Drug decriminalization didn't cause this (Ethan Nadelmann critiques Michael Shellenberger)

[@soulfuzz368]

Handing out needles and drugs to reduce harm is only moral if the individuals handing them out have some kind of responsibility for helping the addicts quit. These proponents don’t have any sense of responsibility for these people at all, they just don’t want to see it.

[@post-leftluddite]

I'm sorry, is there a scientific or medical justification for your abstinence only viewpoint? Why is it your concern if I use drugs indefinitely? Sounds to me like you're just a moral Authoritarian

[@soulfuzz368]

@@post-leftluddite you are making too many assumptions my friend. My comment is directed at people advocating for safe consumption sites, not about the morality of drug use in general. What you do on your own is your personal business but when there are public services and institutions involved, it is now the business of the public. I work hard and it irritates me that my tax dollars are being used to fund peoples habits. If it is their personal choice to use, it should be their own personal responsibility to find clean needles.

[@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017]

It's a huge grift. The "harm reduction" people get millions in taxpayer money and the addicts just keep getting worse.

[@loginavoidence12]

@@post-leftluddite and it sounds to me like you're a pseudo-intellectual dreg that will neither amount to anything nor move out of your parents house.

[@littlekettle5759]

​​@@soulfuzz368 it has always been the business of the public. Addicts die on the streets, public service needs to deal with that. Hospitals need to deal with that. There is a hidden public cost to that too. This solution has drastically lowered overdose deaths, and that makes room for addicts to rehab and become functional members of society. Look at it this way: it's much cheaper for the public health service to prevent people from overdosing in a controlled space than it is to deal with them once they've been taken to the ER of some hospital. In my opinion, you're viewing it from a very narrow POV. This isn't about you. Society isn't about you. Our income tax goes to support us as a nation, as a collective. I don't have kids and I likely will never have kids, but should I feel irritated that a part of my income goes to public schools? No. Furthermore, this is an issue the government created in the first place by criminalising drug use. People have supported this stance because they don't know any better either, so these issues that have arisen are our own making, and it's our responsibility, or obligation even, to fix it.

[@amandakish5828]

This guest was a poor communicator. Once I hear someone throwing up insults and name calling, getting all heated, it makes me question their motivations. He was wrong about at least some of shellenbergers arguments. Anyways.

[@H0mertax]

Glad you said so, you can disagree with policies or suggestions and not resort to mud slinging. Calling someone idiotic isn't usually a way to convince them of anything

[@Pemulis1]

Excellent point. I thought the same thing. Somebody who starts their argument with an ad hominem attack usually loses me there.

[@joemahma3017]

Respond to the content of the message instead of tone policing. If you’re so sensitive that a rude tone makes you incapable of listening then I suggest therapy. The drug war causes all the horrid violence in Mexico. The cartels do ISIS level shit every day and thats just one country. Yet you sit here whining because the guy arguing for 30 years that we need to value human beings and stop unnecessary deaths caused by idiotic policy passed for reasons of race baiting and race control? How ignorant.

[@jeupater1429]

Guest is what he accuses others of being

[@huntergatherer8972]

Completely agree. It's what I thought.

[@magneticbehavior]

Ethan is a rhetoritician. He dismissed Shellenburgers solid research and sober critique of current decriminalization with baseless claims.

[@deshaunjackson8188]

But it works, why does it work? Ethan is completely full sh't. But he talks in a way that convinces idiots. I wish we had lie detector tests, not because I want to know when people are lying but whether or not people actually believe what they say.

[@aldousorwell3807]

"Breed's approach was IDIOTIC!" "It's IDIOTIC!" "Schellenberger is IDIOTIC!" Yeeeah... Thank you for gracing us with your Brilliant Appraisal there, Genius.🥴👍

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

I thought one of the main sticking point for Michael on safe injection sites was that they were just giving out needles rather than doing the needle exchange like it was always suppose to be? Meaning you have to return old needles to get new ones so they're not floating around all over the city as an eye sore and bio hazard. Maybe it wasn't him and I'm confusing him with someone else but I think that's a fair critique.

