# What do you honestly think should be done about addiction?



## sisterpine (May 9, 2004)

What we are doing now obviously is not working. Some say it is a disease some say it is not a disease. What ever it is we cannot "cure" it any more than we can cure depression or infections that beat our antibiotics. The difference being that depressed or infection tainted people generally do not steal, rob, create havoc etc. within our communities. I just read an ad that said "Everyone I know is on heroin". Seems to me that the man was saying everyone he associates with (his personal community) is on heroin. We have tried different treatments, jail and prison terms: We tried stopping the drugs from getting into the country or onto our streets. What do you really think the answer to this problem might be?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Let them all overdose?? What if we just stoped treating overdose "victims"? Tough love, so to speak. I bet I'm going to get flamed for the suggestion, but this cycle of enabling we have going on now sure ain't working.


Seriously, I don't have an answer....


----------



## ET1 SS (Oct 22, 2005)

Tough love.

STOP funding it. STOP supporting puppet governments who produce it. STOP paying drug cartels. Jail all CIA operatives caught importing drugs into the USA.

If our tax dollars were no longer funding it, the profits would drop.

Find a way to get the US federal government off from it's addiction to spending our tax dollars on this nonsense.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Earlier this year my nephew killed himself. He had an on again-off again problem with drugs, and when he broke up with his GF, he apparently decided life was not worth living. I wish he had let people help him, but, he never did want help for ANYTHING. He wanted to do everything himself. I never even know he broke up with her until after he was dead.

I do not think there is a one size fits all treatment. Especially if they will not accept the help that is available.

I grew up in a time and a place where drugs were easily available. Everybody thought they would use lightly and never get hooked, but some people DID get hooked, when they never thought they were.ne friend stopped cold turkey after a bad trip. Some never did stop. Other than the one friend of mine, I did not know what made people stop.

The next time you see your loved ones, take a good long look at them. There is a fair chance at least one of them will someday get addicted. People do not only take drugs for recreation: some of them take drugs because they were injured, and then later they cannot stop


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

I think they should all be legal.....take the robbing, stealing and dealing out of the picture.
Tax the product.

Then let Darwin sort it out.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

ShannonR said:


> Let them all overdose?? What if we just stoped treating overdose "victims"? Tough love, so to speak. I bet I'm going to get flamed for the suggestion, but this cycle of enabling we have going on now sure ain't working.
> 
> 
> Seriously, I don't have an answer....


No flames here, I agree! Overdose on illegal substances and get free health care? Makes sense right?!?!


hunter63 said:


> I think they should all be legal.....take the robbing, stealing and dealing out of the picture.
> Tax the product.
> 
> Then let Darwin sort it out.


Tax the hell out of it like beer, tobacco, and fuel! We spend billions fighting it but then states legalize it! Once again makes sense, states loosening a federal regulation, a touch backwards don't you think? We should allow states do that with gun laws.


----------



## chaossmurf (Jan 6, 2017)

prosecuting the doctors that over prescribe opiates is another great start and I do not mean a slap on the wrist for the constant habitual ones --I mean prosecute them for murder-1... for the ones that are living off 99% of their business being b-s scripts , they know very well they are murdering not only the ones they over prescribe too --but also the ones that are in that addits path to their next fix

and yes we let them overdose

also making the truly addicted not have to steal (or murder)would be a nice start ---why do we burn all the drugs confiscated in our country --when theres an actual need for it ----hey if we had an overabundance of corn (we would feed it to our animals) why not do the same thing to our ddicts ---im pretty sure if an addict knew he could score by just turning in the dealer (its be a win-win)
and we truly need to make the dealers pay for any deaths that happen from their product by overdoses---if a bread company used the chemicals in crack in their bread --wed sue them and prosecute them with murder !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

so far we only truly penalize the users instead of the dealers ---theres more people in jails in America doing lengthy sentences over usage amounts --than there are for dealing amounts

and I don't even wanna get on the subject of medical pot  ---why are we making a medicine illegal ?? -- theres actual uses for medical pot --personaly I think you should be prescribed the seeds and be responsible for growing the strain your prescribed (OR) have it grown for you by a friend or family member or (non-profit) group grow & damned sure not give the highest thc dosage to everybody ---not prescribe something that nobody can hardly afford --the only ones benefiting from medical pot curently are the very few millionaires willing to risk their fortunes & charging way way too much for doing it ---if people were allowed X# of plants per medical card holder ---then millions of people could benefit --a lot of them people that wanted to grow in their bathroom would be buying lights & fertilizers ---- itd be an economic boon for someone other than rich investors && drug gangs ---why cant the common person grow their on meds in their own home --or secured backyard


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

chaossmurf said:


> prosecuting the doctors that over prescribe opiates is another great start and I do not mean a slap on the wrist for the constant habitual ones --I mean prosecute them for murder-1... for the ones that are living off 99% of their business being b-s scripts , they know very well they are murdering not only the ones they over prescribe too --but also the ones that are in that addits path to their next fix
> 
> and yes we let them overdose
> 
> ...


Medical pot here is a sham, just an excuse for dealers to grow for profit. There are some who do use it appropriately, sure....but from what I have seen here in CA at the forefront of the medical marijuana movement.....it's mostly BS. I think pot causes more problems with our youngsters than it solves....

That said, I'm not totally against pot. But I am against people pulling the "medical marijuana" card for an excuse to manufacture it for profit. I could care less if you smoke it....but,don't pretend it's for medical reasons when it's prescribed for something like "anxiety", and you better keep it away from my kid if you know what's good for you


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> No flames here, I agree! Overdose on illegal substances and get free health care? Makes sense right?!?!
> 
> Tax the hell out of it like beer, tobacco, and fuel! We spend billions fighting it but then states legalize it! Once again makes sense, states loosening a federal regulation, a touch backwards don't you think? We should allow states do that with gun laws.


Don't spend billions fighting it....money down a rat hole...and I mean rat in every sense of the word.
Doesn't seem like "just say no" works out all that well.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I'm curious, to those that think that addicts should be allowed to OD without intervention, what if it was your kid, wife, husband, mother, father, brother, or sister? Still OK to let them die?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm curious, to those that think that addicts should be allowed to OD without intervention, what if it was your kid, wife, husband, mother, father, brother, or sister? Still OK to let them die?


I knew this was going to come up. You can't live a good life life FOR someone, no matter how much you love them. You can't help them out of it unless they want to be helped.

But you can spend all your time money and emotions trying (unsuccessfully) to do so if you want...


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> I knew this was going to come up. You can't a good life life FOR someone, no matter how much you love them. You can't help them out of it unless they want to be helped.
> 
> But you can spend all your time money and emotions trying (unsuccessfully) to do so if you want...


So you'd let them die? Even your kid?

ETA: Adults are one thing, even if related, but I'd do just about anything for my kids and grand kids. My parents were alcoholics, there are many in my family, and I cut my father out of my life because of his treatment of my kids.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> So you'd let them die? Even your kid?


I think you're trying to incite a riot, to which I will respectfully decline. I already answered the question.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> I think you're trying to incite a riot, to which I will respectfully decline. I already answered the question.


No, you didn't, but you certainly don't have to. Answering questions is completely voluntary.

No riot (I think that involves physical activity and I'm tired) I'm just asking hard questions.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

This topic is so pregnant with material to address...

First, the most insurmountable problem is that law enforcement has turned into a doppelganger of the military industrial complex. You have everyone from the local PD to the manufacturers of guns, body armor, and assorted other trinkets making untold fortunes off the highly touted 'war on drugs' both through excessive taxation and also through asset forfeiture. I would also be remiss if I were to fail to mention the money the courts, lawyers, and cronies running largely useless treatment programs make. Oh, and let's not forget the way this boosts the numbers in the correctional system building careers and personal opportunities, and since the advent of private prisons, obscene profit writ large. The amounts of money involved and the sheer numbers of people with their fingers in the till are mind-boggling!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...urglars-did-last-year/?utm_term=.954b9994917c

Second, most all levels of government are infected with control freaks who are there to infringe on our rights just like that worthless mother-in-law who wants to control your life. Nothing besides the 9/11 terror attack has been used to greater effect to infringe on our freedom than the 'war on drugs'. Not only, as Merle Haggard observed in the 1990s (before the Patriot Act, I might add) that he had more freedom in the early 60s while on parole supervision than a perfectly lawful citizen had when he made that comment, and has even less today. William Pitt made the observation that 'necessity is the argument of tyrants and the creed of slaves'. What do we have presented as the rationale for every infringement? Necessity, of course.

Third, there is no way to force or coerce a drug addict into becoming a non-addict. I can look back on having had a brother and a cousin of which both were really bad addicts. The cousin is dead and my brother has been clean long enough I have confidence he will stay that way. He would tell you in no uncertain terms that an addict is not going to change unless he sincerely wants to, and when that time comes he will do it without the police, the court, the 27 step program, or any other outside contributor.

Fourth, given the facts of the matter, the 'war on drugs' is nothing more than a fantastically expensive way, in terms of money and the freedom of every non-criminal in America, to try to run water up a rope. Once again, take a good look at how the 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th Amendments have been gutted largely with the 'war on drugs' as the 'justification'.

Fifth, if there were no federal laws against drugs (parallel with the complete absence of any constitutional authority for the federal government to be involved, as regulating interstate commerce means to facilitate its proper operation, not to micromanage it or prohibit it*) the bottom would drop out from under the drug market taking away the motive for the secondary crime attached to it, both property crimes to pay for it and the profit motive for the killing and such associated with it.

Sixth, without prohibition, as hunter63 so eloquently put it, Darwin will sort it out.

