Current Events > Bernie Sanders makes history by being first presidential candidate to endorse

(+) Yeah! (+)

@ssjevot you're right but they don't quite address the same thing. One way needle exchange programs work is by legalizing non prescription syringe purchases. But needle exchanges are supposed to help dispose of used needles in a safe way that wouldn't necessarily materialize if you just legalized all drugs.

Similarly, one of the mechanisms through which safe injection sites work is just by putting the user closer to health services and addiction programs generally from what I understand.

I dunno, it's not my area of expertise tbh

---

Antifar posted...

Conservatives will accuse every Democrat who talks about criminal justice of setting loose dangerous criminals in the suburbs.

I mean conservatives have been pushing criminal justice reforms on the state level. for a long time now. Nothing this radical but if you frame it in terms of intervention and alternatives to incarceration, especially for nonviolent offenders and certain sympathetic groups (veterans, juveniles, those with mental illness) you can definitely get conservatives on board

---

Bossdog421 posted...

I'd much rather the focus be on removing the drugs than helping them do drugs.

Needle exchange sounds like the government would be buying and supplying equipment for drug users.

People are going to do whatever the fuck they want, whenever the fuck they want. And you can't stop them. Prohibition proved this. Our failing drug war proved this. So instead of trying to tell them they can't do something, help them do it in a way that doesn't end their life or punish them for being different from you.
---

But we should care more about making sure druggies die than saving money by helping them not die!
---

Good.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

But we should care more about making sure druggies die than saving money by helping them not die!

Why do we have to do either? I don't think we should spend time or money arresting them or locking them up, but we don't have to help them either. Just leave them alone entirely and let them deal with consequences of their decisions.
---

Bossdog421 posted...

I'd much rather the focus be on removing the drugs than helping them do drugs.

Needle exchange sounds like the government would be buying and supplying equipment for drug users.

Might as well have just posted derp derp tbh bud.

Anyone who says this is either ignorant or callous as fuck and willingly endorses a greater burden on society (including financially) just cause fuck the druggies.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

But we should care more about making sure druggies die than saving money by helping them not die!

Why do we have to do either? I don't think we should spend time or money arresting them or locking them up, but we don't have to help them either. Just leave them alone entirely and let them deal with consequences of their decisions.

Unless you're going to lock them all into a room and let them die, they are going to affect the world. They get sick, they die, their needles pollute and potentially harm others. Drug addicts don't live in a different dimension
---

hockeybub89 posted...

But we should care more about making sure druggies die than saving money by helping them not die!

Literally.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

But we should care more about making sure druggies die than saving money by helping them not die!

Why do we have to do either? I don't think we should spend time or money arresting them or locking them up, but we don't have to help them either. Just leave them alone entirely and let them deal with consequences of their decisions.

Unless you're going to lock them all into a room and let them die, they are going to affect the world. They get sick, they die, their needles pollute and potentially harm others. Drug addicts don't live in a different dimension

Thats the problem, their decisions hurt more than just themselves. Its why addicts are usually estranged from their families, they start stealing at some point.
---

@Bossdog421 posted...

I'd much rather the focus be on removing the drugs than helping them do drugs.

I'm about to use the same reason Americans use when non Americans say "ban guns":

1) people are gonna use them anyway
2) there's too much in circulation
3) it will just cause more issues because drugs will be harder to get and use, but people are gonna use them anyway

I'd rather a junkie be using it safely and supervised rather than ODing in the street in front of my kids
---

Look, Im not for those drugs, but the war against it isnt helping the problem. Its jhst leading to more issues. Arresting and locking up the users isnt solving anything.

---

Decriminalisation usage and harm minimisation is the way to go. Prohibition doesn't work
---

CanuckCowboy posted...

Bossdog421 posted...

I'd much rather the focus be on removing the drugs than helping them do drugs.

Needle exchange sounds like the government would be buying and supplying equipment for drug users.

Might as well have just posted derp derp tbh bud.

Anyone who says this is either ignorant or callous as fuck and willingly endorses a greater burden on society (including financially) just cause fuck the druggies.

They don't need a safe space and supervision, they need to be punished and locked up.

So yeah fuck junkies.
---

Legalized drugs should be a thing imo.

Fuck suppliers, cooks and dealers.

