Heroin deaths surpass gun homicides

[Bill of Rights]

Frenchie, you're lucky you got called on this by the other members before I saw it, or you'd have an infraction at a minimum, and not because I disagree with your originally posted approach (don't want to be enablers) but because a clear site rule is that we do not insult other INGOers.

I've said many times, be civil and polite or be elsewhere. A nicer phrasing of that is "you can disagree without being disagreeable." Focus on the points of the discussion, not on the other member saying whatever he or she is saying.

I appreciate that you changed the stance you'd originally taken... I would have questioned it, too.

Blessings,
Bill

You can treat them without narcan, since your being an *******. Narcan was patented in 1961 and approved by the FDA in 1971. To treat an overdose requires more than just narcan, and it's not a lifesaving drug. You are correct in saying in your quotes but it's not my decision in what we we carry. What I should have said and I will correct my first statement is we do not carry it because we aren't allowed to carry and furthermore we don't feel like we should carry it because... etc.etc.
In my next opinion I will be sure to correctly state my intentions on topics. Yes, why yes you are correct for my misguidance in my first statement, but don't get excited as nothing else you have stated is correct.

I'm sorry if my last post was personal. I do not enjoy being belittled for my opinions. You are right we can talk about anything if it's kept civil on both ends. But when one throws in detraction to another one to react in the same manner.

 

[steveh_131]

If this country wasn't populated near 50% with bat **** crazy liberals those would be all we were left with. Unfortunately there will always be a 5) Provide free treatment to those poor, poor victims of the disease known as addiction. That last one is why we will never satisfy enough people to see all drugs decriminalized or legalized in this country whether it would result in more or less users.

I'm confused. My 1-4 were all the benefits we would see from decriminalization.

You are suggesting that #5 would be an increase in free treatment for addicts - how so? If drug abuse doesn't increase, why and how would liberals then force us to pay for free treatment for addicts?

Portugal has universal health care. They still pushed it through.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

A 25 year old nephew has been a user for some years now.The wife saw him last Saturday ,a month clean out of rehab,Sunday morn,he ODed in a Walmart Parking lot,and went to LaPorte Hospital.He was released and ODed that same evening again.This is the 5th time that I know of.I told the wife is is only a matter of time.I have said that before a couple of times.My Friend locked his brother up in his man cave barn some years back.He let him out after 5 weeks.Cold Turkey.He kicked it and turned his self around.

 

[gamecrimez]

It's a sad epedimic and to say the least I'm tired of seeing it. Maybe next week the same kid kicks in my door to get some fast cash to buy more drugs. Or maybe they will harm a family member with a weapon that stole from the last house they robbed.

So are you saying all addicts are also criminals as well. Me as well as a bunch of other as you stated "junkies" have used for long periods while never committing a single crime other than using the drug itself. I work for a living always have, I support my kids & at the time my own habit, if I couldn't do both my kids came 1st & I went sick or I would go out & make money for my habit by doing actual labor not robbey people breaking into houses ect.. You seem to be a stereotype of sorts, all addicts are criminals. Cant they just be people with problems that you cant comprehend has you haven't been thru anything close to what that "junkie" has. Like that girl that was molested for years by her own dad & can only dull the pain as its truly never gone or forgot or by the guy that was picked on his entire life & beat everyday by his father who thinks their is not a single person in the world that cares for or about him. The list goes on man I understand some or most people here have had a pretty sweet life but don't kid yourself not everyone does & they have problems that you couldn't comprehend how they feel as you haven't walked a block in their shoes. I have met numerous "junkies" and 95% are just f****d up in the head from what they have been thru while some do use to get "high" a majority don't, they use to forget to dull that pain.

 

[bwframe]

 

[Bill of Rights]

Whether it should be or not, using some drugs is a crime, others not. In most cases those are "mala prohibita", meaning they're "bad because they're forbidden", rather than inherently "bad" (like murder)

If we're talking about pot, at some point, it will be legalized (meaning it can be taxed), as opposed to decriminalized, which would put it on a par (legally) with parsley or cilantro. If we're talking about heroin, I don't suspect that will be afforded the same status, ever.

Whether it should or not is personal opinion. I don't like the law being there, but I also don't want to see use of it increase.

Oh... and I starred out more of that word near the bottom of your post. You had some good thoughts there, but that was a leeeetle too close to the original word for this site.

