So very much! Let's take someone who's gotten themselves into a world of pain by becoming addicted to something, and instead of helping them in any way, let's exacerbate the situation by turning them into a convict. Even as a person with moderate libertarian leanings, I find the way we handle this to be absurd. Incarceration has become an industry unto itself though, so expect lobbyists to block any attempt at legalization.Vivi22 said:No, they won't. The only thing that prison instead of rehab results in is people who now have an even harder time turning their lives around, are more likely to resort to crime when they get out (whether to feed their addiction or to simply get by), and they'll have received the best education in crime you can get: serving time in prison.BeerTent said:Correction: It used to not bother me. But working and playing with a bunch of fucking addicts for around an entire year? Now it does. I used to want a lot of these things legalized, now I'm conflicted. Keeping it illegal causes crimes, but having the harsh punishments on the addicts? Well... Maybe they'll change. I don't know.
Removing all drug prohibition and putting the money presently going to incarcerating people with addictions into rehab programs instead would do a lot more to fix the problem. Not the least of which would be helping to destigmatize drug use enough that users might actually be more willing to admit they need help, and suddenly be able to get it. And if someone commits a crime like driving while impaired, you'll all of a sudden have some programs to send them to that stand a chance of actually helping them deal with the problem.
Prison isn't rehab, and people need to stop pretending it is.
OT: Yes, I would discriminate against a person I knew was a hard drug user. I've seen what kinds of things addiction can drive people to do and so would not trust them in ways that I might trust others. My discriminatory practices would be to help ensure my safety and that of the addict.