Junkies are gonna exist no matter what. Rather than punish them, punish the suppliers
---

TreyFlowers posted...

Fuck suppliers, cooks and dealers.

Junkies are gonna exist no matter what. Rather than punish them, punish the suppliers

What, and make it even more lucrative for the ones you haven't caught yet, or the ones who became suppliers after you've created a lucrative market vacuum?

Questionmarktarius posted...

What, and make it even more lucrative for the ones you haven't caught yet, or the ones who became suppliers after you've created a lucrative market vacuum?

Legal marijuana has killed the illegal supplier market in a matter of weeks. It's actually still there, but now represents around 5% of total marijuana transactions in states with legal marijuana.

---

the war on drugs is lost. It's essentially prohibition from the early 20th century.

There's too much usage and too much demand that by trying to take it away, people are going to be finding more dangerous ways to acquire it, or start making shit like krokodil because the cost of "safer" alternatives is too high

People need to just deal with it and accept. Look at Portugal and how they handled their drug problem. THAT is the way to do it, not the Duterte way
---

TreyFlowers posted...

the war on drugs is lost. It's essentially prohibition from the early 20th century.

There's too much usage and too much demand that by trying to take it away, people are going to be finding more dangerous ways to acquire it, or start making shit like krokodil because the cost of "safer" alternatives is too high

People need to just deal with it and accept. Look at Portugal and how they handled their drug problem. THAT is the way to do it, not the Duterte way

Amazed at the dissonance between this while simultaneously calling for gun bans.

If junkies were running around with needles mass injecting innocent people, then yeah I'm calling for drugs to be outlawed altogether
---

TheGleamEyes posted...

Amazed at the dissonance between this while simultaneously calling for gun bans.

You can be both for legalizing drugs and against banning guns. I am.
---

Balrog0 posted...

But needle exchanges are supposed to help dispose of used needles in a safe way that wouldn't necessarily materialize if you just legalized all drugs.

I feel like they kind of would. You would assume a legal den for selling heroin would have to provide and dispose of needles. Shit libraries basically function as the place you buy heroin, shoot-up, and then dispose of needles in Seattle. I mean it's great someone figured out something to do with libraries, but it feels like legalizing it would just make a lot more sense.
---

Democrats are truly the party of social bandaids rather than sustainable structural reform.
---

TheMikh posted...

Democrats are truly the party of social bandaids rather than sustainable structural reform.

and what sustainable structural reform do you propose to reduce the amount of drug use?
---

ssjevot posted...

I feel like they kind of would. You would assume a legal den for selling heroin would have to provide and dispose of needles. Shit libraries basically function as the place you buy heroin, shoot-up, and then dispose of needles in Seattle. I mean it's great someone figured out something to do with libraries, but it feels like legalizing it would just make a lot more sense.

I guess I don't understand why that would necessarily follow. It kind of sounds like youre saying you think legalized heroin would lead to de facto 'safe injection' and 'needle exchange' sites where heroin is sold and that's obviously not true.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

konokonohamaru posted...

TheMikh posted...

Democrats are truly the party of social bandaids rather than sustainable structural reform.

and what sustainable structural reform do you propose to reduce the amount of drug use?

Ssshhh that requires lots of thought and doesnt make for as easy trolling

Types of drug addicts: (1) the mentally ill, (2) those whose daily lives lack meaning, and (3) those whose environments encourage and perpetuate it.

1. We need expanded health services for the mentally ill - private or public - and quite frankly families should have the legal right to institutionalize members with serious mental health issues even if they don't pose an immediate threat to others. As it presently stands, it's incredibly difficult to do so if they do not desire to to, even if their drug use is at the very heart of the problem.

2. We need a revitalization of the civic commons - voluntary public participation, separate from state and business - so that people without meaning in their lives can contribute to their communities even if they're not immediately in a mental state conducive to stable and long-term employment.

3. Probably the most difficult, since it can vary dramatically from person to person. There are also systemic hypotheses, but I'd rather not indulge in them at this time.
---

Balrog0 posted...

ssjevot posted...

I feel like they kind of would. You would assume a legal den for selling heroin would have to provide and dispose of needles. Shit libraries basically function as the place you buy heroin, shoot-up, and then dispose of needles in Seattle. I mean it's great someone figured out something to do with libraries, but it feels like legalizing it would just make a lot more sense.

