San Francisco ties welfare to drug-screening, boosts police powers in stunning tough-on-crime shift - eviltoast
  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    No, it isn’t. That’s my point. Everyone else is given money without such preconditions. No matter how severe their drug addiction. Only the desperate have such placed on them.

    • evergreen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yeah and sure, its a fair point. Honestly curious though, do you think we should just cut out the middle man drug lords then and just provide the addicted with the fent directly? Like just consider it part of the welfare if that’s what they want? Why force them to deal with with stuff that can be cut, adulterated, or what have you?

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Considering the drug war has been a total failure, maybe we shouldn’t worry about so-called drug lords. And weaning people off of an addictive substance slowly can be quite effective, so yes, giving them a specific amount of fentanyl under the care of a doctor could certainly be a treatment option. And, again, they have legitimate pain issues which they will not be able to afford to deal with because they’re the poorest of the poor and those people don’t get care for chronic issues they can’t pay to deal with… so they’ll probably just go back to using anyway.

        We’ve been focusing on the drug war and not on the nation’s healthcare issues for decades. What has it gotten us?

        • evergreen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I only mentioned drug lords because, well, theyre just another obstacle between the addicted and the thing they’re addicted to. May as well remove it, and give them a guaranteed quality product. I’d be 100% on board for treating their chronic pain issues. Nobody should have to live with that and I agree, it’s a factor that could lead to them returning to using again.

          I just wonder though, what happens if they want more than you can give them? How do you wean them off? Is the goal to even wean them off? What stops them from just going somewhere else and buying more than what you give them?

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            If they want to buy more, shouldn’t that be their choice? Currently, we just imprison them for doing that. It’s like arresting someone for attempting suicide. That’s not going to make them less suicidal.

            It’s very unlikely that you will be able to get someone to quit long-term if they don’t want to. So why punish them for it?