Off Topic

Toronto Board of Health Endorses Intravenous Drug Injection Sites

  • Last Updated:
  • Nov 9th, 2017 11:44 pm
Tags:
None
299 replies
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 24, 2012
4816 posts
1260 upvotes
Space
I'm all for it as long as those board members put the IDI sites in their neighbourhood.
Member
Jun 2, 2011
295 posts
55 upvotes
Looking up the google streetview for the site in Vancouver it looks like a real run down area of town. Better there than parks, schools, etc.
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2824 posts
83 upvotes
Toronto
Solsearchin1 wrote:
Jul 10th, 2013 9:56 pm
I'm all for it as long as those board members put the IDI sites in their neighbourhood.


I agree 100%. In addition, any City Councillor in favour should have the safe-injection site next to their house or constituency office, and the first sites should be in Forest Hill, Rosedale and The Bridle Path...but we know that won't happen.

All the injection sites would end up in normal, residential areas and will kill the property values of hard working people.

I remember last year CTV News discussed this and they asked an elderly woman on the street how she feels about safe-injection sites. She said something along the lines of "I think it's a good thing, these people are sick and need help"....then the reporter asked her how she would feel if the safe injection site were close to her house and she said something like "well then I'd have to reconsider"....

We will end up with the same problem we have in the courts...and the same problem France has with immigration. The ruling elite don't see any problems because they don't amongst the problem...when the courts release a sexual offender the judge doesn't live in the community in which the person is released....in France the courts don't understand the problems mass, almost uncontrolled immigation has caused because they don't live amongst the immigration.
Member
Dec 18, 2003
479 posts
47 upvotes
Isn't killing property value a good thing , the less the property value , the less property tax you pay?
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2824 posts
83 upvotes
Toronto
fallengod wrote:
Jul 12th, 2013 12:29 pm
Isn't killing property value a good thing , the less the property value , the less property tax you pay?
Do you think the city will lose tax revenue and just eat the loss? Be real! they will maintain revenues by either raising the % we pay in tax or they will change the rubric of how they base taxes. Either way we will never pay less tax.

And no, lowered property values are disastrous. People who paid $600,000 for their home 5 years ago only to find its worth $450,000 now will be ruined. It is one thing for property values to drop because of supply/demand, lower incomes/poverty, higher interest rates...it should not be from artificial things like the city opening what amounts to crack-houses.
Deal Addict
Dec 26, 2007
2881 posts
167 upvotes
:facepalm: These sites are located where high concentrations of intravenous drug users are located. It's not going to lower property values any more than the current reality in those neighborhoods of junkies shooting up on the street and in abandoned buildings has already. If anything, having a safe injection site might increase property values. There's no NIMBY argument here unless your backyard is already full of junkies.

Interesting that Ford is so adamant in his assumption that this is not something taxpayers want. I'm a taxpayer and I think it's a great idea. Similar programs have had very positive results when implemented in other provinces/countries. Ignoring or demonizing addicts isn't doing anything to help the problem, hopefully this will.
Deal Expert
May 17, 2008
15134 posts
154 upvotes
silky28 wrote:
Jul 11th, 2013 12:46 am
I agree 100%. In addition, any City Councillor in favour should have the safe-injection site next to their house or constituency office, and the first sites should be in Forest Hill, Rosedale and The Bridle Path...but we know that won't happen.

All the injection sites would end up in normal, residential areas and will kill the property values of hard working people.
It only makes sense to locate the site where there are problems with intravenous drug use on the street.

If you put a site at Moss Park, or by Sherborne and Dundas, I don't think it will really affect property values all that much. The drug problems around there are huge, and getting drug users off the street could likely only improve that situation.
silky28 wrote:
Jul 11th, 2013 12:46 am
I remember last year CTV News discussed this and they asked an elderly woman on the street how she feels about safe-injection sites. She said something along the lines of "I think it's a good thing, these people are sick and need help"....then the reporter asked her how she would feel if the safe injection site were close to her house and she said something like "well then I'd have to reconsider"....

