Originally Posted by
qccfc
You are dealing with the drug user any way, whether that be via policing, the health service, housing or recovery. That's all coming from the tax collect anyway.
If you eliminate the dealer, then you can control the product, eliminate the crime from that aspect, and eliminate the need for the user to commit crime to get the money to get the product. You will also eliminate the dealer controlling the price point and steadily increasing it when the subject becomes addicted.
That would then have an improvement to the local community due to a reduction in crimes, and not have drug runners on the streets targeting individuals, and youngsters not looking at drugs as a viable job prospect.
Seems a fair trade off to me, the tax payer pays either way.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote