Guest Editorial: King County's Selective Funding For Safe Consumption Sites Is Wrong

Comments

1
Common Sense, Science, Compassion, Doing the Right Thing... ALL these things (and more) seem to be dead or dying in the hands of politicians these days. What a shame, King County COULD have done the right thing for once. Alas, they continue to take us down the road of more f*ckup-ery.

Thank you Kris for your thoughtful piece, I can only hope it doesn't fall on deaf ears. We MUST do better!
2
Inherently with the problems opioid additions is bad behavior. We need to keep our neighborhoods safe and we don't want the government giving a de facto encouragement to escaping life's problems with a needle.
3
@2 still cant tell if trolling or dumbest person on earth
4
I'm happy I live in a city that provides safe spaces for addicts to shoot up and overdose. It's very inconvenient when a junkie OD's in front of my house in Wedgwood. I spent good money on that property and I certainly don't want drug addicts lowering my property value.
5
@3, I forgot... YOU RACIST!!!
7
@6: Tell that to the people complaining about drug use in parks, alleys, and restrooms. Tell that to people who purchase drugs on the black market, get something they didn't expect, and then overdose in a location where there is nobody nearby to help.
9
If a user ODs in a safe consumption site, can their family sue King County/Seattle and staff for $$$$$?

I'm just wondering if this might be the reason there's resistance to these sites from county/city govt. - worries about liability and lawsuits. If lawsuits are possible, it might be difficult to staff these centers also.
10
Is the author expressing shock, or simply a restatement of the status quo that King County would "[kill] any chance of sites opening outside of Seattle while not actually voting against them?"
You don't need to look too far into the past to see how King County and the county's elected Executive Dow Constantine have agreed to allow retail marijuana stores only in certain urban business zones, therefore voting a de facto prohibition in the vast majority of the unincorporated area. But, since that area has a population larger than Bellevue, it has seen 10 stores open versus Bellevue's 6.
And you can probably guess, they're nowhere near the white neighborhoods in the unincorporated county ...