4 ms·

It's pretty deliberate failure to understand, in my opinion, driven by a core belief that bad things happen to bad people and they need to be punished out of it

It's pretty deliberate failure to understand, in my opinion, driven by a core belief that bad things happen to bad people and they need to be punished out of it, not helped. The goal for many people is absolutely not reducing deaths, or even getting rid of fentanyl smoke on buses. It is expelling fentanyl users from society and expecting that will stop new users appearing. That's why they don't want to spend money on treatment or services. They think enabling the existence and recovery of existing users will encourage more.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
seanmcdirmid 4y ago
> or even getting rid of fentanyl smoke on buses. The burnt peanut butter smell is pretty rancid. Voters, even in Seattle, only have a finite amount of empathy to spare on this problem, and it has mostly been expended. > It is expelling fentanyl users from society and expecting that will stop new users appearing. That's why they don't want to spend money on treatment or services. They think enabling the existence and recovery of existing users will encourage more. We (King County at least) spend around $100k/junkie per year on services. And that still isn't considered enough. So should we double our property taxes or something to spend even more money on this problem? > They think enabling the existence and recovery of existing users will encourage more. If Seattle is the only place these people can get help across the whole country, that would definitely occur. You can't fight a national problem with local resources and not expect distortions (people are mobile).
- pstuart 4y ago
  This is a national problem and needs to be addressed (and funded) as such. The war on drugs has failed miserably (for it's ostensible purpose (to "protect" us from dangerous drugs). We need to legalize and regulate them all, and make their abuse a medical issue rather than a criminal issue. For those that have no desire or ability to quit, we can put them in camps and hand out dope to keep them sedated and "safe" from questionable supplies. If they want to get clean, they can have the support to do that but otherwise are effectively interned on work farms. This is the cheapest, safest, and most humane way of dealing with this problem.
  - eurasiantiger 4y ago
    You still fantasize about a world where everything and everyone is ”clean”. That will never exist but you will destroy the humanity of yourself and others in an attempt to delude yourself.
    - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
      Nah, getting dangerous people off the street is its own reward. If they could get high without causing problems I couldn't care.
      - pstuart 4y ago
        Exactly. Way cheaper than jail too.
    - pstuart 4y ago
      I have lots of fantasies but that ain't one of them. The gist of my point is that there's going to be a subset of the population that is "broken" and is unable to function as a "productive member of society". We are going to spend money on them one way or the other; my way would be far more effective than how it happens today (both in cost and in actual remediation). How would this destroy my (and others) humanity? It's currently challenged by watching people live in tents, shit on the sidewalk, and pass out in public on dope. How is my suggestion worse?
- lazyasciiart 4y ago
  I'm not arguing fentanyl smoke is nice. I'm arguing that people, apparently including you, refuse to do any of the well understood and successful things that would get rid of fentanyl smoke on buses because you don't want to make help available. > around $100k/junkie per year Absolute nonsense. We spend nothing of the sort. We are not even pretending to approach it. Sounds like you're getting your hot takes from Christopher Rufo misinterpreting the Puget Sound Business Journal speculation a couple years ago. The lies spread by Rufo and his ilk certainly contribute to the unwillingness to do anything, by making people confidently delusional about what currently exists.
  - rhaway84773 4y ago
    I am constantly amazed at Americans who seem to think that XYZ is an intractable problem with no solution, without bothering to even look outside their borders and notice the fact that almost no other country seems to have the same problem, or at least the same problem at a similar scale as the US.
    - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
      Vancouver is right next door, they have similar problems. Maybe they deal with it slightly better, but the scale is the same.
zo1 4y ago
> "They think enabling the existence and recovery of existing users will encourage more." It's also a timing issue. I think a lot of people that are currently in the "just get rid of them" camp would have been in the "let's help them rehabilitate" camp when the problem was in small or controlled scale. But we are way passed that. It's a downright epidemic and needs to be dealt with in more drastic and immediate terms for some of us. I'm not going to wait 5 years while my children are innocent and in school and wandering around for the problem to get better. I want my neighborhood safe and clean and innocent for them now. This is why suburbs popped up on some level. People just want to be left alone and in relative calm and clean surroundings.
- lazyasciiart 4y ago
  Gated white communities still exist, if you want a drastic immediate change then move there.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

