The state of California plans to open two controversial “safe injection sites” in San Francisco this July. This will make San Francisco the first city in the nation to firmly commit to such a concept. While Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Seattle are all considering similar sites, they’ve yet to realize any actions or decisions on the matter. Australia, Canada, and parts of Europe already offer heroin addicts places to “shoot up,” as its termed, without fear of prosecution.
California taxpayers will foot the bill to keep the operations running. It would be a likely safe assumption to expect more California cities to follow suit.
The director of San Francisco’s Department of Public Health, Barbara Garcia, said that she will now work out the exacts in terms of location details. She’s deciding between several current nonprofits that offer clean needle exchanges. According to the SF Chronicle, Garcia anticipates the centers to open in July and without any anticipated delays.
When prodded over whether or not she was concerned that the current Trump administration might involve themselves in the situation which would clearly be skirting Federal drug laws, Garcia said, “That’s to be seen, I’m more worried about people dying in our streets.”
San Francisco is currently home to 22,000 intravenous drug users who openly shoot up in public transportation stations and parks. Areas often become littered with dirty, used heroin needles. It is not considered unusual for kids and typical urban residents to witness heroin being shot up by addicts in public spaces.
While many feel strongly that taxpayers should not be forced to pay for drug user housing, the majority of San Franciso’s residents support it. According to a Chamber of Commerce’s Dignity Health CityBeat Poll, 45% support it with 22% support it “somewhat.”
The poll was conducted in January by David Binder Research and surveyed 500 registered city voters in English and Cantonese. The margin of error is 4.4 percent. (source)
California is among several Liberal states who consistently oppose Federal law. Though, San Francisco also remains one of the most treacherous places for vaccine freedom and gun ownership. It seems the state picks and chooses which laws should apply to it on a Federal level.
The central question becomes what roll taxpayers should really have in such a concept. Should taxpayers be asked to foot the bill for drug users who aren’t even intent upon quitting in any capacity? In the most literal terms, California is opening hospitality homes for drug users to more conveniently get high. The focus on assisting with addiction is all but lost from the concept.
Senior vice president for public policy at the chamber, Jim Lazarus, said he wasn’t shocked by the support of injection sites in the city.
“I think the open and notorious use of drugs on the street gives rise to overwhelming support for safe injection sites as a possible solution,” he said.
For the fiscally conservative in California who may not appreciate their tax dollars being spent in such a way, there isn’t going to be much recourse to be had. California has a habit of disregarding people’s income by taxing it to death and they certainly don’t respect any religious freedoms, something that’s been proven tirelessly in the mandatory vaccine push.