I just read an article in the 24 hours newspaper saying how good insite is.

This is my responce to the editor.

I just read your article entitled, "Insite Getting a Raw Deal", I am not one to normally write into the editor to express my thoughts or concerns, however I cannot read this and not respond.

I have been living in the Downtown Eastside for the past four years, and I walk by insite everyday. I can not understand how insite remains funded. I walk by and watch my neighbours stand in line outside of the doors waiting to die.

In your article you said the number of 911 calls to the area has dropped, however you failed to mention that 95% of all 911 calls to the area are dispatched to insite, often for overdose related incidents.

Insite doesn't make sense to me, it is just trading in one way of dying for another. It is saying "Please come get high, under government funding, its okay, we want you to die".

I am not much of a debater, usually why I don't respond to articles, I just know my opinion, and I believe there is nothing good in insite. And I am sad that this article makes the reader thinks otherwise.

I could listen to the arguments against me and possibly be persuaded, but its places like insite that have given birth to places like the Naomi project - a legalised facility where heroin is given to addicts. Now I can somewhat understand why people could have hope in insite, but I definitely cannot understand why people could have hope in Naomi. And I don't think the Naomi project would have been launched if insite never opened.

Sorry I am not a good writer, and sorry I do not agree with you - but I think the next time you write about insite- it shouldn't be glorified in anyway, and we as readers should be informed of reality instead of fantasy.

to read the original article go here
http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/pdf/cover.pdf and scroll to page seven.

you can send an email to the editor if you wish ian.king@24hrs.ca