Seventh, it does no good whatsoever to harass nonparticipants. There is a local pharmacist who would be very well advised not to walk across the street while I am driving or he will become a greasy spot on the pavement. That worthless piece of [manure] gave me an absolutely miserable time over my prescriptions a couple of years ago all while acting like he was single-handedly winning the "war on drugs". The worst part of, beyond the fact that there was no similarity between Yours Truly and a drug dealer or addict, is that the purpose of the pain pills in question was connected with reconstructive surgery ON MY FACE! It isn't like it wasn't obvious!

At the end of the day, the only workable solution to actually solve the problem is to remove the government interference and let the problem sort itself out one way or the other varying by individual. The problem is that, when you follow the money, there are entirely too many politically connected people to ever allow that to happen.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Wow! It's hard to believe I apparently spent 45 minutes on that last post!


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

IndyDave said:


> Wow! It's hard to believe I apparently spent 45 minutes on that last post!


It was pretty eloquent, that's for sure!. Well done.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

ShannonR said:


> It was pretty eloquent, that's for sure!. Well done.


Flattery will get you anywhere!


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

IndyDave said:


> Flattery will get you anywhere!


To a point, it doesn't work on everyone though.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Oh goodness. It seems I forgot a couple of things...

First, that "*" in my long post I failed to follow up on: In 1781-speak, the word 'regulate' meant to cause something to work correctly and efficiently, not to micromanage or control it. Much mischief has been carried out at the expense of our constitutional rights by redefining words like 'regulate' and 'reasonable'. Also problematic is similar redefinition of 'militia' making the recent argument that it refers to the National Guard when it was understood then, and is still found defined in the US Code as every adult citizen. Yes, each of you is a member of the 'militia' whether you like it or not!

Second, to make follow up on my constitutional references a bit easier...

http://constitutionus.com/

Third, President Trump is right about tightening up the border. We have an ongoing influx of invaders who are coming either to perpetrate crimes or else to become colonists (as opposed to immigrants who come to join a society, not supplant it), both of which are a danger to our society.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

ShannonR said:


> Medical pot here is a sham, just an excuse for dealers to grow for profit. There are some who do use it appropriately, sure....but from what I have seen here in CA at the forefront of the medical marijuana movement.....it's mostly BS. I think pot causes more problems with our youngsters than it solves....
> 
> That said, I'm not totally against pot. But I am against people pulling the "medical marijuana" card for an excuse to manufacture it for profit. I could care less if you smoke it....but,don't pretend it's for medical reasons when it's prescribed for something like "anxiety", and you better keep it away from my kid if you know what's good for you


I live in Washington where it's legal for medical or recreational use. I don't personally partake but I fully support and applaud marijuana legalization. I don't care either whether someone claims it's for medical use or personal...none of my business and I have better things to do than worry about why someone uses it.
And anxiety IS a medical condition.

I'm thankful to live in a state where I can choose whether I want to smoke marijuana or even to end my life if I'm suffering from a terminal illness. I may not choose it but I want the right to do so.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Lisa in WA said:


> I live in Washington where it's legal for medical or recreational use. I don't personally partake but I fully support and applaud marijuana legalization. I don't care either whether someone claims it's for medical use or personal...none of my business and I have better things to do than worry about why someone uses it.
> And anxiety IS a medical condition.
> 
> I'm thankful to live in a state where I can choose whether I want to smoke marijuana or even to end my life if I'm suffering from a terminal illness. I may not choose it but I want the right to do so.


I will stand by the argument that what one chooses to do which may be self-injurious without injuring others is none of the government's business, especially that of the federal government if it is neither a power granted in Article I, Section 8 or the defense of enumerated rights. I can also share in disdain for the fantastic number of cases of ailments like 'anxiety' which sprung up with the legalization for medical reasons, using a diagnosis which is largely subjective in nature to legally 'take a nip for medicinal purposes'. In my reckoning it reflects more on the stupidity of the law than anyone partaking, but still, it makes me shake my head.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

sisterpine said:


> What we are doing now obviously is not working. Some say it is a disease some say it is not a disease. What ever it is we cannot "cure" it any more than we can cure depression or infections that beat our antibiotics. The difference being that depressed or infection tainted people generally do not steal, rob, create havoc etc. within our communities. I just read an ad that said "Everyone I know is on heroin". Seems to me that the man was saying everyone he associates with (his personal community) is on heroin. We have tried different treatments, jail and prison terms: We tried stopping the drugs from getting into the country or onto our streets. What do you really think the answer to this problem might be?


No idea really what to do about illegal drugs but it sure seems legal opioids should be only prescribed by certain doctors (pain specialists) held to very high standards and heavily monitored. You have to sign your oldest child away to get pseudoephedrine (here in Oregon you have to have a prescription for it!) so I'd think we'd could do a better job with OxyContin.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

IndyDave said:


> I will stand by the argument that what one chooses to do which may be self-injurious without injuring others is none of the government's business, especially that of the federal government if it is neither a power granted in Article I, Section 8 or the defense of enumerated rights. I can also share in disdain for the fantastic number of cases of ailments like 'anxiety' which sprung up with the legalization for medical reasons, using a diagnosis which is largely subjective in nature to legally 'take a nip for medicinal purposes'. In my reckoning it reflects more on the stupidity of the law than anyone partaking, but still, it makes me shake my head.


Make it legal across the board and that won't be a problem. 
People will push as far as they can. Look at all of the idiots putting an internet ordered vest on their dog and claiming it's a therapy dog.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Lisa in WA said:


> I live in Washington where it's legal for medical or recreational use. I don't personally partake but I fully support and applaud marijuana legalization. I don't care either whether someone claims it's for medical use or personal...none of my business and I have better things to do than worry about why someone uses it.
> And anxiety IS a medical condition.
> 
> I'm thankful to live in a state where I can choose whether I want to smoke marijuana or even to end my life if I'm suffering from a terminal illness. I may not choose it but I want the right to do so.


Medical marijuana was recently approved in New York, but it's crazy what you have to do to get it. 

The right to death with dignity is something that's been bandied about a bit here, and it needs to be legalized.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> I will stand by the argument that what one chooses to do which may be self-injurious without injuring others is none of the government's business, especially that of the federal government if it is neither a power granted in Article I, Section 8 or the defense of enumerated rights. I can also share in disdain for the fantastic number of cases of ailments like 'anxiety' which sprung up with the legalization for medical reasons, using a diagnosis which is largely subjective in nature to legally 'take a nip for medicinal purposes'. In my reckoning it reflects more on the stupidity of the law than anyone partaking, but still, it makes me shake my head.


If you actually knew someone with anxiety (I do) you wouldn't be so flippant. It can be a severely debilitating, and yes, it is a real, diagnosed disorder.


----------



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

Huge problem in Wv. Makes it very hard for people that need pain treatment and dont abuse the drug. Narcan is the big deal. I hear 6 calls a day for overdose and many are the same address. They get the narcan all better and do it again later in the day. No police car ride. Most refuse to go to hospital. I think it needs to stop. One narcan and a police car ride to jail. Dont waste hospital time and tax money. Second time ambulance arrives and holds your hand if you wake up well ok if not even better. Our county even handed out narcan to anyone that wanted it. To help themselves or someone else. My tax dollar paid for that. Treatment centers around here are a joke. Probation is a joke.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Lisa in WA said:


> No idea really what to do about illegal drugs but it sure seems legal opioids should be only prescribed by certain doctors (pain specialists) held to very high standards and heavily monitored. You have to sign your oldest child away to get pseudoephedrine (here in Oregon you have to have a prescription for it!) so I'd think we'd could do a better job with OxyContin.


I don't see where having a restricted subset of doctors would help or even be reasonable. Right now, from two separate incidents separated by roughly a decade, both of my eye sockets are plastic (along with assorted other damage connected with the incidents) I don't see where I needed yet another specialist to correctly discern that I hurt like hell and needed appropriate pain. There was also that time I had hernia surgery. My surgeon, who was not a pain specialist, had to explain to me when I called him when my supply of Vicodin was getting thin that I should start combining with Tylenol and transitioning out of the Vicodin as it is addictive, again without the need for an additional specialist. Having used it on more than one occasion, I can't figure out for the life of my why people would use it recreationally, but plenty of them are in prison for it.



Lisa in WA said:


> Make it legal across the board and that won't be a problem.
> People will push as far as they can. Look at all of the idiots putting an internet ordered vest on their dog and claiming it's a therapy dog.


I would agree, both for practical reasons and the absence of constitutional authority to engage in prohibition. At least in 1913 we had people in office who understood this and fashioned a constitutional amendment for prohibition rather than simplypassing unconstitutional laws.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> If you actually knew someone with anxiety (I do) you wouldn't be so flippant. It can be a severely debilitating, and yes, it is a real, diagnosed disorder.


Did I say there was no such thing? No, I said that it is subjective enough in nature that it is relatively easy to abuse, unlike, say, a broken arm. If you are going to disagree with me, please at least have the courtesy to disagree with something I actually said.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Portugal has had legalized drugs for some time...marijuana to heroin. Just has to be in small amounts. The drugs in sufficient quantity are still illegal, so a dealer or trafficker still does prison time. Overall, drug use seems to be not as much a problem. OTOH, nobody is holding up Portugal as the economic engine of the Free World.

And Portugal's legal system is nothing like that of the U.S. in respect to liability. If I was an employer, I know I would drug screen all my employees at random. Bust the screen once, undergo mandatory counseling. Bust it twice, and don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya. From a liability standpoint, you just can't have an addict on the payroll.

So, what's the answer? Personally, I don't know. But I don't feel like my hard earned tax dollars should continually go to somebody who had OD'd for the third time. At some point, we have to cut the money off.

Oh, but they'll die in the streets, say many. Don't know so much about that. They eventually have to work or steal to support their habit. I had an uncle who was a drunk from the word go. Grandpa used to get so mad at him, he'd whip him like a ten year old child, for coming home sotted. But...when the old man sobered up, he worked as hard as anybody...He had to, because it was work or starve.

