A Store Selling Heroin, Meth, and Cocaine Just Opened in Canada

[viper37]

Having grown up around drinkers (both family drunks and parents owning a bar) alcohol appears a whole lot worse.

When you drink, you don't force everyone around you to drink with you.

No, but you force those around you to be with a drunk and what that  entails (violence most of the time)

And you don't have to hot box other people if you smoke pot

You don't get drunk with one or two shots of whisky.  People who smoke pot do so to get high, not for the refined taste of the product.

And drunks don't drink for the taste, but to get drunk

And that's a minority of alcohol users compared to the total percentage of drinkers.

[HVC]

Having grown up around drinkers (both family drunks and parents owning a bar) alcohol appears a whole lot worse.

When you drink, you don't force everyone around you to drink with you.

No, but you force those around you to be with a drunk and what that  entails (violence most of the time)

And you don't have to hot box other people if you smoke pot

You don't get drunk with one or two shots of whisky.  People who smoke pot do so to get high, not for the refined taste of the product.

And drunks don't drink for the taste, but to get drunk

And that's a minority of alcohol users compared to the total percentage of drinkers.

Minority, but not a small one. I'd wager there are more alcoholics than heroine users in Canada. If you want a gateway drug, coke users are more likely to be drinkers then pot smokers (think it's similar to heroine, but I'm not sure). That being said there are also many many more people who are alcoholics than debilitating pot heads. My father died in part due to alcoholism and my uncle as a direct cause of his alcoholism. I'm sure you can name members in your family or friend group as well. How many people do you know who died from pot use? Or victimized their families because they took a puff too many?

I'm not for legalizing all hard drugs, but marijuana is less harmful than other things that we have currently legalized.

[crazy canuck]

Seems to me that usage rates is not the most relevant metric. I think that if things like deaths, homelessness, crime (petty and organized) go down, I'm perfectly willing to accept an increase in use.

For example - I had a colleague who died from an overdose a few years back. He had a long career, owned property, and was by all accounts solid contributor to society. Pretty sure it was fentanyl in what he thought was heroin that killed him. Access to clean supply would have kept him alive, I'm certain. An increase in users like him who have their shit together is not really that big a concern IMO, especially if they're not at risk from fentanyl. I'd rather he'd be counted in the statistics as a drug user than in the statistics as a death.

On the other end of the spectrum from highly functioning users (and I've known a few) I believe - but do not know - that a clean supply is going to make the social services, addiction counselling, and all the preventative and treatment work less complicated.

That said, I'm sure there are more than one way to do decriminalization/ legalization, and I'm sure there are ways to make a mess of it.

The thing is there are very few functional addicts who can maintain being a functional addict for a really long time.  It's part and parcel of the addiction that as you build up tolerance you need more and more of the drug.

Which leads that eventually you're going to spiral downwards, or you're still going to kill yourself with an overdose.  Or you're just going to die an early death - the life of a heroin addict is not a healthy and happy one, even if it isn't laced with fentanyl.

And a reminder - there are "safe" opiates available.  Most popular is methadone. 

That is just not true.  There are a large number of high functioning addicts.  Do you have something other than your experience dealing with the criminal element to back up that broad assertion.

If you are interested in learning more, please look at the wealth of medical literature on this topic.

[viper37]

Minority, but not a small one. I'd wager there are more alcoholics than heroine users in Canada. If you want a gateway drug, coke users are more likely to be drinkers then pot smokers (think it's similar to heroine, but I'm not sure). That being said there are also many many more people who are alcoholics than debilitating pot heads. My father died in part due to alcoholism and my uncle as a direct cause of his alcoholism. I'm sure you can name members in your family or friend group as well.

I'm not for legalizing all hard drugs, but marijuana is less harmful than other things that we have currently legalized.

The important figure is number of problematic cases / total number of users.

There are a lot more drinkers than heroin users.

I am sorry about father and your uncle, it sucks.   I too have had family died of causes related to their alcoholism.  I'm not saying it's harmless.  But overall, it creates less problems than heroin or even marijuana.  Marijuana has been less studied than alcohol and benefits from an important lobby to minimize the risks.

