Even from a Libertarian perspective that I have, I can't really argue against local communities banning drug use, or very specifically public inebriation for exactly this kind of thing. The Drug War as an institution is a huge problem, that itself profits from drug abuse rather than solving any problems, but full decriminalization is not a solution because of exactly what we see here.
The problem with even that legistlation is that it's still a major social failure anyway. You can't really fix that with laws, only tamp down on it from getting out of control. Thing is, with my perspective, I kind of wonder if I should take the heartless Libertarian approach and say: celebrate your dead addicts, kind of like I say: celebrate your abortions.
The real losers are everyone engaging in the addictive activity. If you stop the enabling, entitlements, and welfare; society would probably return to normal because the moral order would assert itself naturally, and the people who are killing themselves with drugs would be their own Social Darwinism. Literally: "We're taking Narcan away from the cops. They have no obligation to save you from yourselves." It would introduce a bad few years, but at the same time I think that the addicts and zombies would leave.
If you stop the enabling, entitlements, and welfare; society would probably return to normal because the moral order would assert itself naturally, and the people who are killing themselves with drugs would be their own Social Darwinism. Literally: "We're taking Narcan away from the cops. They have no obligation to save you from yourselves."
This is the necessary social and establishment attitude.
"Rehabilitation" is total BS, a con game that enriches a well-entrenched network of grifters and does nothing to dissuade people from using any sort of drug. In fact, opiate "rehab" in the form of methadone clinics is probably the most egregious example of this, including the fact that they are using addicts as guinea pigs for their "opiate substitute" concoctions that are nothing of the sort.
Even from a Libertarian perspective that I have, I can't really argue against local communities banning drug use, or very specifically public inebriation for exactly this kind of thing. The Drug War as an institution is a huge problem, that itself profits from drug abuse rather than solving any problems, but full decriminalization is not a solution because of exactly what we see here.
The problem with even that legistlation is that it's still a major social failure anyway. You can't really fix that with laws, only tamp down on it from getting out of control. Thing is, with my perspective, I kind of wonder if I should take the heartless Libertarian approach and say: celebrate your dead addicts, kind of like I say: celebrate your abortions.
The real losers are everyone engaging in the addictive activity. If you stop the enabling, entitlements, and welfare; society would probably return to normal because the moral order would assert itself naturally, and the people who are killing themselves with drugs would be their own Social Darwinism. Literally: "We're taking Narcan away from the cops. They have no obligation to save you from yourselves." It would introduce a bad few years, but at the same time I think that the addicts and zombies would leave.
This is the necessary social and establishment attitude.
"Rehabilitation" is total BS, a con game that enriches a well-entrenched network of grifters and does nothing to dissuade people from using any sort of drug. In fact, opiate "rehab" in the form of methadone clinics is probably the most egregious example of this, including the fact that they are using addicts as guinea pigs for their "opiate substitute" concoctions that are nothing of the sort.