So, just some kinda random thoughts, probably worth what you paid for them...


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> Did I say there was no such thing? No, I said that it is subjective enough in nature that it is relatively easy to abuse, unlike, say, a broken arm. If you are going to disagree with me, please at least have the courtesy to disagree with something I actually said.


I never even implied that you said there was no such thing, you said it was subjective, and I indicated it was a real disorder. It is a real disorder. It's also not so subjective to a mental health professional. "Nip" isn't handed out willy nilly, and there is oversight in the states where it is legal for medical, rather than recreational, reasons.


----------



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

I have a problem when tv ads say drug addiction is the same as having cancer. Maryland was running one with a football player say its a illness like cancer. Um no its not!


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> I never even implied that you said there was no such thing, you said it was subjective, and I indicated it was a real disorder. It is a real disorder. It's also not so subjective to a mental health professional. "Nip" isn't handed out willy nilly, and there is oversight in the states where it is legal for medical, rather than recreational, reasons.


If you are so sure of the impossibility of such abuse, then please explain for me how it is that people from Indiana are acquiring MJ from Colorado in this way and either using it themselves, bringing it back to sell, or both.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> If you are so sure of the impossibility of such abuse, then please explain for me how it is that people from Indiana are acquiring MJ from Colorado in this way and either using it themselves, bringing it back to sell, or both.


Where did I say that I'm so sure of the impossibility of abuse? Can you point it out? Thanks.

I don't know the specifics of what you're talking about, and to be honest, it's none of my business. If a licensed physician wrote the 'script it is being monitored.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> Where did I say that I'm so sure of the impossibility of abuse? Can you point it out? Thanks.
> 
> I don't know the specifics of what you're talking about, and to be honest, it's none of my business. *If a licensed physician wrote the 'script it is being monitored.*


*You said:*



Irish Pixie said:


> I never even implied that you said there was no such thing, you said it was subjective, and I indicated it was a real disorder. It is a real disorder. *It's also not so subjective to a mental health professional. "Nip" isn't handed out willy nilly, and there is oversight in the states where it is legal for medical, rather than recreational, reasons.*


You appear to have discounted abuse from being within the realm of possibility by virtue of government oversight. My point is that such a diagnosis is subjective enough in nature that it would be harder than hell to prove that a person doesn't have it, unlike something much more clearly provable/disprovable like a broken arm. You said it isn't 'handed out willy nilly'. The bottom line is that it sometimes is and it isn't too hard to find licensed prescribers who are willing to hand out a scrip for an ailment that is nearly impossible to disprove, as evidenced by the fact that it is happening.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I'm not discussing the government, government over reach, blah blah blah. There is oversight for every single prescription written in the US. Period. If you want to go on about the government, have at it. I'm not playing.

What's your medical background? ETA: Specifically, mental health. Please.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Where did I say that I'm so sure of the impossibility of abuse? Can you point it out? Thanks.
> 
> I don't know the specifics of what you're talking about, and to be honest, it's none of my business. If a licensed physician wrote the 'script it is being monitored.


Monitored? By who? Every 10-30 days? When I got home from afghannyland, I was prescribed xanax for anxiety, 30 day prescriptions, how is that being monitored? My friend gets 30 day supply of Percocet for pain management, if he runs out he calls his doctor, doesn't see him but calls and gets more. He's hooked like none other, how is that being monitored? What a crock!


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm not discussing the government, government over reach, blah blah blah. There is oversight for every single prescription written in the US. Period. If you want to go on about the government, have at it. I'm not playing.
> 
> What's your medical background? ETA: Specifically, mental health. Please.


Are you being willfully obtuse? I do not need any medical training whatsoever to know of local drug dealers who are acquiring their supply this way. You really need to learn how to think outside of the brochure. Your dearly beloved oversight simply does not work.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

sisterpine said:


> What do you really think *the answer* to this problem might be?


There is no "answer".
All one can do is worry about themselves not becoming part of the problem.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bearfootfarm said:


> There is no "answer".
> All one can do is worry about themselves not becoming part of the problem.


Well said. Attempting to protect the stupid from themselves is a fool's errand predestined to failure.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> Are you being willfully obtuse? I do not need any medical training whatsoever to know of local drug dealers who are acquiring their supply this way. You really need to learn how to think outside of the brochure. Your dearly beloved oversight simply does not work.


Willfully obtuse? "Think outside the brochure"? "Your dearly beloved"? Resort to insults rather than have a discussion. Got it. 

I'm discussing anxiety, and you're just willy nilly. I don't see this going anywhere constructive...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> My friend gets 30 day supply of Percocet for pain management, if he runs out he calls his doctor, *doesn't see him but calls and gets more*.


That's illegal.
Either the Dr and the Pharmacist are committing felonies, or your friend is a liar.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> Willfully obtuse? "Think outside the brochure"? "Your dearly beloved"? Resort to insults rather than have a discussion. Got it.
> 
> I'm discussing anxiety, and you're just willy nilly. I don't see this going anywhere constructive...


OK, let's take this from the top. You started by calling me flippant over pointing out something that is in fact happening on a daily basis regardless of what your opinion may be. I never said that there are not such things as legitimate anxiety diagnoses, just that there have in fact been a whole bunch of new cases of this diagnosis which is virtually impossible to disprove materialize out of the cracks in the concrete after the legalization of MJ for limited restricted use. 
For some strange reason you seem to think that because a given activity is outside the boundaries allowed by law, it can't happen. News flash: If people did not operate outside the boundaries of the law we would have no need for prisons (which happen to be one of our few true growth industries).

Yes, I was being extremely sarcastic about your repeated insistence that government oversight makes abuse of that system impossible. You earned it.

If you are going to get in a snit and have your feeling hurt because I am dealing primarily with illegal drug use and the laws associated with it rather than anxiety, why are you posting that in a thread about illegal drug use and the laws associated with it?


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's illegal.
> Either the Dr and the Pharmacist are committing felonies, or your friend is a liar.


It's not illegal. Even if you refills are all used up the doctor can authorize another refill directly to the pharmacy without you going to see the doc. You will have to meet quarterly minimum with the pain management doc but don't have to se them every time for a refill.


----------



## sisterpine (May 9, 2004)

Folks, let us at least try not to bite the bait presented to us. I have a Masters degree in Clinical Psychology- Addiction. I have pondered this question all during my 20 plus years as a big city police officer. I have watched friends and family members destroyed along with their loved ones by this thing- addiction. I do believe we could start with stopping the war on drugs (just put the money back in the general fund) We would then be able to close many prisons both private and public. Should addicts be able to get drugs legally...I do not know. I do know that when I first became an addictions counselor the federal government allowed addiction to be a cause of social security disability which totally stunned me. I also know that not all addicts steal, rob and assault people. We do not hear about those that don't. Just like we do not hear about people who do not beat their spouses or children. In fact we are so busy reporting on broken or horrible people that the good ones, the majority, just seem to disappear. I suspect that the current war on Opiates is a false flag to get us to not notice some other important thing the government is doing. It causes us to approve of spending more money on the war on drugs and the border issues as well. As far as I can deduce, no matter what we do, addicts will continue to die on the street and in bathrooms around our country. It is said that you cannot fix stupid (stupid being an inability to learn). Our government preaches to our hearts not our minds. I actually do not know of a single family that is not touched by addiction in one way or another. I believe the pendulum will eventually swing in another direction and this issue will die out. But I doubt it will happen in my lifetime.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Monitored? By who? Every 10-30 days? When I got home from afghannyland, I was prescribed xanax for anxiety, 30 day prescriptions, how is that being monitored? My friend gets 30 day supply of Percocet for pain management, if he runs out he calls his doctor, doesn't see him but calls and gets more. He's hooked like none other, how is that being monitored? What a crock!





Texaspredatorhu said:


> It's not illegal. Even if you refills are all used up the doctor can authorize another refill directly to the pharmacy without you going to see the doc. You will have to meet quarterly minimum with the pain management doc but don't have to se them every time for a refill.


I thought percocet and sanax were both federally controlled substances and as such require a new scrip from the doc for each refill like they do for drugs like Ritalin..
Not so?


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Lisa in WA said:


> I thought percocet and sanax were both federally controlled substances and as such require a new scrip from the doc for each refill like they do for drugs like Ritalin..
> Not so?


The doc doesn't have to see you in person to send a new scrip to the pharmacy.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

sisterpine said:


> Folks, let us at least try not to bite the bait presented to us. I have a Masters degree in Clinical Psychology- Addiction. I have pondered this question all during my 20 plus years as a big city police officer. I have watched friends and family members destroyed along with their loved ones by this thing- addiction. I do believe we could start with stopping the war on drugs (just put the money back in the general fund) We would then be able to close many prisons both private and public. Should addicts be able to get drugs legally...I do not know. I do know that when I first became an addictions counselor the federal government allowed addiction to be a cause of social security disability which totally stunned me. I also know that not all addicts steal, rob and assault people. We do not hear about those that don't. Just like we do not hear about people who do not beat their spouses or children. In fact we are so busy reporting on broken or horrible people that the good ones, the majority, just seem to disappear. I suspect that the current war on Opiates is a false flag to get us to not notice some other important thing the government is doing. It causes us to approve of spending more money on the war on drugs and the border issues as well. As far as I can deduce, no matter what we do, addicts will continue to die on the street and in bathrooms around our country. It is said that you cannot fix stupid (stupid being an inability to learn). Our government preaches to our hearts not our minds. I actually do not know of a single family that is not touched by addiction in one way or another. I believe the pendulum will eventually swing in another direction and this issue will die out. But I doubt it will happen in my lifetime.


I'm sorry, but what bait? I thought this was a fairly civil discussion, even when posters disagreed.