[@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017]

Yeah I think that was his complaint.

[@CharlesLumia]

Makes sense. Why the heck would taxpayers be paying for dangerous drug litter?

[@poppavein1]

In Seattle, one could turn in 1 needle and receive 10. Consequently, children are stepping on needles in parks and beaches. Our children are more important than homeless people that refuse help for their mental/drug issues.

[@amandakish5828]

I think I've heard him say that too.

[@Essy311]

Yes, that's his issue, and it's specifically in reference to San Francisco's program. I don't follow him closely, so I could be wrong, but I don't think he generalized that critique and came out against all safe injection sites.

[@Carlos-tm6zk]

Well, in fact, Portugal has dealt with the drug problem in a very respectable way and has had an impact on the security of the public streets, but I'm not sure if that gentleman understands well what we did here... We weren't all that charming, we arrested a lot of dealers, a**-holes and non a**-holes, and we took down (literally) entire neighborhoods where there was an established trafficking web... but the upside was that, here in Portugal, we started looking at people, with drug abuse problems, as people. And we helped and treated them as people. And we taught our children to stay away from drugs. We sent the statistics to go f*ck themselves. These aren't numbers we're talking, these are people, human beings. So, there you go...

[@julieb7785]

Yes...and the US is not Portugal. Two different social mentalities. And family issues...

[@jimmoses6617]

Like nearly all liberal policies, it is all about doing something that makes these people feel good, and nothing to do with actually addressing a problem.

[@robinsss]

these sites are addressing the most urgent and important issue related to hard drug use that's preventing the users from dying from an overdose

[@jimmoses6617]

@@Dora-hi2nw It would cost too much to the agencies and their subcontractors to actually fix the issues they were set up to address. Once fixed, Just like how curing cancer would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to the industry set up to cure cancer.

[@jimmoses6617]

@@Dora-hi2nw There is money in "trying to fix" problems. That money goes away once the problem is actually fixed. Hence, agencies create industries and subcontractors who earn their money by "trying to fix" not "fixing".

[@flacountryboy79]

You should be allowed to use whatever substance you want, however there should be no public funds use to support that individual. If they can't work to get money, they starve. If the overdose, they died. They can afford there product of choice, they go through withdrawal. Eventually, they either fix themselves or the problem fixes them.

[@post-leftluddite]

Well, then I don't have children so my tax dollars better not go to a school....and I'm not obese so my tax dollars better not go to Healthcare for someone with heart disease...or a person that gets in a car accident....or...or...or

[@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017]

Putting addicts in jail to go cold turkey is more effective than 28 days in rehab.

[@23Butanedione]

Ok you overdose and go to the hospital, who pays? You get necrosis from poor injection technique, who pays for that? You get endocarditis from injecting dirty shots, who pays for your treatment? These things don't happen in a vacuum

[@cucubanana4226]

Yeah, "flacountryboy79", like the "Post-Left Luddite" just said, why are you so SELFISH and don't want your money that you worked for so hard to go to people like these that are clearly in need ? WTF ? Why cant you be more like "Post-Left Luddite", take him as an example he is clearly more empathic and feels for these people, and much more generous than you, clearly, he wants to help people in need not only with his money but also yours and mine and everybody else, now that is definitely not being selfish. You could learn a thing or two.

[@flacountryboy79]

@Post-Left Luddite Your absolutely right! I dont have kids and don't want my tax dollars going to barely functioning public schools that teach common core. I'm also not fat. I exercises and eat a healthy diet. I don't want my tax dollars paying for someone who sits on thier ass all day eating McDonald's and watching Tiktok.

[@johnl5316]

I do not want to pay for injection ctrs.

