> You don't see anyone who is using opioids in the privacy of their own home who aren't out on the streets
I also don't see anyone who is using alcohol and marijuana in the privacy of their own home.
My sampling is biased in that it doesn't accurately reflect the percentage all people using those various drugs. But it is (I believe) relatively unbiased in that it shows that of the people whose drug use concurrent with homelessness a much higher fraction of them are using opioids or meth compared to booze and pot.
I think there is a reasonable inference there that using opioids or method is much more likely to result in homelessness than using booze or pot.
Again, I'm not making any claims about what our policies should be for opioids and method. All I claim is that it's entirely reasonable to have different policies for them versus booze, pot—hell, caffeine—because while, sure, they are all technically drugs, they are radically different in how they affect individuals and society at large.
I'll also point out that I didn't suggest criminalizing hard drug use. Also, of the four epidodes I described, only one is about drug use itself. The other three were violent crimes whose victims were homeless people.
Alcohol, marijuana and caffeine aren't anywhere near as likely to lead to someone losing their job.
You've observed that the most highly criminalized drugs are used by the people who have probably been the most affected by trying to use the criminal justice system as our drug treatment program.
You need to disentangle the effects of the drug from the effects of how we treat the users of the drug. You can't look at the end product at attribute it entirely to the inherent properties of the substance. You're not observing it in a sociological vacuum.
I also don't see anyone who is using alcohol and marijuana in the privacy of their own home.
My sampling is biased in that it doesn't accurately reflect the percentage all people using those various drugs. But it is (I believe) relatively unbiased in that it shows that of the people whose drug use concurrent with homelessness a much higher fraction of them are using opioids or meth compared to booze and pot.
I think there is a reasonable inference there that using opioids or method is much more likely to result in homelessness than using booze or pot.
Again, I'm not making any claims about what our policies should be for opioids and method. All I claim is that it's entirely reasonable to have different policies for them versus booze, pot—hell, caffeine—because while, sure, they are all technically drugs, they are radically different in how they affect individuals and society at large.
I'll also point out that I didn't suggest criminalizing hard drug use. Also, of the four epidodes I described, only one is about drug use itself. The other three were violent crimes whose victims were homeless people.