CNN.com: SF Mulls Nation's First 'Supervised Injection' Site

[Kilmer17]

1. Stop giving them billions of dollars every year, while they grow it, instead of food for thier people.

2. EXACTLY!

Im all for it.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I saw this on tv, and I think its being a little misconstrued in this thread. The idea seemed to me to be that addicts could come in and do drugs safely, but that there were also people their willing to try to help these people get off drugs.

Such things as brochures, pamphlets, information on where to go if you want to kick, etc.

So, I think that it probably is a good idea, IF the point is that they are doing this knowing that addicts really do have a disease which is ruining them, AND ALSO that while right now they need a safe place to shoot up, the end goal is to get them off drugs.

If my understanding of what was going on based on what i saw on TV is wrong, let me know.

[helptheSKINS]

Do you even understand the point of the discussion, because you sure do not demonstrate such an understanding.

Your points are wrong. First off, everyone doesn't "steal" to get their drugs. Some addicts actually have jobs, but they spend all their money on drugs, which is sad. But there are "functioning addicts" in our society, and you probably do not even realize that the person is a junkie. Secondly, this nation does have a Christian morality, even if a person isn't a practicing Christian, and part of this Christian ethic is to help those dire situations.

Let me guess: You probably don't want to help the sick or those in poor situations as well, right? Hell, why do we even have a society with ethics if we don't want to help those in need?

And don't mistake it: Some of these drug users are in need and do need help of one type or another. And, as someone mentioned, so users DO become better, quit using, and improve their lives.

Also, this topic has nothing to do with legalizing. It doesn't, because that is entirely a different step. Thus, you really don't appear to understand the nature of the subject. It is about program that is similar to the needle exchange programs, which helps to alleviate the diseases being passed between users.

This is similar to the prostituon issue: Unfortunately, in areas where it is illegal, it does happen. I would much rather have a system where the prostitutes are tested and assisted with health issues as opposed to just being on the street, aiding to STDs.

The argument of "It is illegal, and that's that" just isn't realistic; it sometimes just is not that simple, especially when it relates to health issues.

Let me be very clear. Drugs are against the law. The reasons for this are obvious (leads to crime, destroys your body, destroys families, ect.). Giving addicts a place to shoot up is a blatently disregarding the law. Allowing people to use drugs legally in any form is encouraging it.

Your Christianity comments are inasne. I'm sure the good Lord would love for his followers to make it easier for people to get high. Addicts are in "dire situations" because they care more about drugs then anything else.

You, like so many others are making excuses. How about instead of making it easier or safer, spend the taxpayer money on furhter enforcing the law. You said your friend died from a heorine overdose. Why are you for this? What makes you think that when people leave the facility they won't inject again. Wouldn't it make more sense for you to be in support of getting people to quit? I don't think having the gov't supply them with needles and a place to do it is a good way to go about it.

As for your "this is a health issue" argument. This is not a health issue. This is a drug issue. People are sharing needles because they do whatever they can to get high. Do you really think people are going to only get high at this center? Do you think at 2am, people are going to get dressed and go down to their local injection center? Maybe the gov't should open "drinking centers". That way, if you are an alcoholic, you can be watched so you don't drink too much. I'm sure when they go home, they won't touch another drop.

[Predicto]

I saw this on tv, and I think its being a little misconstrued in this thread. The idea seemed to me to be that addicts could come in and do drugs safely, but that there were also people their willing to try to help these people get off drugs.

Such things as brochures, pamphlets, information on where to go if you want to kick, etc.

So, I think that it probably is a good idea, IF the point is that they are doing this knowing that addicts really do have a disease which is ruining them, AND ALSO that while right now they need a safe place to shoot up, the end goal is to get them off drugs.

If my understanding of what was going on based on what i saw on TV is wrong, let me know.

No, it is absolutely accurate.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Let me be very clear. Drugs are against the law. The reasons for this are obvious (leads to crime, destroys your body, destroys families, ect.). Giving addicts a place to shoot up is a blatently disregarding the law. Allowing people to use drugs legally in any form is encouraging it.

Your Christianity comments are inasne. I'm sure the good Lord would love for his followers to make it easier for people to get high. Addicts are in "dire situations" because they care more about drugs then anything else.

You, like so many others are making excuses. How about instead of making it easier or safer, spend the taxpayer money on furhter enforcing the law. You said your friend died from a heorine overdose. Why are you for this? What makes you think that when people leave the facility they won't inject again. Wouldn't it make more sense for you to be in support of getting people to quit? I don't think having the gov't supply them with needles and a place to do it is a good way to go about it.

