Just say no to safe-injection drug sites
In the 1980s, first lady Nancy Reagan was the driving force behind the antidrug campaign “Just Say No.” By all accounts, it was extremely effective.
But rather than building upon such successes, some leaders in Philadelphia think they know a much better way to reduce drug use.
They want to give addicts a safe place to obtain free drug paraphernalia and shoot up – without fear of arrest – and have medically trained staff on hand in case of overdose. Those pushing such “safeinjection” sites actually believe that giving junkies the freedom to use drugs in this way will A) reduce the number of opioid deaths in the city, and B) increase the number of people seeking treatment to wean themselves off drugs.
Maybe the organizers are incredibly naïve. Or maybe they’ve snorted too many lines themselves. But one thing is certain: Safe-injection sites don’t just violate the law; they incentivize increased – not reduced – drug use.
Once upon a time, Americans dutifully followed laws, even when they didn’t like them. And it was that adherence to the rule of law, along with the people’s unique ability to change laws legally through their elected representatives, that separated America from other nations.
But now that train has jumped the tracks.
Now, an “I’m-entitled-todo-whatever-I want” attitude has become pervasive throughout society. Rather than working to change laws that may be outdated, increasing numbers of people simply ignore laws that don’t suit them, and deride any talk of punishment with self-righteous indignation. Making the sin mortal is the number of high-profile individuals leading the charge to reject certain laws.
One of the most flagrant examples of trying to toss existing law aside – an effort that has the full support of top elected officials – is occurring in the City of Brotherly Love.
Safehouse, a nonprofit organization, is looking to open the nation’s first medically supervised drug-injection site. It would be a facility where people could use illegal drugs, be given free syringes, and, should they have an “issue” – such as overdosing – health workers would be on hand to render assistance.
In other words, drug users (either junkies or “recreational” users) could walk in with illicit substances, buy goods from friends if they’re running low (also called “drug dealing”), and go to town, without worrying that the party will be busted by cops. And should he push it too far, someone will revive him – so that he can do it all over again. Only in America!
Supporters love to say that these facilities will save lives, and will be an invaluable part of helping users seeking treatment. Stop right there. On what basis can anyone say that the majority of “patrons” will “seek treatment?” Intuitively, it’s obvious that’s not what they’ll be doing, given that there are hundreds of existing treatment centers. If they truly wanted treatment, they would have already sought out such help.
And how will drug possession work? So if you’re inside the door, you’re safe, but if you walk out onto the street, it’s fair game to get arrested? And if it’s acceptable for the city to effectively decriminalize drug use, will drug tests for employees go out the window?
The reality is that many would use a drug-injection facility to – ding, ding ding – do drugs. And why not, since they could use heroin and fentanyl in a “no-police” zone, get free needles, and not worry about an OD. For an addict, what’s not to love?
Not surprisingly, Mayor Jim Kenney fully supports the idea, as does District Attorney Larry Krasner. Not to be outdone, former Philly mayor and Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell not only serves on Safehouse’s board of directors, but incorporated the organization. So let’s get this straight. • The current mayor of Philadelphia, who, as head of the city’s executive branch, was elected to carry out existing laws, favors private enterprise and nonprofits opening drug houses where people can freely use illegal drugs.
• The district attorney – Philadelphia’s top law enforcement official – will look the other way by not prosecuting users or staff. In defending his position, he went to the standard playbook of power-hungry government officials looking to justify power grabs: “We have to be willing to do what is necessary to save lives.” Whatever that means.
Krasner also said there would be a backlash if people at these facilities were arrested. So lawbreakers who generate “sympathy” should be given a free pass? That’s fantastic news for a thief, since he can now justify stealing as a way to take care of his family. Making martyrs out of criminals – only in Philly.
• Rendell, formerly mayor of Philadelphia, Democratic National chairman and Pennsylvania governor, not only supports the blatant law-breaking, and not only got the nonprofit rolling, but openly mocked the feds when the Deputy U.S. attorney general warned that opening an injection facility would be met with a swift response. “I’ve got a message for (Deputy A.G. Rod Rosenstein): I’m the incorporator of the safe-injection site nonprofit, and my address is the offices of the Bellevue. They can come and arrest me first, because federal prisons are nicer than state (ones).”
How utterly ironic – though hardly surprising – that three high-powered politicians, who all swore to uphold the law, are leading the charge to break it.
The feds, in keeping their word, have filed suit to stop the Safehouse effort. United States Attorney William McSwain, in a show of restraint, is seeking a civil ruling, rather than criminal prosecution, that would prevent the site from opening.
“Normalizing the use of deadly drugs is not the answer to solving the epidemic,” he correctly stated.
Should a judge legislate from the bench and rule against the government, however, McSwain could up the ante by making arrests, aggressively prosecuting both users and Safehouse staff, and seizing assets through his office’s forfeiture power.
On cue, his announcement was met with – you guessed it – protests and social media damnation, which means he’s doing the right thing.
The most important aspect to keep in mind is that the effort to stop safe-injection sites isn’t about abandoning drug addicts, but following the law. If you don’t like the current rules, fine. Work to change them at the local, state and federal levels. But don’t ignore the law simply because changing it is hard.
Of course it’s hard! Nothing of value comes easy. But you have to earn the change you seek. It cannot be given just because you think you’re entitled to it, and you cannot circumvent the law when it suits you. Our nation’s history is filled with movements that changed not just laws, but hearts and minds, because of people’s blood, sweat and tears: Slavery, women’s suffrage, workplace rules, civil rights, environmental standards, gay marriage. But the people who fought for those monumental changes did so the right way – the legal way. They protested, organized, lobbied and engaged in civil disobedience until they were successful in changing the law.
But if Philly’s leaders have their way, they will set the extremely dangerous precedent of ignoring laws and, when applicable, have liberal judges legislate from the bench to accomplish their agenda. And that’s as un-American as it gets.
Both sides agree that the opioid epidemic is growing at an exponential rate. Future columns will examine the crisis in greater detail, including legal ways to address the problem.
But in the meantime, we should never deviate from working within the law. Just as it was wrong for people to blow up abortion clinics to protest the killing of unborn babies, so too is it wrong to facilitate supervised drug use, no matter how noble a cause it may seem.
The alternative is becoming a banana republic. And at that point, drug use will be the least of our problems.