• yes_this_time@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yes, confiscation of illegal and dangerous substances and drunk tank for public intoxication. Why is this outlandish?

    If I go through an airport I’m frisked and water can be confiscated. Open liquor at a beach can be confiscated.

    If I get drunk to the point I’m out of control I can be placed a drunk tank.

    Crystal Meth, fentenyl etc… are very dangerous drugs. And people on these drugs are very antisocial.

    You may just be saying that those policies won’t help an addict. Addicts have different profiles and so would behave differently. Having consequences on actions would be helpful for some.

    Conversely, a complete laissez faire attitude is propelling addiction for some. We are implicitly condoning their behavior.

    It’s OK for there to be consequences to an addicts behavior, while also providing more support.

    Their behavior disproportionately impacts the poor. Consider addicts tend to poorer neighborhoods, but only a very small portion of the neighbourhood are addicts. And it’s the poorer families who can’t use their parks, or have their kids run to the corner store or maybe even play outside. Their public amenities are trashed, and local funding doesn’t go as far. The normalization and access to drugs is certainly not helpful either.