getting a little tired of the crack/meth heads

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

This problem isn’t confined to Calgary. Cities across North America are dealing with homeless addicts and the mentally ill in public spaces. Fentanyl and meth have been game changers. Housing affordability compounds the problem.

The public policy response adopted in the last decade of treating it as a public health issue and not a law enforcement issue was well-intentioned. You don’t get people healthy and clean by driving them away with threats of fines that cannot be collected. They’re better served by health services and access to clean drugs.

However, the now evident flaw of that approach is that the great majority on the streets do not want either of those things. They will not voluntarily enter treatment. And while they’ll take clean drugs if they’re offered, they prefer to use them away from public facilities, and they prefer the much stronger (and dangerous) street drugs, because if you want to get wasted the stronger the better.

So voluntary compliance with treatment has proven a failure.

In the meantime, the public has become frightened by the collapse of public order. And no, it’s not mostly comfortable middle-class types who are distressed by disorder. The people most affected by mentally unstable people on transit and in public spaces are the working class who have no choice but to use this public infrastructure. People who work at night, cleaners and food court workers and students who can’t afford cars. Particularly women - who, for reasons that shouldn’t have to be spelled out, are most anxious about being in proximity to deranged men in spaces that are evidently unpoliced, unmonitored, and where nobody will step in to help if you’re assaulted.

The public is not going to just grow accustomed to this level of disorder. They’re not going to become tolerant sophisticates who regard it as part of the rich tapestry of urban life. Public safety is a top issue with voters. Municipal governments across North America who can’t get a grip on this are getting the boot, even in the most progressive cities.

So the era of hands-off treatment of addicts and mentally ill on the streets is drawing to a close. Yes, this is a public health issue. But it’s also a public safety and public order issue. Long-term policies are needed to get at the root of addictions and mental illness. But in the short-term, we need to return to enforcing the law and restoring our transit, sidewalks, and parks to public spaces that the average citizen isn’t frightened to use.

I'm actually shocked that individuals with low self control and addiction haven't been models of social order and, when given the opportunity to do the right thing, do the exact opposite.

My problem with all of these things is that people put themselves in the shoes of the addict and say "if only they had X, they'd make better decisions" but the truth is they are either incapable or unwilling due to mental illness or addiction or both.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I would call it providing a safe, free, drug supply.

Promotion implies some sort of persuasion.

My question is always how much would you supply? If you supply an unlimited amount of drugs, that's not going to do anything positive. If you supply a low amount, the addicts will just supplement that with street drugs and add the supplied drugs on top of their daily usage.

If you're talking about opioids, clean heroin isn't going to make a dent on consumption. Fentanyl is many times stronger than heroin and addicts will actively search it out for that reason. It's not a question of addicts only using fentanyl because they can't afford or find clean heroin. As tolerances build, which happens quickly, the addicts will want the strongest (and by that nature most deadly) drug possible.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

I'm actually shocked that individuals with low self control and addiction haven't been models of social order and, when given the opportunity to do the right thing, do the exact opposite.

My problem with all of these things is that people put themselves in the shoes of the addict and say "if only they had X, they'd make better decisions" but the truth is they are either incapable or unwilling due to mental illness or addiction or both.

Once they're an addict it's too late. Everyone I've ever read about that was deeply into opiates and somehow recovered describes their days as seeking out their next hit. They paid no heed to whether their loved ones or the public at large were hurt in that pursuit. All that mattered was the next hit.

Pretty tough to get through to a person like that. We need to figure out how to keep people from becoming addicts in the first place or we'll never win.

[marsplasticeraser]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

I’m utterly baffled that anyone can look at what’s been going on in the city and what’s happening in cities that are pushing this harm reduction/safe supply garbage even harder like SF Portland and van and not realize that it’s a complete and total failure. It sounded good ten years ago to some egghead academics and the people that make policy decisions purely off of how it makes them feel, but the real world evidence has conclusively proved that it only makes the situation worse. In Europe it’s staggering to see the complete lack of junkies vs seeing roving packs of dozens of them every day in downtown Calgary.

it's worked in other countries that combine it with significant support for recovery.

