Do the Gardas turn a blind eye to drug use in Dublin ?

Dr Brown

I was walking past the Garden of Remembrance today and saw an individual sitting on the grass injecting drugs into his shoulder in full view of the public.

The guy made no attempt to hide his drug use it was like he was just smoking a cigarette he was so causal about it.

This begs the question are Gardas now turning a blind eye to people shooting up in public ?

jimmycrackcorm

If a garda sees it then they will act like any other issue. I do think they'd be very wary of junkies injecting because of the risk of the needle.

crusier

Dr Brown wrote:

The guy made no attempt to hide his drug use it was like he was just smoking a cigarette he was so causal about it.

Dr Brown wrote:

This begs the question are Gardas now turning a blind eye to people shooting up in public ?

Dr Brown wrote:

I was walking past the Garden of Remembrance today and saw an individual sitting on the grass injecting drugs into his shoulder in full view of the public.

Dr Brown wrote:

The guy made no attempt to hide his drug use it was like he was just smoking a cigarette he was so causal about it.

Dr Brown wrote:

This begs the question are Gardas now turning a blind eye to people shooting up in public ?

What did you do about it?

Dr Brown

I can only imagine what tourists must think when they see junkies shooting up right in the open.

If was a tourist and I saw that I wouldn't come back to Dublin.

Happy4all

Dr Brown wrote: »

I was walking past the Garden of Remembrance today and saw an individual sitting on the grass injecting drugs into his shoulder in full view of the public.

The guy made no attempt to hide his drug use it was like he was just smoking a cigarette he was so causal about it.

This begs the question are Gardas now turning a blind eye to people shooting up in public ?

Yes

Dr Brown

crusier wrote: »

What did you do about it?

I got out of the area ASAP.

harry Bailey esq

Dr Brown wrote: »

If was a tourist and I saw that I wouldn't come back to Dublin.

If you happened to be a tourist that likes gear you might consider it. That being said I'd wager that heroin addicts make up the only a miniscule amount of Thomas Cooks target market

squawker

dd972

I remember the QE2 visit and the way they cleaned the place up to the extent it looked like Geneva or the like, I thought, 'Jaysus, she can come and live above the GPO if that's the effect she has on the place'.

wiz569

Are you sure he wasn't a diabetic?

I always presumed hard drugs were injected into veins.

Dr Brown

wiz569 wrote: »

Are you sure he wasn't a diabetic?

I always presumed hard drugs were injected into veins.

He was definitely a junkie he and his mate were also drinking cans of beer.

The Maverick

Dr Brown wrote: »

I got out of the area ASAP.

If you're so concerned in the future, why not ring the guards and tell them?

punisher5112

wiz569 wrote: »

Are you sure he wasn't a diabetic?

I always presumed hard drugs were injected into veins.

They will inject anyway they can and where ever they have a vein left.

I see it a lot around the city and also have seen them getting others to inject into their eyeballs.

A lot are going around abusing prescription drugs and then you will see the ones on opioids where they look like they are drifting in the wind where the legs stay in position but the full body above the waste drifts around and slumps over.

These people need very much needed help and methadone for 10, 15, 20 years isn't working.

There needs to be proper rehab places and they need to be put in to give them a chance and this should be done at the earliest point if possible.

mickuhaha

I have seen them taking things on Pearse st right in front of the station. I would say they are sick of arresting the same guys for the same "minor charges".

jim salter

Dr Brown wrote: »

He was definitely a junkie he and his mate were also drinking cans of beer.

Yes, but how do you know he wasn't diabetic?

Del2005

Dr Brown wrote: »

I was walking past the Garden of Remembrance today and saw an individual sitting on the grass injecting drugs into his shoulder in full view of the public.

The guy made no attempt to hide his drug use it was like he was just smoking a cigarette he was so causal about it.

This begs the question are Gardas now turning a blind eye to people shooting up in public ?

The Gardaí are turning a blind eye to drug taking, and other any social behavior, because when they do deal with it nothing happens to the offender but the Garda has to spend hours dealing with them.

