CITY-FUNDED CRACK KITS NOT HELPING ANYONE

So maybe I don't understand this issue fully because I am not, nor
have I ever been, addicted to crack cocaine. But when I read about
the uproar over the mayor's pledge to cancel the city's "crack pipe
program," I'm left scratching my head a little bit.

So the city isn't going to be providing a cracksmoking goodie-bag to
drug addicts anymore? Say it ain't so. Am I the only person who
thinks that maybe it is a bad idea to provide drug paraphernalia to
these people at the city's expense? Probably not, since apparently
there was only a group of about 25 people protesting Larry O'Brien's
decision to do away with this ridiculousness.

Let's break this issue down a bit, shall we? Here you have a person,
perhaps a homeless person, perhaps a professional with a wife and 3.5
kids, addicted to one of the most addictive drugs out there. If this
person is homeless, the money they are earning as panhandlers is
going to feed their habit. If this person is, for example, a husband
and father, chances are the money he/she is earning that should be
going towards his family is instead being put towards buying some rock.

But it's a dangerous world out there, right? Crack pipes get dirty
and addicts, desperate for a fix, aren't too worried about where
their pipe came from or whether it has already been used by someone else.

Enter the City of Ottawa under then-mayor Bob Chiarelli, and instead
of spending money on oh, I don't know, cheaper rehab, they decide
they might as well create some loot bags to make your crack-smoking
experience an enjoyable one. Into this kit goes a clean pipe and
pipe-disposal system, chewing gum (just in case the drugs rob a user
of their ability to produce saliva), lip balm (for those pesky
crackpipe burns) and condoms (obviously).

Sounds like a pretty good deal, and it only costs the city $8,000
every year. The head scratching continues.

It's all well and good to want to prevent the spread of diseases such
as HIV and Hepatitis C from using dirty pipes, and apparently the
program has encouraged many intravenous drug users to switch from
shooting up to smoking their drugs instead. Way to go, guys.

The Ottawa Citizen even quoted one city hall protester as saying that
smoking your drugs is safer then injecting them. Seriously? You're
still smoking crack, it can't be that much safer.

Why should we--we, of course being taxpayers be making it easier on
these people to do what they do? Could this money not be directed to
a more socially-useful destination, such as perhaps working to get
these people off the drugs?

I'm not even slightly suggesting that it's easy to shake a
crack-addiction, nor do I mean to sound like I am riding on a
sanctimonious, crackfree high-horse. I am, however, suggesting that
it's not the best idea to have a banner up at the entrance to the
city that says "Crack heads welcome."

If the city legitimately wants to get people off the drug, making
them more comfortable while they get high is more than a little
counterproductive to that desire. It may make them give up needles in
favour of smoking the stuff, but what is the solution to get them to
give up smoking it? It takes more than willpower to give up this kind
of addiction, so rehab is the way to go.

Making the crack consumption an enjoyable, safe and painless process
is not going to convince anyone to enter rehab.

I'm sure the city meant well when the program was established; it
seems the thinking was that by handing out these kits it would enable
them to keep tabs on who was using, thus being better able to educate
people about the dangers of drug use, and also to keep them from
getting sick while they're using.

But who is to say if this program is having the desired effect, who
is to say that it's not encouraging drug use, or at the very least
promoting it?

There is no question that drug abuse is a major problem here and
anywhere, whether it is crack, heroin or crystal meth, and any
available money should be directed to prevention, not just to damage control.

Whether prevention involves easily-accessed and cheap rehab for the
poor or an increased policed presence on the streets to curb the drug
trafficking, or both, the solution is not to throw the money away and
say: "Oh, you're a crack addict with a dry mouth and burnt lips,
here's something to make you feel better."

Doing it that way isn't going to make things better, and mayor
O'Brien 's pledge to squash the program is a big step in the right direction.