I would suggest that most solutions that work in the EU would never work in the US as the US doesn't provide the social programs that underpin any policy decisions.

[Mr.Coffee]

Is it more likely a drug addict gets “clean / sober” in jail than on the streets?

I am thinking so, and I believe that getting people clean / sober is essentially mandatory in order to think clearly on how to fix your own life / try to be sober going forward. Any addict I have ever met or heard of- does not think clearly about anything other than where to get their next fix.

Hell, there’s a good argument that putting addicts in jail is the more humane thing society can do for them.

[marsplasticeraser]

I think the drugs epidemic is one of the biggest issues we are dealing with in North American society.

It needs a dramatic solution that focuses on two things:
1. Actual recovery for addicts
2. Reduces crime, violence, and anti-social behaviour towards the rest of society.

For about 10 years the only solution that I think would work is:
Step 1: Find some smaller towns that are down on their luck with vacant / low cost homes, dwindling population and pitch investment to create massive treatment facilities for drug additions.

Step 2: Make these facilities attractive to addicts. This means drugs are free on one half of the facility, and the other side has recovery teams. Both sides provide basic accommodation and meals, meaning that addicts don't need to cause social disorder to fuel their habit. Officers on both side maintain order, reducing crime amongst homeless, which is also an epidemic.

Step 3: Make it a hassle to do drugs in public, so existing addicts go to the treatment facilities.

Step 4: Once in facilities, some will stay there forever but many will grow bored and go into treatment.

Step 5: Good treatment means a lot will eventually leave treatment and return to society. A major improvement is it's harder to relapse as so few drug addicts remain on the streets.

I like this as it's a win-win-win-win

Win 1: Small, dwindling towns win with investment, home values increase, vibrancy comes back.

Win 2: Mental health and social workers win with affordable living and working in environments where they can impact peoples lives.

Win 3: Addicts win as they are given dignity, reduced exploitation, a real chance of recovery, and less likely to slip back.

Win 4: Society wins as crime, violence and anti-social behaviour is reduced. Furthermore, organized crime takes a big hit as significantly smaller market to sell drugs.

Only downside, this won't be cheap. The decision is what is the value of saving tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of people's lives, while also making our cities livable again, protecting our children from accidental overdoses, and more?

This is what we could spend our money on instead of arenas....

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

My problem with all of these things is that people put themselves in the shoes of the addict and say "if only they had X, they'd make better decisions" but the truth is they are either incapable or unwilling due to mental illness or addiction or both.

That kind of naiveté seems to be a part of it. Intelligent, self-disciplined, well-intentioned university graduates imagine how they’d behave if they were on the street - I’d seek out a safe supply of drugs, use them in a monitored place, and then I’d enrol in a treatment program - and assume that’s how homeless addicts should behave when offered those resources. They can’t put themselves in the mindset of someone who simply wants to get as wasted as they can, right now, and #### everything else.

[Monahammer]

I think we just need to reimagine "jail" for people in this situation. Big, open air, single living quarters camp like structures with lack of ability to get things in and out of and no drugs on premises, and defined paths to graduate back into normal society. That's the type of "facility" I would be conceiving of. I think if you avoid even the pedantic connotation of imprisonment and term it something else, a large proportion of society would immediately be in favor of it.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The public is not going to just grow accustomed to this level of disorder. They’re not going to become tolerant sophisticates who regard it as part of the rich tapestry of urban life. Public safety is a top issue with voters. Municipal governments across North America who can’t get a grip on this are getting the boot, even in the most progressive cities.

Agree with everything except this. The United States is a pretty strong counterpoint...they have somewhat more effectively swept the problem under the rug. But Americans seem to simply accept that there are places you don't go at night and places you don't go ever.

We are and will continue to transition more and more to that line of thinking, and perhaps employ more security guards to sweep the problem away from our eyes.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Agree with everything except this. The United States is a pretty strong counterpoint...they have somewhat more effectively swept the problem under the rug. But Americans seem to simply accept that there are places you don't go at night and places you don't go ever.

