the OP has had his 15 minutes of fame and the rest of us would genuinely like to debate these issues and take fellow dopers’ viewpoints into account.
Is there a way that we can maintain the integrity of this thread but exclude the OP from having input?
Because I truly do believe that this thread has persisted in spite of and not because of the OP, and would like to have a reasoned discussion about the consequences of both drug control and gun control legislation.
Whatever attitude you have to IV drug users, they exist and will continue to do so.
When IV drug users share needles, it leads to greater incidents of cross infection. This could be avoided, but IV drug users tend not to have personal safety as their first priortiy, or often the facilities to perform the disinfection procedures that have been mentioned.
Surely then it is in the interest of everyone to provide a needle exchange system, in terms of reducing healthcare costs, and encouraging the safe disposal of used needles? I mean, does anyone honestly believe that giving out needles advocates drug use? You think there are kids out there who would shoot up, but are held back because they can’t find a needle?
Mr. Bunnyhurt, you are deliberately confusing a very simple issue.
FACT #1: Use of heroin (and many similar narcotics) is illegal or heavily regulated (in the case of morphine, etc.)
FACT #2: The needle exchange program exists knowing DAMN WELL that many who participate in the program use the needles for illegal drug use.
Now, with those two facts in mind (or have you still not learned what a “fact” is?), please provide some LEGAL JUSTIFICATION for the existence of the needle exchange program.
Knowing that you’ll simply ignore the question - AGAIN - I’ll answer it for you: There is no way to legally justify the existence of the needle exchange program.
There are two legal options… discontinue the program, or legalize the drugs. The only way to legally justify the existence of the program is the latter option.
Aren’t you taking a rather black/white viewpoint on this one Spoofe.
For starters, I’m not sure why you’re looking for a legal justification? Is there something inherently illegal in swapping used needles for clean ones?
Secondly, I still can’t tell if you’re actually down, per se, on the idea of needle exchanges. Do you think it would cause more trouble or cost the taxpayer more money than it’d save.
Now, if you do think that they’re a bad idea, fair enough. However, if you don’t, do you feel that highlighting what would be an inconsistency with the spirit of the law (i.e. to criminalise people for using drugs) is a reason to not implement an exchange, or do you think it’s a reason to change the law?
Yes, Ok, Bunny.
I’ll ask for the 5th or the 6th time:
If we’ are going to have a needle exchange program, then shouldn’t we have a gun exchange program, too?
Why do IV drug users get special treatment and protection from the hazards of their illegal activities while carjackers do not?
There are lots of unsafe guns out there, and they are highly dangerous to the user.
I’m not exagerating this problem either, as criminals rarely take good care of their weapons. A slightly fouled barrel, or an unclean mechanism can result in a muzzle explosion which has the same effect as a hand grenade going off.
Since this is a thread about consistency of policy between guns and needles. I don’t think it’s an unfair question. If we’re going to have a needle exhange, shouldn’t we have a gun exchange?
Don’t the exact same arguments apply?
Oh, I get very sad when people try to draw parallels like that.
IV drug use - where a person hurts themselves.
Carjacking - where a person steals someone elses property at gunpoint.
Please. You can’t just say that “if action a is criminal, and action b is criminal, then a is as bad as b”.
No Gary, that’s not what I’m saying.
I’m saying that we can no more contribute to one criminal activity than any other.
Furthermore, I’m not sure that IV drug use is as harmless as you think.
IV drug use forces addicts to pursue crime to pay for their addiction. They can pursue violent crime, or they can become a dealer, and recruit new users in the worst ponzi scheme of all time.
And personally, I’d rather be the victim of a violent crime then get lose my job, my family, my friends and become a slave to my next fix while my mind and body disintegrate.
So, I’m not sure which is worse. That’s just my preference. But, I think the “harmless victimless crime” aspect of IV drug use is pure and dangerous horseshit.
First off, I don’t think that IV drug use is harmless. I think it’s incredibly harmful, in much the same way that abuse of any substance is.
The only problem though is that the point you raise, namely the cost of their habit, is caused by a supply and demand situation that the existing laws create. Currently, these laws really only benefit dealers by creating a very lucrative marketplace for them.
For example, alcoholics also have a habit, but no one worries about boozehounds becoming dealers, or recruiting new users.
Either way - I don’t see what harm a needle exchange service can do, although I’d be very interested if anyone can suggest some and I have been reading the other thread on that subject. I can see a lot of benefits of such a scheme though.
Gary:
The main harm is legitimizing heroin use.
