What you're describing sounds like the Nordic model, where drug-related deaths are about on par with most other Western countries.
Sure, it'd be an improvement for the US, but it would still be around an order of magnitude more death (and God knows how much more harm) than the Singapore model.
What I'm describing is not the "Nordic model". Most Nordic countries do not have the government legally supply heroin to users – only Denmark has an established programme to do so; Norway has it on a trial basis (with only a limited number of users involved); as far as I am aware, the rest of the Nordic countries are still discussing the proposal of doing it. And, even in Denmark, I think you will find the ease of access (you have to find a doctor who is willing and able to prescribe it) is significantly less than in my proposal. My proposal was that the government should try to (near-)completely take over the heroin market, to try to drive criminals out of it altogether – even what Denmark is doing is sufficiently less ambitious.
Since what I am proposing is not the Nordic model as it actually exists, but rather something which goes a lot further, I don't see how overdose death rates from the Nordic countries have any relevance to evaluating it.
>Since what I am proposing is not the Nordic model as it actually exists, but rather something which goes a lot further, I don't see how overdose death rates from the Nordic countries have any relevance to evaluating it.
Sure, it'd be an improvement for the US, but it would still be around an order of magnitude more death (and God knows how much more harm) than the Singapore model.