i view "safe" (lol.) consumption sites as a necessary evil - i don't like them, and i'd rather they didn't exist, but i realize that it's more cost effective for a national health service to at least provide for clean needles, to reduce the spread of diseases like aids, which are exceedingly expensive to treat - and which everybody is entitled to treatment for. this is actually a fiscally conservative position, and it's on that basis that i support it.

but, i know better than to think it will ever help.

it doesn't - because nothing does. and, that is the sad truth: addicts are almost always beyond help, and there's generally absolutely nothing that anybody can do but step away and let them die on their own terms.

what i support is an open door, and a government policy that ensures that barriers to care are eliminated as much as possible. as rare as it may be, when addicts make the choice to seek treatment, everything that can be done to help should be done.

but, active attempts to proselytize to addicts in any way should be rejected as government policy, for the simple reason that it just doesn't work, and that means accepting the tough reality that almost all addicts will die as a result of their addiction.

prevention is where the focus should be, and that includes both reasonable attempts to restrict the supply and very aggressive attempts to reduce the demand.