How many people do you know who died from pot use? Or victimized their families because they took a puff too many?

I don't know of any one who died from pot use, because I don't know of anyone who only used pot.  They generally mix it with other recreative drugs.

But I know of many people who smoked pot to the point of being unable to function properly in society, barely able to work.

As for victimizing their family, I don't know, but I do know marijuana can cause psychosis, and I do know there have been a few case where people have been condemned in the past.  But now, it's muddier water, with recent rulings.  Voluntary intoxication is again a defense, so I do not know how the next cases will play.

I also know that just like alcohol, driving while under the influence of such substances can cause accidents.

I could not tell you for certain what are the substances the violent people in Montreal metro stations have consumed before attacking passerbys.  With no arrests, it is impossible to tell.

[viper37]

That is just not true.  There are a large number of high functioning addicts.  Do you have something other than your experience dealing with the criminal element to back up that broad assertion.

If you are interested in learning more, please look at the wealth of medical literature on this topic.

And for how long can you maintain a high functioning addiction to heroin or fentanyl?

[The Minsky Moment]

But it may not be such a hail Mary, he started announcing he would be taking this action months ago.  There has clearly been a lot of thought and effort put into creating  good facts for a test case.  Right down to the detail that this is a fairly articulate defendant who the court is likely to find sympathetic.  His brother died of an overdose caused by tainted drugs. He wants to create a safe drug supply for addicts.

All those things could be true and yet not contradict that its a legal hail mary.
Then again I'm not a Canadian lawyer and know nothing about the Court.  My conclusion is conjecture and assumption.

[Jacob]

The thing is there are very few functional addicts who can maintain being a functional addict for a really long time.  It's part and parcel of the addiction that as you build up tolerance you need more and more of the drug.

I'm curious to see the numbers on functional addicts if any such exist. I'd imagine the illegal nature of drugs means they don't show up on many statistics.

Secondly I'm also curious to degree with which the "inevitable" downward spiral is accelerated by criminalization and to what degree legalization, standardization, and social/ psychological etc support can potentially slow or reverse it.

[HVC]

I am sorry about father and your uncle, it sucks.   I too have had family died of causes related to their alcoholism.  I'm not saying it's harmless.  But overall, it creates less problems than heroin or even marijuana.  Marijuana has been less studied than alcohol and benefits from an important lobby to minimize the risks.

Thank you, and condolences for your losses too.

And I agree, on the aggregate there are some downside to marijuana as well, but while I consider myself liberal I do have some conservative tendencies. One of those tendencies is the view of limited government intervention where the risks are not outweighed by government intervention. I see marijuana in that light. Making it illegal and the consequences of that don't stack up against the negatives of using pot.

[Admiral Yi]

BY rights of course it shouldn't.  The issue was decided in Malmo-Levine.  And M-L was dealing with marijuana - surely the ability of government to regulate and outlaw much more harmful drugs should be much more obvious.

This Accused can get his Charter challenge in superior court, lose, go to court of appeal, lose unanimously, and SCC should decline to hear.

The issue of the public health benefits of legalized drugs was decided in a weed case?

[HVC]

The thing is there are very few functional addicts who can maintain being a functional addict for a really long time.  It's part and parcel of the addiction that as you build up tolerance you need more and more of the drug.

I'm curious to see the numbers on functional addicts if any such exist. I'd imagine the illegal nature of drugs means they don't show up on many statistics.

Secondly I'm also curious to degree with which the "inevitable" downward spiral is accelerated by criminalization and to what degree legalization, standardization, and social/ psychological etc support can potentially slow or reverse it.

Isn't a big part of the downward spiral of habitual use just the costs? Drugs are expensive. When I quite smoking last year I was spending 7k a year for a pack a day. I could have spent less by smoking "straw" but I liked my brand

Even legalized this stores prices seemed hefty. I get that it probably wasn't priced realistically because he didn't expect to be open long, but the price point would by high which leads to all those same pitfalls of a spiral.

