fine.

now, where?

GROSS

@4: Way to change the topic. Who said anything about "ending consumption"?

Safe consumption sites are intended to reduce the harms associated with drug use--both for users and for the surrounding community. The alternative to safer consumption is less-safe consumption. Leaving those drug users who haven't a home in which to conceal their activity to consume in parks, alleys, and public restrooms does not end consumption, and it makes consumption more dangerous and bothersome to most everyone directly or indirectly involved.

The U.S. government have tried for decades to reduce drug use by increasing the risk associated with it (e.g., risk of fines and imprisonment, risk of overdoes with nobody around to help, etc.). The war on drug users has been a miserable failure. It's well past time to move on to pragmatic alternatives. Seattle should continue to lead the way on drug policy reform.

@6: We can't stop people from using drugs INSIDE jails or prisons. Hell, even the threat of a death penalty doesn't prevent drug use. We've tried zero-tolerance and mass incarceration, with the end result that the US incarcerates both more people and a higher percentage of its population than any other country. And, yet, we consume more drugs than any other country. I think legalization and regulation is really the answer, but until then, yes, let's get use off of the streets.

"...I don't want to inject anymore. I'm not ready to quit, but I'd like to switch to smoking instead." Anyone who knows anything about heroin knows that is the reverse of the usual trajectory.

Hamsterdam FTW!

What a great city we live in. Homeless people can commit whatever crimes they want and junkies have nice warm places to shoot up. Lovely.

Yes, by all means, let's have consumption sites for drug users. No danger to the public, I'm sure. Just ask the people eating at La Isla on Saturday.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news…

@16: The fact that a man damaged property and harmed people while allegedly under the influence of the combination of a hallucinogen and a stimulant does not seem to support your assertion that safe consumption sites pose danger to the public.

If that man had been in a safe consumption space when he had his psychotic break, the odds of someone effectively intervening before he posed a danger to others would have increased dramatically. Leaving him to engage in drug use in the shadows did not make anyone safer.