Look at all the Heroin Addicts

[vraiblonde]

For someone that accused me of not being able to Google. "heroin addict full time job"

It's not a silly, nor untrue claim.

Except that's not what you "claimed".

Kwillia said:

This thread lost my interest when it took the stance that those taking heroin would be able to do it recreationally and remain clear-headed, focused, productive members of society during the week.

You replied:

I know ex-heroin addicts that did just that.

Not quite the same as merely having a job.

If life was so peachy keen and wonderful while they were addicted to heroin, why did they stop using it? And the very use of the term "addict" - that you yourself used, btw - indicates that they were NOT in control of their habit, but it was in control of them.

So which is it, Chris? Were they addicts or were they clear-headed productive members of society? Or do you want to change the subject again and throw out another strawman?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Except that's not what you "claimed".

Kwillia said:



You replied:



Not quite the same as merely having a job.

If life was so peachy keen and wonderful while they were addicted to heroin, why did they stop using it? And the very use of the term "addict" - that you yourself used, btw - indicates that they were NOT in control of their habit, but it was in control of them.

So which is it, Chris? Were they addicts or were they clear-headed productive members of society? Or do you want to change the subject again and throw out another strawman?

Yes, when they weren't doing heroin, they were level headed, focused, and productive members of society.

Addicts can be one in the same. Someone completely different on the weekends.

It happens with just about every other mind altering substance out there, yet you want to believe it doesn't happen. I get it, but it's simply not true to think heroin users and even addicts can't hold down a job and be a productive member of society to those that don't know.

 

[IneedSkrimps]

#### off, troll.

Just re-read what you said. I still cant believe someone actually typed that out and clicked post.

June 1971 Nixon declared a "war on drugs." He literally used those terms. He also increased the size and budget of drug control agencies. He also passed laws on mandatory minimums and no-knock warrants.

In 2010 the US spent over 15 billion dollars on the "drug war." 25 additional billion spent by state and local governments.

Drugs did not lose. Addicts and dealers did not lose. The "silly buzz phrase" was literally the words of the President.


So considering all that (stuff you surely already knew), how could you type out the words "never really done anything meaningful to try and curb their distribution or use." Because in my opinion, that's the dumbest thing I have ever read on the internet.

 

[tom88]

So why not support a system that gives those people a chance to get help, or even forces them to get the help they need. So that, A., we don't spend our tax money sending people to jail, and B.,

Which system does not do that? The current American justice system certainly does. Have you been to court and seen what goes on between a drug addict when they are accused of a non-violent crime? First start with drug court. That is a treatment based court. Second, when drug court fails, they "force" rehab on people all the time.

Having said that, how effective is treatment when it's forced? In my experience it's not very effective at all, hence the continued drug problem.

 

[BernieP]

Yes, when they weren't doing heroin, they were level headed, focused, and productive members of society.

Addicts can be one in the same. Someone completely different on the weekends.

It happens with just about every other mind altering substance out there, yet you want to believe it doesn't happen. I get it, but it's simply not true to think heroin users and even addicts can't hold down a job and be a productive member of society to those that don't know.

Well I'll call BS on the use of heroin recreationally. It is probably the one drug that will get you physically addicted even if you aren't an addict.
People have been able to do cocaine, smoke marijuana, and pop pills on the weekend and then seemingly be normal the rest of the week.
Seemingly, because it does take a toll on the brain, just like a "functional" alcoholic. Mood and memory will change and not for the better.

 

[BernieP]

Which system does not do that? The current American justice system certainly does. Have you been to court and seen what goes on between a drug addict when they are accused of a non-violent crime? First start with drug court. That is a treatment based court. Second, when drug court fails, they "force" rehab on people all the time.

Having said that, how effective is treatment when it's forced? In my experience it's not very effective at all, hence the continued drug problem.

Drug court is not necessarily a treatment court. First it's only available in Circuit Court. So you have to be charged with a felony case. Minor possession cases are heard in district court.
They will not force treatment on the patient. They may offer it as a option to avoid incarceration, but if they "force" someone into treatment they have to pay for it.
Drug court is a money maker. The people in the program have to pay a fee, and then pay for the drug testing. They are also on a endless leash, the judge can move them back a step at any time and they do. It's just a form of probation and probation is a system that is a setup for failure - the saving grace as that the agents are typically over worked.
But the least little transgression can get you slapped with a warrant to appear in court..

