
Just 4 miles from Center City, a heroin hellscape hidden in plain sight - shawndumas
http://www.philly.com/philly/health/addiction/A_hidden_heroin_hellscape.html
======
ImTalking
> "Police arrest a heroin addict along the tracks."

We humans think that we are intelligent and just, yet I would love someone to
explain the wisdom and/or logic behind this policy; to arrest someone who is
addicted; to give someone a criminal record which removes any possibility of
bettering oneself all for the so-called 'crime' of succumbing to an addictive
drug. Even more appalling is that it is a subjectively produced list of drugs
that will get you arrested, as other drugs won't.

~~~
dkhenry
I'll give it a try.

Why arrest an addict? Its because by attaching a punishment to the behavior we
attempt to alter the fundamental utility calculation that is taking place when
someone decided to take a hit. That person knows it is illegal to take that
hit, but they also know two additional things. First they are going to enjoy
it, a lot. Secondly the chances of being caught are very slim. In an attempt
balance this calculation on the side of "don't do the drugs" we make the
penalty for getting caught harsher and harsher. The idea being if you make the
penalty harsh enough eventually people will see its not worth it and they will
choose not to do the drugs.

While you might immediately reply that this is nonsense since the addicts are
not driven by rational thought in that moment when they are seeking their next
fix there are many people who aren't as fatalistic about the rationality of
people in that moment, and the penalty isn't really about _that_ person. Its
about the person who is choosing to take their first hit, or who is on the
rebound and is thinking about relapsing. That stiff penalty might just be the
factor that makes a recovering addict not go back to his old habit.

The case against punitive policy's isn't as cut and dry as your comment might
make it out to be, and unfortunately our understanding is still evolving.
There is a lot that goes into policy making besides just what to do with
someone addicted right there in that moment.

~~~
staticautomatic
When someone is already an addict, the addiction almost always wins the
"fundamental utility calculation."

~~~
dkhenry
The addiction doesn't always win. I personally know people who have kicked a
heroin habit. From talking with them one thing they will tell you is that
while the addiction doesn't always win, it never gives up trying either.

~~~
flukus
And those people would be the first to tell you that it almost always wins,
because it likely did until they finally kicked it.

------
subpixel
Open-air drug situations always get the attention (google Philadelphia
Badlands for previous coverage).

But if you drive around Philadelphia without knowing which areas to avoid,
you'll quickly realize that no part of the city is more than a handful of
blocks away from extreme poverty and all the mayhem that comes with it.

(Aside: one of my Philly cousins has a steel plate in his head after being
attacked with a baseball bat near the Temple campus a few years ago; another
one keeps a gun at work in North Philadelphia and has had to use it.)

------
soulnothing
Philadelphia like most cities, is good every couple of blocks. North and west
got bad pretty quickly. I had a coworker, who bought and sold drugs. He was
openly doing this in the break room. He mentioned places where the cops just
ignored drugs, and focused on violence. Knowing they couldn't curtail the drug
use. I know on the weekend in Rittenhouse pot was sold in plain sight. Cops
were on patrol but didn't do anything about it.

The problem mentioned else where is gentrification. If you're kicking more and
more people out. They live on the streets or abandoned houses. No jobs, then
they just sell drugs. Temple area is a prime example. The school had like
their own private force. Stay on campus fine, a couple blocks off nope. This
was due to subsidized housing, where people were living at extremely low
rates. The city was trying to fight this tooth and nail. Brewerytown was
another example. Two property managers were buying up all the reality, and
kicking people out. I didn't really want to step outside my apartment for fear
of being harassed.

The surrounding neighborhoods as well were bad. Just from a filth standpoint.
I forget the name but it was West Philly a few miles from 64th street station.
I was cleaning up the streets making up for a DUI. There was trash all over,
needles, diapers, etc.

Then there's the unspoken, or less spoken bit. The drug triangle between NYC,
Baltimore, and Philly. Heroin came in on the docks in Philly from what I've
gathered.

Living in Wilmington I got to see first hand the turf war between NYC and
PHIL. There were constant drive-bys and you'd hear on the police scanner.
Either NYC or PHIL license plates fleeing the scenes. The genius kids in
Wilmington, decided to stop acting as a trading point along I95. And instead
start making and selling their own stuff. That went over well.

So they're trying, but what's the solution when there are no real jobs to be
had. People are being kicked out from their homes?

