Author Topic: Vancouver Tries Free Heroin Program (Read 3426 times)

bustr · « **Reply #165 on:** March 17, 2005, 04:26:07 PM »

Ok say the US Congress gets religion and legalises all drugs. Now the addicts can indulge all they want.

1. Who pays for their drugs?

I refuse to pay taxes so some druggy can indulge on my dime and spend it's life nonproductive. I was one of those nonproductive druggies for a time. I did the cold turkey route. I have no compassion or tollerance for it and them now. None of the druggies and dealers I associated with back then are alive, or not in prison now.

2. Where do they live now that they can completely indulge themselves?

I refuse to pay taxes to subsidise free housing so druggies can have a place to live while I bust my prettythang to pay my mortgage and secure my future. Some of us work for a living, and if we can, whats stopping them? Before I stopped I had no permenat address and was homeless for a time.

3. Why do so many make the mistake of treating them compassionately and expect the same in responce?

They conduct themselves across the gammit of human traits from enticingly charming to maniacly deranged. At no point do they care about anything but their addiction and feeding it. Unless It chooses to change It is not human in the sense we take for granted. It is an entity that sees you only as a source of resources to get a fix or an obstical in the way of the next fix.

My brother in law was a dealer in Washington DC. He had my sister hooked on speed for a time. He moved up to crack. He started doing his crack instead of selling it. His supplyer cut his throat for non payment of $15,000 in product. She got clean and worked long enough to get her 3 children into college or working with apartments. She is on permenant diability now due to her habit even though she kicked it. Her ex even got all of his brothers selling crack. He had 4. Only 1 is alive now. Three of them died within 6 monthes of each other. They all got hooked on it while dealing it. Thats why I moved to the west coast away from my sister, brother in law and inlaws. I still didn't do my cold turkey until 18 months after I was on the west coast.

Addiction to drugs can become a social flu with broad reaching consiquences

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #166 on:** March 18, 2005, 12:36:38 AM »

Excellent post bustr. Those were my worries also (and I'm not even US taxpayer lol.)

lazs2 · « **Reply #167 on:** March 18, 2005, 09:45:44 AM »

not sure what free drugs will help. The poor area that starts it will have an influx of the worst of the worst. Non addicts will avoid the place so the burden for support will be even higher. Many will remain criminals... free drugs or no.

free drugs or totally illegal drugs... both programs will probly do about the same amount of damage. I have never seen an addict be able to look at anothers misery or even death as a warning that they should stop... In a lot of cases it just fuels their addiction. Addicts don't even know how miserable they are.

I don't have any answers. I think it is sensible to just accept that some percentage of humans will be lost to drugs and addiction and that a tiny little fraction of those lost will recover. most will die early and cause untold misery on the people around em before they go.

sorry if that sounds fatalistic. It was meant to simply be pragmantic given the science of today. Not even sure that I want to turn off the risky behavior gene... I have made friends with it.

lazs

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #168 on:** March 18, 2005, 10:56:59 AM »

Just out of curiosity, what are the drug usage rates / problems in the countries that punish the use by public execution?

mora · « **Reply #169 on:** March 18, 2005, 11:05:08 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Just out of curiosity, what are the drug usage rates / problems in the countries that punish the use by public execution?

I think that only China does that, and just for show purposes. I don't think they have any statistics available

lazs2 · « **Reply #170 on:** March 18, 2005, 12:01:25 PM »

executing the ones you caught would decrease the number of addicts in the population by at least the number you executed. It would of course cause you to execute a small percentage of people that were recoverable and cause you to execute a fairly large percentage that were not really addicts at all but simple dumb enough or unlucky enough to get caught.

The added expense of the executions might be enough to offset the reduction in crime commited by the addicts who were executed but it seems doubtful. We are not talking about reasonable people here.

lazs

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #171 on:** March 18, 2005, 12:03:22 PM »

I was more like thinking is there any correlance with hard punishments and the usage rate.

The chinese executions don't cost more than $1 / person by the way

lazs2 · « **Reply #172 on:** March 18, 2005, 12:10:36 PM »

hash penalties would deter a large percent of casual users and not breathing any more would deter real addicts. The threat of hash penalties up to and including death would not deter an addict. I am not sure that china doesn't have more opium addicts than any other country.

lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #173 on:** March 18, 2005, 12:14:21 PM »

but... please continue siaf... I find this look into the mind of a gun control advocate who feels that only the elite like himself should be armed.... I find it "facinating".

lazs

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #174 on:** March 18, 2005, 12:28:36 PM »

Who said anything about guns? They hang/chop heads down there.

lazs2 · « **Reply #175 on:** March 20, 2005, 09:09:53 AM »

dead is dead... I find it facinating that you feel that killing drug addicts is a viable solution while at the same time....you feel that you are elite enough to shoot and own firearms but must regulate the crazy people in yours and others countries.

No wonder you are so frieghtened... you think everyone is as nutty as you are.

lazs

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #176 on:** March 20, 2005, 09:28:43 AM »

Lazs you're confusing me with someone else. I'm not an advocate of anything gun related. You can shoot your guns as much as you like down there. Here, we simply don't need guns for protection. It's you who is so frightened that you think you must arm yourself.

lazs2 · « **Reply #177 on:** March 20, 2005, 09:40:51 AM »

Oh? seemed to me that you are a self proclaimed expert with lots of access to guns but allways chimes in about having more gun control.

We don't need guns for protection here either... until we need em. I could argue that you really don't need a seatbelt for protection either since your chance of getting into a wreck bad enough for it saving you are allmost nothing. I could argue that wearing the seatbelt every time you get into the car is more hassle than putting a handgun on the nightstand at night or in your bag when you travel.

either way... I don't advocate that the government have anthing to do with you wearing a seat belt or owning a handgun.

lazs

Gunthr · « **Reply #178 on:** March 20, 2005, 10:10:13 AM »

I think those born with an addictive personality can live thier whole life very happily if they never do drugs, alcohol and other substances.

But once they've tasted whatever it is that fills the hole inside them, life will not be the same. Even after getting clean and sober, the recovered addict will feel like a mountain climber standing on a four inch ledge... never able to be completely sure ...

The only way to live from that point forward is to always remember your grave, and to be thankful and appreciative of all the worthwhile things that you do have.

I think this is especially true for heroin users. You can tape that little monkey's mouth shut, but it will always be there, hanging on, waiting...

It isn't my intention to steal hope away from anyone, because obviously there can be fullfilling life after addiction. Its just different, and it requires a deeper committment to truth. The 12 steppers I know are the best friends a person could have - definately not shallow people.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #179 on:** March 20, 2005, 10:11:21 AM »

Lazs2 I have access to guns through friends, true. I don't have a carry license myself (and it's required here).

My point was that where I never ever felt any need to get a gun for anything more than shooting some rounds in the range for fun, you seem to think it as a necessity for personal protection. I enjoyed shooting when I was in the army, but I never bothered to invest $500-$1000 in order to get a decent weapon for myself.

This shows a big gap in the sense of security between our two societies.