[@post-leftluddite]

So you'd rather pay for the much greater cost of disease transmission? And apparently you have no problem with paying for the over $60 billion in federal and state funds wasted every year on prohibition

[@dogguy8603]

​@@post-leftludditeprohibition still exists even in the Portugal model, dealing and trafficking is still a crime, use was decriminalized

[@robinsss]

how about voluntary funding

[@DegreesOfThree]

Great, let's have the government decide who the problematic and unproblematic drug dealers are. Maybe we can set up a new bureaucracy for that as well.🤦

[@johnl5316]

Why does Singapore not have drug prob?

[@soulfuzz368]

You know why.

[@johnl5316]

@@soulfuzz368 because they do not want a drug problem

[@quick-and-easy]

Bingo, no drugs issues whatever, they don't tolerate the behavior.

[@soulfuzz368]

@@johnl5316 exactly

[@post-leftluddite]

Show me any proof that people don't use drugs there

[@DevonBagley]

Reducing the consequences for drug use for those people who chose it isn't likely to have great success in actually reducing drug use. This sounds like a great moments in unintended consequence episode.

[@deshaunjackson8188]

Agreed, reducing consequences for drug use will only increase the number of people who will try drugs and potentially get hooked and become strungout degenerate homeless people.

[@aldousorwell3807]

​​​@@deshaunjackson8188 Maybe that's what these leftist elitist pseudo-intellectuals WANT... Stupid and strung out people are easy to exploit, control, step over, or just eliminate. ...It's A Brave New World out here Kids.

[@littlekettle5759]

@@deshaunjackson8188 I don't know about the US, but virtually every other country for which I read about safe injection rooms, have shown nothing but positive results. Not just lowering health care costs on a national level, but also reducing deaths, and increasing the amount of addicts seeking rehab. Canada, Portugal, Denmark, Netherlands are just some examples.

[@ministryofwrongthink6962]

@@littlekettle5759 Are those independent studies, or government backed statistics conveniently showing their government taking a risk paid off instead of making them look bad?

[@DevonBagley]

@@littlekettle5759 Canada, Denmark, and the Netherlands are pretty infamous for keeping the streets clean by driving homeless people and severe addicts out of the cities to freeze do death in the winter. Not really a tactic that can be replicated in the western United States. Anyway, Portugal hasn't effectively reduced drug use. The number of drug users there has increased it by 40-50% over the last decade and drug experimentation is up across the board. The only thing they have successfully improved is prison population, drug confiscation, HIV, and OD stats, which isn't a measure of success that makes any sense to me personally. The tradeoff doesn't seem worth it now, and we are yet to see the really long term effects.

[@deanjohnson6074]

If you're homeless and on drugs then obviously you're incapable advocating for yourself and the state needs to step in. The problem in SF is that the individual has absolute autonomy even when it's crystal clear that he's harming himself and is a liability to others. The homeless addicts need to be held accountable and forced into treatment. They're not going to get out of the gutter without an intervention imposed upon them. The policies on the west coast have lead to anarchy.

[@robinsss]

forcing an addict into treatment violates their rights the use and possession really doesn't harm anyone

[@deanjohnson6074]

@@robinsss Except when they can't take care of themselves and they're on the street. At that point they become a liability to society.

[@robinsss]

@@deanjohnson6074 that isn't causing harm in the legal sense

[@dfdf4874]

If your critique of someone’s well intentioned and researched policy recommendations begins with an ad hominem, then you’ve lost credibility.

[@Liberty-rn4wy]

Where did Ethan do his street work? Which city ? I am just curious. Or did he read this?

[@deshaunjackson8188]

You aren't allowed to question his baseless claims!!!

[@hollyhawked]

Have you seen the East side of downtown Vancouver! It’s a complete tragedy and getting worse, they’ve had safe consumption sites for decades. People need help from the root of their issues, but that’s a lot more difficult and way more expensive.