As for your "this is a health issue" argument. This is not a health issue. This is a drug issue. People are sharing needles because they do whatever they can to get high. Do you really think people are going to only get high at this center? Do you think at 2am, people are going to get dressed and go down to their local injection center? Maybe the gov't should open "drinking centers". That way, if you are an alcoholic, you can be watched so you don't drink too much. I'm sure when they go home, they won't touch another drop.

As to this post, I don't think its fair the way you are portraying some drug addicts, and I think generally you are failing to realize that its a very dangerous DISEASE which people fall into often when dealing with very serious problems. And I think the studies show that "enforcing the law" has absolutly no value, or at best minimal value, in getting people addicted to drugs to quit.

Just keep in mind, NO ONE wakes up in the morning and says "Gee, I think I'd really like to be addicted to heroin from now on."

No, it is absolutely accurate.

ok, then I think it's a good idea.

[Kilmer17]

Nobody becomes an addict without first trying the drug without the "disease".

Freewill is a *****.

[zoony]

It also worked in Season 3 of The Wire

Guys... there are plenty of things to rail on San Fran about, but this isn't one of them. This is a very practical solution to a very real problem that plagues all of our cities.

And if someone has a better suggestion, I'm all ears. But don't object to something like this because of some sort of moral ground... because that is a house of cards... just not a good argument.

Actually, there is no good argument against something like this. "Drugs are bad, I don't like drug users, and they shouldn't receive this benefit" is an opinion, sure... but it is nowhere near a workable solution to what this nation is facing with regard to the drug problem.

[helptheSKINS]

but that there were also people their willing to try to help these people get off drugs.

Such things as brochures, pamphlets, information on where to go if you want to kick, etc.

I can see it now.........

Injection Center worker: Here you go drug addict. Please look over this pamphlet. You can call the number at the bottom if you want to learn how to quit.

Drug addict: I'm sorry, I'm pretty high right now. Can you just mail this too me. I'll probably lose this wonderful pamphlet on the way home.

The notion that so many of you want our gov't to watch people get high then send them out into the streets is amazing. What if someone is killed or injured by one of them. They get in the car and drive, rob someone, assult them? Can the law abiding citizen sue the gov't for allowing them to get high and leave? And don't give me the typical "not all drug addicts are bad, their functioning".

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Nobody becomes an addict without first trying the drug without the "disease".

Freewill is a *****.

Oh yea, what about Training Day, or Friday. Ethan Hawke and Smokey both got slipped PCP! :laugh:

Seriously though, I still think that drug addictions are usually not the root of the problem. You see people getting addicted to drugs usually b/c of some problem they have in their lives that they cannot cope with. So, they may not have the disease of addiction the first time they try it, but I still think its accurate to say that no one wants to be an addict.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I can see it now.........

Injection Center worker: Here you go drug addict. Please look over this pamphlet. You can call the number at the bottom if you want to learn how to quit.

Drug addict: I'm sorry, I'm pretty high right now. Can you just mail this too me. I'll probably lose this wonderful pamphlet on the way home.

The notion that so many of you want our gov't to watch people get high then send them out into the streets is amazing. What if someone is killed or injured by one of them. They get in the car and drive, rob someone, assult them? Can the law abiding citizen sue the gov't for allowing them to get high and leave? And don't give me the typical "not all drug addicts are bad, their functioning".

And you believe throwing addicts in jail gets them off the drugs?

[helptheSKINS]

Nobody becomes an addict without first trying the drug without the "disease".

Freewill is a *****.

WRONG......... They are all victims and everyone should take care of them. In fact, lets let the gov't pay for their needles and a facility where they can take their drugs.

Where is your compassion Kilmer?

[Tulane Skins Fan]

WRONG......... They are all victims and everyone should take care of them. In fact, lets let the gov't pay for their needles and a facility where they can take their drugs.

Where is your compassion Kilmer?

Wait, wait... its the government paying for it that bothers you?

And who pays cops to arrest addicts? Who pays jails to hold addicts who break the law? Isn't that the taxpayers??

Those are not solutions to the problem. If all you really want is addicts to not be getting a free ride on the government, then what you should be aiming for is ending addiction, and not enforcing the law.

[helptheSKINS]

And you believe throwing addicts in jail gets them off the drugs?

Yes actually for some. Forced detox. It's an addiction, you either get off the addiction or continue to go to jail for longer periods. I would obviously want them to get help while in jail. I do feel sorry for addicts but I refuse to assist them with getting high. You're not born with an addiction (unless your mother is an addict), it's a choice. You have to choose to stop.

I would still like an anwer to my previous scenario from the pro Injection center folks:

Question 1:

What if someone is killed or injured by one of them. They get in the car and drive, rob someone, assult them? Can the law abiding citizen sue the gov't for allowing them to get high and leave? And don't give me the typical "not all drug addicts are bad, their functioning".

Question 2:

Will all women be forced to take a pregnancy test to ensure they are not destroying 2 lives?