To get the Gardaí to deal with these issues the whole justice system needs to be reviewed but the solicitors and judges are part of the problem, so the system will never be fixed to benefit the people while it benefits the people in the system so much.

mickuhaha

Del2005 wrote: »

The Gardaí are turning a blind eye to drug taking, and other any social behavior, because when they do deal with it nothing happens to the offender but the Garda has to spend hours dealing with them.

To get the Gardaí to deal with these issues the whole justice system needs to be reviewed but the solicitors and judges are part of the problem, so the system will never be fixed to benefit the people while it benefits the people in the system so much.

Totally agree.

soiseztomabel

Do posters here think the supervised injection facilities are a good or a bad thing ?

mickuhaha

soiseztomabel wrote: »

Do posters here think the supervised injection facilities are a good or a bad thing ?

Don't agree with them. They should be closed. In my opinion if someone is braking the law they should be arrested and prosecuted not given a place to break the law. Turn them into emergency accommodation.

francois

soiseztomabel wrote: »

Do posters here think the supervised injection facilities are a good or a bad thing ?

A good thing, keeps needles off the street for starters, though they shouldn't be just in the city centre, but in areas which need them

Wanderer78

soiseztomabel wrote:

Do posters here think the supervised injection facilities are a good or a bad thing ?

Legalisation probably is the only way to deal with this now, this should also include the creation of supervised injection facilities

mickuhaha wrote:

Don't agree with them. They should be closed. In my opinion if someone is braking the law they should be arrested and prosecuted not given a place to break the law. Turn them into emergency accommodation.

We ve been playing this 'out of sight' game with our complex social issues such as mental health and drug addiction for far too long now, and it has largely failed, it's time to try something different. This is a health issue not a legal one

mickuhaha

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Legalisation probably is the only way to deal with this now, this should also include the creation of supervised injection facilities



We ve been playing this 'out of sight' game with our complex social issues such as mental health and drug addiction for far too long now, and it has largely failed, it's time to try something different. This is a health issue not a legal one

That's incorrect for drugs its both. No one is hooked on any drug until they are willingly or not introduced to them. In my opinion the state should be part responsible for preventing continued self harm may it be drugs or other. One for instance would be the alcoholics that end up in a hospital every few weeks. Keep records and if they are repeatedly injuring themselves place them in a mental facilities until such a time that they can show they can be responsible for their own wellbeing.

Augme

mickuhaha wrote: »

That's incorrect for drugs its both. No one is hooked on any drug until they are willingly or not introduced to them. In my opinion the state should be part responsible for preventing continued self harm may it be drugs or other. One for instance would be the alcoholics that end up in a hospital every few weeks. Keep records and if they are repeatedly injuring themselves place them in a mental facilities until such a time that they can show they can be responsible for their own wellbeing.

No way tax-payers would be happy to fund that.

mickuhaha

Augme wrote: »

No way tax-payers would be happy to fund that.

With the amount of money the HSE has spent on
the problem so far ie beds and such I would say you could offset the cost to new facilities as you would be moving the problem people to a better place to deal with their mental state rather then the physical results of their problems. No?

Wanderer78

mickuhaha wrote:

That's incorrect for drugs its both. No one is hooked on any drug until they are willingly or not introduced to them. In my opinion the state should be part responsible for preventing continued self harm may it be drugs or other. One for instance would be the alcoholics that end up in a hospital every few weeks. Keep records and if they are repeatedly injuring themselves place them in a mental facilities until such a time that they can show they can be responsible for their own wellbeing.

Have you ever spent time around addicts and the professionals that have to deal with it? There's all sorts of highly addictive substances widely in use including, legal and non legal drugs, nicotine, alcohol, I'd even class food as highly addictive etc etc. The brain tends to respond positively to the use of highly addictive substances, more so in some individuals, which can lead to addiction problems. Humans have a tendency to turn to addictive substances if certain environmental pressures are placed upon them, poverty is one such pressure, but there are many others.

The state indeed must play a role in dealing with these issues, but I suspect, no matter what approach we take, drug addiction will always be problematic. Mental health facilities, that wouldn't be another 'out of sight, out of mind' approach, would it? Talk to people that have experienced this approach, they will tell you stories of how these facilities simply don't work, where drug use is high, abuse from other patience's is common, even abuse from staff occurs.

