getting a little tired of the crack/meth heads - Page 64 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

blankall · 08-17-2023, 02:40 PM

There are a lot of logistical problems with safe supply. Does it mean just giving out unlimited amounts of drugs for free? If you just give out some drugs, won't addicts just use street drugs to supplement what you are giving out? Would it make it easier or harder to kick a habit? Are we just assuming it's not possible to kick a hard drug addiction?

Plus a lot of addicts prefer stronger drugs like Fentanyl.

I definitely want to help people who are addicted to drugs, but the idea of giving drugs to drug addicts seems counter-productive. There would have to be a lot of strings attached to that distribution to make sure it actually benefits anyone.

PaperBagger'14 · 08-17-2023, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormius

My statement was meant more that a safe supply benefits both the occasional recreational users and addicts, and it shouldn’t really invoke the “oh you are just enabling addicts” argument.

So sure maybe you could OD from a massive cocaine binge, but it wouldn’t be because a line you snorted had a milligram of fentanyl or weedkiller added in. Having a safe supply doesn’t hurt anyone.

Having a safe and readily accessible (read: storefront) supply absolutely harms those who otherwise wouldn't entertain the idea of buying these drugs. Why would anyone want easier access to harmful drugs? Just because these drugs are "less harmful" than cut drugs doesn't mean everyone should have access to them.

Locke · 08-17-2023, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

Why am I being dragged into this?

You know why....

Wormius · 08-17-2023, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brendone

Why would I care about someone wanting to play Russian roulette, either recreationally or out of habit? Either one blows their brains out… yeah that’s what happens. Sure not going to support funds going to a “safe handgun supply site” that guarantees the gun only has one chamber loaded, not three.

If you’re a complete drug prohibitionist then your view isn’t going to change regardless, but it’s a bit silly to suggest that every drug is potentially a loaded weapon. It’s that way because there is no regulatory oversight on the manufacture.

Wormius · 08-17-2023, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Having a safe and readily accessible (read: storefront) supply absolutely harms those who otherwise wouldn't entertain the idea of buying these drugs. Why would anyone want easier access to harmful drugs? Just because these drugs are "less harmful" than cut drugs doesn't mean everyone should have access to them.

Did everyone become a pothead after legalization?

fotze2 · 08-17-2023, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormius

My statement was meant more that a safe supply benefits both the occasional recreational users and addicts, and it shouldn’t really invoke the “oh you are just enabling addicts” argument.

So sure maybe you could OD from a massive cocaine binge, but it wouldn’t be because a line you snorted had a milligram of fentanyl or weedkiller added in. Having a safe supply doesn’t hurt anyone.

Are there actual casual users of it? I assumed no, or extremely unlikely, but maybe I'm wrong.

PaperBagger'14 · 08-17-2023, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormius

If you’re a complete drug prohibitionist then your view isn’t going to change regardless, but it’s a bit silly to suggest that every drug is potentially a loaded weapon. It’s that way because there is no regulatory oversight on the manufacture.

I'm no prohibitionist for all drugs, drugs with low levels of addictive properties (weed, zoomers) or low capacity to OD are fine in my books. It's not like junkies started ODing and dropping like flies when fentanyl started getting cut into the supply either. Look at how many famous people have died from speedballs alone and those are 2 very common drugs people want a "safe" supply for. The safest supply for these hard drugs is no supply.

PaperBagger'14 · 08-17-2023, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormius

Did everyone become a pothead after legalization?

No but people who otherwise wouldn't have searched out a pot dealer and would rather buy pre rolled joints from a store sure as hell did. Hell I'm one of them lol.

Brendone · 08-17-2023, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormius

If you’re a complete drug prohibitionist then your view isn’t going to change regardless, but it’s a bit silly to suggest that every drug is potentially a loaded weapon. It’s that way because there is no regulatory oversight on the manufacture.

