary is not very fair. The amount of readily availible drugs in both of those regions is probably tenfold to what we have here.....as is the level of poverty.

I am not saying that with the immplementation of harsher penalties drug use would cease to exist, but I do think it would take a large chunk out of the problem...and this is just my oppinion but I am willing to fork over more tax dollars to get the lowlife drug dealing scum off the streets before they are propositioning my kids in 15 or 20 years. Even if the harsher penalties didnt reduce the cities drug use at all, I would still be in favour of cracking down on the dealers of hard drugs.....these scumbags(for the most part) cannot and will not be rehab'd.