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.
I remember a time not too long ago when democrats supported smoke-free zones and keeping public spaces free of tobacco. Good, I agreed with that.
But apparently that doesn't apply to weed smoke. In light of weed legalization and proliferation where I live, I am now constantly exposed to the skunk stink second hand smoke of some pothead. The rights of us non-smokers to have clean air have been basically trashed overnight.
So the new democratic mantra is now weed is good and can do no harm. And it's creeping up to other drugs. "Harm reduction" is the new woke progressive buzzword. They claim it helps those addicted to hard drugs like heroin and fenty by giving addicts clean needles and unlimited drugs, supposedly modeled after some successful programs in Europe. Whereas the European system requires users of these "harm reduction" sites to wean themselves off, the American woke version does not and provides continuous drug to the addict. Surely anyone with a few brain cells realizes this will not discourage drug use, but proliferate it.
But hey, if 'quality candidates' like John Fetterman who make it their life goal to decriminalize and proliferate ALL drugs are elected, I guess we shouldn't be surprised.
Yup! I’ve seen that firsthand here in Colorado. I never understood the mantra of (smoking) cigarettes or vaping being bad, yet somehow smoking marijuana is ‘safe’ and ‘okay’ and ‘no worse than drinking alcohol.’ Of course, marijuana can be eaten instead of being smoked, so that’s an alternative, I guess. Either way, I think Colorado was ‘better’ prior to legalization of marijuana. You can’t go anywhere without smelling it now and seeing people openly using it in public (even though they aren’t supposed to) at least in Denver.
Harm reduction is not a newfangled idea. It's just finally gaining traction in a historically puritan war-on-drugs USA government. It also works, if implemented properly and not under-funded, which USA seems to have a problem with. You're right about the relative failure of the US system compared to foreign programs. And Democrats have always been the party of (non-alcohol) drugs, where have you been? Smoke-free zones are a little different IMO, those are hyper-locally specific. Of course, you can make the argument that modern Liberals have trouble being actually "liberal".
Harm reduction is not a newfangled idea. It's just finally gaining traction in a historically puritan war-on-drugs USA government. It also works, if implemented properly and not under-funded, which USA seems to have a problem with. You're right about the relative failure of the US system compared to foreign programs. And Democrats have always been the party of (non-alcohol) drugs, where have you been? Smoke-free zones are a little different IMO, those are hyper-locally specific. Of course, you can make the argument that modern Liberals have trouble being actually "liberal".
Harm reduction is great, when you don't drag the rest of us into the mix. Let the druggies have their drugs, but as soon as they impede on the right we all have to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, something needs to change. The rest of society should not be forced to bear the costs of someone else's poor life choices.
Also, harm reduction is not just now been gaining traction. It has been tried in many liberal cities for decades, where addicts have their drugs and syringes paid for by the tax payers. Now these cities are littered with used syringes and often feces. It is not a prosperous look...
Pot stank is a pretty minor problem over all, but the principle of the matter still applied. If people are respectful and courteous, than there won't be any problem, but apparently, that's just too much to ask in most large liberal cities.
Harm reduction is great, when you don't drag the rest of us into the mix. Let the druggies have their drugs, but as soon as they impede on the right we all have to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, something needs to change. The rest of society should not be forced to bear the costs of someone else's poor life choices.
Also, harm reduction is not just now been gaining traction. It has been tried in many liberal cities for decades, where addicts have their drugs and syringes paid for by the tax payers. Now these cities are littered with used syringes and often feces. It is not a prosperous look...
Pot stank is a pretty minor problem over all, but the principle of the matter still applied. If people are respectful and courteous, than there won't be any problem, but apparently, that's just too much to ask in most large liberal cities.
I know what they are meant for. And yet, San Fransisco still looks like a craphole littered with syringes and feces. Vancouver looks like crap too. These cities are literally paying for bum's lifestyles and forcing the rest of society to bear the burden and costs. I'm sure glad I don't feel any personal responsibility to defend that sort of mess.
Harm reduction is great, when you don't drag the rest of us into the mix. Let the druggies have their drugs, but as soon as they impede on the right we all have to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, something needs to change. The rest of society should not be forced to bear the costs of someone else's poor life choices.
Pot stank is a pretty minor problem over all, but the principle of the matter still applied. If people are respectful and courteous, than there won't be any problem, but apparently, that's just too much to ask in most large liberal cities.
Harm reduction cannot and will not work if there is no incentive to get sober. All it does is dehumanize the addict because instead of forcing them into sobriety and becoming a functional human, it promotes continued degeneracy into drugs which almost always ends in death. Harm reduction as the woke American liberals want it is extraordinarily inhumane, worse than the war on drugs.
As for the weed smoke, it indeed is a matter of principle. We've been told for decades smoke is bad and should be banned, but all of a sudden now smoke is good? Give me a break.
After listening to that article I am surprised to learn that supposedly Americans believe that any smoke you inhale is safe. I pretty sure people know smoking marijuana carries a risk and could choose edibles.
After listening to that article I am surprised to learn that supposedly Americans believe that any smoke you inhale is safe. I pretty sure people know smoking marijuana carries a risk and could choose edibles.
Not when democrat politicians extoll the supposed endless benefits of weed. Weed can do no harm, smoke up peasants.
Not when democrat politicians extoll the supposed endless benefits of weed. Weed can do no harm, smoke up peasants.
I think you're just being silly.
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.
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.