Sadly and unfortunately, some are simply unrehabilatative, what do we do with these individuals?

jamesbondings

The Maverick wrote: »

If you're so concerned in the future, why not ring the guards and tell them?

To what end though? Call the guards every time you see a junkie shooting up..... They do turn a blind eye. All that happens is they arrest the junkies. Provide them free legal aid and clog up the courts system only to be let off with another charge on their wrap sheet. Not to mention the risk a junkie poses to the health of an unarmed guard.

Only thing to do is to decriminalise it entirely. Remove the supply from gangs. Get more officers on the beat and arm them with tasers. Junkies are the least of this countries problem unfortunately. Shootings are now a daily occurrence, as are stabbings - murders and sexual assaults also appear to be on the increase (judging from the frequency of it on the news). De criminalizing drug use will remove the risk of harm to general society.

Chris_5339762

A group of junkies were openly smoking crack on the steps going down from James' Street to Bow bridge yesterday evening. Crack pipe in full view.

There was another junkie openly doing the lighter under the tinfoil thing with little baggies of heroin on the ground below him a few days ago.

I really don't like walking down that way but they tend to ignore you so....

mickuhaha

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Have you ever spent time around addicts and the professionals that have to deal with it? There's all sorts of highly addictive substances widely in use including, legal and non legal drugs, nicotine, alcohol, I'd even class food as highly addictive etc etc. The brain tends to respond positively to the use of highly addictive substances, more so in some individuals, which can lead to addiction problems. Humans have a tendency to turn to addictive substances if certain environmental pressures are placed upon them, poverty is one such pressure, but there are many others.

The state indeed must play a role in dealing with these issues, but I suspect, no matter what approach we take, drug addiction will always be problematic. Mental health facilities, that wouldn't be another 'out of sight, out of mind' approach, would it? Talk to people that have experienced this approach, they will tell you stories of how these facilities simply don't work, where drug use is high, abuse from other patience's is common, even abuse from staff occurs.

Sadly and unfortunately, some are simply unrehabilatative, what do we do with these individuals?

I have spent time with addict's and visited mental health facilities which are very different from rehab facility. The mental health facilities were very good there were voluntary and non voluntary patients and two separate area . Non voluntary patients were locked in rooms after a certain time and voluntary were in shared wards. There were no drugs around at all and no abuse from staff. People could begin to deal with problems away from the stress of life. If a member of society is braking the law or putting others at risk to you put them in jail where there no mandatory rehabilitation programs . My line is lock them somewhere where they will be released when they are mentally capable ( if there a danger to themselves and their health).

dhaughton99

Just look at the carry on outside Christchurch. Openly selling drugs and a blind eye is turned. Walk past it every morning and it’s been going on for years. This area must have the largest footfall of tourists in the capital.

Pauliedragon

soiseztomabel wrote: »

Do posters here think the supervised injection facilities are a good or a bad thing ?

Great idea. I lived in Sydney when they opened up one and the number of overdoses and needles on the streets fell dropped massively.

Hellrazer

Treating the mental health of someone wont cure the addiction.

The government have been constantly changing their treatment ideas since the 1950s.
It used to be treated under the mental health act ,then it went to health.
The current thinking is that its both.

Harm reduction needs to be part of that. Injection centres,clean needles need to be part of that.

Then there needs to be more residential detox facilities. Get the addicts clean and stabilised (not methadone for years and years) and only then can you treat the mental side of things.

Locking them in a mental facility wont fix the problem. Locking them in jail with no rehab facilities wont fix the problem.

Detox,stabilisation and then ongoing even lifelong mental health treatment is whats needed.

Studies have shown that stabilisation and then residential detox with after treatment support is the ideal solution and the most effective in achieving complete abstinence. However there are some addicts that this will not work for and in that case long term stabilisation with whatever substance is required can help addicts lead a decent standard of living.

punisher5112

Anyone see the documentary on I believe it was one of the sky channels.

