Seattle opening "Safe Injection Facility" For Heroin*Addicts, first in US

[Deleted]

Oftentimes they put places like this in the poor neighborhoods along with homeless shelters, soup kitchens that give out free meals. It means all the street people will go to the poor neighborhoods where the rich will never see them but the poor will.

Why would they put these places far from where the needed are?

[Endus]

Oftentimes they put places like this in the poor neighborhoods along with homeless shelters, soup kitchens that give out free meals. It means all the street people will go to the poor neighborhoods where the rich will never see them but the poor will.

It's more that putting those homeless shelters and soup kitchens in the wealthy suburbs would mean that those who need those services would have to bus there to make use of them, and they can't afford to do that, because if they could, they probably wouldn't be homeless or eating at a soup kitchen.

So you put those facilities close to where those who need them live. *Same with safe injection facilities; you put it near where addicts tend to live, to make it easy for them to reach, because the goal is to make it as easy as possible for addicts to make use of it, not to put artificial barriers up by locating it way out in the suburbs where they can't reach it.

[Deleted]

And at the same time, it cleans up the streets from needles and human waste and provides medical and psychological support for the addicts.

[Dextroden]

It's more that putting those homeless shelters and soup kitchens in the wealthy suburbs would mean that those who need those services would have to bus there to make use of them, and they can't afford to do that, because if they could, they probably wouldn't be homeless or eating at a soup kitchen.

So you put those facilities close to where those who need them live. *Same with safe injection facilities; you put it near where addicts tend to live, to make it easy for them to reach, because the goal is to make it as easy as possible for addicts to make use of it, not to put artificial barriers up by locating it way out in the suburbs where they can't reach it.

You'd be amazed how far the homeless people walk/bus themselves around here. Fuck. We had one come in, gave him a leftover pizza near closing and he called a taxi after. No joke.

OT: The only reason I can personally think to not back this is I don't think American culture is ready for these buildings when no president will ever federally decriminalize marijuana.

[Endus]

You'd be amazed how far the homeless people walk/bus themselves around here. Fuck. We had one come in, gave him a leftover pizza near closing and he called a taxi after. No joke.

I'd make a firm distinction between two classes of homeless, TBH. There's those who are truly destitute, and then there's young folks who are abusing people's generosity; I don't know how prevalent it is, but there's groups of beggars you see here in Canada who travel around based on where major events are happening, to play off the tourist trade. They make enough in handouts that they're living in hotels and such, not sleeping on the streets. Easily better income than minimum-wage work.*

I don't know how widespread that is, but it happens. Doesn't make them comparable to the guy with mental issues who sleeps in a fridge box in an alleyway.

[darklady]

You'd be amazed how far the homeless people walk/bus themselves around here. Fuck. We had one come in, gave him a leftover pizza near closing and he called a taxi after. No joke.

OT: The only reason I can personally think to not back this is I don't think American culture is ready for these buildings when no president will ever federally decriminalize marijuana.

I believe it. A lot of them have a pretty good hustle down here standing on the corners with signs begging for money. They are all over the city. Not just where the mission is. Some of them aren't even homeless. They're just down on their luck. Some are liars. A popular scam down here is women asking for money to buy formula for their babies. Whatever their story is, a lot of the bus drivers will let them ride for free, until they catch wise.

Today, the majority of congress in the USA is republican, and most of them oppose the legalization of marijuana. So a lot of dispensaries down here are wondering if the other shoe will drop one day in this administration.

[Dextroden]

I'd make a firm distinction between two classes of homeless, TBH. There's those who are truly destitute, and then there's young folks who are abusing people's generosity; I don't know how prevalent it is, but there's groups of beggars you see here in Canada who travel around based on where major events are happening, to play off the tourist trade. They make enough in handouts that they're living in hotels and such, not sleeping on the streets. Easily better income than minimum-wage work.*

I don't know how widespread that is, but it happens. Doesn't make them comparable to the guy with mental issues who sleeps in a fridge box in an alleyway.

It's a problem here, too. They congregate at intersections, interstate exits, gas stations, food places. It's hard to tell which ones are legit and which ones will throw a burger away after saying they were hungry.

Best guy here? Had a sign just asking for beer money. I gave him 5 dollars for his honesty.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe it. A lot of them have a pretty good hustle down here standing on the corners with signs begging for money. They are all over the city. Not just where the mission is. Also, a lot of the bus drivers will let them ride for free.

Today, the majority of congress in the USA is republican, and most of them oppose the legalization of marijuana. So a lot of dispensaries down here are wondering if the other shoe will drop one day in this administration.

