The New Mayor of Vancouver and Drugs

[vison]

Vancouver, B. C. has a new mayor, a fellow named Sam Sullivan. He's an interesting guy in many ways. He's a quadriplegic, for one thing. He's brilliant, acerbic, outspoken, and much more besides. I don't live in Vancouver, so he's not "my" mayor.

Mr. Sullivan very strongly in favour of "harm reduction" strategies for drug users, and supported the establishment of safe injection sites in the city.

He "confessed" that once he gave money to an addict so the addict could buy a fix. Now, there is a ridiculous (IMHO) proposal to "charge" Mr. Sullivan with some crime or other, I can't quite make out just what. Yes, he knowingly gave an addict money so the addict could buy drugs. The addict in question was a man he'd befriended, a man who was trying to kick his habit, but who fell yet again. This admission was made before he was elected, and it didn't keep people from electing him.

Drug addiction is a question rather close to my heart, but for personal, not political reasons. I, too, have given money to a drug addict --- knowing the money would be used to buy drugs, but with the hope that it wouldn't be --- while knowing it would be, if you follow me.

I don't see, myself, that Mr. Sullivan's foolish action disqualifies him for political office. I think it WAS foolish, mind you. But having been there, and done that, I'm not going to judge Mr. Sullivan any more harshly than I judge myself. I don't see myself as an evil-doer promoting drug use, nor do I see him as doing it.

Canadians tend to think of "the drug problem" differently from Americans, at least many do. I see it as a health issue rather than a criminal issue, and I think it should be dealt with in that way. I also think that drugs should be "decriminalized" so that the profit motive is removed from the trade. If there were not huge fortunes to be made selling drugs, no one would bother.

Is Mr. Sullivan's admission reason to kick him out of the mayor's chair? Should the RCMP or the Vancouver City police seek a warrant for his arrest? Should a judge grant that warrant?

[Sassafras]

Canadians tend to think of "the drug problem" differently from Americans, at least many do. I see it as a health issue rather than a criminal issue, and I think it should be dealt with in that way. I also think that drugs should be "decriminalized" so that the profit motive is removed from the trade. If there were not huge fortunes to be made selling drugs, no one would bother.

Decriminalized?
It is a double-edged sword.

Many of you already know that I am an non-practicing addict who has been clean and sober for 20 years. But let me assure you, despite the fact I have injected no drug into my veins for 2 decades, I am still very much an addict.

I have often wondered, if 20 or 30 years ago, drugs had been decriminalized, with safe sites for the legal procurement of drug of choice ... would I be sitting at my keyboard now, today, typing this post? Or would I be off in a corner somewhere, my veins full of heroin, my eyes drooping, locked into my own silent fantasy world?

How wonderful it would be if I could tell you that yes ... legal or not ... I would have kicked addiction so as to be here with you now. But you know what? I don't think that's true. I think I would still be caught in the snares of the demon ... I think I would hate myself (as I did for all of the years I wheedled and whined and stole and deceived so I could get my fix) I think I would still be there ... in that place ......... and I never would have found this place.

True, the profit motive would be removed if drugs were legalized and that is beyond desirable.
But then there's me ... the individual (and the countless numbers like me) ... who might never have found the way back if the spectre of 'jails, institutions and death' had been removed.

As for Sam Sullivan. What an absurd trumped-up charge! I sincerely hope it's exposed for the nonsense it is. He sounds pretty cool, actually.

[vison]

There IS no easy answer. Hard questions never have easy answers. And I see your point very clearly, believe me.

My view is that if drugs were decriminalized and the profit taken out, there would be no reason to create new addicts. That's one leg of the stand.

As for the already addicted, part of the "harm reduction" programs is supposedly to give real incentive to drug users to get treatment and rehabilitation. The sad truth is that in BC, there are not anywhere NEAR enough treatment beds. It's appalling! People who want treatment can't get it, there are long waiting lists. The two things have to go together or there's no real point. It's fine to have safe injection sites that serve to cut down on needle-sharing infections, etc., but the nurses who supervise there ought to be able to steer those wanting help to a place where the user can get it.

I don't know what kind of mayor Sullivan is going to be. Vancouver is a city with many problems and one great "bonus" that is bound to create more problems: the 2010 Winter Olympics.

[Whistler]

Sass, I had no idea!

Allow me to interrupt this excellent discussion long enough to say how glad I am that you're here with us instead of...well, wherever.

[JewelSong]

Many of you already know that I am an non-practicing addict who has been clean and sober for 20 years.

Sass! You have my sincere admiration...!



Kicking an addiction - any addiction - is likely one of the most difficult things to accomplish.