However your post here looks like you are taking things in a political direction and maybe if that is your point, he Dark Room would be a better place for the thread.


IndyDave said:


> The doc doesn't have to see you in person to send a new scrip to the pharmacy.



For drugs like Ritalin you have to go get a new scrip every month. You don't have to see the doc but he has to do a new one. They don't write them for more than 30 days at a time.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> OK, let's take this from the top. You started by calling me flippant over pointing out something that is in fact happening on a daily basis regardless of what your opinion may be. I never said that there are not such things as legitimate anxiety diagnoses, just that there have in fact been a whole bunch of new cases of this diagnosis which is virtually impossible to disprove materialize out of the cracks in the concrete after the legalization of MJ for limited restricted use.
> For some strange reason you seem to think that because a given activity is outside the boundaries allowed by law, it can't happen. News flash: If people did not operate outside the boundaries of the law we would have no need for prisons (which happen to be one of our few true growth industries).
> 
> Yes, I was being extremely sarcastic about your repeated insistence that government oversight makes abuse of that system impossible. You earned it.
> ...


I never said that oversight makes abuse impossible, stop putting words in my mouth. It's not nice. 

The answer to your last bit? Thread drift, it happens. And you responded to the anxiety post before I did... SMH

From your posts, the only thing you're interested in doing is insult those that don't agree with, which is fine, if that's all you want out of a discussion.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Lisa in WA said:


> I thought percocet and sanax were both federally controlled substances and as such require a new scrip from the doc for each refill like they do for drugs like Ritalin..
> Not so?


They are, or are controlled by the individual state. In NYS, there is a state wide registry that has to be checked prior to the issue of any controlled substance prescription. I think similar programs are in place in other state, and more are being implemented. There are no written 'scripts in NY anymore either, they are all electronic directly to the pharmacy.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Lisa in WA said:


> For drugs like Ritalin you have to go get a new scrip every month. You don't have to see the doc but he has to do a new one. They don't write them for more than 30 days at a time.


This is what I understood to be happening when it was mentioned earlier. Friend calls the doc from home, doc sends a new scrip to the pharmacy, friend goes to the pharmacy and then home the proud owner of another bottle full of pills. Just because they can't write a single scrip for more than 30 days worth, that doesn't stop them from writing a scrip at less than 30 day intervals. Might not pass close scrutiny, or it might, given that I am not that familiar with the laws on this, but once again, as with most things, it's only illegal if you get caught.


----------



## sisterpine (May 9, 2004)

Certainly did not mean to go political....just searching for answers or thoughts or things others think might help with this huge problem that is eating our children and our society.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> They are, or are controlled by the individual state. In NYS, there is a state wide registry that has to be checked prior to the issue of any controlled substance prescription. I think similar programs are in place in other state, and more are being implemented. There are no written 'scripts in NY anymore either, they are all electronic directly to the pharmacy.


OK, a person lives in a part of NY within convenient distance of NJ and PA. What is to stop them from having a doctor in each state?


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Lisa in WA said:


> I thought percocet and sanax were both federally controlled substances and as such require a new scrip from the doc for each refill like they do for drugs like Ritalin..
> Not so?


Where did I say you didn't? I said call the doc and your good. Doesn't mean you didn't see the doc at least once. Pain management requires quarterly.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> OK, a person lives in a part of NY within convenient distance of NJ and PA. What is to stop them from having a doctor in each state?


I imagine it could be done, but it wouldn't be easy. Mailing address, no prior medical records, showing up at a new Dr and asking for a controlled substance is a huge red flag, many doctor office's urine test to see how much of the medication is showing up and what else you're taking, that's all I can think of right now I'm sure there are more. If a Dr. writes too many controlled substance prescriptions in a certain length of time, it will cause flags, and it will be looked into. Two years ago, maybe not. It definitely will now.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> I never said that oversight makes abuse impossible, stop putting words in my mouth. It's not nice.
> 
> The answer to your last bit? Thread drift, it happens. And you responded to the anxiety post before I did... SMH
> 
> From your posts, the only thing you're interested in doing is insult those that don't agree with, which is fine, if that's all you want out of a discussion.


You said in response to my addressing the issue of abuse:



Irish Pixie said:


> "Nip" isn't handed out willy nilly, and there is oversight in the states where it is legal for medical, rather than recreational, reasons.


If you find factual consideration of the issues under consideration insulting, well, you are entitled to make up your own opinions but not your own facts. Your argument regarding oversight reminds me much of my pet peeve issue of people using the phrase, "This is America, that can't happen here" as a supposed final word when dealing with a number of potentially dangerous political issues.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> I imagine it could be done, but it wouldn't be easy. Mailing address, no prior medical records, showing up at a new Dr and asking for a controlled substance is a huge red flag, many doctor office's urine test to see how much of the medication is showing up and what else you're taking, that's all I can think of right now I'm sure there are more. If a Dr. writes too many controlled substance prescriptions in a certain length of time, it will cause flags, and it will be looked into. Two years ago, maybe not. It definitely will now.


OK, I see how this is going. You simply don't think like a criminal. I served for a time as a correctional officer and know plenty of people with ties to the drug culture. This system of oversight looks pretty bulletproof to a person who is not in the habit of scrutinizing it day and night for ways around it and does not have contact with people who do. Those inclined to engage in illegal activity likely have a long list of contacts such that for them going to a 'new' doc isn't like it is for us. N.Y. Drugdealer goes to PA to see Dr. Johnson who he already knows has a large enough patient roster to hide quite a few less than proper controlled substance patients and makes a healthy side-business out of doing so. You wouldn't have those connections or have any reason to even suppose they exist. It isn't like there are doctors who do nothing but sit at home on the lazy boy calling in scrips for his 'patients' to get higher than a Georgia pine or else help someone else do so.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> You said in response to my addressing the issue of abuse:
> 
> 
> 
> If you find factual consideration of the issues under consideration insulting, well, you are entitled to make up your own opinions but not your own facts. Your argument regarding oversight reminds me much of my pet peeve issue of people using the phrase, "This is America, that can't happen here" as a supposed final word when dealing with a number of potentially dangerous political issues.


Yer a hoot. Your posts are riddled with statements that give the impression that you're huffing your own exhaust. And you seem to have quite an issue with spinning posts into what you _want_ them to say, it's not nice. 

Discussing anything with you is about as much fun as root canal. I did try tho.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> OK, I see how this is going. You simply don't think like a criminal. I served for a time as a correctional officer and know plenty of people with ties to the drug culture. This system of oversight looks pretty bulletproof to a person who is not in the habit of scrutinizing it day and night for ways around it and does not have contact with people who do. Those inclined to engage in illegal activity likely have a long list of contacts such that for them going to a 'new' doc isn't like it is for us. N.Y. Drugdealer goes to PA to see Dr. Johnson who he already knows has a large enough patient roster to hide quite a few less than proper controlled substance patients and makes a healthy side-business out of doing so. You wouldn't have those connections or have any reason to even suppose they exist. It isn't like there are doctors who do nothing but sit at home on the lazy boy calling in scrips for his 'patients' to get higher than a Georgia pine or else help someone else do so.


Your information is not current. "Dr Johnson" has been updated to the new controlled substance protocol, there is still information that must be provided and checked, there are still urine tests, and there are more red flags raised when a patient asks for a controlled substance.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> Yer a hoot. Your posts are riddled with statements that give the impression that you're huffing your own exhaust. And you seem to have quite an issue with spinning posts into what you _want_ them to say, it's not nice.
> 
> Discussing anything with you is about as much fun as root canal. I did try tho.


OK, I am going to have to step up my game. If I were doing quality work, I would be at least as much fun as two simultaneous root canals.


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

I glad that is settled........Who won?

As long as we are treading swampy ground....
I going to a...... Straight..... bar tonite......Not that there is anything a matter with that?


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

hunter63 said:


> I glad that is settled........Who won?
> 
> As long as we are treading swampy ground....
> I going to a *Straight* bar tonite......


As opposed to gay or crooked? I can't help but wonder whether you are avoiding people of, well, alternative lifestyles or lawyers/politicians!


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

IndyDave said:


> As opposed to gay or crooked? I can't help but wonder whether you are avoiding people of, well, alternative lifestyles or lawyers/politicians!


Shows?......Huh? LOLOLOL
I love these discussions....all sorts of "stuff" flying around and ..No one is going to change their opinion.
Lets see how many pages we can get.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

hunter63 said:


> I glad that is settled........Who won?
> 
> As long as we are treading swampy ground....
> I going to a...... Straight..... bar tonite......Not that there is anything a matter with that?





hunter63 said:


> Shows?......Huh? LOLOLOL
> I love these discussions....all sorts of "stuff" flying around and ..No one is going to change their opinion.
> Lets see how many pages we can get.


Are you actually trying to bait with these two posts? If so, you should check the HT rules.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

hunter63 said:


> Shows?......Huh? LOLOLOL
> I love these discussions....all sorts of "stuff" flying around and ..No one is going to change their opinion.
> Lets see how many pages we can get.


About changing opinions, usually not, but I have seen exceptions. In my case, I have had times that I did when having new actual information (not to be confused with feelings or blind faith in some person, group, institution, or government construct where I can see more holes than a Swiss cheese) brought to my attention.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> About changing opinions, usually not, but I have seen exceptions. In my case, I have had times that I did when having new actual information (not to be confused with feelings or blind faith in some person, group, institution, or government construct where I can see more holes than a Swiss cheese) brought to my attention.


So you're in the baiting as well, or are you trolling? I can never keep those two straight. Good to know...


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

Nope...just letting ya know .....I think.... logic has gone out window...
Call it what you want.
Have a nice evening.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> So you're in the baiting as well, or are you trolling? I can never keep those two straight. Good to know...


