Pro verses Con

Pro Argument:
-All Needle Exchange Programs offer information about safer injection methods and referral to substance abuse treatment centers
-Reduces drug use through effective referrals to drug treatment and counseling
-NEPs are widely supported by the public
-Has been proven to actually reduce the spread of AIDS
-By failing to support these programs, government officials are failing to save human lives
-NEPs only attempt to make drug addiction less harmful
-Vast majority of NEPs are exchange programs, not distribution services. This means that they require a set of dirty needles for clean ones.
-Federal studies found that these programs did not increase drug use but proved that NEPs can reduce the spread od H.I.V. and save lives without losing foot in the battle against illegal drugs.

Con:
-NEPs will expose the public to dirty needles
-These programs do not stop people from using illegal drugs
-NEPs aren't exchanges, but are infact giveaways to IDUs, saying that participants rarely exchange dirty needles for clean ones meaning that dirty needles are still out on the streets
-Government funding for AIDS is expensive and not extremely efficient
-By funding NEPs, we are sending mixed messages to our children
-Critics also argue that NEPs don't reduce the suffering of drug users or prevent them from spreading the disease, but they do further foster drug use.

Argument Position: Pro.