Blessings,
Bill

So are you saying all addicts are also criminals as well. Me as well as a bunch of other as you stated "junkies" have used for long periods while never committing a single crime other than using the drug itself. I work for a living always have, I support my kids & at the time my own habit, if I couldn't do both my kids came 1st & I went sick or I would go out & make money for my habit by doing actual labor not robbey people breaking into houses ect.. You seem to be a stereotype of sorts, all addicts are criminals. Cant they just be people with problems that you cant comprehend has you haven't been thru anything close to what that "junkie" has. Like that girl that was molested for years by her own dad & can only dull the pain as its truly never gone or forgot or by the guy that was picked on his entire life & beat everyday by his father who thinks their is not a single person in the world that cares for or about him. The list goes on man I understand some or most people here have had a pretty sweet life but don't kid yourself not everyone does & they have problems that you couldn't comprehend how they feel as you haven't walked a block in their shoes. I have met numerous "junkies" and 95% are just f****d up in the head from what they have been thru while some do use to get "high" a majority don't, they use to forget to dull that pain.

 

[churchmouse]

So are you saying all addicts are also criminals as well. Me as well as a bunch of other as you stated "junkies" have used for long periods while never committing a single crime other than using the drug itself. I work for a living always have, I support my kids & at the time my own habit, if I couldn't do both my kids came 1st & I went sick or I would go out & make money for my habit by doing actual labor not robbey people breaking into houses ect.. You seem to be a stereotype of sorts, all addicts are criminals. Cant they just be people with problems that you cant comprehend has you haven't been thru anything close to what that "junkie" has. Like that girl that was molested for years by her own dad & can only dull the pain as its truly never gone or forgot or by the guy that was picked on his entire life & beat everyday by his father who thinks their is not a single person in the world that cares for or about him. The list goes on man I understand some or most people here have had a pretty sweet life but don't kid yourself not everyone does & they have problems that you couldn't comprehend how they feel as you haven't walked a block in their shoes. I have met numerous "junkies" and 95% are just f****d up in the head from what they have been thru while some do use to get "high" a majority don't, they use to forget to dull that pain.

So in this you are saying that all the thieving low life users I have met in this life and yes there has been many due to a family member or 2 being one of them....they are all basically good people inside.
You might be 1 in 500. Still, in my mind using is a problem regardless.
Now before you think me a straight laced turd you must understand where I have been in this life. Grew up in the age of Aquarius so I have been there and done that but never ever went towards needles etc. and I do not see any of that as acceptable behavior. I have seen the down side of it. Up close.

As to a sweet life........that is all how one perceives things. I have rose above some of the things that so many cower in the corner over. It can be done. If you really want to.

If you can roll through this life doing this and taking care of you and yours good on you.

 

[gamecrimez]

So in this you are saying that all the thieving low life users I have met in this life and yes there has been many due to a family member or 2 being one of them....they are all basically good people inside.
You might be 1 in 500. Still, in my mind using is a problem regardless.
Now before you think me a straight laced turd you must understand where I have been in this life. Grew up in the age of Aquarius so I have been there and done that but never ever went towards needles etc. and I do not see any of that as acceptable behavior. I have seen the down side of it. Up close.

As to a sweet life........that is all how one perceives things. I have rose above some of the things that so many cower in the corner over. It can be done. If you really want to.

If you can roll through this life doing this and taking care of you and yours good on you.

I didn't say all are good crime free people, just merely stating that not all are bad. I understand in bigger cities its way worse than my neck of the woods but by simply thinking every junkie you come across is a low life criminal is way off. Some people who use needles only do so cause the dope aint that good & its the only way they will feel it or their tolerance is way up. Others use needles for the rush & the high. I know people who are addicted to the needle not even the drug they will shoot up anything as long as it gives them a headringer. I quite so im not rolling thru life getting hi, its to dam expensive & way not worth it for me or to put my family thru the financial burden in my opinion, im glad i cleaned & turned my life around & I try to be a positive influence for my siblings that use. Its an evil drug & most cant put it down, they might quit for a few but usually start using again 1st chance they get. My brother & sister are those types, im not going to write them off just because of it, I will be their & try to help.

 

[phylodog]

I'm confused. My 1-4 were all the benefits we would see from decriminalization.

You are suggesting that #5 would be an increase in free treatment for addicts - how so? If drug abuse doesn't increase, why and how would liberals then force us to pay for free treatment for addicts?

Portugal has universal health care. They still pushed it through.

Your 1-4 are benefits but with them would come consequences.

There are plenty of addicts to go around. While legalization may not see abuse increase dramatically I don't believe we would see it decrease dramatically either.

Many people who discuss legalization bring up that it would be cheaper to provide "free" treatment than to incarcerate abusers. While this may be true it does not justify hoisting the problems of some onto the shoulders of others.

This is the United States of America. If we were to get legalization pushed through without requiring free treatment it wouldn't be two years before Sarah Mclaughlin had commercials on tv depicting the sad eyes of addicts and the liberals would be attempting to guilt the country in to taking care of these "victims".

