3 ms·
If you are unwilling to lock people up—whether in jail or elsewhere—that’s the only opinion you get to have. Every other “rule” you propose is meaningless. Rig
by bradleyjg 3y ago
If you are unwilling to lock people up—whether in jail or elsewhere—that’s the only opinion you get to have. Every other “rule” you propose is meaningless.
Right now the nyc transit system is on the pay what you wish system because the voters have decided they can’t bear to see people locked up for not paying. You can hem and haw, but that’s the consequence.
- hutzlibu 3y agoI suppose you meant "option" and in general that, the only solution is locking people up? I see lots of other ways, the most simple one: just take away their drugs, if they use drugs in public. If you do this regulary, no junkie will go somewhere, where he will seriously risk loosing his stuff. Locking up people at some point is also possible, but there are lots of other ways before that.
- bluefirebrand 3y ago> Just take away their drugs, if they use drugs in public. Seems short sighted. Do you know how people act when they want to get high and can't? When they're going through serious withdrawal? Just taking their drugs is going to get people hurt. They will either hurt themselves, or they will hurt other people.
- hutzlibu 3y agoIf you have competent police - than taking the drugs away is sort of a lackmus test. Meaning if they get violent - then they are a danger and further meassures are needed. So yes, jail (conventional or mental) is then the temporary solution.