Nice try, but it's not going to solve anything. Am I expected to believe that someone is going to go out and buy some nice street heroin, then test it for fentanyl and throw it away if it tests positive? Street drugs are used by people without a lot of foresight to start with, made worse by their cravings. They're not going to use this.
Nice try, but it's not going to solve anything. Am I expected to believe that someone is going to go out and buy some nice street heroin, then test it for fentanyl and throw it away if it tests positive? Street drugs are used by people without a lot of foresight to start with, made worse by their cravings. They're not going to use this.
The only solution is to legalize the drugs. I don't worry about fentanyl in my celery. Why? Because the suppliers have a reputation to uphold, and there is legal recourse if they did. Neither of which apply to suppliers of street drugs. I can't sue my heroin supplier for selling me some tainted junk. I can't shame them. I probably can't even buy from someone else next time.
Is legalization a complete solution that will make everything sunshine and roses? No. It's just less harmful than prohibition. Prohibition doesn't make the demand go away, it just means that demand will be met by criminals. And not nice criminals, because in that world nice criminals end up dead pretty quickly.
As long as there are people stupid enough to take heroin there are going to be problems. There are just fewer problems if they're getting their heroin from reputable manufacturers and suppliers than from whatever criminal gang happens to be the most violent this week.
Decriminalization in Oregon has essentially enabled unrestricted use of cocaine, heroin, LSD, methamphetamines, ecstacy, methadone and oxycodone. It hasn’t helped.
I can believe that there are problems. All those things are really still illegal. Maybe the police aren't jailing users, but that's not enough to really solve the problem. A competent manufacturer can't produce them, so the only option is for the products to be supplied by criminals.
I don't know for sure what's going on in Oregon, but let's try a hypothetical. Someone is selling heroin. Someone else comes along and steals his heroin. Can the dealer go to the police, and expect the police to seriously investigate the crime, and if possible recover his product? If so I'll believe it's really legalized. If not, it's not really.
Good points! Still believe that enabling the users is not benefiting them in any way. Spent some time working in a mid-town ED. What we’re doing is not humane IMO. Just noticed recently that our city is encouraging funding for “drug use programs.” 🤪 They can’t even bring themselves to call the extremes abuse. Narcotics can be used appropriately. We need a different term for those whose use destroys their lives. “Abuse” worked just fine.
Thanks for sharing the reality. This is made complex by addict mentality, unfamiliar ground to most of us writing here. Sober logic is not on the table; whatever is effective has to counter ill effects of addict mentality.
I think as we are learning, this isn’t just about “street people”.
In fact, I know of a young family not on the street, with teens that are druggies with a huge lack of parental control. This test could be hard-core “evidence” to them of the lethality of what they are dosing, therefore a huge help to the parents who trying to bring reality home to these kiddos.
Have made the same argument re decriminalization. However, that alone not enough. Okla was dry and bootleggers ruled. It only went wet when the governor there dried the state up by forcefully closing down the bootleggers by blocking all incoming hooch.. Then and only then, were they ready to vote the state wet.
Nice try, but it's not going to solve anything. Am I expected to believe that someone is going to go out and buy some nice street heroin, then test it for fentanyl and throw it away if it tests positive? Street drugs are used by people without a lot of foresight to start with, made worse by their cravings. They're not going to use this.
The only solution is to legalize the drugs. I don't worry about fentanyl in my celery. Why? Because the suppliers have a reputation to uphold, and there is legal recourse if they did. Neither of which apply to suppliers of street drugs. I can't sue my heroin supplier for selling me some tainted junk. I can't shame them. I probably can't even buy from someone else next time.
Is legalization a complete solution that will make everything sunshine and roses? No. It's just less harmful than prohibition. Prohibition doesn't make the demand go away, it just means that demand will be met by criminals. And not nice criminals, because in that world nice criminals end up dead pretty quickly.
As long as there are people stupid enough to take heroin there are going to be problems. There are just fewer problems if they're getting their heroin from reputable manufacturers and suppliers than from whatever criminal gang happens to be the most violent this week.
Decriminalization in Oregon has essentially enabled unrestricted use of cocaine, heroin, LSD, methamphetamines, ecstacy, methadone and oxycodone. It hasn’t helped.
I can believe that there are problems. All those things are really still illegal. Maybe the police aren't jailing users, but that's not enough to really solve the problem. A competent manufacturer can't produce them, so the only option is for the products to be supplied by criminals.
I don't know for sure what's going on in Oregon, but let's try a hypothetical. Someone is selling heroin. Someone else comes along and steals his heroin. Can the dealer go to the police, and expect the police to seriously investigate the crime, and if possible recover his product? If so I'll believe it's really legalized. If not, it's not really.
Good points! Still believe that enabling the users is not benefiting them in any way. Spent some time working in a mid-town ED. What we’re doing is not humane IMO. Just noticed recently that our city is encouraging funding for “drug use programs.” 🤪 They can’t even bring themselves to call the extremes abuse. Narcotics can be used appropriately. We need a different term for those whose use destroys their lives. “Abuse” worked just fine.
Thanks for sharing the reality. This is made complex by addict mentality, unfamiliar ground to most of us writing here. Sober logic is not on the table; whatever is effective has to counter ill effects of addict mentality.
Right, Fred - And it also drastically increased the homeless problems. More drug users = more homeless.
I think as we are learning, this isn’t just about “street people”.
In fact, I know of a young family not on the street, with teens that are druggies with a huge lack of parental control. This test could be hard-core “evidence” to them of the lethality of what they are dosing, therefore a huge help to the parents who trying to bring reality home to these kiddos.
Have made the same argument re decriminalization. However, that alone not enough. Okla was dry and bootleggers ruled. It only went wet when the governor there dried the state up by forcefully closing down the bootleggers by blocking all incoming hooch.. Then and only then, were they ready to vote the state wet.