We will end up with the same problem we have in the courts...and the same problem France has with immigration. The ruling elite don't see any problems because they don't amongst the problem...when the courts release a sexual offender the judge doesn't live in the community in which the person is released....in France the courts don't understand the problems mass, almost uncontrolled immigation has caused because they don't live amongst the immigration.
I think you are kind of seeing this backwards. The people pushing for safe injection sites are the ones who are seeing the problem and trying to do something about it. People who think like you seem not to realize that the problem already exists and seem to think that putting these sites in a community is what will create a problem.

The fact is that there are areas in Toronto with significant injection drug problems on the streets. These sites are meant to address that problem.
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2824 posts
83 upvotes
Toronto
BornRuff wrote:
Jul 12th, 2013 9:55 pm
It only makes sense to locate the site where there are problems with intravenous drug use on the street.

If you put a site at Moss Park, or by Sherborne and Dundas, I don't think it will really affect property values all that much. The drug problems around there are huge, and getting drug users off the street could likely only improve that situation.



I think you are kind of seeing this backwards. The people pushing for safe injection sites are the ones who are seeing the problem and trying to do something about it. People who think like you seem not to realize that the problem already exists and seem to think that putting these sites in a community is what will create a problem.

The fact is that there are areas in Toronto with significant injection drug problems on the streets. These sites are meant to address that problem.
No, people like me think there are other, better ways of dealing with the existing problem other than accomodating their social and self abuse. You seem to think this is the only solution to the problem and because you agree with it it must be right. I would be all for accomodating them in some way if the accomodation came with increased responsibility...allow them XXX but if they violate XXX the penalty is HUGE. But that will never happen because the more we accomodate the more we will accomodate in the future. The progressive accomodation will never end.
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2824 posts
83 upvotes
Toronto
jerrysiz wrote:
Jul 12th, 2013 1:59 pm
:facepalm: These sites are located where high concentrations of intravenous drug users are located. It's not going to lower property values any more than the current reality in those neighborhoods of junkies shooting up on the street and in abandoned buildings has already. If anything, having a safe injection site might increase property values. There's no NIMBY argument here unless your backyard is already full of junkies.

Interesting that Ford is so adamant in his assumption that this is not something taxpayers want. I'm a taxpayer and I think it's a great idea. Similar programs have had very positive results when implemented in other provinces/countries. Ignoring or demonizing addicts isn't doing anything to help the problem, hopefully this will.
There are million dollar houses near Moss Park and Regent Park. There are million dollar houses near St.James Town. There are million dollar condos all over downtown. My sister works in an office building downtown. She often tells me she is afraid in her office building because of the drug addicts, drunks, bums and crazy people who come into her office building to get cheques from some government office. If they put an office in a big office building like that what makes you think they wont put an injection site in a similar building?

There is a huge drug problem at Dawes and VP area because of the social housing complex on the west side of Dawes. Surrounding this area is a pleasent community with bungalos and a lot of older people in bungalos. You don't think they would put a safe-injection site right there since there is a drug problem there? You don't think that would affect property values? Most of the government housing complexes in Toronto are not big communities like Regent Park. They are quite often single buildings in nice residential areas.
Deal Addict
Dec 26, 2007
2881 posts
167 upvotes
silky28 wrote:
Jul 13th, 2013 1:59 am
There are million dollar houses near Moss Park and Regent Park. There are million dollar houses near St.James Town. There are million dollar condos all over downtown. My sister works in an office building downtown. She often tells me she is afraid in her office building because of the drug addicts, drunks, bums and crazy people who come into her office building to get cheques from some government office. If they put an office in a big office building like that what makes you think they wont put an injection site in a similar building?

