Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
thinks that if any of them are abusing drugs or alcohol, they need to stay on the streets, end of story.
I know if I was running a shelter, to try to help them out, but if it became plagued with drugs and booze, mostly since it people just sneaked it in, I wouldn't think anything about closing it down on the spot.
Sadly, it seems to me, that that's why so many people, even if it's not most, are against homeless shelters, especially for men, in their neighborhoods. Heard of too many stories of needles and booze bottles being left around places, where these shelters or assistance centers exist. If there was some way, to guarantee, that they would be drug and alcohol free, I don't think any one would take issue with any homeless shelter or assistance.
Is there any realistic way to do a drug test, with results on the spot, as a condition of entry?
Asking, since I believe in the Christian principle that Jesus said (if you do good to those who are most vulnerable, you do on to me as well), but, I positively draw the line if they are drug users or boozers who have no interest in stopping.
The answer to bottles and needles left on the street is to keep addicts on the street? That makes no sense at all.
I volunteer for several homeless agencies in my town and none of them allow drugs or alcohol. They don't test, but if someone appears to be under the influence or starts trouble, they are kicked out.
(1)Ill try to respond but you are attributing things to me, never said. (please see 2)
Rehab isn't violent, but extracting the money from the taxpayer to pay for a state run system is. Then there is the immorality of forcing non-users to pay for the rehab of the users. (3)Addicts need to find their own help and not rely on money swiped from the checks of productive people who don't have any such habits. (see 4)
Please don't call yourself a libertarian out of one side of your mouth and advocate for a huge redistribution scheme from the other. (see 5)
Let's recap what you said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
A libertarian that believes in (2)government violence to administer a rehabilitation/ redistribution scheme?
Sorry but you are the extremist
Decriminalize drugs yes , tax non-users to pay for the users, NO
...and I said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h
You're all over the place bro! You believe that rehab is more violent than prison? (see 2) (4) You want to make drugs legal and then give no way for addicts to help themselves. Rehab is voluntary, prison is enforced... and you're already paying for that my friend!
Your position isn't even remotely rational. No, the extremist isn't me, and I'd bet most people in here would agree.
You accused me of believing in government violence, administering rehab!
I attributed to you, what you implied. (5) You are saying it's okay to leagalize drugs, and not okay to use the funds (taxes) you already provide for prisons to be used to treat those who would otherwise be imprisoned.
Don't tell me what I am or am not, when you are being a total hypocrite. At least I'm honest that there will be problems which must be addressed. I'm not playing the liberal definition of a libertarian who wants zero social programs. I'm smart enough to know those addicts will need help, and if we don;t plan for those issues we would be doomed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.