[@robinsss]

no i think the Vancouver safe injection site only opened recently and if they have more than that one they don't have many more they need a large number of them to reduce OD deaths throughout the province

[@hollyhawked]

@@robinsss the first one opened in 2003. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2942917/

[@robinsss]

@@hollyhawked they only have 5 across a large land area they need a lot more to reduce OD deaths

[@mtfine]

Normalizing dangerous and criminal behavior is neither compassionate nor effective.

[@robinsss]

if it is dangerous to other people no it's not compassion but drug use is not dangerous to other people only to the user so allowing it is compassion

[@reilysmith5187]

Yes, it did. The state prevents anyone from disabling and halting their drug usage in order to explicitly allow them to continue doing it. That is enabling.

[@robinsss]

yes it is enabling but it's worth it because it prevents people from over dosing

[@Liberty-rn4wy]

Ethan, which city does that? What Shellenburger is saying is you have to arrest addicts and force them to go into treatment. That is what Europe does. I have no idea what he is talking about. Does Ethan really think that addicts go to a government "safe injection site" to shoot up? REally? Where?

[@amcynic]

Yeah, I guess it's just amazingly coincidental that homelessness exploded after CA began to decriminalize drugs.

[@jameshair5557]

Why so little conversation about the Homelessness Industry, and how addiction is being farmed to direct a billion dollars a year to Progressive non-profits? Fewer and fewer people can believe that the true intention of addiction/homeless advocates is to actually help either the citizenry or the addicted.

[@Srekwah]

Profitting from other people's misery is stock in trade to progressives. Never let a crisis go to waste is their motto and if they can't find one they create it.

[@ministryofwrongthink6962]

I still don’t understand how “Backroom” injection sites will actually slow the spread of drugs themselves? I understand people using them would be safer, but that’s not addressing the main problem people have who are against them. Besides, are we really supposed to believe an entire town’s worth of addicts will routinely use such a facility instead of the streets/their homes? We live in the era Uber Eats.. you really think the majority of addicts living in the average american city have the energy/care to use them every day? How is this not like expecting firearm sales to go _DOWN_ after installing several gun ranges?

[@robinsss]

''''''''''I still don’t understand how “Backroom” injection sites will actually slow the spread of drugs themselves?''''' they won't they will reduce over dose deaths in the area they may not get all of the addicts to visit the sites but the ones that do visit will be saved from over dose deaths in a few years that will add up to thousands of lives saved

[@tcorourke2007]

Anything done to make an addict's life easier will eventually kill them. I believe that drug injection sites are good policy, but I don't pretend this is to benefit addicts.

[@soulfuzz368]

Who do they benefit then?

[@post-leftluddite]

Your abstinence only viewpoint has no basis in science.....you're a moral Authoritarian, nothing more

[@tcorourke2007]

@soulfuzz368 People contributing to a functional society. Business owners and bus drivers and dog walkers and school children who don't have to step over them strewn about the sidewalk.

[@tcorourke2007]

@post-leftluddite475 I love drugs. I just acknowledge that helping people addicted to narcotics is enabling them. Schellenburger's thesis is correct: allowing people to openly consume narcotics whilst camped in the public right of way without the threat of jail to divert them into substance abuse programs has caused a crisis of epic proportions. But I suppose we could just provide them the drugs. Maybe that would deliver us your Utopia.

[@joemahma3017]

@@tcorourke2007 basing peoples inherent value on their ability to be exploited by the system is grody, my dude.

[@VeniVidiVid]

Turns out you can separate concerns. Intimidating people on the street can be a problem regardless of the motivation. Selling dangerous substances to children can be a problem regardless of the substance. Control those. People who choose to drink or take other drugs in the privacy of their home or on the private property of a business owner who allows it can be handled differently. And since we know what happens with outright prohibition in the face of relentless demand, and I assert it’s none of my business what other consenting adults do with their own bodies in private, I advocate completely decriminalizing the latter.

