Food & Drink3 mins ago
Nhs Drug Fix Rooms Proposal For Glasgow- Not Impressed
39 Answers
http:// www.bbc .co.uk/ news/uk -scotla nd-glas gow-wes t-37817 622
Hi there what do abers think? I think this is controlled continuation and a waste of money and resources
Hi there what do abers think? I think this is controlled continuation and a waste of money and resources
Answers
But the trouble is they are facilitting an illegal activity. so where does it end?
12:20 Mon 31st Oct 2016
The word success may not be the best one to use, however it can mean less drug paraphernalia being used and left on the streets, fewer infections from dirty needles etc and with proper supervision some may indeed be weaned off their habit. Of course not all, that would be idealistic.
An article here about how it has gone elsewhere.
http:// www.npr .org/se ctions/ paralle ls/2013 /12/16/ 2466067 97/denm arks-fi x-rooms -give-d rug-use rs-a-sa fe-have n
An article here about how it has gone elsewhere.
http://
You make a valid point but I don't think any of the funding that The Glasgow City Alcohol and Drug Partnership is in receipt of is able to be used in other areas.
Equally if I thought no 'fix rooms' meant more palliative care for Cancer sufferers, I would be against them.
Sadly I don't think it balances out that way.
Equally if I thought no 'fix rooms' meant more palliative care for Cancer sufferers, I would be against them.
Sadly I don't think it balances out that way.
that argument (cancer sufferers versus addicts) is a slip slidey one. If fix rooms save money by addicts needing less treatment caused by use of dirty needles and adulterated drugs, if there is less clinical waste cleanup needed and drug related crime is reduced, then its arguable that this new service could indeed be called successful....
Mushroom the entire argument is that is users/addicts could get medical grade pure drugs free of charge as long as they took them only under supervision in treatment centres. This would mean they did not have to turn to crime to get the money for their drugs. It is estimated that 80% of ALL crime is either to get cash to pay for drugs or criminal supply of drugs.
So we could do away with 80% of jails, 80% of courts. 80% of the police. Think of how much money we could save! (Yes, it is a bit tongue in cheek but you see the point!)
Prohibition does not work , you only have to look at 1920s USA to see that! Prohibition was how organised crime got started! It didn't work for booze and it won't work for drugs!
So we could do away with 80% of jails, 80% of courts. 80% of the police. Think of how much money we could save! (Yes, it is a bit tongue in cheek but you see the point!)
Prohibition does not work , you only have to look at 1920s USA to see that! Prohibition was how organised crime got started! It didn't work for booze and it won't work for drugs!
-- answer removed --
It is time that the world accepted that the 'War On Drugs' - wonderful electioneering phrase though it is - is futile and as time has shown, completely unwinnable.
The fact is - we have a world-wide drug problem.
The only response we have is - how we deal with it.
We can act like drug addicts are 'the enemy' and criminalise them, which time again has proved to be not only futile, but horrendously expensive.
Or, we can accept that bringing them into a facility like this not only reduces surplus infected needles on the streets, it also enables councils to interact with users with a view to educating them into reduction programmes which can, and will reduce the problem overall.
Pretending that drug addiction is a matter for moral superiority and sniffy condemnation is gone, it is time to deal with it for what it is, a health and social issue which needs proper resourcing and a real intention to reduce and eliminate it.
You can't do that by pretending that there is an 'enemy' to be fought and a 'war' to be won - this stance may secure votes, but it does nothing to actually start to sort out the problem.
The fact is - we have a world-wide drug problem.
The only response we have is - how we deal with it.
We can act like drug addicts are 'the enemy' and criminalise them, which time again has proved to be not only futile, but horrendously expensive.
Or, we can accept that bringing them into a facility like this not only reduces surplus infected needles on the streets, it also enables councils to interact with users with a view to educating them into reduction programmes which can, and will reduce the problem overall.
Pretending that drug addiction is a matter for moral superiority and sniffy condemnation is gone, it is time to deal with it for what it is, a health and social issue which needs proper resourcing and a real intention to reduce and eliminate it.
You can't do that by pretending that there is an 'enemy' to be fought and a 'war' to be won - this stance may secure votes, but it does nothing to actually start to sort out the problem.
ummmm - I have had my house burgled by a junkie thanks - but that is not the point.
We are looking at a society-wide problem, and simply saying that these people commit crimes is not offering any sort of solution.
The point is not to hold up our hands in horror at the odious behaviour of these individuals, the point is to address and eliminate its cause - and that is what these 'Fix Rooms' are going to help to do.
We are looking at a society-wide problem, and simply saying that these people commit crimes is not offering any sort of solution.
The point is not to hold up our hands in horror at the odious behaviour of these individuals, the point is to address and eliminate its cause - and that is what these 'Fix Rooms' are going to help to do.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.