Posted on 04/17/2023 4:00:08 AM PDT by george76
Darwin strikes again.
That is the maddening part of our drug policy. In the US at least, there is no mandatory, locked-down treatment. In most jurisdictions, its either jail (where addicts can easily get booze and drugs) or voluntary treatment (where addicts can check themselves out the first day). We need jail-like, forced, long term (1 year, 2 years) treatment where addicts are locked in for a long period. Then a halfway house after that. They reintroduction into society with long-term probation.
British Columbia , Canada’s California
Quit putting (free) NARCAN on ambulances to continue the problem.
Obviously you have no idea how the system works.
I think a lot of them govern by anecdote. They had a friend or relative once who got in more trouble than the politician thought they deserved to for drug use, so the politician tries to change laws to make sure something like that never happens again - no matter what collateral damage follows.
Who didn’t see this coming? Spit!
DEAD PEOPLE have been voting for years.
Do you feel the same about alcohol and cigarettes?
It certainly seems like TPTB have washed their hands of the addiction problem, hoping that “survival of the fittest” will resolve it for everyone. I’m not sure I can object to that idea, considering the incredibly small number of addicts who actually get clean and stay clean with voluntary or involuntary treatment. The expression, “They shoot horses, don’t they?” keeps coming to the forefront of my mind.
I have long been opposed to taxpayer-funded health care and open-ended obligations for health insurance plans — for this very reason. It’s ludicrous for government to prohibit health coverage exclusions related to personal high-risk behavior.
Do you also support making alcohol and cigarettes illegal, so we can use the same effective tactics we use against drugs to get them off the street?
I don’t think drugs should be illegal, either. But it’s no coincidence that these decriminalization measures are all being implemented in places where personal consequences for destructive behavior have been eliminated.
We seem to agree that the war on drugs is a failure and that the DEA is not the answer.
Where we disagree is whether treatment programs such as those employed in Portugal should be offered/enforced here. Since many druggies grew up in bad homes or got their habits as a result of being trafficked, I say yes.
But it’s no coincidence that these decriminalization measures are all being implemented in places where personal consequences for destructive behavior have been eliminated.
It's also no coincidence that the side that supports the war on drugs is OK with alcohol remaining legal and see the slightest restrictions on cigarette use as an infringement on their rights. It all comes down to your vice of choice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.