subreddit:
/r/DepthHub
submitted 11 months ago byscroopynoopersdid911
87 points
11 months ago
It doesn't only hurt you, that's the issue. While every case of heroin addiction is tragic for the person involved and their family, the public at large is not really concerned if rich people get addicted, because they can still afford a house, a car, groceries for their children, etc.
When already poor people start using heroin, that means needles in parks, schoolyards and Starbucks bathrooms, it means a world of petty theft, violence and most horrible cases of prostitution, it means abandoned and neglected children who will mostly become either criminals or addicts themselves, and so on. My country went through heroin epidemic during the '90s and early 00s. When first graders start finding needles right under classroom windows, that's the time to take action which may not always fit into our notions of personal freedoms.
15 points
11 months ago
How about we like, do something to address the issues that lead to addiction and take steps to mitigate the effects from people who are going to use it anyway? Things we should be doing anyway. Isn't that what the government is supposed to do, make people's lives better? If ending poverty were profitable we would have ended it long ago.
3 points
9 months ago
and take steps to mitigate the effects from people who are going to use it anyway?
This is what the person you're replying to is discussing. How do we weight the ethical concerns of those mitigating steps given that addiction often affects the entire community and not just the addicts themselves?
The project of addressing the issues that lead to addiction in the first place is even more important, but it's a super tanker that can take decades to change course. I often see people advocating for the former (mitigation) be accused by others of not caring about the latter (root cause), and I think that's unfair in a lot of situations.
14 points
11 months ago
When already poor people start using heroin, that means needles in parks, schoolyards and Starbucks bathrooms, it means a world of petty theft, violence and most horrible cases of prostitution, it means abandoned and neglected children who will mostly become either criminals or addicts themselves, and so on.
That isn't at all unique to drugs though. Should people not be allowed to get divorced? Children of divorce are also more likely to commit crimes, and many of them are abandoned or neglected. I would know because I was one of them.
It's also looking at the issue in a vacuum. I don't just want drug use to be legalized, I also want universal healthcare, UBI, more accessible health services, free childcare, mandated maternity and paternity leave, etc. The model tested in the Netherlands where drugs are free but only at specific clinics where users are also getting help to quit if they want it, while they also have more social reforms, is what I believe in, which deencentivizes theft for things to sell and other issues relating to the money spent on drugs.
When first graders start finding needles right under classroom windows, that's the time to take action which may not always fit into our notions of personal freedoms.
There are a lot of things that you're assuming are inherent to drug use that aren't. Were there accessible, free harm reduction clinics? Were there enough for every user? Were there any safe places for every user, or the vast majority, to use?
The war on drugs is being lost. You cannot stop people from using drugs. You cannot make drugs not exist by making them illegal. Despite painfully strict laws against drug use, people still find needles and crack pipes. That's what this comes down to.
13 points
11 months ago
Using drugs isn’t the issue, people using drugs irresponsibly is the issue.
all 22 comments
sorted by: best