Cops slam ecstasy harm-reduction campaign

CALGARY – Calgary officials have decried a week-long education campaign in central Alberta that preaches harm reduction, rather than abstinence, when it comes to ecstasy.

Volunteers from the Central Alberta AIDS Network Society (CAANS) are venturing into bars and clubs around Red Deer, Alta., to educate young people about the dangers of ecstasy and how to avoid overdosing.

There have been several ecstasy-related deaths in the province in recent months.

"We're going to say to them, 'If you know somebody who is going to dose, we recommend they dose half a pill and see how it goes,'" said CAANS executive director Jennifer Vanderschaeghe.

"We want to say, make sure you guys have a plan if you get separated, if somebody looks like they're ODing, that you actually respond with health care.'"

But that harm-reduction approach conflicts with the 'just say no' message being pushed by police and health officials here in Calgary, where politicians and police have ramped up a campaign promoting abstinence as the only sure-fire way to avoid serious injury and even death.

CAANS' approach is misguided, Calgary Police Association president John Dooks charged.

"Having a buddy there when you take an overdose that could kill you, it's already too late," said Dooks. "That's a very bad, selfish, arrogant and irresponsible program. They may have good intentions, but we all know where good intentions go.

"It is absolutely absurd to suggest there is a safe way to do drugs."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2012/02/04/19339396.html

"Having a buddy there when you take an overdose that could kill you, it's already too late," said Dooks. "That's a very bad, selfish, arrogant and irresponsible program. They may have good intentions, but we all know where good intentions go."

Click to expand...

All good intentions are wrong, guys.

What a fucking idiot.

It's absurd to suggest that a harm reduction campaign is selfish and arrogant.

You have to look at it from the medical-legal-emergency perspective to understand why cops are too pissed to listen. For starters, ecstasy is a luxury, not a necessity. And, because it is not legal or regulated, there will always be a percentage of pills that contain PMA (or whatever). Because harm reduction is not a ubiquitous strategy yet, and because there is always going to be a percentage of drug users who would snort glass to get high, there will be a non-zero number of people who call an ambulance and get 10-20 professionals involved for several hours to assess a serious health problem and possibly save a life. This costs money in every country - and I'm not trying to sterotype my drug using brethren, but realistically society is going to pay for the ambulance ride and hospital visit, the combination of which will approach $5-$10 thousand (in dollars), not including the opportunity cost police face when they are forced to regulate the situation. The reason is pisses off cops should be obvious: a bunch of serious business that costs emergency rooms and public employee time occurs because someone wants to have a lot more fun than he or she would otherwise have. They look at ecstasy users as people who gamble with other people's money and time.

A well-regulated, above-ground ecstasy industry would be less of a drain on society than what we have now. I imagine it'd generate revenue far in excess of its costs.

^ Exactly...it would take the guessing game out of buying MDMA, among other substances. People would know exactly what they were getting every time. The club could sell the MDMA and give a flier including information on the safety measures that are necessary to follow when taking it. They could have trained medical staff on hand as well. If they only dispensed on weekends, the cost of having the staff at hand wouldn't be as costly either.

My response to "people would take it all the time" is: there are people that will do what they want, regardless of consequences, the best we can do as a society is to work toward reducing the harm that comes with that and throwing people in jail definitely doesn't accomplish that.

Just some ideas of mine.

*sigh* Calgary cops at their finest yet again =\

It pisses me off to no end when they do this. Harm reduction is what works to prevent these, not slamming abstinence. I have been significantly safer with my drug use ever since joining bluelight, and all of my RL friends who use various drugs have been too, I'm the "go to" person for all my friends with their "safe use of drugs" questions, so I know first hand it works.

People who want to do drugs are going to do drugs. If you teach them how to do it safer, chances are they will. In a lot of scenarios it'll actually turn out to be an overall more enjoyable experience one way or another by doing so!

Ugh, to be able to buy pure shard moonrock at a store.

The day I read that news article I'm probably going to cream my pants...

235360287471352662 said:

A well-regulated, above-ground ecstasy industry would be less of a drain on society than what we have now. I imagine it'd generate revenue far in excess of its costs.

Click to expand...