I made a general observation about my cumulative experience. How did you come up with this? How is sharing that I have in the past changed my opinion based on being presented credible information trolling or baiting?


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

IndyDave said:


> This topic is so pregnant with material to address...
> 
> First, the most insurmountable problem is that law enforcement has turned into a doppelganger of the military industrial complex. You have everyone from the local PD to the manufacturers of guns, body armor, and assorted other trinkets making untold fortunes off the highly touted 'war on drugs' both through excessive taxation and also through asset forfeiture. I would also be remiss if I were to fail to mention the money the courts, lawyers, and cronies running largely useless treatment programs make. Oh, and let's not forget the way this boosts the numbers in the correctional system building careers and personal opportunities, and since the advent of private prisons, obscene profit writ large. The amounts of money involved and the sheer numbers of people with their fingers in the till are mind-boggling!
> 
> ...


I joined late, but read your fine effort. Should send it to the local rag as an opinion piece. 
War on drugs has supplanted the military industrial complex, especially when you factor in the prisons for which Americans have a fondness of (most incarcerated nation on earth, except 'maybe' North Korea).

The question I have, (and it may have been asked - my apologies) will decriminalizing drugs have a over sized effect on society? That is, will decriminalizing drugs cause more harm, than what we see today? And when I say today, one must really look hard at all the things we've given up, both financially and our freedoms, never-mind the loss of life (both from addicts, and the participants in the war - police, dealers and gangs). And it should be pointed out, we treat addicts as lepers, and there is some shame in admitting you are one, and as such, less likely to get help sooner, rather than later (too late). Some of the impositions we've suffered has been ingrained in us, since birth. In essence, we've become doped by our war on drugs. We may have started out with good intentions, but like many things, we've turned our respective states into jails. We even brainwashed ourselves. For example, way back, we were all convinced those on pot were the number one menace to society (very graphic depictions of crazed individuals - similar to Zombies). I have to chuckle, for if pot were truly our scourge in society, we'd be in a happy place, probably in front of a 'happy meal'...lol
Unfortunately, pot is really the least of our worries. Alcohol, meth, heroin, cocaine, opioids and now fentanyl are worse than the herb by orders of magnitude.


----------



## Teej (Jan 14, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm curious, to those that think that addicts should be allowed to OD without intervention, what if it was your kid, wife, husband, mother, father, brother, or sister? Still OK to let them die?


I have no problem with a person getting help for a loved one as long as it paid for with private funds. Tax payers should not be having to fund rehab or healthcare for a person who willingly started down the path that put them there. This includes drugs, alcohol and tobacco. I'm including myself in this as I am a smoker and nobody but me is to blame for it. 

Even parents reach a breaking point. My cousin is an addict and has been since he was a teenager, not sure what his drug of choice is. His family has supported him, sent him to rehab, family interventions in which they begged and pleaded with him. I don't know how he's managed not to kill himself because he's so wasted every time I see him he can barely function or starved himself because he doesn't eat and is skin & bones. He's in his late 40's now and my aunt (she's in her mid eighties) just recently admitted that he has been breaking into her house and stealing stuff to sell. She not only filed a complaint with the PD, she also got a restraining order on him.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

melli said:


> I joined late, but read your fine effort. Should send it to the local rag as an opinion piece.
> War on drugs has supplanted the military industrial complex, especially when you factor in the prisons for which Americans have a fondness of (most incarcerated nation on earth, except 'maybe' North Korea).
> 
> The question I have, (and it may have been asked - my apologies) will decriminalizing drugs have a over sized effect on society? That is, will decriminalizing drugs cause more harm, than what we see today? And when I say today, one must really look hard at all the things we've given up, both financially and our freedoms, never-mind the loss of life (both from addicts, and the participants in the war - police, dealers and gangs). And it should be pointed out, we treat addicts as lepers, and there is some shame in admitting you are one, and as such, less likely to get help sooner, rather than later (too late). Some of the impositions we've suffered has been ingrained in us, since birth. In essence, we've become doped by our war on drugs. We may have started out with good intentions, but like many things, we've turned our respective states into jails. We even brainwashed ourselves. For example, way back, we were all convinced those on pot were the number one menace to society (very graphic depictions of crazed individuals - similar to Zombies). I have to chuckle, for if pot were truly our scourge in society, we'd be in a happy place, probably in front of a 'happy meal'...lol
> Unfortunately, pot is really the least of our worries. Alcohol, meth, heroin, cocaine, opioids and now fentanyl are worse than the herb by orders of magnitude.


So far as actual evidence as opposed to speculation and opinion goes, we have only a few items to work with. A family friend who was a bit older than my grandparents had said that Prohibition made more drunks than any other single event in history. It also fostered organized crime and much of the ancillary mayhem we see in the war on drugs. Its repeal did not cause an explosion of alcohol-fueled crime and mayhem no matter what the fine ladies of the temperance movement may have preferred people believe. In modern times, there are a few societies which do not penalize drug use and claim to have good results with that choice. I do have to point out for the sake of intellectual honesty that those are significantly different societies and the results do not necessarily translate neatly into our society. Based on observing those around me and those known to others I trust, I do not believe in the 'gateway drug' argument. I am also inclined to believe that people using harder drugs may settle for MJ if it is legal and the others are not. I also believe that if all the above were made legal, Darwin would have a field day for a brief while and then we would settle down to a new normal with a great many of the users, particularly of harder drugs, no longer with us on account of self-liquidating.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Teej said:


> I have no problem with a person getting help for a loved one as long as it paid for with private funds. Tax payers should not be having to fund rehab or healthcare for a person who willingly started down the path that put them there. This includes drugs, alcohol and tobacco. I'm including myself in this as I am a smoker and nobody but me is to blame for it.
> 
> Even parents reach a breaking point. My cousin is an addict and has been since he was a teenager, not sure what his drug of choice is. His family has supported him, sent him to rehab, family interventions in which they begged and pleaded with him. I don't know how he's managed not to kill himself because he's so wasted every time I see him he can barely function or starved himself because he doesn't eat and is skin & bones. He's in his late 40's now and my aunt (she's in her mid eighties) just recently admitted that he has been breaking into her house and stealing stuff to sell. She not only filed a complaint with the PD, she also got a restraining order on him.


I have a cousin who lived in Houston (he's now deceased) who had three kids. The two boys went to college on swimming scholarships, one made it to the Olympics. The daughter lost her way in college and daddy kept bailing her out of trouble and paying for all kinds of help, including a couple of stints at expensive rehab facilities.

Didn't matter, Janie never could stay straight. Her dad got a call in the middle of the night from a jail in California. She'd been picked up again. He told her that her home hadn't moved and if she ever needed a hot meal or a place to sleep. stop bby when you get out, and hung up the phone.

I don't know if she straightened out or died in a road ditch and neither did her parents. Sometimes, you do everything you can and it still doesn't work. At that point, you've done what you can do and the ball is entirely in the addict's court.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

IndyDave said:


> So far as actual evidence as opposed to speculation and opinion goes, we have only a few items to work with. A family friend who was a bit older than my grandparents had said that Prohibition made more drunks than any other single event in history. It also fostered organized crime and much of the ancillary mayhem we see in the war on drugs. Its repeal did not cause an explosion of alcohol-fueled crime and mayhem no matter what the fine ladies of the temperance movement may have preferred people believe. *In modern times, there are a few societies which do not penalize drug use and claim to have good results with that choice.* I do have to point out for the sake of intellectual honesty that those are significantly different societies and the results do not necessarily translate neatly into our society. Based on observing those around me and those known to others I trust, I do not believe in the 'gateway drug' argument. I am also inclined to believe that people using harder drugs may settle for MJ if it is legal and the others are not. I also believe that if all the above were made legal, Darwin would have a field day for a brief while and then we would settle down to a new normal with a great many of the users, particularly of harder drugs, no longer with us on account of self-liquidating.


Is that based on facts or your opinion. Not trying to rattle a nest, but I haven't really looked hard at a country that has legalized drugs to see how they are faring. I've heard positive things in Portugal, but nothing substantive. 
I've seen documentaries on drug dispensaries in Netherlands giving out daily doses of heroin. Supposedly, it has lowered crime rates associated with addicts stealing for a fix, and has made them employable. I call that a win win. 
Some places 'overlook' hard drugs, but still have laws prohibiting drugs. An old friend went to Thailand way back, and found himself in an opium den in the northern part of country (Chiang Mai comes to mind). He had a good time he says...lol


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

melli said:


> Is that based on facts or your opinion. Not trying to rattle a nest, but I haven't really looked hard at a country that has legalized drugs to see how they are faring. I've heard positive things in Portugal, but nothing substantive.
> I've seen documentaries on drug dispensaries in Netherlands giving out daily doses of heroin. Supposedly, it has lowered crime rates associated with addicts stealing for a fix, and has made them employable. I call that a win win.
> Some places 'overlook' hard drugs, but still have laws prohibiting drugs. An old friend went to Thailand way back, and found himself in an opium den in the northern part of country (Chiang Mai comes to mind). He had a good time he says...lol


That's why I phrased it the way I did. I have never had the inclination to care enough to actually dig and research to sort truth from fiction about any of those examples, therefore, I simply glossed over the claims made that it works well. This works for my point which is that even if true it is no guarantee that we would get results similar to the claims made for any of them, and therefore, I do not use that as the 'proof' that a number of others do that it should work here because it works there.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> It's *not illegal*.





IndyDave said:


> The doc doesn't have to see you in person to *send a new scrip to the pharmacy*.





Texaspredatorhu said:


> You will have to meet quarterly minimum with the pain management doc but *don't have to se them* every time for a *refill*.


Yes, it's illegal to get Percocets without seeing the Dr.
They cannot "call in" a prescription for Opioids.