For me, “hard drugs” have always been the other side of a line where your possible outcomes are a splitting headache the morning after over indulging booze vs overdose and death, so I guess that does make me a drug Prohibitionist. I also stayed away from pot because I considered it a grey area between alcohol and hard drugs. Sort of that next step to rabbit hole I didn’t want to risk going down. I had lots of friends that would indulge in pot and never had an issue, and I don’t consider it a path to the dark side like I used to, but still can’t stand the smell, so not for me.

I have lots of sympathy for those who become addicts due to situations they don’t know how to cope with, and I believe in treatment, not safe supply. I’m all for more funding for treatment. The “I like to party hard” addict. Nope, you chose your path.

powderjunkie · 08-17-2023, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

The safest supply for these hard drugs is no supply.

Well maybe we can come up with a religious angle to encourage abstinence. Because that is always really effective.

blankall · 08-17-2023, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fotze2

Are there actual casual users of it? I assumed no, or extremely unlikely, but maybe I'm wrong.

Casual cocaine use is extremely common, with the vast majority of users being non-addicts. Casual opioid use is less common but does happen.

fotze2 · 08-17-2023, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blankall

Casual cocaine use is extremely common, with the vast majority of users being non-addicts. Casual opioid use is less common but does happen.

For sure cocaine, wasn't thinking of that, but maybe I missed some of the convo.

blankall · 08-17-2023, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fotze2

For sure cocaine, wasn't thinking of that, but maybe I missed some of the convo.

Actually now that I think about it, opioid use recreationally is fairly common. Taking pills (both opioid and Benzos) or drinking "lean" is fairly common with teenagers and young adults these days. Shooting heroin isn't really a trend anymore. Most recreational users aren't purposely taking Fentanyl, and one of the rationales behind safe supply is to make sure they don't.

TorqueDog · 08-17-2023, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Well maybe we can come up with a religious angle to encourage abstinence. Because that is always really effective.

If you don't have sex, you might give birth to the next messiah! Won't that be exciting!

PepsiFree · 08-17-2023, 06:05 PM

If the safest drug supply is no supply, shouldn’t we apply that to all drugs including alcohol? Should more consumables be banned and more heavily policed?

I see it more as, if people are already accessing something in heavy numbers despite it being banned, and that thing is dangerous and the money is going to fund criminal behaviour, isn’t it smarter to try and make it safer/reduce the amount of $$$ going to criminals?

Has prohibition ever worked? Did the war on drugs work?

MRCboicgy · 08-17-2023, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locke

You know why....

My teeth were messed up without ever having had to try meth, tyvm.

PaperBagger'14 · 08-17-2023, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If the safest drug supply is no supply, shouldn’t we apply that to all drugs including alcohol? Should more consumables be banned and more heavily policed?

I see it more as, if people are already accessing something in heavy numbers despite it being banned, and that thing is dangerous and the money is going to fund criminal behaviour, isn’t it smarter to try and make it safer/reduce the amount of $$$ going to criminals?

Has prohibition ever worked? Did the war on drugs work?

If you would have read through my previous posts you could answer your question. Also maybe you should give heroin a shot, since there's no tangible difference between alcohol and meth, crack or heroin, why aren't you shooting up? If you did start chasing the dragon it might actually lead to better arguments. Imagine having such a moronic point of view you compare alcohol use to heroin.

iggy_oi · 08-17-2023, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

No but people who otherwise wouldn't have searched out a pot dealer and would rather buy pre rolled joints from a store sure as hell did. Hell I'm one of them lol.

Are we to infer that the only reason you’re not shooting up speedballs right now is laziness?

PaperBagger'14 · 08-17-2023, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Are we to infer that the only reason you’re not shooting up speedballs right now is laziness?

The coke would sure help with the laziness that's for sure.

PepsiFree · 08-17-2023, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

If you would have read through my previous posts you could answer your question. Also maybe you should give heroin a shot, since there's no tangible difference between alcohol and meth, crack or heroin, why aren't you shooting up? If you did start chasing the dragon it might actually lead to better arguments. Imagine having such a moronic point of view you compare alcohol use to heroin.

Why would I read through your previous posts when I have no interest in what you have to say and don’t value your answers?