------
erentz
I visited Philly a couple of times last year while staying in NJ. I was really
impressed with the downtown area, it was clearly a nice city with tonnes of
potential. Then we went for an excursion to somewhere on the west side of the
river and wound up driving for a few miles through a hellscape of run down
poor urban neighborhoods that were depressing, and frankly scary. It blew my
mind that an area like that existed. It surprised me such a well laid out
urban area right on the fringe of a major city would be in such bad shape, I
expected it to be full of hipsters.

~~~
spyspy
West Philadelphia is mostly students from Penn and Drexel, at least up until
45th St. or so. The "hipsters" you're talking about mostly live in south/east
Philly (Italian market, fishtown areas). Both are being gentrified at an
accelerating rate.

~~~
dkhenry
Philly is late to the gentrification that most other cities are dealing with,
its going to take a bit longer for the really prime places to price out people
who are willing to move into the seeder neighborhoods.

------
donretag
4 miles? In San Francisco, they are shooting up right on Market St in the
middle of the city. And recruiters wonder why I am not willing to re-locate to
SF for an incredible opportunity.

~~~
x0x0
At 6th and Market, a woman was screaming at her (boyfriend?) about the people
whose dicks she'd sucked to get (I'm not quite sure), and he'd run off and
used it all without sharing just after buying it. I was honestly tempted to
give her money to get her whatever it was she needed so badly.

------
wnoise
> ... heroin market, smack dab ...

Heh. That must be deliberate.

------
notatoad
that's possibly the most obnoxious case of scrolljacking i've ever seen:
attempting to scroll down the page triggers an auto-playing video that
prevents further scrolling.

~~~
projektir
NoScript deals with that issue flawlessly, it seems.

------
spyspy
You could find something like this in or around most major areas.

~~~
gydfi
What about Manila? Do people take drugs openly in Manila?

~~~
x0x0
Are you seriously suggested we kill these people? They are _people_ for fucks
sake.

~~~
gydfi
I'm just asking whether the Philippines' policies are sufficient to deter
people from taking drugs. You're the one who is inferring anything on top of
that.

It seems to me, however, that the overwhelming priority of our heroin policy
should be ensuring that people who aren't already taking heroin _don 't
start_. Those who have already got hooked are pretty much doomed already, they
should be a lower priority than those who can easily be saved. It seems to me
that many people advocate a "softly softly" approach to drug users that fucks
over the first group to help the second, and thus ensures that our drug
problems continue instead of being wiped out.

~~~
wklauss
> Those who have already got hooked are pretty much doomed already

That is definitely not true (you can recover from an addiction and there are
examples all around you) and a really bad policy to follow if you really want
to eradicate addiction, since you are basically marginalizing large groups of
people. Saying that you need to "save" those who are not addicted implies that
everyone is at risk, but the mechanics of addiction vary from person to person
and are heavily influenced by socioeconomic background.

Please refer to professionals that work in this field before proposing
approaches like this.

~~~
gydfi
Argument from authority? Is that the best you can do? Those "professionals"
don't have a great track record, which is why drugs are still a huge problem.

So I repeat my question: how are things working out in the Philippines? Are
the harsh policies being pursued doing a good job of decreasing the drug
problem? If they are, perhaps we can think about adopting aspects of those
solutions while leaving out some of the more problematic aspects such as
extrajudicial executions.

~~~
dkhenry
In the eyes of most of the rest of the world the policies in the Philippines
are doing a good job of slaughtering citizens for morally dubious causes. The
drugs are being fronted as a way to usher in dictatorial authority for the
state and corrupt criminal elements.

Drug use is no different from any other vice, and the nature of addictive
behavior is that most people will find some object to attach themselves to if
you removed all drugs from the picture ( perhaps it would be human trafficking
or gambling, both of which are widespread ) essentially what the people have
done is shown that by being presented with a present danger they will
willingly give over the very decency that allows a society to function. So no
even if mass slaughter did manage to end the drug problem in the Philippines
there is no way it should be accepted anywhere else, because it's an inhumane
policy.

------
redsummer
The internet means you can ignore this, and this is why Trump won. You don't
have to see it if you stay home and commune electronically with people with
the same backgrounds who agree with you.

~~~
flukus
A lot of us walk past it everyday and still ignore it. The internet and Trump
is nothing new here.

