How is that a citation proving that heroin is controllable if only the heroin was pure? Overdoses happen even with pure heroin.

Also, I assumed "citation" would infer that a reputable book or scholarly white paper should be referenced, not a very short newspaper article.

Though, we both seem to be unwavering in our views, so I am cool with stopping this back and forth. :)

>> How is that a citation proving that heroin is controllable if only the heroin was pure

I didn't say that.

My point was that people can lead functional lives on heroin with families and jobs. If the heroin is impure, laced with dangerous chemicals or of unknown strength then the cutting agents can harm people or they may overdose.

Clean heroin is free of harmful cutting agents, of known purity and not laced with other drugs. You mock the term "clean heroin" but that's what it is.

You misread my original post.

I mock "clean heroin" because at it's purest, it is still the most harmful drug. More harmful than meth, crack, cocaine, etc, etc.

I cited Wikipedia.

You have still cited nothing of worth.

Can you compare psychotic violence of heroin addicts versus meth addicts?

That's what I mean by harmful. Meth addicts are psychotically violent and are responsible for countless murders and attacks.

Heroin addicts get smacked out and unconscious. Perhaps dangerous to themselves.

Go to an NA meeting (non-addicts can go, just be courteous) or read some white papers about drug use.

You are avoiding, or simply ignorant of, many aspects of drug addiction.