[@aldousorwell3807]

I agree with most of that... But nobody is kicking in the doors of private recreational drug users and dragging them out of their homes for nothing more than that. ...That's a myth perpetuated by the 'Criminal Justice rEfOrM' Hustlers.

[@SpenserHartman]

You would need specific codes regarding legalize sale zones, otherwise “policing the bad dealers and turning the blind eye to the good dealers” is a big equal protection issue and a unequal protection leads to official corruption

[@cjcorallo5775]

So if I had a family member that was an alcoholic then these guys think it would be better if I stuck him in a bedroom and give him all the booze he wants just to keep him placated and out of sight?? If someone has a problem that is killing them, i.e drug addiction, then it's not the best practice to enable it. Sweeping a problem under the rug and out of sight is the most cowardly policy to enact.

[@joemahma3017]

He didn’t say anything like that whatsoever.

[@RobGiordano]

Man these guys really don't understand the druggie mentality at all. When you need a fix you will do anything and say anything and go anywhere to get it...after that...rinse and repeat. Very rare they will do anything to really stop using.

[@robinsss]

the purpose for safe injection sites is to prevent ODs not prevent use harm reduction means reduce the harm created by the use not reduce the use

[@edgabel6814]

Aren’t we just hiding the problem from ourselves by sticking people with this problem in a room where we don’t have to see it

[@Gwenhwyfar7]

Tent cities are more common on the west coast because the weather is so mild. It wouldn't matter if drugs were legal in my state, they'd die in the winter unless they had their head together. Or they start drinking instead of drugs just to keep warm.

[@miketerran4140]

This dude never saw New York in the 70-2000's

[@miketerran4140]

Bro thinks it's the weather 😂

[@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017]

That's a myth that drinking warms you up. You actually die faster.

[@Gwenhwyfar7]

​@@miketerran4140 Not a bro. It's both drugs and weather and progressive policy. As drugs legalized and decriminalized on the west coast and more people realized the weather was more livable. At the same time, there was a crackdown in NY. I hitchhiked and traveled from coast to coast for 20 years.

[@miketerran4140]

@@Gwenhwyfar7 ok bro, tell that to the crack heads in Winnipeg

[@IronHeel]

Improve their health by enabling heroin use... These sites don't allow for proactive intervention, only passive. Safe injection sites are often sited in residential communities, which is not acceptable.

[@23Butanedione]

I'm glad you seem to understand, Reason is chock full of some really, really stupid people

[@dw5523]

It’s frustrating that everyone seems willing to give their ideas a perfect world in which to flourish, but not their opponents. We can’t have real discussion or find solutions if we’re all approaching things from fantasy land.

[@jgumbakis]

I don't think Portugal had an issue with its government drug trafficking narcotics to a particular population like the US did to fund unpopular movements such as the Iran-Contra affair. Granted this was in the '80s; however, this might be one reason we have an issue with ineffective drug policy compounded with the lack of responsibility on the state and individual.

[@benjamindover4337]

Yes. The alphabet agencies will provide the greatest resistance to legalization because they stand to gain so much power from controlling the black market.

[@SirBlackReeds]

The copium is real.

[@Mark1JT]

Safe injection site sounds an awful lot like a crack and/or a flop house with a nurse.

[@peacepoet1947]

If people don't have health insurance and need insulin but can't afford the price, what should they do? Call 211 in southern California. Not sure what happens north of Los Angeles.

[@PatrickFerryCoach]

Speaking of IDIOIC was his communication style when talk about Michael. I wish smart well intended people would take a communication 99 class so we all could get better solutions into execution vs fight over whi h shade of gray is best and who is right and wrong.

[@robinsss]

did you vote for Trump ?

[@ideo4430]

Dear Ethan .. spend some time in Portland where they have had safe injection sites for years. Then count the needles on the sidewalks. See the Narcan taped to the light posts . Get out of your ideological bubble and visit Michael's world before you call someone's real life experience idiotic.

