November 25th, 2020

There are other victims of drug crisis besides the addicts


By Lethbridge Herald on November 13, 2020.

As I watch a certain segment of the population of Lethbridge spin their various agendas, I feel that I need to address one of the more serious problems we have been facing in recent years.
I most certainly appreciate and respect those of our city who want to help what they consider our most vulnerable people. I would ask that those people also respect my opinion as well.
Who are our most vulnerable? Is it the drug addicts that roam our streets or is it those people that suffer from the consequences of those same people’s actions? When an entrepreneur sinks their life’s savings and may also borrow monies from a bank to run a business and said business suffers from a loss of traffic and thus income and loses everything, are they not one of our most vulnerable?
When a home owner has their home broken into and “stuff” stolen, are they not vulnerable? When a senior is afraid to walk in certain areas of Lethbridge, do they not feel vulnerable? When someone has their vehicle broken into or stolen, does that not make them one of our most vulnerable?
Here is an idea. Stop calling drug addicts our most vulnerable. Why? It gives them an excuse to not be accountable. Stop calling drug addiction a disease. Why? No accountability. Hey, Mr. or Ms. Drug Addict, you have a problem because of your bad choices. It’s time to get your life back and we want you to have a wonderful happy life. Let’s get you the help you need and we will be there to support and encourage you but it is all up to you. Are you ready?
That is what I would like to see. If we keep telling these people it is not their fault and the rest of society is to blame for their problems, are we helping or hurting their chances for a normal life? Think about it.
Doug Cameron
Lethbridge

Share this story:
<5
Subscribe
Notify of
14 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ChuckB

As someone who has lost around $5000 worth of things from their property, I think we are vulnerable. However, I still firmly believe that the most vulnerable are our children and grandchildren. They are the ones who are too young to make a safe choice, such as “Look what I found Gampy” as she bends over to pick up a needle. After shouting for her to “Drop it”, I disposed of it in a sharps container. Now, what if a child who didn’t have a parent or grandparent right there found it. A needle prick, a series of injections and monitoring. Drug addicts make their own choices. I chose to stop smoking pot and drinking when my wife got pregnant with our first child.I come from a family of mostly drunks so, I dodged a bullet there. Let’s give our children in Lethbridge the same chance to grown up safe and healthy. I feel that anyone who labels the drug addicts our most vulnerable is suffering from an extreme sense of self-importance and delusions. Addicts can get help, if they choose it. Most won’t and so, that is on them. Children first in my world!

Last edited 11 days ago by ChuckB
ewingbt

Thank you Doug for bringing this important issue up! Unfortunately it only touches the tip of an massive submerged iceberg.
We have allowed about 150 addicts take over our city, raping and pillaging it and costing taxpayers $25-$30 million in 2 years of the SCS and all the rippling social and housing programs put in place.
Some business owners put over $30,000 into security cameras and fortifying their business and that same one was assauted several times trying to protect his business, while one next door lost over 60% of his walk in business and one comment from an ARCHES SCS employee, well he still has his online business! They didn’t care!
The illegal tent that is set up has plans of a second one already, enabling addicts and endangering them by allowing them to do drugs in the winter, walk out of the tent and go die in some back alley if they ovderdose. Just a matter of time!
The legal mobile unit is set up at the Shelter and Alpha house detox, where the addict has shelter and help right there if they run into problems.
People left the old SCS and fatally overdosed after doing drugs at that SCS, one right in their parking lot! They enable addicts and for the one they save, ten more die that are enabled by them!
Shut them down and let’s take back our streets!!!
T

Last edited 11 days ago by ewingbt
biff

d.c poses an excellent consideration: “Who are our most vulnerable? Is it the drug addicts that roam our streets or is it those people that suffer from the consequences of those same people‚Äôs actions?”
thank you, d.c., for taking the time. allow me to keep on pounding away on this: drug use, nor addiction, cannot be eradicated. (addictions of all types cannot be eradicated; it appears that almost everything humans interact with comes with about a 10% addiction rate). therefore, the approach, needs to change, as does the perspective; and d.c. provides a good perspective with regard to victims.
the fallout of drug addiction is broad, and innocent people are affected by the fallout from certain various addictive behaviours. insofar as drugs, this need not be the case as drugs are ridiculously cheap to produce and use, unless, of course, their production and distribution is left in the hands of scum like big pharm and various other gangster orgs. monopoly drives up cost exponentially, as does risk that arises from draconian and illegal drug laws.
consequently, the feds must rescind what are in fact illegal drug laws. our supreme court has been as lame in ensuring freedom to use drugs as it has been lame in safeguarding fundamental freedoms of all sorts, over the past 40+ years in particular. they must oversee not for profit growth and/or sourcing, and distribution of quality ensured opium and coca leaf for registered addicts, provided free or for a nominal cost based upon ability to pay. it will cost us somewhat, but only a tiny fraction of the costs associated with drug addiction fallout, policing, courts, and prisons.
we will not solve addiction overall, but we can mitigate the social and financial cost substantially. moreover, we can reduce drug addiction because the natural products, plants/shrubs/fungi that societies the world over have been using with little to no fallout for thousands of years, are far less addictive than the poison crap big pharm has been allowed to push, and far less addictive than processed derivatives peddled by organised, thug pushers. when addicts do not need to steal for drugs, our property is much safer.
i know, hard for still too many to comprehend, due to a lifetime of having been lied to about drugs by our govts. a great study of how easy it is to condition people on a mass scale. while prejudices and jaundiced beliefs will make it difficult for many to see the benefits of such an approach, what society has been trying for generations is not working on any level…unless one believes: that fundamental freedoms and human rights have little value; that addicts must suffer to the max; that innocent people must remain victims due to fallout from artificially expensive and even poisonous drugs; that an approach that breeds criminals and lines pockets of organised crime and drug enforcers alike – off the backs of, and, while actually victimising recreational and hardcore users alike, is just or humane; that an absolutely ineffective on every level approach that costs us dearly in life, property, and capital is the path to continue to follow.
even in countries where drug users are summarily executed, another crime against humanity fallout that comes thanks to the ignorant and evil and entirely illegal war on drugs created by the nasty usa, drug use continues. what a brilliant focus, eh. create criminality and undue hardship where none should be simply because of hardcore bias and ignorance. meanwhile, just for perspective sake, human trafficking – little girls and boys, and teens and young adults all held prisoners to satisfy the sexual illnesses of predators – receives a crummy fraction of the resources that drug “enforcement” has been getting. create victims where none should be; and ensure victims where none should be. well done, people!

phlushie

Thank you Doug for the real explanation and also ChuckB and ewingbt
for your added input. Lets hope the politicos follow through.

jonbacc

Great letter Doug and great comments from all of you.

If I can add another example… There are rumours that drug addicts (former SCS clients) started that recent apartment fire on the Westside that displaced dozens of ppl and caused over $1 million in damage. Police have yet to charge anyone…

Fescue

Interesting. I heard they were the harbingers of the apocalypse.
Recent DNA tests have shown that they may actually be a new genus of hominidae. Maybe not even of this world.

Last edited 10 days ago by Fescue


14
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x