The Nov. 18 Herald article, “‘Safe’ sites aren’t popular,” says that studies have shown a drop in overdoses with such sites in other countries. I don’t buy it. Allowing such sites effectively says to addicts that their illegal activities are condoned. To take this to the extreme, why don’t we have safe robbery sites if we’re going to allow people to indulge their penchants for illegal activities? We already have the beginnings of a safe shooting site, Casino Road, so why not go all the way and divide the city and county into various “illegal activity allowed” sections?
To say that these addicts are unable to break their addiction and so need a place to shoot up is not the solution. I have my own addiction, so I know that it is not easy in the least to kick a habit, so that’s why I say that addicts should be taken in and undergo mandatory detox. Then get rid of the drugs in the area with police sweeps or otherwise make it too expensive and difficult for the pushers to remain in business.
You can’t get rid of a problem by allowing the end result, the addict, to continue being a problem; you can only get rid of a problem by addressing it at its root.
Fabian Borowiecki
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