[@DegreesOfThree]

Drug use should be allowed in zoo-like enclosures where citizens of all ages could come to hurl detritus at the users. Fun for the whole family. 🎉

[@robinsss]

are you Mother Teresa ?

[@willardfasto4494]

"there cant be just one reason" "no that reason definitely didn't cause it" Not much logic, multiple reasons cause the issue and wide availability of drugs and their decriminalization are two of the reasons among others. We decriminalized alcohol and started charging massive taxes....there are still millions of Americans that die slow deaths of alcoholism so obviously banning doesn't work and unbanning it doesn.t

[@deshaunjackson8188]

Agreed

[@coreywiley3981]

The problem is 1. drugs need to be pure and regulated 2. we need to address poverty...we need housing, health care and services accessible for all The reason these people are getting high on the street is becasue they don;t have a home, the reason they are getting so messed up is becasue the drugs are laced with fentinyl and impure harmful ingredients.

[@TheFirstTriplefife]

He says the treatment beds are to expensive. Its all being pushed upon the tax payer. I almost think maybe it would make more sense to decriminalize it and have those serving the drugs also provide the beds. This way users are safe, not doing it on the streets and cartels aren't making money off it.

[@DegreesOfThree]

Overdoses are the primary benefit of allowing drug use. Why would we want to limit those?

[@totes_muhgoats]

These videos never address the real reason for the homeless, the violence, the property crime. The drugs cause the addiction regardless of where or how the drugs are obtained or used. A "new" drug user (God Forbid) can start in a safe injection site, or private drug sale, But, as the addiction grows, they will turn to the options that are the quickest, cheapest, just so they can use more and more often. Their relationships fracture, they loose their money, income, and home. Many users think they can use responsibly, but I've never encountered a successful meth addict. A standup opioid addict.

[@kerwinbrown4180]

The culture of the USA is different than the culture of Portugal. Yes; drug addiction, mental illness, financial situation, culture, and other factors are linked to homelessness.

[@pookatim]

Look, if you legalize drug use for recreational purposes there is an issue you must face. Where will these drug users get the money to buy the drugs? Once they become addicted and cannot hold a job, where will they get the money? Crime, of course. Okay so what if we give the drugs out for "free"? Well, there isn't any such thing as "free". Someone will have to pay for them, so the taxpayers? When these drug addicts are no longer capable of paying for rent or food what then? Back to the taxpayers? When we start seeing drug addicts sick and dying on the sidewalks and in alleyways, do we just step over them? They will eventually die, then I guess it is back to the taxpayers to bury them? Even if some of these addicts want to stop, who will pay for their care and rehabilitation? I think you can see the folly of this.

[@robinsss]

if we legalize drug use the issue of Where these drug users will get the money to buy the drugs remains because the drugs have not been legalized we could use taxes from alcohol and cigarettes to buy them we could give each homeless person a large room that would homelessness

[@DegreesOfThree]

Have all the safe injection sites you want, just don't stick your hand in my pocket to pay for it.

[@robinsss]

ok we can use sales taxes

[@DegreesOfThree]

Crack down on littering, and it would probably solve a lot of the other problems.

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

Maybe so. It's clearly not solving i either. Alot of people who advocate for legalization act like it will actually make almost everything better. You can make the argument from a pro liberty angle, which I'm even sympathetic too and actually admit it could have negative consequences.

[@post-leftluddite]

Well, it seems to me it'd be a lot better to try something new than continue on the failure of prohibition

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

@Post-Left Luddite did you miss where I said I'm sympathetic? Just want people to be honest. Maybe advocates actually believe it, idk. Most just don't seem to even discuss that it might actually make things worse or at least drug use. Alot of people seem to argue it will make people more likely to seek treatment because it will destigmatize it. I could see some of that, but I doubt it changing much.