It has to be hand written and hand delivered to the Pharmacy.
You cannot get "refills".
You have to have a new prescription and they cannot write one for more than 30 days at once.

My wife has done this for a living for decades now.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

IndyDave said:


> Drugdealer goes to PA to see Dr. Johnson who he already knows has a large enough patient roster to hide quite a few less than proper controlled substance patients and makes a healthy side-business out of doing so. You wouldn't have those connections or have any reason to even suppose they exist. It isn't like there are doctors who do nothing but sit at home on the lazy boy *calling in scrips* for his 'patients' to get higher than a Georgia pine or else help someone else do so.


You're describing multiple federal felonies, and no legitimate pharmacy will take an opioid prescription over the phone.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You're describing multiple federal felonies, and no legitimate pharmacy will take an opioid prescription over the phone.


I am using the term 'calling' loosely and with a bit of facetiousness about the lazy boy. Seriously, every prescription I have received for a few years has been electronically transmitted to the pharmacy of my choice without my ever having had a scrip in my hand. My larger point is that if people necessarily followed the law there would be no such thing as criminals and even if one cannot manage to sneak past the diligence of an honest doctor, there are crooks willing to pad their pockets.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

Jolly said:


> I have a cousin who lived in Houston (he's now deceased) who had three kids. The two boys went to college on swimming scholarships, one made it to the Olympics. The daughter lost her way in college and daddy kept bailing her out of trouble and paying for all kinds of help, including a couple of stints at expensive rehab facilities.
> 
> Didn't matter, Janie never could stay straight. Her dad got a call in the middle of the night from a jail in California. She'd been picked up again. He told her that her home hadn't moved and if she ever needed a hot meal or a place to sleep. stop bby when you get out, and hung up the phone.
> 
> I don't know if she straightened out or died in a road ditch and neither did her parents. Sometimes, you do everything you can and it still doesn't work. At that point, you've done what you can do and the ball is entirely in the addict's court.


Thanks for sharing...I am of the mind, that drug addiction is just a disease (mental disorder). Some folks are just predisposed to getting hooked and environment plays a role. I haven't seen my brother in decades (chat via email from time to time), but I suspect he is addicted to something (what, I don't know).

I really think most folks have an ability to do a course correction in life, while some don't or it is harder. I recall my mid teens, and being taken to alcohol, and I consequently OD'd on gin. Ever since then, I've lost the taste for alcohol (smell of gin would make nauseous for years). I am ok with that, as it is one less expense in my life. Not to say I never partook in a couple of beers, but it was situational type thing, not a habit. And in my case, I've gone years without buying any, even for special occasions. I feel blessed, as most folks I know, keep a well stocked cabinet (and they use it nightly). I bought a 6pack of beer a few years back, and it took two years to finish it off...I was wondering if that last can was spoiled from rolling around at the bottom of my fridge...lol
I wonder if that bad experience in youth with alcohol somehow altered my pleasure center in brain, as I see alcohol, except in very small doses (like a drink at neighbors), in a negative light. I recognize the good feeling one gets with alcohol (depressant), but I am also thinking of the repercussions a few hours after imbibing, and the next day. It is those negative thoughts that really temper any enthusiasm I may have towards alcohol (and has a crossover effect).
Yet, I had a university friend who pounded back drinks, and the next day seemed right as rain, whereas, the two beer max drinker (me), would be in a bad place for most of the next day...lol
Either I have genetic issue with alcohol or I psychological induced a brain aversion to alcohol. Odd, as I would always wonder why other folks seemed to fair well the next day after a bender, while I, the 2 beer max participant would be a train wreck (should note, the other participants were doubling or tripling my intake, and I was their size or bigger)


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

IndyDave said:


> That's why I phrased it the way I did. I have never had the inclination to care enough to actually dig and research to sort truth from fiction about any of those examples, therefore, I simply glossed over the claims made that it works well. This works for my point which is that even if true it is no guarantee that we would get results similar to the claims made for any of them, and therefore, I do not use that as the 'proof' that a number of others do that it should work here because it works there.


I agree, some things work better in other countries than ours...
Not a stickler, but you prefaced your post with "So far as actual evidence as opposed to speculation and opinion goes, we have only a few items to work with." I then assumed you had some evidence that societies who legalized, had been unable to claim good results. No biggie...I was just curious if you had evidence. 
Speaking of which, I should have a gander at the Portugal situation.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

melli said:


> I agree, some things work better in other countries than ours...
> Not a stickler, but you prefaced your post with "So far as actual evidence as opposed to speculation and opinion goes, we have only a few items to work with." I then assumed you had some evidence that societies who legalized, had been unable to claim good results. No biggie...I was just curious if you had evidence.
> Speaking of which, I should have a gander at the Portugal situation.


I see. I could have been more clear when I changed direction there!


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yes, it's illegal to get Percocets without seeing the Dr.
> They cannot "call in" a prescription for Opioids.
> 
> It has to be hand written and hand delivered to the Pharmacy.
> ...


He sees a pain management doctor every quarter and he calls in and the prescription is sent over electronically and if he needs it earlier he calls and he gets an emergency prescription. Never said he NEVER saw a doctor. NEVER said the doctor calls the pharmacy. I said my friend calls the doctor. My wife has been switched from Vicodin to Percocet without going in to see the doctor just by calling the doctor. So obviously it's not illegal here in Texas.


----------



## How Do I (Feb 11, 2008)

It's pretty obvious making it illegal and locking people up over it hasn't brought about a desirable outcome, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. So....huh. Where does that leave us?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Teej said:


> I have no problem with a person getting help for a loved one as long as it paid for with private funds. Tax payers should not be having to fund rehab or healthcare for a person who willingly started down the path that put them there. This includes drugs, alcohol and tobacco. I'm including myself in this as I am a smoker and nobody but me is to blame for it.
> 
> Even parents reach a breaking point. My cousin is an addict and has been since he was a teenager, not sure what his drug of choice is. His family has supported him, sent him to rehab, family interventions in which they begged and pleaded with him. I don't know how he's managed not to kill himself because he's so wasted every time I see him he can barely function or starved himself because he doesn't eat and is skin & bones. He's in his late 40's now and my aunt (she's in her mid eighties) just recently admitted that he has been breaking into her house and stealing stuff to sell. She not only filed a complaint with the PD, she also got a restraining order on him.


I've never been to this point, my opinion could (and probably would) change. Like I said, I had no problem whatsoever cutting my father out of my life, but a kid, especially my kid, is a different story. My post was in response to the rather cavalier attitude of "let 'em die" earlier in the thread. 

Addicts are people with a disease, in the beginning it may be a choice, but the brain becomes involved quickly and it's no longer a choice. I have no brilliant insight regarding the growing problem of addiction, I wish I did.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

ShannonR said:


> Let them all overdose?? What if we just stoped treating overdose "victims"? Tough love, so to speak. I bet I'm going to get flamed for the suggestion, but this cycle of enabling we have going on now sure ain't working.
> 
> 
> Seriously, I don't have an answer....


Others may have already said this, but much of the addiction problem is directly caused by doctors who over prescribe addictive painkillers.

One of the 1st things that has to be done is to stop irresponsible doctors. The 2nd is, since we (the government) caused much of the problem through lack of enforcement and a porous border, we need to make these people whole again. (I'm primarily referring in those addicted to opioids).

"A very large proportion and large number of adults use these medications in a given year," said study author Dr. Wilson Compton, deputy director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland. "I was still a bit surprised that 38 percent or about 92 million people used prescription opioids in 2015." MSN​


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

Teej said:


> I have no problem with a person getting help for a loved one as long as it paid for with private funds. Tax payers should not be having to fund rehab or healthcare for a person who willingly started down the path that put them there. This includes drugs, alcohol and tobacco. I'm including myself in this as I am a smoker and nobody but me is to blame for it.
> 
> Even parents reach a breaking point. My cousin is an addict and has been since he was a teenager, not sure what his drug of choice is. His family has supported him, sent him to rehab, family interventions in which they begged and pleaded with him. I don't know how he's managed not to kill himself because he's so wasted every time I see him he can barely function or starved himself because he doesn't eat and is skin & bones. He's in his late 40's now and my aunt (she's in her mid eighties) just recently admitted that he has been breaking into her house and stealing stuff to sell. She not only filed a complaint with the PD, she also got a restraining order on him.


Well then, what about an obese person who is eating themselves to death, or the coronary patient who has parked himself in front of a greasy spoon for his whole life? 
They willingly started down the path too...and didn't stop. 
Come to think of it, poor eating habits probably far outstrip the drug epidemic and pull more tax dollars out of your pocket than a rehab patient. And a rehab patient is far cheaper than a coronary bypass, diabetic with renal failure, COPD who still smokes, etc. 

Of course, I am north of your border, and our healthcare is 'built in'. Just like the obese patient, the coronary patient, drug addicts don't always change their ways, at the first diagnoses. Either we treat them as trash, and let Darwin sort it out, or we treat them as health issue like the others. I am for the latter. Perhaps, I have an optimistic streak, but some folks, given the right care (not revolving jail stints), do recover from their addiction, and go on to have healthy lives, and contribute to society. 

I really think it comes down to perception. We've fed ourselves so much tripe on how evil drugs are, and imposed criminal sanctions, that it is no wonder we see a drug addict as the lowest of the low. It started during the prohibition era or maybe before...and we cycled through all the new drugs that hit our shores. 

Ironic we don't have quite the same feeling as we do for a cigarette smoker or an alcoholic. Of course, we tax those, so it would be a tad hypocritical to put them alongside a meth head. A meth head we send to jail. A smoker we send to the corner store. 