[zoony]

Question 1:

What if someone is killed or injured by one of them. They get in the car and drive, rob someone, assult them? Can the law abiding citizen sue the gov't for allowing them to get high and leave? And don't give me the typical "not all drug addicts are bad, their functioning".

That is an interesting question. I'd be curious what any lawyers on ES might say about that.

[helptheSKINS]

Wait, wait... its the government paying for it that bothers you?

And who pays cops to arrest addicts? Who pays jails to hold addicts who break the law? Isn't that the taxpayers??

Those are not solutions to the problem. If all you really want is addicts to not be getting a free ride on the government, then what you should be aiming for is ending addiction, and not enforcing the law.

no, it's just one of the many ridiculous pieces of this.

How about answering those two questions for me

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Yes actually for some. Forced detox. It's an addiction, you either get off the addiction or continue to go to jail for longer periods. I would obviously want them to get help while in jail. I do feel sorry for addicts but I refuse to assist them with getting high. You're not born with an addiction (unless your mother is an addict), it's a choice. You have to choose to stop.

I would still like an anwer to my previous scenario from the pro Injection center folks:

Question 1:

What if someone is killed or injured by one of them. They get in the car and drive, rob someone, assult them? Can the law abiding citizen sue the gov't for allowing them to get high and leave? And don't give me the typical "not all drug addicts are bad, their functioning".

Question 2:

Will all women be forced to take a pregnancy test to ensure they are not destroying 2 lives?

Well, considering you answered my question with two questions, I will try to answer yours as best I can, but I expect an answer to mine as well.

1. If someone commits a violent crime as you alluded to after shooting up, I agree that person should be held responsible for that crime. But, I still think, even more importantly then just sending that person to jail, is having some type of system to get that person OFF drugs. To end his addiction. The problem with just throwing addicts in jail is that it is not a deterrent to the crime of drug abuse. Usually, prison serves as a deterrent not only to society, but also to the individual who gets caught. But, with addicts, it does not because they have a disease called addiction. and if they get out of jail with no real addiction rehabilitation, the first thing they want to do is shoot up again.

As for can they sue the government... I am assuming you mean for monetary damages. I am pretty sure, not positive, but if I remember correctly from law school, a citizen cannot sue a state for civil damages, generally.

EDIT: One thing to add though, you would have what is called a "negligence per se" action and would certainly be able to collect from the addict himself. Assuming they had any money, of course.

2. As for the pregnancy test, I think that's actually a pretty good idea you have there. Like I said, I think there is more going on at these facilities than just giving them needles (based on what i saw on TV). And I think there are nurses, etc., there that are trying to get each of them off drugs. But, I think you have a good idea with the pregnancy test thing.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

no, it's just one of the many ridiculous pieces of this.

How about answering those two questions for me

sorry, i actually was taking the time to think about it and post a thought out piece... wasn't dodging it.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

no, it's just one of the many ridiculous pieces of this.

How about answering those two questions for me

I'm not sure I understand what you meant? Please elaborate.

[Baculus]

Let me be very clear. Drugs are against the law. The reasons for this are obvious (leads to crime, destroys your body, destroys families, ect.). Giving addicts a place to shoot up is a blatently disregarding the law. Allowing people to use drugs legally in any form is encouraging it.

Your Christianity comments are inasne. I'm sure the good Lord would love for his followers to make it easier for people to get high. Addicts are in "dire situations" because they care more about drugs then anything else.

You, like so many others are making excuses. How about instead of making it easier or safer, spend the taxpayer money on furhter enforcing the law. You said your friend died from a heorine overdose. Why are you for this? What makes you think that when people leave the facility they won't inject again. Wouldn't it make more sense for you to be in support of getting people to quit? I don't think having the gov't supply them with needles and a place to do it is a good way to go about it.

As for your "this is a health issue" argument. This is not a health issue. This is a drug issue. People are sharing needles because they do whatever they can to get high. Do you really think people are going to only get high at this center? Do you think at 2am, people are going to get dressed and go down to their local injection center? Maybe the gov't should open "drinking centers". That way, if you are an alcoholic, you can be watched so you don't drink too much. I'm sure when they go home, they won't touch another drop.

This is very much a health issue, because needle exchange programs are successful at stopping the spread of Hepatitis C or HIV. Sure, it is easy to simply say "they are breaking the law" or "We are just encouraging their usage" when reality shows that these programs help with one of the worst parts of drug use, which is spreading diseases.

In fact, US Surgeon General, Dr. David Satcher, stated the following:

"After reviewing all of the research to date, the senior scientists of the Department and I have unanimously agreed that there is conclusive scientific evidence that syringe exchange programs, as part of a comprehensive HIV prevention strategy, are an effective public health intervention that reduces the transmission of HIV and does not encourage the use of illegal drugs."