I guess I don't understand why that would necessarily follow. It kind of sounds like youre saying you think legalized heroin would lead to de facto 'safe injection' and 'needle exchange' sites where heroin is sold and that's obviously not true.

If you actually think business wouldn't provide that service, you could require it by law, seems pretty obvious to me though. Like you ever go to a weed store that doesn't sell things to smoke it with?
---

TheMikh posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

konokonohamaru posted...

TheMikh posted...

Democrats are truly the party of social bandaids rather than sustainable structural reform.

and what sustainable structural reform do you propose to reduce the amount of drug use?

Ssshhh that requires lots of thought and doesnt make for as easy trolling

Types of drug addicts: (1) the mentally ill, (2) those whose daily lives lack meaning, and (3) those whose environments encourage and perpetuate it.

1. We need expanded health services for the mentally ill - private or public - and quite frankly families should have the legal right to institutionalize members with serious mental health issues even if they don't pose an immediate threat to others. As it presently stands, it's incredibly difficult to do so if they do not desire to to, even if their drug use is at the very heart of the problem.

2. We need a revitalization of the civic commons - voluntary public participation, separate from state and business - so that people without meaning in their lives can contribute to their communities even if they're not immediately in a mental state conducive to stable and long-term employment.

3. Probably the most difficult, since it can vary dramatically from person to person. There are also systemic hypotheses, but I'd rather not indulge in them at this time.

Where the sustainable structural reform? That reads as a red herring.

Good use of all that free money that Bernie already has spent.
---

This is a quality topic with lots of good points on both sides.

I dont know how to feel about the issue. My small government side doesnt support spending more taxpayer money to help drug addicts get high. But I also dont feel they deserve to be locked up for using. They are already in Hell being addicted. But they are also inherently selfish because getting high is their biggest priority. I dont know. Ive been around a lot of homeless people and drug addicts while i was in jail. It kinda makes it hard for me to pity them because most are truly criminal and will steal and lie to support their habit. They hurt people.

If someone were working a job and quietly getting high at home, I would never care. But the people on the streets are creating victims and consuming resources. Dont forget that lots of these same people are also dangerous. You can forget that while your empathy kicks in, but it would bite you in the ass. And i say this as someone who lives on the streets and often eats at a homeless center to save money. But spreading disease through using needles is a serious problem. Yet, these same people would take the clean needles, use them with an infected person, and still be passing contagious diseases anyways. A junkies mind is a fucked up place.

shockthemonkey posted...

TheMikh posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

konokonohamaru posted...

TheMikh posted...

Democrats are truly the party of social bandaids rather than sustainable structural reform.

and what sustainable structural reform do you propose to reduce the amount of drug use?

Ssshhh that requires lots of thought and doesnt make for as easy trolling

Types of drug addicts: (1) the mentally ill, (2) those whose daily lives lack meaning, and (3) those whose environments encourage and perpetuate it.

1. We need expanded health services for the mentally ill - private or public - and quite frankly families should have the legal right to institutionalize members with serious mental health issues even if they don't pose an immediate threat to others. As it presently stands, it's incredibly difficult to do so if they do not desire to to, even if their drug use is at the very heart of the problem.

2. We need a revitalization of the civic commons - voluntary public participation, separate from state and business - so that people without meaning in their lives can contribute to their communities even if they're not immediately in a mental state conducive to stable and long-term employment.

3. Probably the most difficult, since it can vary dramatically from person to person. There are also systemic hypotheses, but I'd rather not indulge in them at this time.

So 1 you want to just fucking lock people up and 3 you wont tell us.

I liked this better when I assumed you hadnt thought instead of finding out you have psychotic thoughts.

Some people do deserve to be civilly commited. Maybe you just havent seen the shit that poster has? I have. If your family wants you commited, they are often the first ones to notice your downward spiral. And it might save them from actually winding up in jail or prison. So calm down a bit, lad. Hes not psychotic and what hes suggesting isnt cruel. Its often in that sick indivduals best interest, although they will most likely resist because theyre a junkie.

shockthemonkey posted...

It doesnt take shit for them to throw you into a mental health facility now, locking up more people because someone else doesnt like them isnt solving shit.