We are and will continue to transition more and more to that line of thinking, and perhaps employ more security guards to sweep the problem away from our eyes.

That may have been the case 6 or 8 years ago. No longer. Public lawlessness has been a major issue in recent elections in San Francisco, LA, New York, etc. In most cases, progressive candidates are losing to law and order types.

Progressive Democrats were knocked on the defensive in their own party over crime and homelessness on Wednesday after voters in two high-profile California races delivered a stark warning about the potency of law and order as a political message in 2022.

The landslide recall of a progressive prosecutor in San Francisco, Chesa Boudin, and the strength of a Republican-turned-Democratic mayoral candidate in deep-blue Los Angeles, Rick Caruso, who ran relentlessly as a crime-fighter eager to clean up the streets, showed the extent to which voter anxieties about public safety have taken hold — even in some of the most progressive corners of the nation.

The results offered fresh evidence of the depths of voter frustration in major American cities about quality-of-life issues. They were also the latest signs of a restless Democratic electorate that was promised a return to normalcy under President Biden and yet remains unsatisfied with the nation’s state of affairs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/08/u...ats-crime.html

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by marsplasticeraser

I think the drugs epidemic is one of the biggest issues we are dealing with in North American society.

It needs a dramatic solution that focuses on two things:
1. Actual recovery for addicts
2. Reduces crime, violence, and anti-social behaviour towards the rest of society.

For about 10 years the only solution that I think would work is:
Step 1: Find some smaller towns that are down on their luck with vacant / low cost homes, dwindling population and pitch investment to create massive treatment facilities for drug additions.

Step 2: Make these facilities attractive to addicts. This means drugs are free on one half of the facility, and the other side has recovery teams. Both sides provide basic accommodation and meals, meaning that addicts don't need to cause social disorder to fuel their habit. Officers on both side maintain order, reducing crime amongst homeless, which is also an epidemic.

Step 3: Make it a hassle to do drugs in public, so existing addicts go to the treatment facilities.

Step 4: Once in facilities, some will stay there forever but many will grow bored and go into treatment.

Step 5: Good treatment means a lot will eventually leave treatment and return to society. A major improvement is it's harder to relapse as so few drug addicts remain on the streets.

I like this as it's a win-win-win-win

Win 1: Small, dwindling towns win with investment, home values increase, vibrancy comes back.

Win 2: Mental health and social workers win with affordable living and working in environments where they can impact peoples lives.

Win 3: Addicts win as they are given dignity, reduced exploitation, a real chance of recovery, and less likely to slip back.

Win 4: Society wins as crime, violence and anti-social behaviour is reduced. Furthermore, organized crime takes a big hit as significantly smaller market to sell drugs.

Only downside, this won't be cheap. The decision is what is the value of saving tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of people's lives, while also making our cities livable again, protecting our children from accidental overdoses, and more?

This is what we could spend our money on instead of arenas....

I think the hardest part of that plan is dealing with the non-addicts in the town you plan on setting this up in. Could you imagine the NIMBY outrage? Facts would have little bearing, and RW media would lose their #### in defence of these small idyllic peaceful towns being overrun with the evil drug addled masses from cities.


For that reason alone, you are probably better to run it outside of a town, or the idea wouldn't get off the ground.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by marsplasticeraser

I think the drugs epidemic is one of the biggest issues we are dealing with in North American society.

It needs a dramatic solution that focuses on two things:
1. Actual recovery for addicts
2. Reduces crime, violence, and anti-social behaviour towards the rest of society.

What about preventing people from becoming addicts so we don't have this massive tragedy and drain on society 50 years from now?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Is it more likely a drug addict gets “clean / sober” in jail than on the streets?

I am thinking so, and I believe that getting people clean / sober is essentially mandatory in order to think clearly on how to fix your own life / try to be sober going forward. Any addict I have ever met or heard of- does not think clearly about anything other than where to get their next fix.

Hell, there’s a good argument that putting addicts in jail is the more humane thing society can do for them.

Based on my own observations from clients, many get totally clean in jail. You can visibly see it, as they often put on considerable weight.