 

[PeoplesElbow]

Most doctors, psychiatrists, will not treat anyone who is on or has recently been on drugs.

There is a reason for that. They are a huge pain in the ass and most likely a big ####bag.

 

[tom88]

Drug court is not necessarily a treatment court. First it's only available in Circuit Court. So you have to be charged with a felony case.

I didn't read beyond this because it is factually incorrect, therefore there is no point in reading anything else you wrote as it is obvious you don't know what you are talking about. Misdemeanors where a person can spend over a year in jail are subject to circuit court jurisdiction.

 

[mitzi]

Yes, when they weren't doing heroin, they were level headed, focused, and productive members of society.

Addicts can be one in the same. Someone completely different on the weekends.

It happens with just about every other mind altering substance out there, yet you want to believe it doesn't happen. I get it, but it's simply not true to think heroin users and even addicts can't hold down a job and be a productive member of society to those that don't know.

A weekend addict? Not a true addict. A heroin addict is not going to function and go to work 5 days a week and only use on weekends. I don't buy it. Other drugs, yes. A person could be doing cocaine (not smoking crack and geeking out) on the job and you probably wouldn't even know it. They would be pretty productive and talk a lot lol. I know a woman who drinks to access every evening as soon as she hits her front door. The drinking starts late morning on the weekend. Yet gets up at 5 am and goes to work every day Monday thru Friday. She even got Employee of the Year at her job. How she does it, I don't know.

 

[vraiblonde]

Yes, when they weren't doing heroin, they were level headed, focused, and productive members of society.

Addicts can be one in the same. Someone completely different on the weekends.

It happens with just about every other mind altering substance out there, yet you want to believe it doesn't happen. I get it, but it's simply not true to think heroin users and even addicts can't hold down a job and be a productive member of society to those that don't know.

Then why would they quit and become ex-addicts?

 

[Midnightrider]

For someone that accused me of not being able to Google. "heroin addict full time job"

It's not a silly, nor untrue claim.

Again, why would anyone want to know a heroin addict? So I can prove a point on an internet forum? Please.

I have read a few studies that suggest junkies are very reliable workers if they know their fix is tied to going to work. But they aren't weekend users, the nature of an addict is habitual use. So they aren't going to be your bus drivers or pilots, but dishwashers or laborers sure.

Then why would they quit and become ex-addicts?

Probably the same reason people quit smoking.

 

[This_person]

I think you miss the point, the attitude in this community is that druggies don't deserve a chance, they have proved they are unreliable and should just go off and die.
That would be what is best for the rest.
The system is stacked, and if you read my comment above you can see why it's stacked. The only place right now that is available in this county is the clinic in Calloway for treating addictions. Most doctors, psychiatrists, will not treat anyone who is on or has recently been on drugs. This makes it hard to deal with the physical side effects of withdrawal.

I was responding to the asinine position of "why make yourself better if people will know you made mistakes".

The system isn't stacked. The system provides consequences for illegal action. That's not "stacked", that's life.

There's a great way to deal with the physical effects of withdrawal - don't go through withdrawal. But, that said, people do. It's sad, but they do. Sometimes it's painful to learn from mistakes.

 

[Larry Gude]

In a time when it is almost impossible to die in a car accident due to seat belts, air bags, crumple zones, etc., we're killing 31 people per day in cars due to nothing else than the inability of a person to not drive drunk. In what world is that an end to the violence? I assumed there was no need to differentiate between drunk driving 'violence' and what I also assumed was obvious when we're talking drug violence; profit motivated, business motivated violence.

Yes, Al Capone is no longer wielding a Tommy gun in Chicago. I'd venture to say we have far more deaths per capita with alcohol legal than we ever did with it illegal based solely on alcohol. I'd take that bet, easy. How do we settle it? And, that's just deaths. That's not dismemberment, handicapping, time off of work, etc., etc., etc.