Clinton, Sanders nor any other candidate was going to actually do anything. It's a powerful dog whistle for young voters to say "legal marijuana". Plus, the federal ban allows them to loot California and Colorado for marijuana they can flip for a profit. And prisons love non-violent offenders they can get to use phones or seal letters.

[darklady]

- - - Updated - - -

Clinton, Sanders nor any other candidate was going to actually do anything. It's a powerful dog whistle for young voters to say "legal marijuana". Plus, the federal ban allows them to loot California and Colorado for marijuana they can flip for a profit. And prisons love non-violent offenders they can get to use phones or seal letters.

Don't forget the cash. You can only pay for it with cash. The Federal Reserve will not allow dispensaries to have any type of banking relationship, so there's lots of cash lying around that will get confiscated. It sucks for the neighborhoods they're in. Lots of weed and tons of cash lying around have made most dispensaries robbery targets.

[Dextroden]

- - - Updated - - -

Don't forget the cash. You can only pay for it with cash. The Federal Reserve will not allow dispensaries to have any type of banking relationship, so there's lots of cash lying around that will get confiscated. It sucks for the neighborhoods they're in. Lots of weed and tons of cash lying around have made most dispensaries robbery targets.

Really? Only cash.

Yep. Doomed by two sets of robbers.

[Mad_Murdock]

Fundamentally I cringe at the thought of such things. But if they can show me that it works and not just by twisting some stats around, I can get on-board with it. Even in a lose lose scenario it's best to take the one with the least lost.

[Deleted]

Fundamentally I cringe at the thought of such things. But if they can show me that it works and not just by twisting some stats around, I can get on-board with it. Even in a lose lose scenario it's best to take the one with the least lost.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/portugal...g-drugs-382598

[Mad_Murdock]

http://www.medicaldaily.com/portugal...g-drugs-382598

I skimmed it, I need a TLDR version. What I got out of it, is they implemented it, it seems to have worked for them, but other countries saw declines so it's not a slam dunk.

[Deleted]

Enabling drug users?

What could go wrong.

[Deleted]

I skimmed it, I need a TLDR version. What I got out of it, is they implemented it, it seems to have worked for them, but other countries saw declines so it's not a slam dunk.

It depends on the how and why is implemented. Thanks to the program, Lisbon did changed from a open sky drug market, with the drug addicts living on the hills, to one of the most peaceful cities in the world.

[artemishunter1]

Yeah I think a lot of people's kneejerk response is that this equates to permissiveness and I don't think that's necessarily the case. You can still be harsh with dealers while not treating addicts as criminals. All the evidence available seems to show that this is a good idea, reducing the demand side of the equation, which is something the US hasn't been all that great at addressing.

why be harsh with dealers then? They are only meeting the demand. All evidence also shows drug users are garbage of society. Why not simply let them use whatever they want, when they get addicted and commit crimes to sustain their abuse, kill them. Also, narcan should be banned. Addicts who overdose have shitty life. let them die in peace (speaking from experience working at rehab, same people show up regularly)

[Dezerte]

I think this is a good thing. Drug addiction needs to be treated, not punished.

As usual, I'm linking this Kurzgesagt video on addiction.

[TITAN308]

You'd be amazed at what offering help vs scorn does.

I don't disagree over all with you sentiment. With that said there is a stark difference between helping someone and enabling them.

Then again I am of the frame of mind if someone wants to inject themselves with liquid dookie I really don't care. As a tax payer I really have no say over where those fractions of a penny end up for various programs so as long as they don't fuck with my life while they get high on putting doo doo in their bodies I don't care.

[Darkeon]

As long as there is some sort of treatment\support going on - instead of merely enabling the addicts and keeping these in check for statistics - sounds like a good deal.

[PACOX]

I would love to hear about the proposed alternatives from the "they are enabling them" crowd.

Keep drugs use illegal but offer better ways to treat users. Criminalizing drug use and addiction does not help anyone except the people collecting money from the justice department. Much of the bad, dangerous, illegal habits of drug users are due to the way they are treated if caught. You do nothing for the addict except give them a new place to do drugs by throwing them in prison for non-violent offenses.


Addiction has to dealt with biology and mentally to be cured/manageable/successful. Safe injection sights offer a road to recovery by just getting users off of the streets. If you know that a crack rock won't land you 10 years then you probably won't go to a trap house to do your dirt - there is a reason why they are called trap houses. You would be sharing nasty needles spreading all types of nasty shit. Not ODing with your kids in the back seat.

[monkmastaeq]

My friend was away on vacation and a few homeless or drug users broke into his garage and squated in there for a week or two. He paid another friend of ours to clean it up after them, while cleaning shes was stuck by a discarded needle she was fine but it easily could have gone the other way.

So I am 100% for safe injection sites