Give people access to the help they need, dont involuntary everyone and call yourself a hero.

Calm down you're not helping your case.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

TheMikh posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

konokonohamaru posted...

TheMikh posted...

Democrats are truly the party of social bandaids rather than sustainable structural reform.

and what sustainable structural reform do you propose to reduce the amount of drug use?

Ssshhh that requires lots of thought and doesnt make for as easy trolling

Types of drug addicts: (1) the mentally ill, (2) those whose daily lives lack meaning, and (3) those whose environments encourage and perpetuate it.

1. We need expanded health services for the mentally ill - private or public - and quite frankly families should have the legal right to institutionalize members with serious mental health issues even if they don't pose an immediate threat to others. As it presently stands, it's incredibly difficult to do so if they do not desire to to, even if their drug use is at the very heart of the problem.

2. We need a revitalization of the civic commons - voluntary public participation, separate from state and business - so that people without meaning in their lives can contribute to their communities even if they're not immediately in a mental state conducive to stable and long-term employment.

3. Probably the most difficult, since it can vary dramatically from person to person. There are also systemic hypotheses, but I'd rather not indulge in them at this time.

So 1 you want to just fucking lock people up and 3 you wont tell us.

I liked this better when I assumed you hadnt thought instead of finding out you have psychotic thoughts.

The state should not have a hand in institutionalizing the mentally ill, but if the severity is sufficient, families should if the family member refuses, particularly if there is a way to minimize profit motives that might lead to exploitation. It may not be so easy for you to understand if your family has not had to deal with that situation.

#3 could be improved in part by a the previous two, particularly the second. There's also the hereditary nature of addiction which, given both the judgment-impairing nature of narcotics and our government's propensity to subsidize everything that walks on two legs, provides a compelling case that in conjunction with the inclination to social malaise the system is already contributing to, we're systematically proliferating an increasing predisposition to addiction with each passing generation. It's an unsavory suggestion, which is why I've tried to focus on other factors.

But your loaded language and leading assertions hints that further engagement will not be constructive.
---

@ButteryMales posted...

Where the sustainable structural reform? That reads as a red herring.

Unless you believe rising drug addiction rates just magically happen, attempting to identify and tackle the sociological factors driving the trend is imperative. The commons is a place to start, as the decline of the pervasiveness of such an institution in conjunction with growing nihilistic sentiment and behavior - including addiction - seems like a most peculiar correlation.
---

Balrog0 posted...

obviously not true.

What's obvious about it?
---

Hamsterdam was ahead of it's time
---

Why try to curb drug use when you can just support it by opening safe zones to do them in.

Liberalism in this country is a joke. God help us if any of these people get in power and have a majority.
---

EternalDivide posted...

Why try to curb drugs use

Has worked so well to date
---

Will the family be able to sue the government when someone ODs and dies while at the safe injection site?
---

There is literally no rational reason to oppose this. Only emotional ones

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

Will the family be able to sue the government when someone ODs and dies while at the safe injection site?

No

Same way you can't smoke until you die of cancer and then sue the government.

It being legal doesn't absolve you of consequence
---

ssjevot posted...

If you actually think business wouldn't provide that service, you could require it by law, seems pretty obvious to me though. Like you ever go to a weed store that doesn't sell things to smoke it with?

I have, actually, but I don't think it's the same thing. What's the incentive for them to offer to get rid of needles? Disposing waste is a classic collective action problem that we have a variety of government services to address, so I'm not sure why it's such a slam dunk in your mind that businesses would provide the service of their own volition. At the very least that seems to imply that people who do heroin would value that service enough to pay for it, but why would they? Needle exchanges work by giving you a free needle in exchange for a dirty one. Either the business is selling the syringes themselves or else they're packaging it with their product. Either way, why would someone buying heroin care to bring back their used shit unless the business incentivizes them, and whats the business reason to do that?

The other reason I could see is if the business sees it as some kind of PR move that would increase their sales, which seems plausible but not guaranteed.

---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

What's obvious about it?

You can't even smoke pot in public, so the idea that legalized drugs is going to lead to heroin bars is a joke if you think about it for like 2 seconds. AND you would run into a variety of regulatory issues even if they were hypothetically permissible, which already seems pretty implausible to me!

---