There is a huge drug problem at Dawes and VP area because of the social housing complex on the west side of Dawes. Surrounding this area is a pleasent community with bungalos and a lot of older people in bungalos. You don't think they would put a safe-injection site right there since there is a drug problem there? You don't think that would affect property values? Most of the government housing complexes in Toronto are not big communities like Regent Park. They are quite often single buildings in nice residential areas.
So there are all these junkies there already and you think property values will be lowered by providing services that are proven to have an impact on getting drug addicts into treatment and therefore reducing the number of junkies? And, if the sites are going to be in neighborhoods like Moss Park and Regent Park, the fact that there might be million dollar houses near Moss Park and Regent Park isn't really an issue, as the sites will be in the neighborhoods where they're needed, not near them.

I know exactly where Dawes and Vic Park is, a friend of mine lives in one of the houses there. She takes her baby daughter for walks in the neighborhood all the time and has never had a problem. I've never seen evidence of a "huge" drug problem in the area when I visit, so if there was a safe injection site located in wherever this "huge" drug problem is, I doubt it would lower the value of her property that is (very) near the area. And the scary scary people aren't going to bother your sister, they're there to pick up their cheques and carry on with their lives. The world isn't as frightening as you and your sister seem to think it is.
Deal Expert
May 17, 2008
15134 posts
154 upvotes
silky28 wrote:
Jul 13th, 2013 1:52 am
No, people like me think there are other, better ways of dealing with the existing problem other than accomodating their social and self abuse. You seem to think this is the only solution to the problem and because you agree with it it must be right. I would be all for accomodating them in some way if the accomodation came with increased responsibility...allow them XXX but if they violate XXX the penalty is HUGE. But that will never happen because the more we accomodate the more we will accomodate in the future. The progressive accomodation will never end.
Think about the population we are dealing with here. These are people who are out on the street sharing needles and doing god knows what else to get their fix. These are people have often lost their home, their family, their friends, their job, and their future to a substance, and they still risk their lives every day by using dirty needles just to get more of it. If none of that changed their behaviour, what possible punishment could we impose on them to change their behavior? I don't know what we could do to these people that is worse than what they have done to themselves.

It still seems like you think that providing accommodations for safe injections is somehow going to create a problem, when in reality the problem is already there. It is just easier for us to ignore if we don't have an official facility.

Safe injections are just one part of these facilities though. If you take a place like Insite in Vancouver, it is so much more than just a place to be supervised while shooting up. While they provide clean instruments so that people don't spread disease and intervention in the case of an overdose, they also provide routine healthcare, mental health counsellors, addiction counsellors, help in finding housing, and detox facilities for when people do decide that they want to quit.

It really is a win for everybody. Reducing the spread of serious diseases and reducing the number of people showing up in ERs with overdoses would save our healthcare system a ton of money. Bringing some of this activity off the streets improves our communities. Keeping people in better health and having easy access to services to help kick the addiction makes it way more likely that someone will actually be able to turn their life around.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 19, 2010
14339 posts
1989 upvotes
Toronto
BornRuff wrote:
Jul 13th, 2013 2:48 am
Think about the population we are dealing with here. These are people who are out on the street sharing needles and doing god knows what else to get their fix. These are people have often lost their home, their family, their friends, their job, and their future to a substance, and they still risk their lives every day by using dirty needles just to get more of it. If none of that changed their behaviour, what possible punishment could we impose on them to change their behavior? I don't know what we could do to these people that is worse than what they have done to themselves.

It still seems like you think that providing accommodations for safe injections is somehow going to create a problem, when in reality the problem is already there. It is just easier for us to ignore if we don't have an official facility.

Safe injections are just one part of these facilities though. If you take a place like Insite in Vancouver, it is so much more than just a place to be supervised while shooting up. While they provide clean instruments so that people don't spread disease and intervention in the case of an overdose, they also provide routine healthcare, mental health counsellors, addiction counsellors, help in finding housing, and detox facilities for when people do decide that they want to quit.