 

[hoosierdoc]

With as little actual punishment as addicts receive now, how will decriminalizing make it better for them? They are still going to buy the cheapest crap they can find, and that is not going to be at the strip mall dispensary. It will still be from a sketchy drug dealer with who knows what inside it.

 

[churchmouse]

I didn't say all are good crime free people, just merely stating that not all are bad. I understand in bigger cities its way worse than my neck of the woods but by simply thinking every junkie you come across is a low life criminal is way off. Some people who use needles only do so cause the dope aint that good & its the only way they will feel it or their tolerance is way up. Others use needles for the rush & the high. I know people who are addicted to the needle not even the drug they will shoot up anything as long as it gives them a headringer. I quite so im not rolling thru life getting hi, its to dam expensive & way not worth it for me or to put my family thru the financial burden in my opinion, im glad i cleaned & turned my life around & I try to be a positive influence for my siblings that use. Its an evil drug & most cant put it down, they might quit for a few but usually start using again 1st chance they get. My brother & sister are those types, im not going to write them off just because of it, I will be their & try to help.

I wish only the best for you in this.
I have never met a user I would trust with anything and they all prove me out to be right.
Not around much of this anymore. Those knuckle heads are either gone/locked up or dead. Plus those that were exposing others to this life style have moved on and are no longer welcome. Others have passed on.

 

[churchmouse]

With as little actual punishment as addicts receive now, how will decriminalizing make it better for them? They are still going to buy the cheapest crap they can find, and that is not going to be at the strip mall dispensary. It will still be from a sketchy drug dealer with who knows what inside it.

Bingo.

 

[actaeon277]

So are you saying all addicts are also criminals as well. Me as well as a bunch of other as you stated "junkies" have used for long periods while never committing a single crime other than using the drug itself. I work for a living always have, I support my kids & at the time my own habit, if I couldn't do both my kids came 1st & I went sick or I would go out & make money for my habit by doing actual labor not robbey people breaking into houses ect.. You seem to be a stereotype of sorts, all addicts are criminals. Cant they just be people with problems that you cant comprehend has you haven't been thru anything close to what that "junkie" has. Like that girl that was molested for years by her own dad & can only dull the pain as its truly never gone or forgot or by the guy that was picked on his entire life & beat everyday by his father who thinks their is not a single person in the world that cares for or about him. The list goes on man I understand some or most people here have had a pretty sweet life but don't kid yourself not everyone does & they have problems that you couldn't comprehend how they feel as you haven't walked a block in their shoes. I have met numerous "junkies" and 95% are just f****d up in the head from what they have been thru while some do use to get "high" a majority don't, they use to forget to dull that pain.

Whether it should be or not, using some drugs is a crime, others not. In most cases those are "mala prohibita", meaning they're "bad because they're forbidden", rather than inherently "bad" (like murder)

If we're talking about pot, at some point, it will be legalized (meaning it can be taxed), as opposed to decriminalized, which would put it on a par (legally) with parsley or cilantro. If we're talking about heroin, I don't suspect that will be afforded the same status, ever.

Whether it should or not is personal opinion. I don't like the law being there, but I also don't want to see use of it increase.

Oh... and I starred out more of that word near the bottom of your post. You had some good thoughts there, but that was a leeeetle too close to the original word for this site.

Blessings,
Bill

I didn't say all are good crime free people, just merely stating that not all are bad. I understand in bigger cities its way worse than my neck of the woods but by simply thinking every junkie you come across is a low life criminal is way off. Some people who use needles only do so cause the dope aint that good & its the only way they will feel it or their tolerance is way up. Others use needles for the rush & the high. I know people who are addicted to the needle not even the drug they will shoot up anything as long as it gives them a headringer. I quite so im not rolling thru life getting hi, its to dam expensive & way not worth it for me or to put my family thru the financial burden in my opinion, im glad i cleaned & turned my life around & I try to be a positive influence for my siblings that use. Its an evil drug & most cant put it down, they might quit for a few but usually start using again 1st chance they get. My brother & sister are those types, im not going to write them off just because of it, I will be their & try to help.

You started off by saying "criminal", then moved the statement to "good crime free people", or "low life criminal".

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criminal
Definition of criminal

• 1 : relating to, involving, or being a crime <criminal neglect>
  
• 2 : relating to crime or to the prosecution of suspects in a crime <criminal statistics> <brought criminal action>
  
• 3 : guilty of crime; also : of or befitting a criminal <a criminal mind>
  
• 4 : disgraceful

[h=2]criminally[/h] adverb


They (or you) might be otherwise a good person. Does not change the definition of criminal, because disagree with it or not, it's illegal.

Sort of like an "illegal immigrant" that people don't like the "illegal" part.
They might be an otherwise great all around person, but they still came "illegally"

 

[Bill of Rights]

Of course, Act, that begs the question: if use of a given substance violates the written law on, say, June 30, and someone uses it on both June 30 and July 1, is said person a bad person the first time and a good person the next? Or does the one even have bearing on the other?

