That you used a forced analogy (even if experiential) and ethos in a policy discussion? Sure, I can see that. I can even see blaming drugs for mental health issues and addiction despite the causality really being screwy if you try to force it that way.

It's okay to be wrong, even when emotional, so long as we learn from it.

Friend, your lack of consideration that you might be wrong or that I'm wrong, absolutely-fullstop, is telling. I stand by what I said.

Telling is that you expect folks to introspect because you're failing to admit rhetorically twisting the head off the chicken of an argument.

We thus persist. Pleasant evenin' to you sir or madame.

No, I don't know what you intended to say there if not what I initially read it as. It seems a straightforward reading to me.

My point was to suggest to OP that their dichotomous reductionism goes way, way overboard to the point of unproductive callousness. People with addictions aren't just data points. Saying this as a data journalist who focuses on policing and jails.