Very informative it was to the epidemic hitting the US.

Opioids which in the 90's were said to be addictive and should not be prescribed for everything and so on.

Then in 2000's it changed where doctors were told ah it's grand they are in no way addictive etc.

It's gone so bad now people that need long term pain relief it's cheaper to buy the heroin etc then it is the prescription drugs for their cronic pain.

Very sad way to end up.

Obviously it doesn't pull everyone in but many even ones who worked, had a house and good jobs have been ruined.

joeysoap

soiseztomabel wrote: »

Do posters here think the supervised injection facilities are a good or a bad thing ?

I think we’d learn a lot from Portugal. Not illegal to use any drug. Still illegal to have more than enough for ‘personal’ use though. First country in the world to give it a go, and by all accounts it’s working.

On Assignment on ITV visited Portugal on Monday, to see how it works. No drug deaths in the last year according to the program.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it

Wanderer78

joeysoap wrote: »

I think we’d learn a lot from Portugal. Not illegal to use any drug. Still illegal to have more than enough for ‘personal’ use though. First country in the world to give it a go, and by all accounts it’s working.

On Assignment on ITV visited Portugal on Monday, to see how it works. No drug deaths in the last year according to the program.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it

i do think the approach of countries such as Portugal is probably the better way to go, but i think it would be naive of us to think, its truly working, id imagine complications are created and have been created by such an approach, i.e. theres no one hit wonder here, all approaches creates its own problems

splinter65

Wanderer78 wrote: »

..and this will solve the problem by?

I think that the Gardai are doing the right thing.
There’s no pressure on any individual at all now to take any personal responsibilty for their own health and welfare, more or less any circumstances you find yourself in can be blamed on somebody/thing else and everybody is a “victim” and has to be looked after by the state unconditionally with no pressure on the individual to endure any discomfort or hardship whatsoever.
Most of the burglaries handbag snatches etc that affect honest law abiding citizens are as a result of addiction issues but the addict is returned to the community in double quick time on a vague promise of attending rehab which he or she has no notion of doing. So arresting addicts is a waste of time and effort.
Eventually the addicts in the city center will start to outnumber the regular working/shopping guys and girls and tourists and overseas employees and genuinely vulnerable people like pensioners will stay out in the suburbs or down the country or overseas and the addicts will be left to fight amongst themselves in what will have become the only capital city centre that is one big no go area in the world.

Hellrazer

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i do think the approach of countries such as Portugal is probably the better way to go, but i think it would be naive of us to think, its truly working, id imagine complications are created and have been created by such an approach, i.e. theres no one hit wonder here, all approaches creates its own problems

But it actually is truly working.

Just some of the stats.

60% increase in uptake of drug treatment.
90% drop in new HIV drug related infections.
Drug related criminal cases decreased.

That alone should give any government at least the will to try it out.

The dissuasion committees can still give out penaltys for drug use.

The committees have a broad range of sanctions available to them when ruling on the drug use offence.

These include:
Fines, ranging from €25 to €150. These figures are based on the Portuguese minimum wage of about €485 (Banco de Portugal, 2001) and translate into hours of work lost.

Suspension of the right to practice if the user has a licensed profession (e.g. medical doctor, taxi driver) and may endanger another person or someone's possessions.

Ban on visiting certain places (e.g. specific clubbing venues).

Ban on associating with specific other persons.

Foreign travel ban.

Requirement to report periodically to the committee.

Withdrawal of the right to carry a gun.

Confiscation of personal possessions.

Cessation of subsidies or allowances that a person receives from a public agency

Wanderer78

Hellrazer wrote: »

But it actually is truly working.

Just some of the stats.

60% increase in uptake of drug treatment.
90% drop in new HIV drug related infections.
Drug related criminal cases decreased.

That alone should give any government at least the will to try it out.

The dissuasion committees can still give out penaltys for drug use.

'truly working', what does this actually mean, as i suspect, thats actually a highly subjective term? im not disputing your stats, but i think we should always be wary of stats, as they can in fact be highly manipulated and biased to prove success. again, i do think Portugals approach is probably one of the best approachs to dealing with these kind of complex social issues

Hellrazer

Wanderer78 wrote: »

'truly working', what does this actually mean, as i suspect, thats actually a highly subjective term?

