From what I've noticed, even discussion of safe consumption spaces (which would reduce public drug use) brings out the libs' inner Officer MacGruff. I wouldn't be surprised if this is also related to the fentanyl scare.
The guy I'm responding to is bringing up negative reaction to safe injection sites. I am pointing out a material reason for why this might be. Most people are opposed to being randomly shot.
And this is a consequence of general poverty caused by the material conditions of capitalism not of safe injection sites.
Saying “most people are opposed to crime” as a defense of reactionary beliefs and the removal of safety protocols is a lowhanded way to support pro-police “tough on crime” propaganda.
So then what is your policy proposal for this then?
Increased police presence? Shut down of safe injection sites? Because I'm seeing a lot of disingenuous "concerns" and appeals to public opinion but zero actual calls to action
I dont have a solution. The topic is the shifting view of the war on drugs and attitudes towards safe injection sites came up. I described the public reaction, and negative reactions from otherwise left or liberal individuals, as I've seen them.
I described the public reaction, and negative reactions from otherwise left or liberal individuals, as I've seen them.
For what reason? We are all aware of them, this is neither new nor groundbreaking information especially when you frame it as a "people do not wish to be around criminality" style of concern trolling we expect out of tough on crime liberals and conservatives.
This is even worse considering you literally do not have any idea on how to address it besides just bringing up the opposition of right wing liberals and conservatives to effective strategies to reducing addiction and addiction related deaths as a means to....what? Appeal to consensus? As if just because liberals and conservatives think a thing is a bad we must cede ground to it out of fear of bad optics?
Like the entirety of a communist/socialist project is unpopular to these people, and yet here we are on a website that explicitly in support of it.
Not once have I ever seen that reaction. The most common complaint is the spread of used needles into nearby parks and gardens, which is an objective reality. Clinic workers do their best to clean them up but they cant find them all and they're not allowed to go on private property to get at them.
From what I've noticed, even discussion of safe consumption spaces (which would reduce public drug use) brings out the libs' inner Officer MacGruff. I wouldn't be surprised if this is also related to the fentanyl scare.
Removed by mod
Ok and? Safe injection sites still drastically reduce overdose deaths, HIV infections and are a critical waypoint to drug rehabilitation
The guy I'm responding to is bringing up negative reaction to safe injection sites. I am pointing out a material reason for why this might be. Most people are opposed to being randomly shot.
And this is a consequence of general poverty caused by the material conditions of capitalism not of safe injection sites.
Saying “most people are opposed to crime” as a defense of reactionary beliefs and the removal of safety protocols is a lowhanded way to support pro-police “tough on crime” propaganda.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
So then what is your policy proposal for this then?
Increased police presence? Shut down of safe injection sites? Because I'm seeing a lot of disingenuous "concerns" and appeals to public opinion but zero actual calls to action
I dont have a solution. The topic is the shifting view of the war on drugs and attitudes towards safe injection sites came up. I described the public reaction, and negative reactions from otherwise left or liberal individuals, as I've seen them.
For what reason? We are all aware of them, this is neither new nor groundbreaking information especially when you frame it as a "people do not wish to be around criminality" style of concern trolling we expect out of tough on crime liberals and conservatives.
This is even worse considering you literally do not have any idea on how to address it besides just bringing up the opposition of right wing liberals and conservatives to effective strategies to reducing addiction and addiction related deaths as a means to....what? Appeal to consensus? As if just because liberals and conservatives think a thing is a bad we must cede ground to it out of fear of bad optics?
Like the entirety of a communist/socialist project is unpopular to these people, and yet here we are on a website that explicitly in support of it.
The reaction I've seen isn't "people might get shot," it's "people shouldn't be allowed to consume illegal substances without legal consequences."
Not once have I ever seen that reaction. The most common complaint is the spread of used needles into nearby parks and gardens, which is an objective reality. Clinic workers do their best to clean them up but they cant find them all and they're not allowed to go on private property to get at them.
Ok but they are still going to be using needles to take drugs without the centres
Those fatcats hoarding all their used needles.
private property as a bourgeois institution is forming a legal barrier preventing health officials from doing their job