And as someone just pointed out, most of our 'drug' issues are with prescription drugs. 38% of Americans on opioids! I suspect similar numbers up here...Call me skeptical, but I seriously doubt near half our population have terminal pain issues or one's serious enough to need a script.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

MoonRiver said:


> Others may have already said this, but much of the addiction problem is directly caused by doctors who over prescribe addictive painkillers.
> 
> One of the 1st things that has to be done is to stop irresponsible doctors. The 2nd is, since we (the government) caused much of the problem through lack of enforcement and a porous border, we need to make these people whole again. (I'm primarily referring in those addicted to opioids).
> 
> "A very large proportion and large number of adults use these medications in a given year," said study author Dr. Wilson Compton, deputy director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland. "I was still a bit surprised that 38 percent or about 92 million people used prescription opioids in 2015." MSN​


Have a doc friend who occasionally chats about the pain med issue. She got out of family physician care, but when she was in it, she had many patients who came in with the sole intent to get a script for pain meds. Weeding out who needed them and who didn't is a bit like playing god. I don't blame docs who capitulate and just write the script, or they'd be with a patient for hours trying to suss out who is a liar and who needs it (I can see it now, sort of like a game in the examination room). Heck, if we blame docs, we should supply them with a lie detector machine and a panel of psychologists, and have them hook up all patients to lie detector and have the psychologists grill them, to see if they are indeed in need of a pain script. Docs are not in the business of looking for liars...they assume, rightly so, that the symptoms you present is the truth. I've never thought about lying to my doc (that would be counterproductive and dangerous). What if a doc got it wrong...that is a slippery slope if the doc you see is so jaded, they think you are a liar or worse, miss an underlying medical issue because they inferred your a liar, when you weren't. 
Docs up here are now given addiction counseling education to help them weed out the obvious cases, but obviously, it isn't working. And we've instituted a tracking system to make sure folks don't doctor shop for pain meds. But folks are creative, and figure out ways to circumvent the system. Then, we have folks who turn to street supplies. I wish we didn't have the nonsense, and an addicted person could, without shame or embarrassment, get help right at the beginning. I think the longer one is hooked, the harder it is to fix the situation. 
This whole opioid crisis reminds me of the 70's (or 60's?) when docs handed out benzos to mothers (Mother's little helper). It became an epidemic. We had millions of women hooked on benzos. A bunch of zombies. And if they mixed alcohol with their script, watch out. Then the medical establishment found out it wasn't a good thing, long term use of benzos is not healthy, and getting off them probably caused all those women more grief than if they'd never started in first place. 

Can you imagine if we screened docs...the 'soft' ones (script writers) were sent packing, and we kept the 'strict' ones? No look of empathy on docs face, just a drill sergeant, as your doc sizes you up. He/she then launches in a tirade on how weak and pathetic you are, to shape up, and show some guts! Sometimes, that is what we need, but other times, perhaps not.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

IndyDave said:


> Seriously,* every prescription I have received* for a few years has been electronically transmitted to the pharmacy of my choice without my ever having had a scrip in my hand


That has nothing to do with current laws pertaining to Opioids.
Like I said, my wife does this stuff every day for a living.



IndyDave said:


> I am *using the term 'calling' loosely* and with a bit of facetiousness about the lazy boy.


I'm using it literally.
I've found that works better in the real world.



IndyDave said:


> *My larger point is* that if people necessarily followed the law there would be no such thing as criminals and even if one cannot manage to sneak past the diligence of an honest doctor, there are crooks willing to pad their pockets.


Then your point has nothing at all to do with what I said about prescriptions.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

sisterpine said:


> Certainly did not mean to go political....just searching for answers or thoughts or things others think might help with this huge problem that is eating our children and our society.


 Not a problem going political here , Austin made it pretty clear You can talk about anything in general chat. The dark rooms are for rough behavior , not a particular subject.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yes, it's illegal to get Percocets without seeing the Dr.
> They cannot "call in" a prescription for Opioids.
> 
> It has to be hand written and hand delivered to the Pharmacy.
> ...


 You need to be clear, what has your wife been doing? Writing prescriptions , overusing opioids,investigating doctors , what ?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Deleted double post


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> He sees a pain management doctor every quarter and he calls in and *the prescription is sent over electronically* and if he needs it earlier he calls and he gets an emergency prescription.


Repeating it won't change anything I said about how those prescriptions are handled.
He still has to go *to the Dr* in order to get it filled.
The Dr can send it "electronically" to the pharmacy, but the patient can't get it without a hand written, signed prescription to present.

https://www.consumerreports.org/cro...nkillers-will-soon-be-harder-to-get/index.htm


> With Schedule II drugs, on the other hand, your doctor must write the prescription on paper or electronically transmit it to the pharmacy using a secure system. (Nationwide, about 70 percent of physician practices are now set up for “e-prescribing.”) He or she can fax a prescription to the pharmacy, but unless it is for a patient in a long-term care facility or hospice program, *you will still need to present the paper prescription* to pick up the medication.


You can't get that *paper prescription* without going to the office.

https://www.pharmacy.texas.gov/consumer/broch4.asp


> *Prescriptions for Schedule II medications may not be refilled*.
> *
> A new, written prescription is required* if your physician wants you to continue to take a Schedule II medication after completion of the first prescription.





> For more on* misconceptions about opioids *as well as advice for taking them safely see *"Prescription painkillers: 5 surprising facts**."*


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> You need to be clear


I was.


----------



## How Do I (Feb 11, 2008)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I was.


So your wife is a pharmacist? Rhetorical question.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

How Do I said:


> So your wife is a pharmacist?


She's a Certified Medical Assistant, currently working for one of the largest hospitals in the state.

She's the one who would actually be calling in the prescriptions and screening the patients for the Dr's, as well as keeping track of the patient's histories, among other clinical tasks like drawing blood, giving shots, or assisting with medical procedures in the office.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Repeating it won't change anything I said about how those prescriptions are handled.
> He still has to go *to the Dr* in order to get it filled.
> The Dr can send it "electronically" to the pharmacy, but the patient can't get it without a hand written, signed prescription to present.
> 
> ...


Try this one. OR not AND.

http://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/publi...=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=22&pt=15&ch=315&rl=3

(a) Schedule II Prescriptions.


(1) Except as provided by subsection (e) of this section, a practitioner, as defined in the TCSA, §481.002(39)(A), must issue a written prescription for a Schedule II controlled substance only on an official Texas prescription form *or through an electronic prescription that meets all requirements of the TCSA.* This subsection also applies to a prescription issued in an emergency situation.


(2) A practitioner who issues a written prescription for any quantity of a Schedule II controlled substance must complete an official prescription form.


(3) A practitioner may issue multiple written prescriptions authorizing a patient to receive up to a 90-day supply of a Schedule II controlled substance provided:


(A) each prescription is issued for a legitimate medical purpose by a practitioner acting in the usual course of professional practice;


(B) the practitioner provides written instructions on each prescription, other than the first prescription if the practitioner intends for that prescription to be filled immediately, indicating the earliest date on which a pharmacy may dispense each prescription; and


(C) the practitioner concludes that providing the patient with multiple prescriptions in this manner does not create an undue risk of diversion or abuse.


(4) A schedule II prescription must be dispensed no later than 21 days after the date of issuance or, if the prescription is part of a multiple set of prescriptions, issued on the same day, no later than 21 days after the earliest date on which a pharmacy may dispense the prescription as indicated on each prescription.


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

Why are so many people in pain now that they need to have these painkillers? Years ago they did not give out all these opioids.

I have had several painful surgeries but don't take any opioids because I can not tolerate them, I just use ice and live through the pain.

The really only time I was glad to have morphine was when passing a huge kidney stone and that was just one dose.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

haley1 said:


> Why are so many people in pain now that they need to have these painkillers? Years ago they did not give out all these opioids.
> 
> I have had several painful surgeries but don't take any opioids because I can not tolerate them, I just use ice and live through the pain.
> 
> The really only time I was glad to have morphine was when passing a huge kidney stone and that was just one dose.


Years ago, you could buy opioids over the counter, same as you could cocaine. Lots of laudanum addicts in the 1800's. Lot's of drunks, too. Alcohol was a major pain killer and was used liberally.

Of course, you also had some home remedies, like willow bark tea and such.

Lastly, I think people in years past were lighter, stronger pound-for-pound and simply tougher than we are today.

Edit: And...as some have said, there was no safety net in society, not like we have today. Become an addict, die young.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Try this one. *OR not AND*.





Texaspredatorhu said:


> (1) Except as provided by subsection (e) of this section, a practitioner, as defined in the TCSA, §481.002(39)(A), must issue a written prescription for a Schedule II controlled substance only on an official Texas prescription form *or through an electronic prescription that meets all requirements of the TCSA.* This subsection also applies to a prescription issued in an emergency situation.


The link I posted said the Dr could send it electronically* to the pharmacy.*



> With Schedule II drugs, on the other hand, your doctor must write the prescription on paper *or* electronically transmit it to the pharmacy using a secure system. (Nationwide, about 70 percent of physician practices are now set up for “e-prescribing.”) He or she can fax a prescription to the pharmacy, but unless it is for a patient in a long-term care facility or hospice program, *you will still need to present the paper prescription to pick up the medication*.


That doesn't negate the requirement for *the patient* to present a written copy when they pick it up.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The link I posted said the Dr could send it electronically* to the pharmacy.*
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't negate the requirement for *the patient* to present a written copy when they pick it up.


a generic .gov site, I posted the actual Texas law. It's cool though you win, I'm lying. I showed you the law and you still don't believe even though I have done it numerous times as has my wife. I usually think your a halfway levelheaded individual and you usually have sources to back your words up, I guess you can't handle being wrong so I will be. Have a good night.


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

For opioids, if someone go to get clean what if the fall off the wagon rate?


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> So you'd let them die? Even your kid?
> 
> ETA: Adults are one thing, even if related, but I'd do just about anything for my kids and grand kids. My parents were alcoholics, there are many in my family, and I cut my father out of my life because of his treatment of my kids.