It really is a win for everybody. Reducing the spread of serious diseases and reducing the number of people showing up in ERs with overdoses would save our healthcare system a ton of money. Bringing some of this activity off the streets improves our communities. Keeping people in better health and having easy access to services to help kick the addiction makes it way more likely that someone will actually be able to turn their life around.
Yes I agree. There are people out there that need the help and can't have it because it simply isn't out there.
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2824 posts
83 upvotes
Toronto
BornRuff wrote:
Jul 13th, 2013 2:48 am
Think about the population we are dealing with here. These are people who are out on the street sharing needles and doing god knows what else to get their fix. These are people have often lost their home, their family, their friends, their job, and their future to a substance, and they still risk their lives every day by using dirty needles just to get more of it. If none of that changed their behaviour, what possible punishment could we impose on them to change their behavior? I don't know what we could do to these people that is worse than what they have done to themselves.

It still seems like you think that providing accommodations for safe injections is somehow going to create a problem, when in reality the problem is already there. It is just easier for us to ignore if we don't have an official facility.

Safe injections are just one part of these facilities though. If you take a place like Insite in Vancouver, it is so much more than just a place to be supervised while shooting up. While they provide clean instruments so that people don't spread disease and intervention in the case of an overdose, they also provide routine healthcare, mental health counsellors, addiction counsellors, help in finding housing, and detox facilities for when people do decide that they want to quit.

It really is a win for everybody. Reducing the spread of serious diseases and reducing the number of people showing up in ERs with overdoses would save our healthcare system a ton of money. Bringing some of this activity off the streets improves our communities. Keeping people in better health and having easy access to services to help kick the addiction makes it way more likely that someone will actually be able to turn their life around.

Everything you want to do does nothing but help to support a bad lifestyle and bad decisions that ultimately has and will continue to lead to increased drug use and further drains on the already burdensome social safety network.

The effective way to deal with these people that helps everyone is to remove these people from the communities. Stop allowing them to make decisions that hurt themselves and society. Stop allowing them to massively tax the healthcare system that is failing to provide service to the tax paying public because it wastes billions helping drug addicts and alcoholics who, for the most part contribute nothing to society yet take a lot out of the tax pool. We need to stop holding the hand and combing the hair of the useless and start paying attention to the useful. It's no wonder that pretty much every western nation is bankrupt because they have pretty much all jumped on the band wagon of support vs condemnation.

Even the programmes to get people off drugs are useless. What is the end-goal of it? Get people off drugs then what? They end up on ODSP for the rest of their lives and further tax everyone.

It is time we stop allowing people to continually take from the system and demand they up something in. There are far FAR too many people in the country (an all western countries) who do nothing but take from the tax pool supplied by the hard working. For instance, there are 1 million people + on welfare and ODSP in Ontario and 20% of all rental housing inOntario is government housing. Worse still is that only about 5% per year of people on assistance get off it. So about 10% of Ontario's population pay nothing into the system yet habitually take and 20% have taxes paying their rents. How can we run a province with that many people net-takers? Again.....bankrupt.

Move towards personal responsibility and punishment because the accommodation model is a failure!
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
2824 posts
83 upvotes
Toronto
jerrysiz wrote:
Jul 13th, 2013 2:43 am
So there are all these junkies there already and you think property values will be lowered by providing services that are proven to have an impact on getting drug addicts into treatment and therefore reducing the number of junkies? And, if the sites are going to be in neighborhoods like Moss Park and Regent Park, the fact that there might be million dollar houses near Moss Park and Regent Park isn't really an issue, as the sites will be in the neighborhoods where they're needed, not near them.

I know exactly where Dawes and Vic Park is, a friend of mine lives in one of the houses there. She takes her baby daughter for walks in the neighborhood all the time and has never had a problem. I've never seen evidence of a "huge" drug problem in the area when I visit, so if there was a safe injection site located in wherever this "huge" drug problem is, I doubt it would lower the value of her property that is (very) near the area. And the scary scary people aren't going to bother your sister, they're there to pick up their cheques and carry on with their lives. The world isn't as frightening as you and your sister seem to think it is.
Ask a cop. Do some research on the number of shootings and stabbings in that area!

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)