Heroin is a much more addictive substance than booze. Have a couple of drinks, and it’s no big deal. Shoot heroin a few times, and you become physically and psychologically addicted.
Again, hardly comparing like with like. When someone commits a crime like carjacking, they’re deliberately hurting someone other than themselves.
When someone becomes a substance abuser, they’re usually hurting themselves.
Rather than criminalize someone in that situation, wouldn’t it be better to try to help them, and their families with it. A person catches HIV through sharing a needle. They pass it on to a lover, and then perhaps to children, and so on. You can quite easibly think of circumstances where an exchange not only helps users, but those around them.
True, but creating a needle exchange hardly legitimizes heroin use. Do you honestly think more people would try it, just because they can exchange needles?
Surely if you want to stop drug abuse, educating people is a better tactic than just making life as hard as possible for those who are already abusers?
Actually Gary, a carjacker is after a car. The goal is not to hurt or kill a person, but to steal a car. The goal of drug dealing is to hurt people by addicting them.
If we exchanged faulty and zip guns for safer more reliable weapons with carjackers, I don’t doubt that lives would be saved as well.
I have no problem with helping addicts. Let’s make dealing drugs so difficult and dangerous, and with such heinous penalties, and let’s enforce them to such a degree both locally and with smugglers that no one dares get involved with the trade.
Save the people from becoming addicted. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Let’s help the current addicts not by catering to and facilitating their addiction. Make a law. If you’re caught using IV drugs, you go away for a year. Maske 6 months of that year a get-clean program, and 6 month a penalty/copmmunity service phase. Pursue the drug trade to such a degree that when they get back on the street, there’s no opportunity to get drugs.
Don’t treat the symptoms. Don’t make it easier to be an addict. Make it harder. Treat the disease.
I fully agree. But now you’re talking about dealers rather than users.
Cite, please (joking, joking - honest)
Believe me, I fully agree with that as a philosophy.
It rather looks like we’re reached agreement on most points - unless I’ve missed something? Considering the strange logic of the OP, that’s almost an achievement in itself.
Yes, it is nice to argue with a reasonable person. I wasn’t expecting it in this thread.
I think the main difference is that you see addicts as victims.
They are.
They are also criminals. My understanding is that they quite often resort to dealing as their addiction takes control. They’re hurting others as well now.
Drug addiction doesn’t appeal to the human or intellectual side of a person. In fact it does away with that aspect. Addict a person to heroin, and he’ll behave the same a monkey or a dog would as regards to that addiction. Trying to appeal to the human or intellectual aspect of a junkie as regards their addiction is purely wasted effort.
The solution is don’t let IV drugs available. Take no quarter, and pursue the extermination of the drug trade. That will save lives.
It’s one solution Scylla. There’s others that could be put forward for consideration, too - personally, I always thought that if you wanted to exterminate the drug trade, you should do it through economic forces. Perhaps state clinics selling to registered addicts at prices that undercut dealers. I really like the idea of dealers and smugglers being forced out of business. Of course, I can see why a lot of people would find the idea of the state effectively dealing in drugs morally repugnant. It’s a shame there are seldom any clear cut solutions to life’s little problems.
Oh well, I guess we’re getting into a separate thread now. No apologies to the OP for hijacking though.
Joe_Cool
[Moderator Hat ON]
Broadly hinting that someone is a dick is no more allowed than saying that they have a tiny dick.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
what does that mean - ‘legitimizing heroin use’. heroin is bad simply on the basis of its effects on the body. there’s no way to ‘legitimize’ its use - it’s obviously destructive. addicts don’t stop using it just because they don’t have access to clean needles. have a couple of drinks and it’s no big deal? that’s alcohol’s place in society these days? please. you can’t justify the legality of alcohol on the basis of its safety. do we really need to drag stats on alcohol related death due to liver damage, od’s, driving, domestic and public violence, and general idiocy into this debate? needle exchange doesn’t make stealing to support your habit acceptable. all it does is control the spread of disease. honestly, i don’t care if people i don’t know are using heroin, for the same reason i don’t care if they’re drinking or smoking cigarettes. i would support a ‘deposit’ program for cigarette butts for the same reason i would support a needle exchange program. if people are going to engage in personally destructive behavior anyway, i at least want to minimize its encroachment into my territory. in this case, the spread of aids and its otherwise blood tainting ilk.
So I can’t even admit that **I ** have a tiny dick anymore?
What’s up with this draconian persecution of men with small dicks anyway?
Isn’t the motion of the ocean more important than the size of the boat?
No. Sorry. 