Maybe we should just give homeless people Housing....

[GnauzBookOfRhymes]

Its a component of the drug war in that these addicts are viewed negatively in a war context instead of what they should be viewed as which is as medical patients.

I agree to a certain extent. But honestly there are more than enough new addicts, who came of age in a time that is actually treating addiction from a more enlightened "medical" perspective, to replace the ones who were victims of the 80s.

Addicts nowadays suffer from mental/psychological disorders, PTSD, untold physical sicknesses and God knows what else...untreated for years/decades. Can we be honest that the overwhelming majority are actually unlikely to emerge, settle down with a nice family, career and white picket fence? What is the next best option so that they can still live personally meaningful/enjoyable lives, outside of the brutal cycle of homelessness, petty crimes to finance their habit, vulnerability to the elements, violence, overdose, jail, and withdrawal?

 

[GnauzBookOfRhymes]

Fake libertarian says what?

 

[2Quik4UHoes]

I agree to a certain extent. But honestly there are more than enough new addicts, who came of age in a time that is actually treating addiction from a more enlightened "medical" perspective, to replace the ones who were victims of the 80s.

Addicts nowadays suffer from mental/psychological disorders, PTSD, untold physical sicknesses and God knows what else...untreated for years/decades. Can we be honest that the overwhelming majority are actually unlikely to emerge, settle down with a nice family, career and white picket fence? What is the next best option so that they can still live personally meaningful/enjoyable lives, outside of the brutal cycle of homelessness, petty crimes to finance their habit, vulnerability to the elements, violence, overdose, jail, and withdrawal?

Might need more almshouses and more housing dedicated to addicts and social programs for therapy. They may never get to the point of a normal life but stability of some kind needs to be provided in order to help them and keep them in a safe environment.

 

[Gus Money]

He's finally on board!

Glad to see you’re maturing later in life

for finally being correct

It’s kinda funny to me that @DEAD7 just didn’t respond to these posts. No jokes, no daps, no further explanation, breh simply pulled a complete 180 on a decade of right wing posting and kept it moving.



But I’m glad to see the change in viewpoint.

 

[DEAD7]

It’s kinda funny to me that @DEAD7 just didn’t respond to these posts. No jokes, no daps, no further explanation, breh simply pulled a complete 180 on a decade of right wing posting and kept it moving.



But I’m glad to see the change in viewpoint.

It’s simply a cost vs benefit issue for me…
If we dove deeper I’m sure I’m opposed to how the majority of posters itt believe we should achieve this goal.

 

[bnew]

90% of this is drug addiction.

We need to give drug addicts a place to stay and allow them to get high.

If they want help to kick the addiction, we should fund that as well....but most don't. They just want to get high. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I support this as well...

In the interest of pragmatism when dealing with addicts who are into hard drugs, I think the government should supply those drugs for free and at a government owned facility. A facility or compound with nurses, security guards and drug counselors on site. Prohibition gave rise to organized crime and the drug war just amplified it 1000 fold across the world destabilizing countries by corrupting governments. The proceeds from the illegal drug trade allows criminals to reinvest into other criminal activities like sex trafficking, arms dealing and et cetera.

the government buying property and having drug treatment centers every 2-4 miles where addicts can get their fix is way cheaper than the current price tag of the war on drugs. There'd be less prostitution if addicts didn't have to sell their bodies to earn money for their next fix which would reduce the number of std transmissions. There'd be less violent crime, such as armed robbery, assaults, break-ins and murders if addicts didn't have to pay for their next drug fix. fewer crimes means fewer traumatized victims and property damage. a gradually reduced war on drugs in it's current form would greatly reduce police powers. fewer stop-and-frisk, reduce search and seizures, put an end to civil forfeitures by police. The police have no reason to remain militarized if there isn't a war on drugs.

Every school should have a drug awareness class that shows the gory downsides of drug use/abuse. I'm talking about images showing what it does to the body and what it does to your various organs. The youth should be armed with this info so should they decide to use hard drugs such as crack, meth etc. they know exactly what they're getting into. people have to accept not everyone can be saved and our current method of wack-a-mole dealing with users and dealers harms everyone.