[Sheilbh]

Isn't a big part of the downward spiral of habitual use just the costs? Drugs are expensive. When I quite smoking last year I was spending 7k a year for a pack a day. I couldn't have spent less by smoking "straw" but I liked my brand

I thought it was, with opioids but with a lot of addiction to a substance in general (not sure if/how it applies to, say, gambling), at least in part that your resistance increases so you tend to need to increase your consumption to have the same effect?

Not necessarily in size but because your resistance is higher so the gaps shrink. I imagine you werer also smoking a lot more/lot more regularly by the time you quit from shortly after you started (I sure was ).

[HVC]

Isn't a big part of the downward spiral of habitual use just the costs? Drugs are expensive. When I quite smoking last year I was spending 7k a year for a pack a day. I couldn't have spent less by smoking "straw" but I liked my brand

I thought it was, with opioids but with a lot of addiction to a substance in general (not sure if/how it applies to, say, gambling), at least in part that your resistance increases so you tend to need to increase your consumption to have the same effect?

Not necessarily in size but because your resistance is higher so the gaps shrink. I imagine you werer also smoking a lot more/lot more regularly by the time you quit from shortly after you started (I sure was ).

I was too . Had smoked since I was 12, so for about 25 years. The money wasn't the problem in the grand scheme, it wasn't bankrupting me (though it wasn't a great thing either). it was the health, started to get the smokers cough. But the money was always "oh it's only 12 bucks, then 15, then 19 (Canada likes to up smoke taxes ) so psychologically I can see why money doesn't seem like a problem to the addicted until your jonesing and out of money. then skipping a few bills or doesn't seem so bad. Then once that avenues cut off robbing a person or place doesn't seem like such a bad idea either.

[viper37]

And I agree, on the aggregate there are some downside to marijuana as well, but while I consider myself liberal I do have some conservative tendencies. One of those tendencies is the view of limited government intervention where the risks are not outweighed by government intervention. I see marijuana in that light. Making it illegal and the consequences of that don't stack up against the negatives of using pot.

I see marijuana having at the very least, the same problems as cigarette, which we are trying to move away from, by investing in huge advertising campaigns to make people stop smoking, providing meds to make people stop smoking and forbidding smoking in all public places.

Then, we add to all these problems a psychoactive component known to cause various problems related to mental health.

The argument of the Liberal government was the legalization would remove the sales from the organized crime and put it in the hands for the government.  But it hasn't happened yet.  And there's no indication the trend will reverse in the near future.  And we do not have clear transparency on who owns these legal pot manufacturers due to their use of fiscal paradise.

I still don't see the net positive: black market is still there (as I predicted), organized crime is likely to be involved in the legal sale (as I predicted) and consumption is increased (as I predicted).

And legalizing hard drugs will lead to the same problems.

We already have legal, "safe" injection sites.  All that has seem to lead to is no difference between Canada and the US for the overdose crisis and a decrease in the security of citizens living or transiting near these spots, or in public transit areas.

I really don't see any net positive in increasing consumption of the products.

Sure, we may temporarily save the live of a few addicts, until they overdose with something else a few months later.  But is it worth it to extend their lives to fuel their addiction while poisoning the lives of everyone else around?  Shouldn't we be instead finding a way to help them stop their addiction?

A very good friend of mine is an alcoholic.  He had to stop drinking after is second arrest, he just went too far.  He drove completely drunk from here (his mother used to live nearby) to near his home in Montreal and got arrested because someone called the police after seeing him drive erratically.

He went into therapy this day and never touched the bottle again.  That's how things are.  He can't take just one drink like some of us.   My former step brother tried to moderate his consumption, by following some new therapy for the 5th or 6th time after losing his 2nd job because of his drinking.  In the end, one of his friend found him dead in his back yard.

Addiction is addiction.  I don't believe that pseudo scientific crap that people will eventually tire themselves and abandon the drug.  They will reach the bottom end before going clean.  And fueling the addiction just pushes things further back at great costs to the society.