seanmcdirmid 4y ago

> or even getting rid of fentanyl smoke on buses. The burnt peanut butter smell is pretty rancid. Voters, even in Seattle, only have a finite amount of empathy to spare on this problem, and it has mostly been expended. > It is expelling fentanyl users from society and expecting that will stop new users appearing. That's why they don't want to spend money on treatment or services. They think enabling the existence and recovery of existing users will encourage more. We (King County at least) spend around $100k/junkie per year on services. And that still isn't considered enough. So should we double our property taxes or something to spend even more money on this problem? > They think enabling the existence and recovery of existing users will encourage more. If Seattle is the only place these people can get help across the whole country, that would definitely occur. You can't fight a national problem with local resources and not expect distortions (people are mobile).

pstuart 4y ago
This is a national problem and needs to be addressed (and funded) as such. The war on drugs has failed miserably (for it's ostensible purpose (to "protect" us from dangerous drugs). We need to legalize and regulate them all, and make their abuse a medical issue rather than a criminal issue. For those that have no desire or ability to quit, we can put them in camps and hand out dope to keep them sedated and "safe" from questionable supplies. If they want to get clean, they can have the support to do that but otherwise are effectively interned on work farms. This is the cheapest, safest, and most humane way of dealing with this problem.
- eurasiantiger 4y ago
  You still fantasize about a world where everything and everyone is ”clean”. That will never exist but you will destroy the humanity of yourself and others in an attempt to delude yourself.
  - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
    Nah, getting dangerous people off the street is its own reward. If they could get high without causing problems I couldn't care.
    - pstuart 4y ago
      Exactly. Way cheaper than jail too.
  - pstuart 4y ago
    I have lots of fantasies but that ain't one of them. The gist of my point is that there's going to be a subset of the population that is "broken" and is unable to function as a "productive member of society". We are going to spend money on them one way or the other; my way would be far more effective than how it happens today (both in cost and in actual remediation). How would this destroy my (and others) humanity? It's currently challenged by watching people live in tents, shit on the sidewalk, and pass out in public on dope. How is my suggestion worse?
lazyasciiart 4y ago
I'm not arguing fentanyl smoke is nice. I'm arguing that people, apparently including you, refuse to do any of the well understood and successful things that would get rid of fentanyl smoke on buses because you don't want to make help available. > around $100k/junkie per year Absolute nonsense. We spend nothing of the sort. We are not even pretending to approach it. Sounds like you're getting your hot takes from Christopher Rufo misinterpreting the Puget Sound Business Journal speculation a couple years ago. The lies spread by Rufo and his ilk certainly contribute to the unwillingness to do anything, by making people confidently delusional about what currently exists.
- rhaway84773 4y ago
  I am constantly amazed at Americans who seem to think that XYZ is an intractable problem with no solution, without bothering to even look outside their borders and notice the fact that almost no other country seems to have the same problem, or at least the same problem at a similar scale as the US.
  - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
    Vancouver is right next door, they have similar problems. Maybe they deal with it slightly better, but the scale is the same.

zo1 4y ago

> "They think enabling the existence and recovery of existing users will encourage more." It's also a timing issue. I think a lot of people that are currently in the "just get rid of them" camp would have been in the "let's help them rehabilitate" camp when the problem was in small or controlled scale. But we are way passed that. It's a downright epidemic and needs to be dealt with in more drastic and immediate terms for some of us. I'm not going to wait 5 years while my children are innocent and in school and wandering around for the problem to get better. I want my neighborhood safe and clean and innocent for them now. This is why suburbs popped up on some level. People just want to be left alone and in relative calm and clean surroundings.

lazyasciiart 4y ago
Gated white communities still exist, if you want a drastic immediate change then move there.