That's not how I read it, but I see that you have some personal connections to this topic that I do not.... Kakato and LW said costs would be lower if things were legalized, and that actually ends up depending more on tax policy. But definitely if you have public corporations and businesses producing these products in open markets instead of criminal cartels, the cost of the products would be lower.
Yes, that is what I was asking you about. I don't think anyone who thinks it should be taken out of the criminals hands thinks it should be through medical prescriptions...or very few. Again, that wasn't how I read Kakato or LW's comments.
And that's because the bureaucracy involved is a nightmare. In PEI I think there is now only one doctor who will right the Rx, but patients need a second doctor and have to go out of province to find one, either in NB or NS. Besides, doctors prescribe medical marijuana to treat symptoms of other illnesses. For addictions to opioids they prescribe other drugs like methadone, and patients go to clinics for that.
Those treatment clinics are one of the routes for people going through Insite's doors. Unlike the cases you mention where people use addictions services by court order, clients at Insite aren't there by court order, so all visits made to detox services originating at Insite are not in the same ball park as those that you mentioned with legal trouble.
Also health benefits. It's also a great way for the government to get more revenue. Gasoline, alcohol, tobacco, fill the coffers of both Provincial and the Federal governments. Like I said up above, the cost of legalizing the products would depend a great deal on taxes.
The price went up based on taxes, not the actual price from the market place...if the price comes down that's a different story altogether. That's not splitting hairs. So, this is back to where I asked you about getting things right. If we know that driving prices up increases demand for black market products, then the smart thing to do would be what?
So there are a few countries that have done this. Have you actually looked at the costs against countries that did not?
Anything less is pure speculation. If you haven't looked yet I'll give you a hint to get you started. Portugal got rid of the criminal penalties for drugs. You can still get charged, there's just no jail time ever. Instead they get therapy. That is by a long shot the most liberal drug policy of any country. Kind of like what you mentioned a few pages back. Pot, cocaine, heroin, meth, no jail time, just therapy...try comparing their healthcare costs before and after. It was 2001, so there's a whole decade of data now.
That's a good start. Portugal actually has below average per capita costs for OECD countries.
I've never heard of Hillbilly Heroin, at least not by that name. Is it dilaudids?
Anyways, no policy you can think of ever will stop all crime. That's hardly a solid basis for any new poIicy.
Insite is cost-effective, is getting people into rehab programs without court order, is reducing the risk of disease transmission, and has not lead to an increase in drug-related crime.
They walk in the door with the drugs in their possession, I cannot fathom how anybody would prefer the situation where fewer addicts are getting treated for addictions, where there are more dead bodies on the street, where first responders have a greater risk of disease transmission, and where resources are being used less effectively.
That's insanity.
