Electrical-Wish-519 t1_j70lyi9 wrote
At what point do we decriminalize heroin and regulate / tax it? I’d imagine it’s cheaper to keep addicts safe and doped up than is to support the war on drugs and all the crime that comes from the drug trade / property theft. It doesn’t say people can’t take drugs anywhere in the Bible, right?
Lucretian t1_j71ig0o wrote
Regardless of whether that would work, that isn’t within the power of the Mayor.
throwawaitnine t1_j71jh84 wrote
To me, I have seen up close what happens to addicts and their families and with that suffering in mind, I don't think we should ever legalize or decriminalize heroin.
It doesn't matter if it's cheaper, to me it seems like the right thing to do, to aggressively intervene in these people's lives.
DoubleDoobie t1_j71njmm wrote
>It doesn't matter if it's cheaper, to me it seems like the right thing to do, to aggressively intervene in these people's lives.
I agree. To be candid, I have no medical background but I have read some books on the opioid crisis and have personally lost three people over the last 10 years to overdoses.
When you're an addict, all that matters is the next high. IMO it can be reasonably assumed that you are not in control of your mental faculties and therefore are subject forced intervention to protect you from yourself. We would do the same for people who are obviously having mental episodes.
kellyoohh t1_j7232a9 wrote
We SHOULD do the same for people who are obviously having mental episodes, but we don’t. That’s what makes this all so difficult. There is a HUGE overlap between addiction and mental health, however we (as a country) are so incredibly inept at mental health policy. I truly believe that fixing mental health policies will fix addiction issues, but it’s just not been a priority. It’s infuriating.
jackxaniels t1_j71pmb9 wrote
The point of decriminalization/legalization is so instead of interacting with dealers, who have an incentive to keep them addicted, the users interact with health professionals who can intervene
That’s the idea in theory, anyway
throwawaitnine t1_j71svcm wrote
Ultimately intervention almost always has to be someone saying, you aren't getting high for 30 days and we are going to make sure you don't drop dead from withdrawal at an inpatient facility, against your will.
jersey_girl660 t1_j78ab4i wrote
That very rarely works and we don’t have the treatment beds for it.
Also the treatment system for addiction is in shambles
espressocycle t1_j72aw94 wrote
It's called harm reduction.Safe, legal heroin would reduce the overdoses and violence. I mean back when the pill mills were in business people with opioid addictions got their pills and went to work. It wasn't ideal but when you took that away they ended up on the streets.
throwawaitnine t1_j735bfz wrote
I totally understand the concept and where the idea of harm reduction is coming from. I respect the idea of harm reduction and I think it comes from a good place.
To me, I think about a person I was close with being hooked on drugs, crack, throwing their life away, destroying their body, destroying all their relationships and many close calls with death. I think about how I felt and his family felt when he was arrested, relieved. I remember when he was jailed, we were hopeful. In that moment of sobriety, he opted for inpatient rehab. That's the kind of intervention I think we need. I
jersey_girl660 t1_j78alf6 wrote
Jail is not treatment. While we absolutely should be incorporating treatment into jail for those who have to go it’s not a system meant to treat addicts.
Make no mistake majority of people don’t end up like your friend. Majority end up either dead or worse off then they were.
Jail is not treatment. Also we don’t have the room in jails to do that anyways. So we should let dangerous criminals out instead of fixing the system actually meant for SUD?
throwawaitnine t1_j78h47r wrote
My friend was jailed briefly before taking a plea deal which had him in a 30 day inpatient rehab in lieu of a prison sentence. The time he spent in jail was because he couldn't post bail. In today's climate, he wouldn't have been arrested, or jailed or kept in custody awaiting a trial.
I don't think prison is an answer, although there are certainly addicts who should be in prison for the actions they take to support their addiction. There should be an infrastructure in place, in prisons, to treat addicts for are incarcerated.
I strongly believe that most addicts, should be arrested, charged and forced into 30 day rehab in lieu of a prison sentence. If we don't have the beds for that, we should make the beds for that. We should spend whatever money is necessary to force people through detox and into treatment at every opportunity. As a society we should put our foot down and say, no, you will not get high on heroin with impunity.
Electrical-Wish-519 t1_j71uxr6 wrote
The cheaper part is a ploy to the phony fiscal responsibility crowd. They won’t help people just to help people. After all, they believe it’s gods will that people have misfortune or that their sin caused them to become addicted
Thecrawsome t1_j71k5rs wrote
Good thing the Bible ain't law
Electrical-Wish-519 t1_j71uyr4 wrote
Yet
uptown_gargoyle t1_j71mjxv wrote
That happens in 2046 don't ask me how I know
themoneybadger t1_j71v3pa wrote
With the number of people dying from opiods, we will never decriminalize them.
mrmcspicy t1_j723w9d wrote
Any congressman or senator that tries to make this policy a thing would get eviscerated by the public and media. It's a career suicide that no one would do.
espressocycle t1_j72af7x wrote
We don't have to go that far. Making Suboxone more available would be enough.
jersey_girl660 t1_j78a6dy wrote
While this is needed the political will is simply not there. Harm reductionists are working towards change that 1. Works 2. Doesn’t require all the legal changes such a program would require but it’s still a fight when the stigma is as bad as it is
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments