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.
Everyone thinks shoot up sites are a great idea. However, like flyingsaucermom said, "Not in my backyard". Everyone supports attracting hordes of junkies and homeless people to their city via safe injection sites. However, they don't want these anywhere near them. The problem is, that the more safe shootup sites we build, the more junkies we attract.
To be honest, it would cost not much more bringing a junkie to an ER in an ambulance than it would from a safe shootup site. If you think they will be able to pay medical staff to monitor the junkies while they shootup and that is cheaper than bringing them to ERs to get a shot of epinephrine, think again.
It's like saying having bars will help reduce alcohol related deaths, since people are drinking in safe environments. An OD is and OD and I don't think a safe shootup site will make a significant difference to a guy who shot up a new batch of heroin that was much more concentrated than his last or is a newbie who isn't good at measuring out his dope. Are these people going to teach people how to shoot up heroin? Are they going to help find them veins in their arm after their arms are all bruised to oblivion?
As far as reducing litter.. What stops these junkies from dumping their needles in a garbage can as is? The same junkies who are leaving their needles on a street corner for a kid to step on are probably the same junkies who will not waste their time or go out of their way to find a safe shootup site either. When junkies with an advanced addiction want a fix, very rarely will they waste any time shooting up. Junkies have been found shooting up in the craziest of places. Usually, it is because they cannot even wait very long when they want a fix. Then there are many other junkies shoot up with groups of people they are familiar with and won't shoot up around strangers. Many others prefer to shoot up alone and wouldn't want to be in a place where they have to be around other people. Seriously, are we going to pay for a private room for each junkie in the city? How expensive will that be? Very few will want go and shoot up in an area surrounded by other people. Others will just not trust any government ran facility. If they were privately run, that may be a step up, but still.
Either build shoot up sites like you build bars or accept that these safe injection sites will not solve a problem, but most likely create a bigger one as the city accommodates drug addicts, criminals and homeless people more and more at the expense of hard working people and to detriment of businesses that supply jobs and help make a city successful and productive.
The city spends all its time accommodating drug addicts, homeless , criminals and constantly punishes businesses and hard working people with endless amounts of taxation, regulation and restrictions that will drive all of them out of the city.
I hope Seattle enjoys being Detroit Number Two. Seattle thinks it's too big to fail, but Motor Town was the most booming city in America not very long ago before it deteriorated into one of the world's most dangerous and run-down cities.
Last edited by RotseCherut; 11-14-2017 at 11:47 PM..
To hear the advocates tell it, all that's needed to deal with the problem is more accommodation so these once-functional folks who're temporarily down and out can be helped.
I think the majority are beyond help, and there is no amount of tax money that can save them from themselves. The city's only hope is to dissuade addicts from coming here by making them unwelcome rather than treating them as a valued, sacred class.
Seattle's idea that it is is too high-minded and advanced to use crude but effective methods is the arrogance that'll hasten it's downfall. It may be too late as it is.
Honestly I don't feel strongly for or against safe injection sites but they could potentially help prevent the spread of disease, alleviate needles littering the parks and lower EMS costs. Like condoms and sex education in the schools, one doesn't have to condone of teen sex to face that it happens and it's better to minimize the costs to society at large.
By the same logic, the city needs to have subsidized safe brothels to promote safe sex and combat human trafficking.
Everyone thinks shoot up sites are a great idea. However, like flyingsaucermom said, "Not in my backyard". Everyone supports attracting hordes of junkies and homeless people to their city via safe injection sites. However, they don't want these anywhere near them. The problem is, that the more safe shootup sites we build, the more junkies
To be honest, it would cost not much more bringing a junkie to an ER in an ambulance than it would from a safe shootup site. If you think they will be able to pay medical staff to monitor the junkies while they shootup and that is cheaper than bringing them to ERs to get a shot of epinephrine, think again.
It's like saying having bars will help reduce alcohol related deaths, since people are drinking in safe environments. An OD is and OD and I don't think a safe shootup site will make a significant difference to a guy who shot up a new batch of heroin that was much more concentrated than his last or is a newbie who isn't good at measuring out his dope. Are these people going to teach people how to shoot up heroin? Are they going to help find them veins in their arm after their arms are all bruised to oblivion?
As far as reducing litter.. What stops these junkies from dumping their needles in a garbage can as is? The same junkies who are leaving their needles on a street corner for a kid to step on are probably the same junkies who will not waste their time or go out of their way to find a safe shootup site either. When junkies with an advanced addiction want a fix, very rarely will they waste any time shooting up. Junkies have been found shooting up in the craziest of places. Usually, it is because they cannot even wait very long when they want a fix. Then there are many other junkies shoot up with groups of people they are familiar with and won't shoot up around strangers. Many others prefer to shoot up alone and wouldn't want to be in a place where they have to be around other people. Seriously, are we going to pay for a private room for each junkie in the city? How expensive will that be? Very few will want go and shoot up in an area surrounded by other people. Others, will just not trust any government ran facility. If they were privately run, that may be a step up, but still.
Either build shoot up sites like you build bars are accept that these safe injection sites will not solve a problem, but most likely create a bigger one as the city accommodates drug addicts, criminals and homeless people more and more at the expense of hard working people and to detriment of businesses that supply jobs and help make a city successful and productive.
The city spends all its time accommodating drug addicts, homeless , criminals and constantly punishes businesses and hard working people with endless amounts of taxation, regulation and restrictions that will drive all of them out of the city.
I hope Seattle enjoys being Detroit Number Two. Seattle things its too big too fail, but Motor Town was the most booming city in America not very long ago before it deteriorated into one of the world's most dangerous and run-down cities.
Again, RotseCherut you are 100% right. This will not change one single thing in Seattle and I'm sad to say this, but if "Seattle" wants this, than keep it in the Seattle city limits and don't try to force you BS and failed ideals onto the rest of the county... Many of us have left the city in order to "improve" our quality of life for our families.
I'll put money on the fact that the people who so strongly support this ideal WILL ensure that these "safe site" are far away from their little protected rich/well to do neighborhoods. I'll aslo put money that these "safe sites" will be placed in and around Rainier Valley/Beach... Excluding the "upper" Mt. Baker and Columbia City areas since they're well to do areas with deep pockets and strong voting power... Martin Luther King/Empire Way and White Center areas will also be targeted as well. Uber liberals are way too funny. They claim to want to help and share the weight, but once it's time to put "skin in the game" they're gone until it's time to float some other failed "feel good" ideal.
Do I have the answer? No. Am I being paid with tax dollars or voted into power to come up with a workable ideal? No, but being a lowly tax paying "Blue Collar" worker that missed the tech boom money, I know that having these legal herion "shooting galleries" is a serious mistake... I just feel sorry for the neighborhoods that will be forced to live around these sites since their "property" crime levels will be off the charts since this failed ideal will also attract junkies from across the nation... Not just from our local area and remember this, all these junkies will need to steal and rob people to get money for their drugs... Since that's the case, I'm now waiting to see how long it will be until some idiot in Seattle "thinks" that the real solution to this problem is to provide drugs at these "safe sites." Anyway!! Great job Seattle!!
I get a ticket for my dog pooping if I don’t pick it up.
This And you wonder why so many people from across the country who are homeless come to Seattle. Seattle throws millions of dollars for the homeless Studies and problems.. They could’ve built an entire apartment building just for the homeless and junkies. Don’t you realize that by enabling safe injection sites you are enabling the drug epidemic and homelessness and crime to continue? It seems the more conservative cities have the lesser amount of problems with homeless. It’s getting worse and worse the more liberal Seattle gets and the more high paying tech jobs. I think every single liberal who wants safe injection sites and to throw more money to the homeless, should Help the problem by fostering a homeless person and a drug addict in their home. Seattle was a great city before hordes of people moved into Seattle. It’s not the same Seattle from 50 years ago. All the new people moving in for tech jobs really don’t know the history and really don’t know what it was like to live in this great city. Also, all the people who moved into Issaquah during the Microsoft years has ruined it for all of us and think they know what’s best. King County is the worst county in the country as far as I’m concerned.
I feel very NIMBY (not-in-my-back-yard) about this. We had some explosive conversations about it here in Issaquah last week. My husband and I attended a public hearing about it.. 24 spoke adamantly against it, 2 were mildly in favor and 1 was sobbing for one... in Issaquah...
In Issaquah...
Those that spoke against it were varied in perspective, education, exposure and expertise. We had medical professionals trained in treatment argue for more treatment facilities and programs and not just a shooting gallery (shooting heroin that is). We had grandparents and ex-wives/girlfriends of heroin addicts say that they don't want it in our community... that it doesn't/wouldn't make a difference in their loved one's life and that the risks to the community aren't worth it. We had angry tax payer citizens that complained it's not right that our city government would condone the use of illegal drugs. We had one of the co-authors/founders of the I-27 initiative come out and gave all of us an extremely articulated five minutes synopsis of the FACTS regarding not just the safe injection sites themselves, but also what they do to the community around them as well as the legal arm twisting being done by the county and court. He described in detail what InSite in Vancouver is like and how, at best, the impact of the facility is just so-so.
It prompted me to do my own research about it. I got on google maps and I took a "tour". I'm happy to share, if C-D will let me.
I save these images to demonstrate the insane contrast between Issaquah and InSite in Vancouver if it comes again here. I cannot believe any professional with a family here would ever find this acceptable.
But Seattle???
Yeah, maybe. The google images of Vancouver look like parts of Seattle. Pioneer Square and the international district might be most appropriate for one.
I honestly don't think it will improve anything, but I don't think it can make those areas worse.
Just keep them out of Issaquah please.
Your post seems to be suggesting that Insite has somehow caused the dereliction shown in your Streetview links.
This is patently false.
The streets you showed, all with a four for five block radius, have always been down and out. It is the poorest postal code in all of Canada. Insite did NOT create this.
If you notice, though, a few of those buildings are besides normal looking apartment blocks, or buildings with scaffolding and tarps. The area, although still not totally desirable, is changing, slowly.
It's also very contained. This is just one block behind Insite.
Has it eradicate (update ) all drug users? Of course not. They are limited by only been an INJECTION site. Those who swallow or smoke their drugs aren't helped. It was dirty needles spreading HIV etc, for the reason for this site. The other drug users are harder to get into the system and get the care. Insite users, at least get a foot in the door.
There was no NIMBYISM in choosing the site, since it's dead centre in the area that needs.
As for Issaquah, you guys will have to decide where a place like this is best placed. I fully understand not wanting it in certain places, and I'm not that familiar with Issaquah and it's drug issues, but I'm assuming the area with the trouble isn't the best neighbourhood anyway.
Location: at the foothills of the cascades, washington
234 posts, read 162,145 times
Reputation: 277
I think the pros outweigh the cons to have an injection site, IF a lot of people will be using it....but that's a lot of money for just 1 site. As a former IV heroin addict (who also used to live on the streets in Seattle) I can tell you that a junkie is not going to take the x minute long bus ride just to shoot up at an injection site. It might be good for the junkies within a several block radius of the injection site, but if you are dopesick and have just scored, you are gonna shoot up the nearest bathroom/park/whatever you can find.
To hear the advocates tell it, all that's needed to deal with the problem is more accommodation so these once-functional folks who're temporarily down and out can be helped.
I think the majority are beyond help, and there is no amount of tax money that can save them from themselves. The city's only hope is to dissuade addicts from coming here by making them unwelcome rather than treating them as a valued, sacred class.
Seattle's idea that it is is too high-minded and advanced to use crude but effective methods is the arrogance that'll hasten it's downfall. It may be too late as it is.
Or we could mandate rehab for anyone caught high. There are better ways to spend our money than these injection sites and chasing people away. There's a reasonable middle ground to be had.
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.
