Safe injection sites and the 'War on Drugs'

Heroin operation taken down in Delaware, May 2016

There has been a great deal of controversy in recent weeks here in my hometown of Philadelphia regarding a proposal by some local politicians to open so-called safe injection sites.

The position of Mayor Jim Kenney and others is that such sites would help combat the exploding opioid crisis.

This would be accomplished by providing a safe place for drug abusers, but also by providing them with counseling.

Kenney was quoted by Aubrey Whelan for Philly.com just last week:

“We don’t want dying on the street and we want to have a place to administer Narcan if necessary. We also want an opportunity to speak to people about their future and getting their lives straight. They can’t do that under a train bridge or on a train track.”

Almost immediately, various members of Philadelphia City Council tried to apply the brakes. Per a piece by Claudia Vargas and Holly Otterbein for Philly.com, those concerns were summed up by Councilwoman Maria Quiñones-Sánchez: “There’s no plan,” Sánchez said, adding that the city’s official presentation on the proposal looked “like an intern gave it to them.”

I have a number of problems with the idea. Concerns over exactly where any facilities would be located, issues involving liability for the city involving death and injuries at the facilities, and many others.

However, perhaps my biggest problem with the idea is even more basic and controversial. This is especially so coming from me, as I spent most of the last three decades as a Philadelphia Police Officer, Detective, and Sergeant. That included a decade in the Training Bureau teaching officers, supervisors, and commanders.

My biggest problem is that the city would be basically endorsing and supporting folks who are breaking the law. Possession and use of illicit drugs such as heroin is a crime. Addiction is not a valid defense.

Now that statement is factual, so my problem may not seem immediately apparent. Until I reveal why I feel that it is a problem. It's a problem because the city is supporting an illegal activity. But it is an activity that I do not believe should be illegal in the first place.

That's right - I do not support laws against the sale, possession, or consumption of narcotics. And if you do, I want to hear the reasons. The real reasons.

Those reasons cannot have to do with health concerns for the individuals involved in that usage, or their families, or for the community. Not unless you also support criminalizing the use of tobacco products and alcohol.

The cost of alcohol addiction to the U.S. economy has been estimated at nearly $250 billion annually. This includes lost productivity, health care expenses, law and other justice costs, and motor vehicle crashes.

More than 40% of that cost, over $100 billion, is drained from government. In other words, you and I pay for it with our taxes. Another $3.5 billion in costs is incurred by individual states, who of course also get their money from we the taxpayers.

Even with all of the education regarding tobacco abuse and the decline in its use over recent decades, its use remains the single largest preventable cause of disease and premature death in America today.

Corey Haim Should Have Just Said 'No'

Of all the truly great legacies left to us by the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, one of the truest, simplest, most enduring messages is the one that came from the campaign during those years of his wife, Nancy Reagan.

The validity and importance of her anti-drug campaign with the slogan "Just Say No" was brought home once again today with the overdose death of popular 1980's child movie star Corey Haim.

This death comes on the exact 22nd anniversary of the death of 1970's teen heart throb, musician Andy Gibb, the kid brother to the Bee Gees who also abused drugs. Haim was a child star and Gibb died during the very year that the First Lady was popularizing her vital message.

"Just Say No" is a simple slogan, and some of it's detractors have stated that it is not only simple, but that it is simplistic, even simple-minded. Of course these critics are always the same old liberal "I can do whatever I want with my body and who are you to tell me different" crowd. Funny thing is, when the Haim's and the Gibb's die of their excess, these folks are never heard from.

Islamism Series: The Unholy Trinity

Though they have existed since the earliest moments of the very first terrorist groups in man's history, the links between today's 'modern' terror groups, particularly the Islamofascists that have declared open war on the United States and all of western civilization, and criminal activity is escalating at an alarming rate.

For years now we have been warned that links were forming between Islamofascist groups such as al Qaeda, Hezbollah, the Tamil Tigers, and others with South American drug cartels. What would make such seemingly disparate groups get together in the first place?

The Islamofascists would, on the face of things, seem to be against everything that the drug cartels support. The Islamists want society run completely by Sharia Law, the Islamic religious authority and rules, and both the use of illicit drugs and the violence that accompanies their trafficking would be against that law.

From their side one would think that the last thing that the drug cartels would want would be some radical religious group that is vehemently against their business interests and that would eradicate them if possible coming to worldwide power, or even to expand their influence in any region that the cartels service.

However, the motivations of these two groups are such that they are finding in one another an ally, at least temporarily and in the short term, against an even bigger, stronger, more organized, more powerful foe. Specifically that would be the United States of America.

What Are You Prepared to Do?

In the motion picture "The Untouchables", Kevin Costner plays legendary FBI man Elliot Ness. He is trying to break the grip of organized crime on the city of Chicago, and is running into obstacles at every turn when his partner puts things into clear resolve.

Sean Connery's grizzled veteran police character turns to Ness and asks the key question: "What are you prepared to do?"

It is this very response that is the key question that needs to be asked when talking about the big problems in our world today.

There are many well meaning people in America who are concerned about Third World hunger. There are many well meaning people who are concerned about AIDS in Africa.

There are many well meaning people who are concerned about illicit human and drug-trafficking. There are many well meaning people who are concerned about illegal aliens flooding into the United States.

There are many well meaning people who are concerned about ethnic cleansing in various nations. There are many well meaning people who fully understand the danger from and are concerned about the spread of radical Islam.

But most of these people don't have a clue as to what they should do next. Many simply resort to the easiest thing for them individually: they write a check. "Hey, if I mail off $20 to some organization each month, I can feed one child. If everyone did that, we could feed all the children."

Nice sentiment, but is it true? The organization doesn't take your $20 and go shopping for the child whose photo and alleged 'bio' they sent to you. They pool all the money sent by people like you, and put it together in trying to improve conditions in some particular village or country. There are many good people, Christian missionaries and others, out there trying to do this good, necessary work.

Unfortunately as often as the food and medical shipments get through to the village, they are even more frequently intercepted by military regimes in those nations, and sometimes by the governments themselves, and dispersed to a privileged few. That is the reality of what happens to the supplies bought by the check that you write.