[@Dielonthug]

This guy is totally nuts. Didnt accurately address Michael's arguments. With his ideas cities would be even more of a dump than they already are

[@oldlifter530]

Yeah drug liberalism has worked WHERE?

[@robinsss]

the Netherlands

[@wg8304]

Here here. I like his message. But I also liked shellenbergers message when I first heard it.

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

In Europe it's also much easier to force people into drug treatment, mental health services etc. Idk how you can maintain laws and policies with a high concern for Liberty around that like we have in most thrle US, legalize drugs AND keep places from looking like San Francisco.

[@deshaunjackson8188]

Legalization would make the world look a lot worse than san fransisco. Can you imagine a world. Where companies can mass-produce drugs that actively harm people, such as crack, meth, or some insane combination of new drugs we haven't even seen yet.

[@hb9149]

I'm with Michael Shellenberger. I don't appreciate the panel member saying he is "full of sh*t"

[@Thumper68]

Everyone who wants to use is already more or less not a lot would changed. Probably less deaths, gang violence etc.

[@centaur6ify]

🤣That Nadelmann sees the world as a two year old would

[@robinsss]

why do you say that?

[@barrydworak]

No, drug decriminalization didn't cause it. The rest of what Ethan advocates does.

[@deshaunjackson8188]

Well we can agree that most of Ethan's ideas are ass. And that's good enough for me😂

[@barrydworak]

@@deshaunjackson8188 I am fully in favor of the Rippetoe Solution.😁

[@quick-and-easy]

Visited San Fransisco in 2019. open drug use, massive homelessness, aggressive drugged homeless people. A completely dysfunctional society. Will not be back and no city or state wants to adopt those policies.

[@post-leftluddite]

That's caused by prohibition, not the substances themselves...look up the research on Heroin Assisted Treatment in Europe and it'll refute all your assumptions

[@dogguy8603]

​@@post-leftludditehow about this, decrimanized use, but 20 year minimum for selling in a public space, and life if you sell to someone who later ODs and dies

[@michaelroach2959]

Ethan's comments about local bodega owner being a non-asshole dealer tell me he deals exclusively with imaginary drug users and dealers. When working with real people, a bodega owner who sells drugs will, at some point, start trading drugs for merchandise he can put on his shelves. This merchandise will be stolen, and both the bodega owner and his customers will know this. At best, this bodega owner becomes a low level fence; at least equally likely, he starts selling larger quantities of drugs, putting more stolen merchandise on the shelves, and finding ways to dispose of everything he can't put on the shelves.

[@nordan00]

Bums give a lot of America’s Dem-run cities their character! Go bums!

[@thatguy4015]

Is government intervention to reduce overdose in the homeless addict population a public good? I understand this is a very callous observation, but overdose is a simple, efficient and libertarian solution that eliminates the source of multiple negative and socially detrimental behaviors. Libertarianism and government funded social safety nets are incompatible ideas. I’m not saying intervention is inherently bad. I’m in favor of private, voluntarily funded intervention. However, government theft of productive citizens’ resources to fund injection sites and intervention programs for unproductive addicts seems like a greater evil than allowing each individual the freedom to live or die with the consequences of their choices.

[@daviddoch4872]

jail is the only place we all use to get clean.

[@julieb7785]

"Not selling to kids." I lived across the street from 24/7 drug dealers in Portland. You are dellusional if you think there are dealers who bother to distinguish.

[@randolphwilliams2365]

Managing insanity??

[@quietmousse]

Nah drug decriminalization is partly responsible for this. Just not as big of a problem as others, like the lack of border control

[@robinsss]

why is that a bigger problem ?

[@MrAtoz-jq5ry]

Safe injection sight sounds a lot like Opium den. FWIW they'd be out of sight.

