Jump to content

Drug fail: The Liberal government's 'safer supply' is fuelling a new opioid crisis (a must read)


Recommended Posts

https://archive.ph/8WdxE

I would encourage everyone to read this - but it IS very long. This is 5 months of investigative research and most of it has the ring of truth to it and meshes with things i've heard from local people.

TLDR point:

The 'free drugs' given out as safe supply are sold to buy street drugs which hit harder.

The 'free' drugs are sold cheap, which means people can afford them and there's less desire to stop, so fewer people get off the drugs.

The situation has led to a host of overdose and medical issues.

These programs haven't seemed to reduce the problems

DRs who speak out against it face reprisals and punishment.

This is not working. This should not be expanded and should probably be stopped.  We need a better solution.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Giving hard drugs to addicts is just a bad idea.!

Yeah but it reduces the spread of illness like HIV and hepatitis.

Sure it makes more people addicts and makes drugs more accessible, and compounds the homelessness crisis while reducing how many get clean as this isn't openly provided in some instances, but a win is a win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Yeah but it reduces the spread of illness like HIV and hepatitis.

Sure it makes more people addicts and makes drugs more accessible, and compounds the homelessness crisis while reducing how many get clean as this isn't openly provided in some instances, but a win is a win.

Here's a novel idea. Why not just round up all the addicts and put them in treatment? We could also round up all the drug dealers and put them all in jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Here's a novel idea. Why not just round up all the addicts and put them in treatment? We could also round up all the drug dealers and put them all in jail.

I disagree with the first option. It should be a choice, but don't have an issue with the second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

I disagree with the first option. It should be a choice, but don't have an issue with the second.

Some jurisdictions are moving towards involuntary treatment. BC already does it, alberta was kind of toying with it. Obviously there's conditions, they can't just grab someone at random or some guy they find with a gram of something in his pocket but bc right now can involuntarily force someone to a treatment facility.

I'm not sure we HAVE any - but if we ever do then by god  we can force them there!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Many would but...what would you do with the addicts?

Stop giving them free drugs. Stop incentivizing their lifestyles.

So many can work. 

Provide more incentives to get off the streets. Make housing more affordable. Stop making it so painfully long/difficult to find affordable housing. Its the catch 22. How can I get a job, looking like I slept on the streets?

Many of these people have lost everything. They need hope, not a crack pipe.

Some are lost causes, but enforce laws that keep them from seeing opportunity in doing petty crime for profit.

I don't think you can ever eradicate homelessness as let's be real. Some people are lazy and just don't want to work. For those who are there due to circumstances, the hoops to jump out should be smaller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"A 300 per cent increase in drug overdose deaths in B.C. since Trudeau took office ... it's a complete disaster'"

Poilievre calls Liberal's drug policies 'a complete disaster' | National Post

When faced with criticism, the minister of mental health and addictions, Honourable Bennett seemed to go completely bizerk on the news this week.  That is very concerning.  Been looking on the internet to see if I can find a video of that but haven't been able so far.  It was on CTV or CBC television news a day or so ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only place it mentions the Liberal government is in the title.

Seems to me that the safe injection  etc is a provincial initiative and administered by , run by, fed by and operated by the provinces.

On  personal note, I think it is a wrong thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"

"Recreational Marijuana Use as Opposed to the Flourishing Life

Not only will marijuana most likely lead to a violation of the biblical commands for sobriety, but prolonged recreational marijuana use will ultimately render us unable to enjoy a flourishing life which is rightly ours in Christ. In other words, the commands to be “sober-minded” are for a reason:

In Ephesians 5 we learn that it is the sober-minded in Christ who will be filled with the Spirit.

Proverbs tells us that a lack of sober-mindedness can lead to poverty and a whole host of worldly anxiety.

Hosea 4 reminds us that much wine leads to a lack of understanding.

Isaiah 28 says it leads to a lack of judgment.

Recreational Marijuana Use as a Failure to Love Thy Neighbour

The Apostle Paul tells us that in Christ we have been given “a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control” (2 Timothy 1:7). Paul is reminding Timothy of this in a passage centred around Timothy’s pastoral and evangelistic work, meaning not only is recreational marijuana and the inevitable intoxication opposed to a flourishing life, it is also a way in which we fail to love our neighbour. Self-control isn’t something the Spirit gives us for our own sake; he gives us self-control that we might be beacons of stability in a volatile world. Philip Towner writes about Paul’s use of self-control here:"

How Should Christians Think about the Legalization of Cannabis? - The Gospel Coalition | Canada

Of course before a person thinks as a Christian should think, they must become one.  Do you really want to continue living as a heathen or pagan, taking drugs or booze or some other mind altering thing, with no meaningful life and no meaningful future?  God has a better plan.

So we have a liberal government that legalized marijuana and then shortly after that, they legalized medical assistance in dying.  So if after you take marijuana for a while and it messes up your life and you are not happy, you can always opt out with an medically assisted suicide.  Some government.  Evil from top to bottom.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you want to convince yourself something's a bad idea, ensure you include every disproven and irrelevant idea to do so. Propose ideas that can't and haven't worked for a century and claim the ideas being tried in the last year or so are the root of the problem.

You'll find much support among the unenlightened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, herbie said:

When you want to convince yourself something's a bad idea, ensure you include every disproven and irrelevant idea to do so. Propose ideas that can't and haven't worked for a century and claim the ideas being tried in the last year or so are the root of the problem.

You'll find much support among the unenlightened.

And, what are these ideas??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

The only place it mentions the Liberal government is in the title.

Seems to me that the safe injection  etc is a provincial initiative and administered by , run by, fed by and operated by the provinces.

On  personal note, I think it is a wrong thing.

Not quite  - basically safe injection sites are breaking the law and require a federal exemption to operate. It was initially backed and pushed by the liberals of the day, opened it's doors in 2003 and now after a number of court rulings they're having trouble shutting it down.

The feds basically have to pass a law shutting it down and they don't want to. But they're being forced to keep it open if they don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, herbie said:

For those dinosaurs who won't find out themselves its called the four pillars model:
Prevention, Harm Reduction, Enforcement, and Treatment

So, you are saying that "bad idea, ensure you include every disproven and irrelevant idea to do so. Propose ideas that can't and haven't worked for a century and claim the ideas being tried in the last year" are the 4 pillars? And mean what??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,744
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    John Wilson
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • exPS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • gatomontes99 went up a rank
      Proficient
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...