It probably is subjective but they have compared it to what was there before and have shown a drop in what Ive listed above.

im not disputing your stats, but i think we should always be wary of stats, as they can in fact be highly manipulated and biased to prove success. again, i do think Portugals approach is probably one of the best approachs to dealing with these kind of complex social issues

The Portugese model has to be worth a shot though. What we have at the minute is definitely not working. Its not working for the public/ tourists and its definitely not working for those addicts that do want some way to become clean. Theres only 7 public detox beds in the country. That's not enough.
Addicts are relying on charity based and community based treatments and while these are doing their best they are next to useless.

biko

The druggies are brazen only because the civilians aren't going to do anything about it. And the Gardai are busy with crime that affect actual people, not just merely eyesores.

You want a clean city centre? Start acting as soon as you see something, even if it is just shouting from afar.
Be the change you want to see in others.

soiseztomabel

Pauliedragon wrote: »

Great idea. I lived in Sydney when they opened up one and the number of overdoses and needles on the streets fell dropped massively.

Personally the result of these facilities speak for themselves. In fact, if this was idea was courted maybe 2 decades ago i think Dublin may have been a different place entirely. Sadly for all the liberal and progressive aspirations we have about ourselves as a nation the general attitude of the public seems to be "**** that".

Dr Brown

If we had a zero tolerance approach were anyone caught with drugs got a minimum of 5 years in jail I think drug users would disappear pretty quickly from the city centre.

Wanderer78

Dr Brown wrote:

If we had a zero tolerance approach were anyone caught with drugs got a minimum of 5 years in jail I think drug users would disappear pretty quickly from the city centre.

It ll be interesting to see how this works out in the Philippines!

Dr Brown

Wanderer78 wrote: »

It ll be interesting to see how this works out in the Philippines!

I heard that over there they drop drug dealers out of helicopters.

harry Bailey esq

Dr Brown wrote: »

definitely a junkie he and his mate were also drinking cans of beer.

Beer :eek:
Definitely hardcore yakbags :rolleyes:
Opiates and alcohol don't make pleasant bedfellows. Did you go to Hollywood upstairs medical school also?

Eircom_Sucks

Too busy fining people who have no nct than tackle real issues like drugs

Got stopped by garda wed night , i taxed my car and insured it on same day , dif this on monday and hadnt received my discs , but the harrassment and attitude towards me stunk , takes them 2 secs to radio in to indeed find out i was taxed and insured , but god no that was too much effort to the pricks , power tripping ****

They’d never go near a junkie , that needs a person with balls and they don’t have it

mickuhaha

Since we're giving junkies injection centres will we also supply brothel's for prostitute's er to protect them, maybe give thieves a warehouse and give out gun safes .. where do we stop. Maybe we should get rid of laws and see what happens.

Hellrazer

mickuhaha wrote: »

Since we're giving junkies injection centres will we also supply brothel's for prostitute's er to protect them, maybe give thieves a warehouse and give out gun safes .. where do we stop. Maybe we should get rid of laws and see what happens.

Don't be stupid.

Del2005

Dr Brown wrote: »

If we had a zero tolerance approach were anyone caught with drugs got a minimum of 5 years in jail I think drug users would disappear pretty quickly from the city centre.

The USA had a zero tolerance policy, the infamous 3 strikes law, and that worked really well in reducing crime and drug use there.

Caliden

Del2005 wrote: »

The USA had a zero tolerance policy, the infamous 3 strikes law, and that worked really well in reducing crime and drug use there.

In America there's profit to be made from arresting people and putting them in prison.

Del2005

Caliden wrote: »

In America there's profit to be made from arresting people and putting them in prison.

The private prisons came about because they were locking so many people up. They still have the highest per capita prison population and they still have a massive problem with drugs. So zero tolerance doesn't work while decriminalisation does.

off.the.walls

crusier wrote: »

What did you do about it?

He shouldn't have to do anything about it its not his job!