...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?
2GET
> It's just so bizarre and out there.
The Netherlands have done it, too. But I don't feel like expanding on why these programs are good for the tax payers as well as the junkies themselves. Maybe somebody else does, or I'll later.
What do you think Methodone is? It's just liquid smack.
Hey, at least the junkies aren't breaking into your house to steal your shit.
DONT STEAL: THE GOVERNMENT HATES COMPETITION
It's not just about competition. The very concept of property in general relies on the government backing up and securing it by legal means. Of course you can also trade and make your living in illegal economical sectors but when shit goes down (which it does all too often in the drug business) extreme violence is bound to happen immediately (in everything legal, it usually takes a lot of time and goes through a lot of political processes until such actions (up to war) are actually carried out).
I knew that somewhere, someone out there would hear about this and try to argue that it's not a very important and positive thing. I just didn't expect to find that person here.
The Canadian Government, leaders of a nation soiled by violent "followers," are taking action against drug-related crime. No matter how many words you try to put to this, there's simply no arguing that this is a positive thing.
The other argument is that it may entice clean, upstanding people to become drug addicts. The same applies in countries where unemployment benefits are easily obtained, many people just become flaky with their employment with the full knowledge that the taxpayer can clean up their ignorance.