[LawTalkingGuy]

> Multiple Republicans ... and you wonder why there's a backlash

I'm generally not in the USA so I'm trying to speak of things more internationally, and broader than just the divisive Dem/Rep mob.

And no, the backlash I'm talking about is the last eighty or more years. The hippies are boomers, after all.

> Top 10 states by drug overdose ...

I'm not talking about deaths but deaths that society encourages. What would happen in that area if you tried to shoot up in front of a cop?

> there's no fentanyl distribution that I can see. Care to provide a source?

The programs aren't very well documented because they're "just" a doctor treating their patients, many of whom they never meet. The newspaper articles aren't great. Here's a transcript of the Alberta government examining Vancouver's drug situation for the purposes of setting their own policies. There are also other days of testimony and citizen input if you look around. https://docs.assembly.ab.ca/LADDAR_files/docs/committees/ess...

> The drug is extremely potent to be consumed alone.

Yeah. The dealers intentionally kill a few every now and then as an ad for their product and they manipulate the potency in competition with other dealers. The police warn non drug users that a cheap street dose is many times more likely to kill an inexperienced user than a similar dose from a decade ago.

[themitigating]

You provided a link to a Canadian program. If you don't have other sources then why do you think it happens in the us

"The police warn non drug users that a cheap street dose is many times more likely to kill an inexperienced user than a similar dose from a decade ago."

This is a conspiracy theory. Evidence?

And about your first comment, I'm showing numbers of deaths, you're claiming that some part of that is encouraged and that percentage is higher for liberal cities. But the death rate doesn't correlate either way. So it doesn't make sense, even if it was encouraged apparently it's not making things worse

Most of what you said is speculation and you haven't provided meaningful evidence besides linking to a paper in another country.

[LawTalkingGuy]

> You provided a link to a Canadian program. If you don't have other sources then why do you think it happens in the us

Because the cities literally follow the same public policy. Don't arrest for "simple usage", camping on the streets is allowed, etc. They're getting advice from the same people. But yes, the USA does not that I know, have vending machines for drugs yet, that's still afaik a Canadian thing. In the USA you have to go to a "clinic" and ask a worker for your dose by hand and generally they want you to consume the drug there.

> [Street doses growing in strength] is a conspiracy theory.

Not even a little. I'm not talking about the why or the who. When tested the bags sold contain more active drug and many first-time users are reported dying when generally opioids (read erowid, etc) don't do that.

> Evidence?

Your googling fingers are busted but the ones you use to complain are working?

> Most of what you said is speculation and you haven't provided meaningful evidence besides linking to a paper

No, I've provided enough evidence to show that things are run by people who don't know what they're doing and are misrepresenting the studies to the city. If you can't find the public documents talking about your own cities you aren't trying hard enough.

> in another country.

Lol, so sorry the world doesn't end at your borders.

[themitigating]

"Your googling fingers are busted but the ones you use to complain are working?"

It's not my job in a debate to provide evidence for your arguments

"Lol, so sorry the world doesn't end at your borders."

We are discussing American politics

[LawTalkingGuy]

> We are discussing American politics

We're also discussing drugs and the lib/con divide which aren't in the article either. I didn't respond to you originally, you responded to me which means you adopt the discussion at that point - or did you intend to reply elsewhere?

Also, this is how you stay uninformed. Refusing to look to countries who are a few years ahead of you on a policy cycle. Drugs are drugs no matter the country.

> [not my job] to provide evidence for your arguments

You don't have to. I fully supported my argument, it's not my fault you can't read Canadian.

It's as valid for me to quote Vancouver as a model for SF and LA as it was for Vancouver to reference Amsterdam twenty years ago.