this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2024
314 points (97.9% liked)

News

22625 readers
3633 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ryathal 3 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Whether they are a cause or symptom, people shooting up in the streets and leaving needles everywhere is unacceptable.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago (2 children)

They wouldn’t have to shoot up in the streets if SF still had the safe injection sites up. People who shoot up in the streets do so mostly because they want to get found if they OD.

Making it illegal to be high won’t make addicts want to stop getting high, it will just push them into dark corners where they die when they OD. Imo that’s way more unacceptable.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If you don't want people injecting in the streets then kicking drug addicts out of shelters and taking away their rent subsidies seems pretty counterintuitive.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The ordinance specifically does not have a sobriety requirement for continued shelter and assistance. It just requires treatment. Even if you're still using, you don't lose assistance. You just also need drug treatment.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I know, but there are going to be some people who refuse treatment and are forced out of there living situations and onto the streets, thus exasperating the problem the guy above mentioned.

I'm just saying If your main concern is seeing people doing drugs on the street your main priority should be giving them somewhere else to do them, either a safe injection site or shelter, and anything getting in the way of that is counterproductive. You can try and get them off drugs but coercing people into treatment like this rarely works.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Where do they end up in that system? Is the idea to just keep them safely on drugs for the rest of their lives since treatment rarely works? Safely locked away in a shelter, dependent on opiates?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Hopefully one day they seek treatment, and any system should make that option as open as possible at any point, because treatment can work if the person is truly committed to it. It almost never works when you coerce someone into it though, especially if whatever's forcing you into it is as alienated from you as the city government. Maybe if the addict truly loved a person or group of people could an ultimatum like it's me or the drugs work, and even that fails sometimes. But the city government, a government that you may blame for the shitty circumstances your in, telling you that is more likely to turn someone away in spite then awaken some actual desire in a person to seek sobriety.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So it sounds like that's a yes then. Keep them on drugs and just hope. Hope that they change, all while their minds and bodies are actively being destroyed and whittled down by the drugs, and the Honduran gangs in SF gain money and power... This just doesn't seem to be sustainable. There is a seemingly endless supply of people coming here from all over the country who are addicted to this stuff, and it really fees like it's turning parts of the city into a zombie land. Many people in this city, especially those that live and work in these areas are just fed up. And the votes reflect that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

I'm not saying it sustainable or good, just that these propositions are short sighted and not the way to do it, and most addiction specialists would agree. Fixing this problem doesn't require more law and order and discipline which we've been doing to no effect, but to solve the underlying socioeconomic issues causing addiction. No one is going to quit drugs if it's the one thing making their life on the streets bearable. To get people to quit, or even not abuse drugs in the first place, they need a stable living situation, a purpose and a regular job and a support structure, these propositions provide none of that. Turning people away from the welfare programs that can provide these will only push them deeper into addiction.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

I agree about safe injection sites, but the feds won't allow it. SF and Philly both tried but got shut down.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So create safe injection sites then.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

SF tried. So did Philly. Feds shut em down.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

All of history has shown that getting tough by criminalizing drug use doesn't solve the problem.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

but it is does provide good cover to fund corrupt police and "non-profits" so middle class people can get decent jobs.

That money is deff should not be wasted on things like building public housing...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

people shooting up in the streets and leaving needles everywhere is unacceptable.

How much housing and safe injection sites could a city afford if it funneled less money into arming pigs with instruments of murder?