The government should hire the chemists or herbalists to manufacture the drugs, the nurses to dispense it and the security to ensure thats everyone on-site is safe. i wouldn't want high individuals walking around in public or operating a vehicle.

i think the public at large would feel immense relief if addicts were out of sight and out of mind.

no more billions of dollars every year being funneled to various criminal organizations around the world because the competition(the government) is giving away product for free. theres no incentive to manufacture if no one is buying. There'd be fewer gang turf wars which always end up with innocent bystanders becoming victims.

i think if we had comprehensive drug awareness and drug treatment programs in addition to the free drugs, we'd finally put an end to the war on drugs.

 

[GnauzBookOfRhymes]

In the interest of pragmatism when dealing with addicts who are into hard drugs, I think the government should supply those drugs for free and at a government owned facility. A facility or compound with nurses, security guards and drug counselors on site. Prohibition gave rise to organized crime and the drug war just amplified it 1000 fold across the world destabilizing countries by corrupting governments. The proceeds from the illegal drug trade allows criminals to reinvest into other criminal activities like sex trafficking, arms dealing and et cetera.

the government buying property and having drug treatment centers every 2-4 miles where addicts can get their fix is way cheaper than the current price tag of the war on drugs. There'd be less prostitution if addicts didn't have to sell their bodies to earn money for their next fix which would reduce the number of std transmissions. There'd be less violent crime, such as armed robbery, assaults, break-ins and murders if addicts didn't have to pay for their next drug fix. fewer crimes means fewer traumatized victims and property damage. a gradually reduced war on drugs in it's current form would greatly reduce police powers. fewer stop-and-frisk, reduce search and seizures, put an end to civil forfeitures by police. The police have no reason to remain militarized if there isn't a war on drugs.

Every school should have a drug awareness class that shows the gory downsides of drug use/abuse. I'm talking about images showing what it does to the body and what it does to your various organs. The youth should be armed with this info so should they decide to use hard drugs such as crack, meth etc. they know exactly what they're getting into. people have to accept not everyone can be saved and our current method of wack-a-mole dealing with users and dealers harms everyone.

The government should hire the chemists or herbalists to manufacture the drugs, the nurses to dispense it and the security to ensure thats everyone on-site is safe. i wouldn't want high individuals walking around in public or operating a vehicle.

i think the public at large would feel immense relief if addicts were out of sight and out of mind.

no more billions of dollars every year being funneled to various criminal organizations around the world because the competition(the government) is giving away product for free. theres no incentive to manufacture if no one is buying. There'd be fewer gang turf wars which always end up with innocent bystanders becoming victims.

i think if we had comprehensive drug awareness and drug treatment programs in addition to the free drugs, we'd finally put an end to the war on drugs.

Exactly, and honestly it doesn't need to be an overly institutionalized setting. Lot of ppl may not realize this if they don't live in cities with large homeless/addict populations, but 99% of the antisocial behavior is directly related to their inability to get their fix. It's a reaction to their addiction. Once they have what they need, they do the same shyt anyone else does...sit around and talk shyt with their friends, zone out or hustle to make sure they have money before their high runs out. I have a few properties and for each of them there's a cpl homeless guys in the neighborhood that make sure the trash is picked up around the lots. They keep the bushes trimmed, weeds pulled and grass cut (tenant gives them access to a storage shed). They have cell phones so whenever they do something they let me know and I or a tenant will give them $20 for every "task" even if it just took 30 minutes. I don't want ppl to think my suggestion means that I want to shoot these addicts up w/ so much drugs that they're catatonic. But give them whatever they need so that they can function and live meaningful/enjoyable lives. Most of them have skills/talents that are unused and have the same capacity for pride in their work that anyone else has. There are plenty of jobs or work they can do that isn't compromised by whether the employee/person doing it is a drug addict.

 

[Skeptic]

That would be the right thing to do, but in the US we don't care about that apparently.