The problem is that as soon as they get out, they fall into the same patterns. Except now it's worse as they have a criminal record, no savings, no house, no connections, etc...They often go directly back to the street they were on and resume drug use and petty crime. When you're in jail, you become even more isolated and the world passes you by. What few positive connections you had can disappear while in jail pretty easily.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Agree with everything except this. The United States is a pretty strong counterpoint...they have somewhat more effectively swept the problem under the rug. But Americans seem to simply accept that there are places you don't go at night and places you don't go ever.

We are and will continue to transition more and more to that line of thinking, and perhaps employ more security guards to sweep the problem away from our eyes.

Americans never swept anything under the rug, unless you want to consider the "rug" the other side of the tracks, wrong side of town, etc.

The reason the drug epidemic has come to the forefront of broader social concern is because the users have proliferated and spilled out into "normal" parts of town. This is very much a case of "out of sight, out of mind" no longer being the case, and that's the problem.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by blankall

Based on my own observations from clients, many get totally clean in jail. You can visibly see it, as they often put on considerable weight.

The problem is that as soon as they get out, they fall into the same patterns. Except now it's worse as they have a criminal record, no savings, no house, no connections, etc...They often go directly back to the street they were on and resume drug use and petty crime. When you're in jail, you become even more isolated and the world passes you by. What few positive connections you had can disappear while in jail pretty easily.

I’m a criminal defence lawyer that deals with meth addicted clients every single day.

Sadly, immediately after jail, they all end up back in their previous situation (or worse) and addicted to meth again.

It seems to be an incredibly hard addiction to kick.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

What about preventing people from becoming addicts so we don't have this massive tragedy and drain on society 50 years from now?

You mean, like hmm, wage a battle on the producers and suppliers?
I bet that would totally work. Actually wait, even better - like elect a former charismatic leader type from Hollywood to lead us to victory. I just can't think of what to name it, I mean this war.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

I’m a criminal defence lawyer that deals with meth addicted clients every single day.

Sadly, immediately after jail, they all end up back in their previous situation (or worse) and addicted to meth again.

It seems to be an incredibly hard addiction to kick.

I'm likely not nearly as well versed in criminal law as you, but I've done a few cases. In Vancouver, it's pretty apparent what's going as most homeless people with drug severe drug addictions are concentrated in one area. As they get out of jail, people go directly back to their previous neighbourhood (the downtown eastside) and all of their friends and everyone else they knew are still using drugs. None of the issues that led them to drugs in the first place have been dealt with.

With drugs like crack, meth, and opioids, all it takes is one slip up to put someone back on a bender and likely full blown addiction again. So the odds of not re-using are slim to none.

I have heard stories of people getting out of jail and seeing that as rock bottom and reforming afterwards, but that's certainly not the norm. It's possible that the forced sobriety of jail could be effective, but the justice system would have to fundamentally change towards a model focused towards reintegration and mental health issues. The current model of pulling people off the streets and confining them for a few months to years and then booting them back onto the streets certainly isn't working.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

You mean, like hmm, wage a battle on the producers and suppliers?
I bet that would totally work. Actually wait, even better - like elect a former charismatic leader type from Hollywood to lead us to victory. I just can't think of what to name it, I mean this war.

No, like keeping people from having such #### lives that they get into the stuff.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

No, like keeping people from having such #### lives that they get into the stuff.

I know, I know, I said it in jest I have no answers, we as society love our vices.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I think the hardest part of that plan is dealing with the non-addicts in the town you plan on setting this up in. Could you imagine the NIMBY outrage? Facts would have little bearing, and RW media would lose their #### in defence of these small idyllic peaceful towns being overrun with the evil drug addled masses from cities.


For that reason alone, you are probably better to run it outside of a town, or the idea wouldn't get off the ground.

A new residential treatment centre recently opened in Red Deer. Two more to follow in Lethbridge and the Blood Reserve.

https://www.cbc.ca/newsinteractives/...marshall-smith

Haven’t heard any NIMBY outrage about them, right-wing or otherwise.