Obviously it is a health issue if the Department of Health and Human Services are examining this issue.

You can find more information at this page:

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/syringee.htm

It simply CANNOT BE denied that this isn't a health issue when there are physical problems assocated with drug use. You are simply defying reality when you say that it is merely a legal issue. It is a health issue when disease are involved with such usage, and to deny it is a health issue is to ignore, or to be ignorant, of some of the problems associated with intravenous drug usage.

Also, this is a social issue, and there has been a demonstrating of reduced social costs by these type of programs.

Furthermore, you appear to be missing one of the critical points of these programs: Needle exchange programs become a first contact for those who may want treatment with their program, and this has proven to be more effective then simple law enforcement when it comes to attempting to help those with drug problems.

And this is one of the MAIN reasons why I would support such a program, even with my experience of a friend who died from such drugs.

Whether you like it or not, such programs already exist in the U.S., and they have demonstrated to work and to encourage those on drugs to actually quit. It is amazing how involvement with addicts and actually discussing their problem can actually go a long ways towards assisting them with their drug use.

Also, why are my Christian remarks inane? Aren't drug users sinners like anyone else, and who would deserve salvation in spite of their sins? Are you saying that such drug users aren't deserving of help and assistance because they "care more about drugs then anything else." So Jesus shouldn't have redeemed the prostitute, and should have rejected her because she cares about "prostitution then anything else?" I guess we were raised with different versions of Christanity....This is aside and is probably OT, anyway.

Incidentally, there are states with government run liquor stores, and there are areas in which folks can legally drink and even sleep, case in point, Mardi Gras, so your argument on the "government drinking ceter" doesn't hold much water.

[Predicto]

These people are ALREADY shooting up. Please take that small bit of information into account in your analysis.

[Baculus]

I would like to hear some comments from those who are against these programs, but they don't appear to have an opinion on government involvement with importing drugs or in the drug trade.

[helptheSKINS]

sorry, i actually was taking the time to think about it and post a thought out piece... wasn't dodging it.

I may have been a little pushy there, my apologies.

As for your previous post. I am all for rehab in prison. The most important thing is to stop using. You are less likely to get high in prison. While there, they should get all the rehab they need. I am all for it. The reason I think prison is necessary is most addicts do not stop on their own. Prison gives them no choice. I've posted what I would do before, but here it is again.

First offense (caught high or with drugs): mandatory rehab and drug testing for 30 days once out.

Second offense (sign you are an addict): mandatory 30 days in jail (detox), mandatory rehab and drug testing for 180 days.

Third offense: mandatory 60 days in jail, mandatory rehab and drug testing for 1 yr.

and so on.......

[Kilmer17]

I would like to hear some comments from those who are against these programs, but they don't appear to have an opinion on government involvement with importing drugs or in the drug trade.

Im against the Govt saying it's okay to break the law because it has a benefit for society. If they truly think this way, than illiminate all the drug laws.

[helptheSKINS]

I would like to hear some comments from those who are against these programs, but they don't appear to have an opinion on government involvement with importing drugs or in the drug trade.

I agree with you that it's a problem. But Kilmer (i think) had a point about us only having so much influence. There are too many other factors involved with Afghan. to make it that simple. I think our best bet is to guard against the drugs getting in (border).

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I may have been a little pushy there, my apologies.

As for your previous post. I am all for rehab in prison. The most important thing is to stop using. You are less likely to get high in prison. While there, they should get all the rehab they need. I am all for it. The reason I think prison is necessary is most addicts do not stop on their own. Prison gives them no choice. I've posted what I would do before, but here it is again.

First offense (caught high or with drugs): mandatory rehab and drug testing for 30 days once out.

Second offense (sign you are an addict): mandatory 30 days in jail (detox), mandatory rehab and drug testing for 180 days.

Third offense: mandatory 60 days in jail, mandatory rehab and drug testing for 1 yr.

and so on.......

No worries, didn't think you were pushy, just wanted to clarify what was taking so long.

I guess two things I don't see in your analysis:

1: I dont see why you wouldnt be in favor of these centers, which from what I understand, have the most success in getting addicts into rehab.

2. I dont see prison being at all valuable in the ways of rehab. One, rehab is not just not having access to drugs. Rehab is much more than that. And two, I think its accurate to state that addicts can actually get drugs in prison, and so its usually not cold turkey, as you seem to imply it must be.

I guess ultimately, you kinda see this center as money ill spent b/c it is spent on addicts. and i think i see it as money spent on preventing addiction. and ultimately, you think prison and testing (i know your plan was more elaborate) is a better way to spend that money intended for rehabbing addicts.

And I am just quite confident that the statistics show that prison is not effective, and these centers are. And I'm just willing to spend the money this way to end/prevent addiction.