Car accidents don't get movies made about them, Al Capone did. That does not make alcohol less violent, it just makes it less likely to be popularized and idolized by folklore. Again, I was talking about the 5-6,000 street murders every year that are drug business related.

If we stop going after sellers and start going after users, the demand will dry up, making the selling not financially attractive, thus drying up the supply. No, no it won't. That never worked in the USSR, it does not work in Muslim countries where they execute people for using.

It's really that easy. It was that easy 100 years ago, it's that easy today. But, we all want the big fish guy, not the two joints guy

At core, we have very different ideas in what a free country is supposed to be about. You're a prohibitionist and I am not. I think drug use is a serious problem. I think the way to address it is as a health issue. You think we simply need more invasive and aggressive enforcement. Yes?

 

[This_person]

At core, we have very different ideas in what a free country is supposed to be about. You're a prohibitionist and I am not. I think drug use is a serious problem. I think the way to address it is as a health issue. You think we simply need more invasive and aggressive enforcement. Yes?

Ok, so what does "address it as a health issue" mean?

 

[Larry Gude]

Ok, so what does "address it as a health issue" mean?

You know anyone who got cancer? Diabetes? Sever weight problems? Gout? Respiratory problems? Heart ailments? Depression? Anxiety? Drinking problem? Trying to quit cigarettes?

We treat those as health issues. Not criminal.

 

[vraiblonde]

You know anyone who got cancer? Diabetes? Sever weight problems? Gout? Respiratory problems? Heart ailments? Depression? Anxiety? Drinking problem? Trying to quit cigarettes?

We treat those as health issues. Not criminal.

That's because they're not against the law. Duh.

 

[BernieP]

You know anyone who got cancer? Diabetes? Sever weight problems? Gout? Respiratory problems? Heart ailments? Depression? Anxiety? Drinking problem? Trying to quit cigarettes?

We treat those as health issues. Not criminal.

I think there are some here who would find some of them criminal and their understanding of modern medicine is as follows:
- you get the diabetes from eating sugar so stop eating sugar
- you get fat from eating so stop eating
- you get heart, Respiratory from things you do, so don't do them
- Depression, anxiety and other "mental" disorders are all make belief, so just get over it.
- Drinking is not a problem, it's a sport.

 

[vraiblonde]

I think there are some here who would find some of them criminal and their understanding of modern medicine is as follows:
- you get the diabetes from eating sugar so stop eating sugar
- you get fat from eating so stop eating
- you get heart, Respiratory from things you do, so don't do them
- Depression, anxiety and other "mental" disorders are all make belief, so just get over it.
- Drinking is not a problem, it's a sport.

Maybe the real question is: how much does society owe people who make poor choices with their health? If someone eats compulsively and develops diabetes, do we owe them taxpayer funded medication? Or the person who doesn't take even the most remote care of themselves and ends up needing a mobility device - should we have to pay for that? If you smoke 4 packs of cigarettes a day, does the taxpayer owe you a lung transplant or heart disease meds? Hell, if you're a man who thinks he's a woman, do the taxpayers owe you a surgery?

If people want to do drugs, I really don't care. I am completely self-centered when it comes to other people's self-inflicted problems and ALL I CARE ABOUT is how much of that bill I'm going to have to foot. If I thought druggies would be on their own and leave me out of it, I'd legalize everything tomorrow, including that zombie drug. But that's not the way it works. Someone makes poor life choices and we all get to pay for it one way or another.

 

[Larry Gude]

That's because they're not against the law. Duh.

That wasn't the question. Duh.

 

[vraiblonde]

That wasn't the question. Duh.

Your question was dumb.

Drug use, like alcoholism or any other addiction is a matter of choice. It's not a health issue, it's a behavioral issue. You can easily not become a drug addict by...not doing drugs in the first place. Diabetics don't have that luxury, and neither do people with cancer.

And ONCE MORE, people do NOT go to jail for doing drugs. They go to jail for selling drugs. They go to jail for stealing stuff to fund their drug habit. They go to jail for public nuisance. But they do not go to jail for simply using drugs. You, of course, already know that because if people went to jail just for using drugs, several of the people near and dear to both of us would be imprisoned right now.