Am I the only one who thinks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thankfully, yes. You are the only one.

+1

I value the life of those people and don't mind spending a little money to save them. Enough of my tax money gets used to kill people, a little save them is fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't disagree with OP, I think the wording is a little off. I have been frustrated at the thought of my tax money going to these projects surrounding addiction. The part that bugs me is this is completely preventable from the get go. We all know drugs are bad, yet choices were made to use them. I've been prescribed narcotics plenty of times for pain, never had the desire to abuse them (if you use them as prescribed, there is no uncontrollable urge that overtakes you). I don't see myself being affected by an addict in my personal life, like a pp claims, but it is likely that I will be a victim of a crime due to someone needing money to feed their addiction. So I kind of get it, I guess--but would still rather see the funds used for other things.

You don't get it. Addicts come from all walks of life. They need help. Nobody sets out to become an addict.

Biggest pile of crap I've read. Addiction is something that people shop around for. Please explain to me how one becomes an addict if drugs are not routinely used in questionable quantities ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thankfully, yes. You are the only one.

+1

I value the life of those people and don't mind spending a little money to save them. Enough of my tax money gets used to kill people, a little save them is fine.

The problem with this line of thinking is that addicts remain addicts forever . You may think you're saving their lives but to them it's just another opportunity to get another high. Have you always felt this way or you just feel this way now that the faces of these 'junkies' are hmm different? Feel free to lie to me