Police are on the front line of where theory meets reality. If we could switch directly into a well-funded harm reduction society, things would definitely be better. The problem is the following: people aren't going to stop gambling with bad ecstasy pills and wait until a new paradigm is established. As drug users, we would make much more headway by reducing ecstasy use through self discipline and spending time cleaning the legislative pool before jumping in again.

^
Tis true. Ecstasy is my favorite drug by far but I haven't done it in 8 months. I have become far more selective and cautious with my pills and since then I have yet to find any of acceptable quality. Sometimes the only way to be safe (like right now in my area) is to really just say no

"It is absolutely absurd to suggest there is a safe way to do drugs."

Make them legal???

im sick of people who just want it their way and if not their way its stupid.. well people are gonna use drugs no matter what so why not be safe and possibly save someones life.. who ever said them things needs to look in the mirror

the abstinence modle worked so well for teen pregnancy that they all but shit canned it and went with pregnancy prevention. it is the same situation... what is wrong with using both ideas as a way to reach the public. if people want to be totally safe then they will not take the drug but if they want to take the risk then they should be provided the tools to limit the risk as much as possible.

the only sure fire way to not get killed in a war is to not have the war in the first place....but when they do send in the troops they give them training, a weapon, and body armor. it may not stop them from being killed but they have a better chance than if the sent them out there naked.

My response to "people would take it all the time" is:

Click to expand...

mine: if it were legal and available like alcohol, individuals and culture would adapt and learn how to use with more equilibrium... i don't buy alcohol 24/7, same principle. in fact, alcohol addicts more of its users by percentage... different people just have different brains.

captainballs said:

Police are on the front line of where theory meets reality. If we could switch directly into a well-funded harm reduction society, things would definitely be better. The problem is the following: people aren't going to stop gambling with bad ecstasy pills and wait until a new paradigm is established. As drug users, we would make much more headway by reducing ecstasy use through self discipline and spending time cleaning the legislative pool before jumping in again.

Click to expand...

i liked your economic analysis and explanation of why officials are pissed. but i don't think changing legislators will change the legislative environment that keeps leading to prohibitions, though. and while using less drugs would create less of a reaction toward those drugs and us drug users from society--it is the reaction itself we are trying to address, once drug use rose again it would be just as bad.

i'd say we have to continue living the fact that drug users are humans too.

qwe said:

mine: if it were legal and available like alcohol, individuals and culture would adapt and learn how to use with more equilibrium... i don't buy alcohol 24/7, same principle. in fact, alcohol addicts more of its users by percentage... different people just have different brains.
i liked your economic analysis and explanation of why officials are pissed. but i don't think changing legislators will change the legislative environment that keeps leading to prohibitions, though. and while using less drugs would create less of a reaction toward those drugs and us drug users from society--it is the reaction itself we are trying to address, once drug use rose again it would be just as bad.

i'd say we have to continue living the fact that drug users are humans too.

Click to expand...

I think you have an idealistic philosophy about change, which I hope every new generation continues to push - but I am an old man now, and I have grown cynical: the legislative environment that moves slowly and hurts people is the only one we have ever had, and the only one we will have for our lifetimes. While it is important to continue to raise awareness that it doesn't have to be like this, it is more important to play the game and force legislators to behave the way we want them to, issue by issue. When confronted by angry police and health professionals, it is time to act like a lamb and admit the faults of the ecstasy business, with no defensive qualifications or masked attacks on the law. By reducing ecstasy use we disarm them, and that is when it is time to act like lions with insidious research and positive promotion.

Gotta love how they think making it legal would make people take it all the time.

Er, people already do! being illegal suuuure stops that. ¬_¬

Harm reduction without encouraging testing? Just try half a pill instead? Sounds like crap HR governments who deal drugs would give in lieu of the PMMA scare reducing business.

severely etarded said:

Harm reduction without encouraging testing? Just try half a pill instead? Sounds like crap HR governments who deal drugs would give in lieu of the PLACE scare reducing business.

Click to expand...

You have to remember this article is already clearly biased against the use of drugs. I doubt those quotes are correct and they actually took the time to get the correct information from the harm reduction campaign.