Safe Injection Is A Fallacy
A SCPV site – or Safe Child Pornography Viewing site – allows pedophiles and perverts the opportunity to view child pornography behind closed doors without endangering innocent children living in their neighborhoods. SCPVs keep pedophiles off the streets and allows them to get their daily fixes without harming anyone. Such sites have been proven to reduce child rape and keep Canada's playgrounds free of sexual predators. Instead of imprisoning people for perversion, SCPVs reduce prison populations by allowing pedophiles and potential rapists to indulge in sexual fantasies privately. Let's face it, these pedophiles and rapists have a sickness. They're victims and should be treated as such. By letting them jerk off to videos of naked kids, we're not only protecting our children, we're letting these pedophiles safely engage in victimless acts.
We have to stop letting delusional conservatives turn the clock back to the dark ages. SCPVs are the alternative to the callous policies of fascist right-wing nutjobs who want to imprison helpless junkies and pedophiles. If conservatives had their way, we'd all be in jail and we'd all be throwing stones and feces at each other. We need to be more progressive. We need to reject the archaic views of conservatives. SCPVs are the future.
If shivers of joy and exhilaration shot up your spine while you were reading that, you're probably a liberal, a socialist, or a stoned teenager whose parents are too busy reminiscing about the cocaine of the 80s to give a shit about what you're doing right now.
If you actually bought the garbage about victimless acts and SCPVs being the solution, you're an idiot. You fell for the quick emotional high that comes with the idea of a utopian world where empathy and kindness cure all of society's ills. You failed to see the bigger picture. You failed to accept human nature at its most foul. Like safe injection sites, SCPVs have a negative impact on society that most progressives can't see.
That's right. I'm doing the unthinkable. I'm comparing junkies to pedophiles. Put on your helmets and war paint, you zealous moonbats.
Unlike SCPVs, safe injections sites are real. Years ago, someone decided that junkies are innocent people and should be treated more like victims than criminals. Safe injection sites sprung up at some point in the 1980s and have come and gone since. This idea to help instead of punish was backed by opportunistic doctors who sought to make drug addiction a disease rather than a self inflicted affliction. This was great because now they could medicate it and make money from prescriptions and treatments. Now it's 2013 and the paradigm has shifted mostly in their favour.
In the eyes of egalitarians and progressives, junkies are victims who suffer from a crippling disease. They need sympathy, not condemnation. They'll point to countless medical journals that were financed by big pharmaceutical companies as evidence. Instead of tough love and incarceration, this evidence suggests medication and behavioural therapy as solutions. In countries with publicly funded healthcare, a junky's treatments and ailments might often be paid for by taxpayers. Furthermore, anyone who isn't a doctor or doesn't have a doctorate is disqualified from the debate. There isn't any real way for laymen and opponents to disprove any of it.
It is true that incarceration hasn't proven to be any more or less successful than therapy and medication. The rate of recidivism for incarcerated drug addicts is just slightly higher than the rate of relapse for patients of rehab. That doesn't mean that we should continue to enable drug dealers by enabling drug users. There has to be a way to counter drug abuse without enabling it.
The laws of simple economics dictate that cutting off a supply will cripple and destroy an entire market, the same as cutting off consumption. Supply and consumption are codependent, like yin and yang. Encouraging consumption only stimulates growth and supply. Supply is wasted without consumption and consumption can't exist without supply. It's a pretty simple mathematical equation that any layman should be able to understand. If drugs are to remain truly and completely illegal, then organizations that enable their consumption can't be justified.
Like child pornography, drug abuse has a an overall negative impact on society. On the surface it seems completely harmless and victimless, but it isn't. The consumption of both drugs and child porn creates a demand, a market, and a supply. As long as there's a demand, there will be people with bad intentions looking to capitalize in these markets. Like child porn, drug abuse puts money in the hands of disgusting criminals that depend on victims.
Progressives will go out on a limb to defend drug dealers, but none of them can truthfully tell you that they've ever met a nice drug dealer who nurses kittens and is always in bed by ten o'clock. The truth is that most drug dealers own illegal weapons, have been in prison for other crimes, and have a conscience the size of a corn kernel. Most drug dealers prey on teenagers and impressionable adolescents and have no quarrels selling hard drugs to curious kids. Some drug dealers probably wouldn't have any quarrels about gunning down innocent bystanders. These are all undeniable facts that proponents of safe injection sites refuse to accept. The bystanders, the children, and the innocent civilians are the real victims of the drug trade.
It's also nice to imagine your neighbourhood park without used needles strewn about or junkies passed out on benches. However, safe injection sites can't even guarantee that. Even if they could, it wouldn't be worth it. There's more to drug abuse and trafficking than dirty junkies and used needles littering our streets. There's a much larger consequence of enabling junkies via safe injection sites.
The junkies aren't victims when it comes to drug trafficking and sales. Junkies put money in the hands of drug dealers and traffickers. This money converts to violence. Dealers can't buy guns without money, just as junkies can't buy drugs without money. A normal day job isn't always enough to fund an expensive addiction. Most junkies will cheat, steal, and manipulate to get the extra money they need to buy their drugs. Anyone who has ever watched Intervention should know this. Sometimes junkies will even engage in elder abuse by harassing, threatening, and manipulating their parents and grandparents for money. In some cases, junkies will kill or engage in armed robbery.
Junkies are not victims, they have victims.
Beyond the denial of facts, contradictions spread far and wide among progressives. On the same side of the political spectrum, advocates of safe injection sites support the regulation of trans fats, sugars, and sodium. In some cases they even support outlawing harmful foods and additives. This shines with blinding absurdity. The contradictions are so blatant that we can only wonder what the left's real agenda is. Is there something we're missing here, or are these people really that stupid? They want to cut off our supply of junk food but stimulate the supply of drugs. What happens when they succeed at outlawing junk food? Will they support opening “safe junk ingestion” sites for junk food junkies?
One plausible use for safe injection sites would be to use the junkies to track down and trace drug dealers. Vancouver's safe site, InSite, claims to have over 12,000 registered users. This should be considered plentiful pickings for local authorities. Instead of giving junkies the choice to go to rehab and detox (like InSite), police should cut off their supply, arrest them and their dealers, and force them into detox. Regardless of whether junkies go to safe injection sites and then detox – or straight to detox by force – taxpayers are likely footing the bill for both options.
Safe injection sites are an abomination. Safe injection sites, like the one in Vancouver, haven't proven effective at reducing transmittable diseases, keeping needles off of streets, or helping junkies lose their habits. Injection sites have done nothing more than keep business alive for local drug dealers. Sites like the one in Vancouver and other proposed sites across Canada are antithetical to the building and maintenance of strong, healthy communities. Anyone who knows the facts and long term consequences of safe injection sites would oppose them. If we want drug-free communities, we should let law enforcers do their jobs without enabling the criminals they're trying to fight.