4 ms·
But some people actually do prefer to rot on the street on their own terms, than rot in some asylum cell locked up. Still, I think other people have a right to
by hutzlibu 3y ago
But some people actually do prefer to rot on the street on their own terms, than rot in some asylum cell locked up.
Still, I think other people have a right to walk the streets undisturbed, so I don't see an easy, clean solution solving everything at once. But banning public drug use, is very fine with me.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoOf course some people prefer a to b. It doesn't automatically mean they are entitled to it. I could build myself a really cool James Bond-style tent house in Central Park and live there in the summers for basically free. I'd like that. I'm not entitled to it. Voters can easily decide that the sidewalk is no longer a place for people to rot on.
- john-radio 3y agoWhen does James Bond live in a tent house?
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoThe house at the beginning of No Time to Die is roughly a tent house like those in the Four Seasons in Chiang Rai.
- hutzlibu 3y agoYeah, I agree and that is what I said .. "I think other people have a right to walk the streets undisturbed" And when you ban public drug use and enforce it, you automatically remove all junkies from public spaces.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago> And when you ban public drug use and enforce it, you automatically remove all junkies from public spaces. Depends on your definition of "use". I can do a bunch of meth somewhere discreet, and then party on the streets without actively "using" drugs for hours - days even!
- hutzlibu 3y agoI think the legal definition is, if you have drugs in your blood, for which there are simple tests for. And people bothering other people on the streets is not alright and should be stopped any way, drugs in their blood or not.
- morelisp 3y agoIn one comment thread you've gone from "some people may need to be forced to accept treatment" to "anyone taking drugs on the street should be arrested" to "anyone doing anything that bothers anyone else in a public space, or who has done something in the recent past that bothers someone now near them, should be arrested."
- hutzlibu 3y ago"some people may need to be forced to accept treatment" I did not say that, you probably confused my comment with someone else.
- morelisp 3y ago[flagged]
- hutzlibu 3y agoLike I said in another comment. There are lots of other ways to ban something in a area, than locking up. Fine them and take their drugs would be a simple one.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoFine them? They don't have money, and won't pay. What do you do when they won't pay? Garnish their wages? Don't have any. Take their drugs? Oh no. They'll just get more, eventually. It's not like they have a lifetime supply stashed away. They generally do the drugs shortly after getting them. They're unlikely to have any to take. You act as if the police are complete morons and totally incompetent and haven't thought of any or tried any alternatives - anywhere in the world.