Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Hoyarugby OP t1_j3dgl3k wrote

Reply to comment by familyofgeniuses in [New York Times] Tranq Dope: Animal Sedative Mixed With Fentanyl Brings Fresh Horror to U.S. Drug Zones by Hoyarugby

There's a British documentary I watched a while ago called The Wet House, basically a dorm for homeless alcoholics in London where they are allowed to keep drinking, basically somewhere they can safely drink themselves to death. It's a grim documentary, but it was better than those people still being alcoholics but homeless instead (one guy in it had horrible scars after somebody set him on fire while he was sleeping in a park)

I honestly feel like we should give that a shot, what we are doing now is clearly not working

60

towerninja t1_j3ducy1 wrote

Honestly legalization is the only answer. Have drugs sold by the State like liquor in PA. Have to be 21 to enter, can have safe injection sites l, and have quality control and just sell real heroine. With that you also have huge potential for out reach and the drug money can fund education, health care, and rehab and with drug legalization treatments like Ibogaine can be administered as well as Ayahuasca

34

JennItalia269 t1_j3ew4kk wrote

Legalization is probably the only remaining solution because everything else has been a miserable failure.

31

towerninja t1_j3fdjeu wrote

Aside from everything I already mentioned and other social benefits. It instantly puts drug dealers out of business freeing up police for other things

1

TreeMac12 t1_j3h0c45 wrote

That’s naive. Oxycodone and Percocet are legal drugs and they are still sold by armed, illegal drug dealers in McPherson Square. So no, it doesn’t put them out of business “instantly.”

14

towerninja t1_j3h40fi wrote

I'm not talking about legal by prescription. I talking about legal for recreational use where anyone of age can go buy whatever they want. So yes it does instantly put drug dealers out of business. Also I can almost guarantee you can't buy oxycodone in Mcfoerson square! You can probably buy counterfeit pills made from fentanyl though

−2

TreeMac12 t1_j3h95sq wrote

Just like no one sells weed anymore except dispensaries

8

towerninja t1_j3i57rp wrote

Weed isn't federally legal and it did fuck up the street business in places like Colorado

5

bonald-drump t1_j3gy3vi wrote

Also this is such a defeatist attitude. Make the government the drug dealer? And you really believe no one under 21 would be able to get it?

8

towerninja t1_j3h4i77 wrote

Of course some people under age would get it. But right now it's easier for a 15 year old to get fentanyl than it is for them to get a beer.

11

cathistorylesson t1_j3hpf0l wrote

I guess anyone who downvotes this wasn’t smoking weed as a teenager when it was illegal for everyone - I definitely remember it being significantly easier to get than underage alcohol. To get alcohol, you actually had to know someone over 21, but everyone had weed.

9

KingMalcolm t1_j4xc8c9 wrote

FACTS. prohibition has NEVER and will NEVER work

3

bonald-drump t1_j3eiug8 wrote

Put out a bounty on drug dealers with dollar incentives. That’s an answer.

−7

randompittuser t1_j3gplur wrote

There will always be another drug dealer, as we’ve seen for the last 40 years.

2

bonald-drump t1_j3gxzs8 wrote

Not saying there won’t be drug dealers. Just make it more of a financial incentive to hunt them down vs being the dealer.

2

Hib3rnian t1_j3dzo7y wrote

As always it comes down to funding and oversight. But I'd prefer my taxes going to something like this over $50B going to Ukraine. Hell, I'd even be ok with splitting it, half to Ukraine, half to addiction services/housing

−10

towerninja t1_j3e0srl wrote

We already spend it. Except it's going to "the war on drugs" Legalization solves more problems than it creates

16

jamin_g t1_j3e61rd wrote

I will say it! I do not care about other countries when we are losing at home.

Call me cynical, for a very long time our war spending is to protect wealthy business interests, not human interests.

1

porkchameleon t1_j3e3lk2 wrote

> But I'd prefer my taxes going to something like this over $50B going to Ukraine.

By what I've heard it was way over $120B ($3B more was announced this week), and it hasn't been a full year yet (you can google it yourself, there are different numbers being floated around, but it's mos def over $100B by now).

(You are also comparing spending money on saving people's lives to spending money to have more people die).

−5

proximity_account t1_j3eebae wrote

>You are also comparing spending money on saving people's lives to spending money to have more people die).

Kind of depends on your perspective there. I imagine a lot more Ukrainians would be dead by torture and execution by Russians if it weren't for military support from the West.

9

porkchameleon t1_j3f0nxk wrote

> I imagine a lot more Ukrainians would be dead by torture and execution by Russians if it weren't for military support from the West.

Tell me you read only mainstream media without telling me you read only mainstream media. Please...

(This kind of take is my new favorite after reading armchair experts on Israel-Palestine conflict for some years).

−5

proximity_account t1_j3f9ojn wrote

It's more a matter of known numbers in a short time under war vs unknown numbers over a long time under an authoritarian government. The Kremlin doesn't exactly publish the number of people it throws out windows, etc; most authoritarian regimes don't.

And if mass Graves in Izium, Bucha, and possibly Mariupol are just the tip of the Iceberg of what Russia might want to do to Ukrainians, things can go bad real fast. It took 4 years to kill six million Jews and 100 days to kill 500,000 Rwandans.

How long do you think it will take Putin, who thinks Ukrainine/Ukrainians shouldn't exist and constantly paints them as sub-human Nazis, to kill more than the ~50-200k people that have died during the war before something if anything finally stops him?

2

porkchameleon t1_j3fhmvy wrote

> How long do you think it will take Putin, who thinks Ukrainine/Ukrainians shouldn't exist and constantly paints them as sub-human Nazis, to kill more than the ~50-200k people that have died during the war before something if anything finally stops him?

Yeah, you completely lost me. Don't lay out "facts" like this, when your main source of propaganda is US mainstream media, and you seemingly have little to no understanding of what's been going on in that particular region in the best part of last 100 years.

I am embarrassed to have been a part of this conversation.

−1

proximity_account t1_j3fqal7 wrote

> Yeah, you completely lost me. Don't lay out "facts" like this,

Yeah, people like you who don't know history tend not know what's coming.

> your main source of propaganda is US mainstream

I actually don't watch any US media other than listening to NPR for US politics. Maybe some AP news sneaks in there occasionally.

Where do you get your news? Russian state television?

> you seemingly have little to no understanding of what's been going on in that particular region in the best part of last 100 years.

I'd say I understand it pretty well. A lot of what I understand comes from people that actually lived there.

2