...on the taxpayer's dime.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150076,00.html

I... I don't even know how to classify this. It's just so bizarre and out there... I guess it's a socialist act, but aren't acts of socialism supposed to be a direct benefit to those who receive them, and (theoretically) an improvement to the population as a whole? There's nothing beneficial about heroin, so it could be a detriment in the mindset of "a government holds a monopoly on violence;" surely non-government entities are not allowed to go around and hand out syringes full of smack, right? But then, this "punishment" is completely voluntary...

I understand the arguments about disease and overdosing, but if someone has a drunk driving problem, you don't make sure the car they get into has seat belts and airbags; you stop them from getting in the car and then stop them from driving in the future. Making a dangerous problem slightly safer is nowhere near as desirable as stopping the problem entirely.

As an American, I know that my taxes go to pay for some pretty stupid shit, and definitely a lot of stuff for which I believe the government has no business paying for. But at least I can take some small consolation in knowing that they're not buying fucking heroin injections for heroin addicts.

Whatever happened to methadone? Or hell, even needle exchange programs?