[@charlie-km1et]

interview Joe Eskanazi a journalist in the Bay Area

[@connecticutaggie]

When living in a small town in CT, I noticed that a large number of homeless had substance abuse and/or mental illness. This led me to research that confirmed that " a substantial proportion of people who were detained in jail in this study's urban setting were homeless and that such individuals had elevated rates of co-occurring severe mental disorders and substance-related disorders." I agree that arresting these people for relatively benign crimes just ends up sending them to a jail or prison which that is not equipped for treating/managing mental illness and costs a ridiculous amount of money. There have got to be a better solution.

[@dogguy8603]

Theft is not a benign crime

[@deshaunjackson8188]

"What are you talking about, most homeless have just fallen on hard times, they aren't addicts" -my ex

[@reilysmith5187]

What mental illness? These people are druggies, their brains are affected by drugs they dont have a mental illnes because they are drug addicts.

[@sylviatarnowskilizewski4870]

DE-CREME THE DRUG USAGE.EVERYONE IS USING DRUGS THAT ICLUDES ALCOHOL USAGE AND THC WHICH IS BEEN USED FOR YEARS .THIS IS HOW GOVERNMENT WILL BE ABLE TAKE OUT DRUG DEALERS.

[@soulfuzz368]

Canada has legalized cannabis and the black market is thriving. Try again

[@deshaunjackson8188]

I also thought decriminalization was a good idea....for like two seconds, until I realized the millions of even worse outcomes that would unfold.

[@LukeThomasPerth]

Singaporeans will look at these fools and laugh. I suppose your only way out is to legalise it all once youve embarrassingly lost control of it all

[@Vaelosh466]

Singapore is a city state on an island, they can realistically have almost complete control over imports. Even if the US wanted to have the control Singapore does it would be impossible.

[@LukeThomasPerth]

@@Vaelosh466 singapore, from the 70s, has been strictly and considtently drug averse. Theyve towed that line very nicely. Meanwhile, the US has complacently given in to its own drug companies addicting its citizens ie purdue pharma. Its also had pathetic drug laws with poor legislaation for its black market scene. And its ideals of individualism, although in moderation, is an excellent idea, has instead gone the other way, to the point of supporting individual drug use/abuse despite the obvious sequelae of social rot. And so it now comes down to legalizing drugs, so tat least the government can make a buck of this. Please consider that Portugals drug decriminalisation is quite different to the Us. There are immense governmental and societal pressures to keep people from abusing. And, even before decriminalisation, the trend was that portugal was already reducing its rate of abuse. In fact, after decriminalising, rates of abuse and drug deaths went up considerably in the 2007s and 2008s. At the end of the day, a successful outcome for any country is not only that people have not died from overdose., but is the prevention of social rot, allowing a healthy, productive population that can contribute to the country.

[@johnburn872]

None of his arguments are convincing

[@jarrodyuki7081]

top 6 ruels in every antion adn top 3 rules for life. eveyr human nation civlizantn a orgnaiozint is black hole in him or herself.

[@soilalpin900ad5]

Now you have a war on drugs ..

[@deshaunjackson8188]

A war on drugs is way better than what we got right now.

[@peacepoet1947]

People who use drugs, have a reason why they use those drugs.

[@peacepoet1947]

@@CoryPchajek most of the time. People like being intoxicated.

[@peacepoet1947]

@@CoryPchajek and being pain free more than anything.

[@deshaunjackson8188]

Doesn't mean it's a good reason. Personally I can't think of a single good reason. How can you address or let alone solve a problem when you are high on drugs?

[@deshaunjackson8188]

​@@peacepoet1947 .

[@joemahma3017]

@@deshaunjackson8188 you don’t get to decide for other adults unless they are violating one of our other increasingly numerous laws e.g. theft, assault, the like.

[@ttarantulas4u258]

fantasyland

[@AncientRylanor69]

v

[@stargazerh112]

Your guest is dishonest

[@RandomApril]

Good shit I see what y’all out here this is going to be a part of history I can feel it