Blessings,
Bill

You started off by saying "criminal", then moved the statement to "good crime free people", or "low life criminal".

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criminal
Definition of criminal

• 1 : relating to, involving, or being a crime <criminal neglect>
• 2 : relating to crime or to the prosecution of suspects in a crime <criminal statistics> <brought criminal action>
• 3 : guilty of crime; also : of or befitting a criminal <a criminal mind>
• 4 : disgraceful

criminally

adverb


They (or you) might be otherwise a good person. Does not change the definition of criminal, because disagree with it or not, it's illegal.

Sort of like an "illegal immigrant" that people don't like the "illegal" part.
They might be an otherwise great all around person, but they still came "illegally"

 

[actaeon277]

Of course, Act, that begs the question: if use of a given substance violates the written law on, say, June 30, and someone uses it on both June 30 and July 1, is said person a bad person the first time and a good person the next? Or does the one even have bearing on the other?

Blessings,
Bill

I never made a claim about bad/evil, or good.
Mine merely made a statement about "criminal" as someone that breaks the law.
In your example, the person would be a criminal on the 30th, and not on the 1st.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Cigarette use over time, and one could suppose that a combination of education, aggressive marketing to change the cultural acceptance of smoking, and increased tobacco taxes lowered the rate.

Alcohol use has seen the opposite. Alcohol is still widely considered socially acceptable (particularly during socialization) and you can drink around non-drinkers in ways that smokers cannot smoke around non-smokers in public and private settings. No one I know makes you go on the porch to drink a beer.

I'm sure there's lessons in this that rates of use are tied to things other than if it's illegal or not. Cost, risk, social acceptance, etc all have a role to play. That said, I'm sure there's no easy answers. If there was, we'd have fixed it by now.

 

[Denny347]

I never made a claim about bad/evil, or good.
Mine merely made a statement about "criminal" as someone that breaks the law.
In your example, the person would be a criminal on the 30th, and not on the 1st.

Hmmm, you bring up an interesting point. I deal with clear cut criminals every day. I also deal with law abiding citizens daily. Somewhere in the middle, "criminal" is defined. I've arrested plenty of good people who might have made a silly mistake, minor error in judgement, but have broken the law. Never in trouble before that. Are they REALLY criminals? I argue they are not. While they may have broken the law, they are not criminals. I reserve that term for those who continue to choose to break the laws. The world is rarely so black and white.

 

[Robert Richardson]

A person should be responsible for their own decisions and if they make bad ones, that is their problem. Their addiction is not my fault or problem. Stupid is as stupid does.

 

[Mgderf]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...st-time-cdc-data-show/?utm_term=.8f1f407ac605

In a grim milestone, more people died from heroin-related causes than from gun homicides in 2015. As recently as 2007, gun homicides outnumbered heroin deaths by more than 5 to 1.

This is extremely interesting.
Consider, if you would, that in this same time span, firearms sales in the U.S. has set new records for the past consecutive 18 months.
Record numbers of firearms on the streets should be resulting in exponentially greater numbers of homicides, suicides, and accidental deaths directly related to firearms use/possession.
But wait, firearms related deaths are on the decline, unless you live in Chicago.

 

[actaeon277]

You started off by saying "criminal", then moved the statement to "good crime free people", or "low life criminal".

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criminal
Definition of criminal

• 1 : relating to, involving, or being a crime <criminal neglect>
• 2 : relating to crime or to the prosecution of suspects in a crime <criminal statistics> <brought criminal action>
• 3 : guilty of crime; also : of or befitting a criminal <a criminal mind>
• 4 : disgraceful

criminally

adverb


They (or you) might be otherwise a good person. Does not change the definition of criminal, because disagree with it or not, it's illegal.

Sort of like an "illegal immigrant" that people don't like the "illegal" part.
They might be an otherwise great all around person, but they still came "illegally"

Hmmm, you bring up an interesting point. I deal with clear cut criminals every day. I also deal with law abiding citizens daily. Somewhere in the middle, "criminal" is defined. I've arrested plenty of good people who might have made a silly mistake, minor error in judgement, but have broken the law. Never in trouble before that. Are they REALLY criminals? I argue they are not. While they may have broken the law, they are not criminals. I reserve that term for those who continue to choose to break the laws. The world is rarely so black and white.

I would reserve the term for those to be "career criminals".
And, some might accidently break the law. Such as a normally law abiding citizen that accidently breaks a gun law, because the laws can be so confusing sometimes everyone on INGO argues what the law "really means".

According to the quoted definition, that person is still a criminal. I may disagree with the law, but the law was broke.