By Guy Page
A California resident and self-professed Democrat from Grand Isle told Front Porch Forum readers she worries about the impact of ‘safe injection sites’ on local businesses.
Grand Isle-Chittenden Rep. Josie Leavitt (D-Grand Isle) is a co-sponsor of H72, the safe injection site bill approved by the House of Representatives last week. The comments below appeared in community discussion of a post she published in the January 16 FPF.
“If you think that small businesses are having a hard time getting people to come and patronize their stores here on the island or anywhere else in Vermont you just wait until you’ve got a bunch of people with substance use disorder running around being coddled by these safe injection sites (which is exactly what happened in Oregon),” Bianca DeValeria wrote.
“There was recently in the New York Times an article which talked extensively about how the substance use disorder population has boomed since safe injection sites were started, since drug use was no longer being criminalized, and confirmed the horrors that people were witnessing there. The detrimental effect that it had on small businesses who had closed their doors because nobody wants to pay to shop while there are people performing oral sex on each other and shooting up right outside (disgusting, but a reality in Oregon since the decriminalization of drugs and safe injection sites were put into place).”
Portland, Oregon has ‘harm reduction centers’ offering needle exchanges, Narcan and other services for drug users – but as yet does not allow injection inside, according to media reports.
Supporters of H72 say safe injection sites reduce overdoses. Opponents say they normalize opioid drug use, prevent police and child services workers from intervening with teen drug users, violate federal law, and open the door to decriminalization of fentanyl, heroin and other ‘hard’ drugs.
The original draft of H72 called for a drug decriminalization study. The bill passed in the House last week is now in the Vermont Senate.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Legislation
no comment
I am of the opinion that the placement of the safe injection centers should be based on the neighborhoods of those who co-sponsor the bill and those who Vvote to approve it. If they truly believe that the centers are a good idea….place them near their residences. Oh…whats that? You don’t want the increased crime, used needles and zoned out druggies hanging out near your homes? No? But you don’t mind placing them in other neighborhoods or near stores….let someone else deal with the consequences of your asinine decisions….in other words…business as usual under the dome.
Holy hell a democrat that doesn’t have their head up their butt.
Too bad drug addiction isn’t considered an oppressed race or gender.
…oh, but it IS considered a victimhood status, that will earn you attention, sympathy and taxpayer largess. It is a victimhood status that you voluntarily engage in when you dont have any other overt “victimhoods” to earn you free stuff.
Remember also, the “safe injection sites” will be in Burlington and Brattleboro, meaning drug addicts from four different states will be enjoying the hospitality of the state of Vermont.
Vermont’s new program ” Safe Injection Site “, so we can get all the scourge of society from our surrounding states because we are promoting the use of illegal drugs………………………..
A pathetic display of leadership, promoting the use of illegal drugs, where do we get these buffoons ??
Where do we get these buffoons?…a majority of us vote for them…every time.
The title, Levitt’s photo below the title, and phrasing of the first two paragraphs implies it is Josie Levitt that warns against the injection sites. This is NOT the case. It is a Grand Isle resident, not our legislator Josie, that opposes it. Levitt is in fact FOR them. Be careful!
thank you for this comment. i have edited the headline to provide more clarity
“Harm reduction centers.”
An oxymoron because there is no one who isn’t being harmed by these centers.
Are they canning the phrase “safe injection sites” in favor of the supposedly less alienating, more politically correct “harm reduction centers?”
Have you noticed that every time politicians justify, legitimize, and legalize criminal behavior, they have to come up with new buzzwords and phrases to obfuscate what’s really happening?
Let’s consider worse case scenario with the established ‘Safe Houses’ in Vermont.
First and foremost, a increase in drug users migrating to Vermont, from NY and most of New England states. Why, because drug users can maintain their habit without fear of being arrested. As a result a greater flow of drugs coming to Vermont. What things seem to follow large amount of drugs ? Guns (that aren’t bought in a gun shop), increase in crime , prostitution, (sex slavery market). Why does it all end up on Vermont’s doorstep ? Because we invited it through our legislation. Bottom line for the addicted, every time the shoot drugs into their veins their health is greatly compromised. Sooner or later their organs within their body stop working. But we (Vermont Legislation) have made a Safe Way to do that; and increase danger to society who are law abiding, and do not use drugs.
You want to make is easy? OKAY!!! LET’S GO!!! “So lock up your daughter, Lock up your wife, Lock up your back door, Run for your life, The man is back in town…”
No. I really mean it. I’m TNT, I’m Dynamite. Don’t you mess around with me.
How have these girls voting in favor of this sort of thing even survived? Do they have any life experience at all, or are they so tightly wrapped into their facebook generated reality that they fail to see the warning signs?
How about if we ask some recovering addicts how they feel about these things before we jump blindly off into oblivion? I’m pretty sure they will refer you back to paragraph one of my statement here.
Cloward-Piven Strategy
“The enemy is already here”. – Dan Bongino