That is a moot question. You cannot stop it for them. Really, what are you going to do? Did you stop your parents from drinking? You can detach yourself as much as possible and let them live their miserable life that is of their own making. Or you can wear yourself to a frazzle. What virtue is in that? It is terrible, but that is what it is. Aside from that, I am with Ron Paul. Legalize it. Cut out the profits and the dealers will stop pushing it on kids. No more profits ought to put the brakes on it. You buy it at the pharmacy and sign a roster every time.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yes, it's illegal to get Percocets without seeing the Dr.
> They cannot "call in" a prescription for Opioids.
> 
> It has to be hand written and hand delivered to the Pharmacy.
> ...


 Led to this


AmericanStand said:


> You need to be clear, what has your wife been doing? Writing prescriptions , overusing opioids,investigating doctors , what ?


So how can this be true


Bearfootfarm said:


> I was.


 If you have to say this. 


Bearfootfarm said:


> She's a Certified Medical Assistant, currently working for one of the largest hospitals in the state.
> 
> She's the one who would actually be calling in the prescriptions and screening the patients for the Dr's, as well as keeping track of the patient's histories, among other clinical tasks like drawing blood, giving shots, or assisting with medical procedures in the office.


In other words how would we have understood the stuff in the last quote from what you said in the first ?


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

It appear we are dipping back into the Picky, Picky, Picky land again......LOL

All I know... is that none of my Dr.'s gives out anything.... "fun"...just stuff like HBP pills , cholesterol pills, pee pills, heart rhythm pills.....baby aspirins, Vit. B ...gout pills.....WTH?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

It seems like everyone is stuck on the pain pill thing here. From where I'm setting, that ship has sailed. Getting doctors to write less prescriptions, better accountability, more stringent guidelines, all those things might have worked, ten years ago. Now, it's pretty much a given that it is hard to come by extra painkillers. People that are addicted find it much easier to get heroin now. And it is everywhere, hard to believe. We could go in and declare war on Afghanistan, we could make it illegal to sell heroin, (imagine that) and if it were even possible to make it disappear, something else will take it's place. 

Make it all legal. Even if you could take out a specific drug, people that have mental predispositions toward addiction will find a way to ruin their lives with other things. Alcohol works just fine, spray paint will even work. 

Think how easy it would be for police to solve real crime, get a stolen property report, go down to the corner junkie store and pick up the guy that just came into some cash. Now, they might trade stolen property to people that engage in criminal activity and are somewhat discreet, so police have no idea where they are headed. With a state run junkie store, they would have a pretty good idea where people were headed, probably the pawn shop across the street from the junkie store. If you can shoot heroin without stealing, more power to you, but the guy behind the counter will know how much you can usually afford at one time. State facility, cameras, problem solved, there is a guy buying heroin, check the outside camera five minutes earlier, oh look, he just walked into the pawn shop with a weedeater, and there will be a pawn shop opening up next door to a heroin store.

Or better yet. We are already paying for it, give them a card, would cost less than helicopter fuel and inmate housing. They wouldn't have to steal our stuff. Keep them all rounded up in one place.


----------



## Teej (Jan 14, 2012)

melli said:


> Well then, what about an obese person who is eating themselves to death, or the coronary patient who has parked himself in front of a greasy spoon for his whole life?
> They willingly started down the path too...and didn't stop.
> Come to think of it, poor eating habits probably far outstrip the drug epidemic and pull more tax dollars out of your pocket than a rehab patient. And a rehab patient is far cheaper than a coronary bypass, diabetic with renal failure, COPD who still smokes, etc.
> 
> ...


I'm all for medical insurance having to pay for anything their insureds need. I pay dearly for my health insurance every month so that when I need it it's there even though over the long haul I've paid more than I've benefited because smoker or not I've always been healthy, knock on wood. I'm saying that I don't think taxpayers should have to pay for that healthcare except in instances where a person is REALLY physically or mentally disabled and has no other resources. If for some reason I could no longer pay for my own insurance before I reach Medicare age (already paid for that out of every paycheck I've ever gotten) then I either pay out of pocket or do without. The thought of dying doesn't bother me in the least, it happens to the best of us sooner or later. 

As far as the drug addiction problem, I have no answers to that because I don't know what would help. Maybe making a person be more accountable for taking care of themselves would help in some cases but probably very few. With prescription pain meds there should be a baseline for recovery time on different surgeries and injuries and after that make do with something non narcotic.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

Teej said:


> I'm all for medical insurance having to pay for anything their insureds need. I pay dearly for my health insurance every month so that when I need it it's there even though over the long haul I've paid more than I've benefited because smoker or not I've always been healthy, knock on wood. I'm saying that I don't think taxpayers should have to pay for that healthcare except in instances where a person is REALLY physically or mentally disabled and has no other resources. If for some reason I could no longer pay for my own insurance before I reach Medicare age (already paid for that out of every paycheck I've ever gotten) then I either pay out of pocket or do without. The thought of dying doesn't bother me in the least, it happens to the best of us sooner or later.
> 
> As far as the drug addiction problem, I have no answers to that because I don't know what would help. Maybe making a person be more accountable for taking care of themselves would help in some cases but probably very few. With prescription pain meds there should be a baseline for recovery time on different surgeries and injuries and after that make do with something non narcotic.


To the first part, I have never dealt with a lack of health coverage in my life. Universal health care came into effect prior to my birth, so I cannot really comment on the option to have it or not. Dare I say, it is something I don't even think about. Even though I am in one of the few provinces that impose a monthly health care 'premium', that premium (~$75 or so, I think...don't know...lol) is taken of my check so I don't even think about it on a month to month basis (employer covers half). I would be remiss not to use it, if I was dying...lol

Our drug scourge is very similar though. We have millions of Canadians addicted to pharma pain meds. Decades ago, I was prescribed pain meds. I can see the appeal, once the actual pain lessened. You'd figure our genetic makeup would have weaned out our love of mind altering drugs, given the OD death rate, especially today. I find it shocking to see that my province loses a 1000 people every year to OD deaths. It eclipses our suicide rate (I used to volunteer for suicide hotline). 
A thousand souls lost because of an addiction to a pill. And if that wasn't bad enough, the tens of thousands probably addicted, most likely playing roulette with their life every day. 
I like your idea about having a set limit per given surgery, but there will always be exceptions. At least it would caution the medical establishment on the perils of prescribing pain meds like candy. I think it is working...I see signs at pharmacy in bold type about pain med dispensing regs. I know we have a system to stop doctor shopping.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Tabitha said:


> That is a moot question. You cannot stop it for them. Really, what are you going to do? Did you stop your parents from drinking? You can detach yourself as much as possible and let them live their miserable life that is of their own making. Or you can wear yourself to a frazzle. What virtue is in that? It is terrible, but that is what it is. Aside from that, I am with Ron Paul. Legalize it. Cut out the profits and the dealers will stop pushing it on kids. No more profits ought to put the brakes on it. You buy it at the pharmacy and sign a roster every time.


Obviously our opinion on an imaginary situation differs. Well, you do seem to be posting from experience, but I'm definitely not.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> In other words *how would we have understood *the stuff in the last quote from what you said in the first ?


There was no need for you to "understand" those details since it changes none of the relevant facts. 
The relevant facts were provided in the links I posted, which for some reason you refuse to utilize, always asking for explanations.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

I think that we need to really determine how we see addiction - not just drugs but alcohol, gambling, etc. Is it an illness or is it a social issue? Right now it is being treated as a combination of both which really is not helpful. If it is an illness then it needs to be treated and a lot of money for medical resources needs to be applied. If it is a social issue then we need laws and applicable punishment. Right now we have a friend who is an alcoholic. His employer healthcare plan has sent him to rehab twice. When he relapsed the first time he was punished by being suspended without pay. This would not happen to someone who has cancer and has a relapse that prevents them from doing their job properly. So which is it? After the suspension he was still not able to do his job properly or safely so then they decided it was an illness again and sent him to rehab again. Confusing.

We also need to determine how much responsibility falls on the individual for their addiction. Is it a question of choice? Your fault? Did you decide to take that first smoke or drink? and were you the creator of the decision that started it all or was this a genetic predisposition or medical issue that would have led to addiction even if you had just eaten a liquor filled chocolate or been exposed to second hand smoke?


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

emdeengee said:


> I think that we need to really determine how we see addiction - not just drugs but alcohol, gambling, etc. Is it an illness or is it a social issue? Right now it is being treated as a combination of both which really is not helpful. If it is an illness then it needs to be treated and a lot of money for medical resources needs to be applied. If it is a social issue then we need laws and applicable punishment. Right now we have a friend who is an alcoholic. His employer healthcare plan has sent him to rehab twice. When he relapsed the first time he was punished by being suspended without pay. This would not happen to someone who has cancer and has a relapse that prevents them from doing their job properly. So which is it? After the suspension he was still not able to do his job properly or safely so then they decided it was an illness again and sent him to rehab again. Confusing.
> 
> We also need to determine how much responsibility falls on the individual for their addiction. Is it a question of choice? Your fault? Did you decide to take that first smoke or drink? and were you the creator of the decision that started it all or was this a genetic predisposition or medical issue that would have led to addiction even if you had just eaten a liquor filled chocolate or been exposed to second hand smoke?


Yep, I see it as a medical issue. No ifs or buts. 
Logically speaking, I see it as no different than someone who is morbidly obese and acquired diabetes as a result. Or a person who has fed themselves an endless greasy spoon diet, who needs a triple bypass. We all have our addictions. Some worse to our health than others. We are biological beings influenced by our genetics and environment. 
Emotionally speaking, try as I might to suppress my feelings, when I see a strung out addict, I want to tell them to shape up, get a grip. Obviously, I am a tad hypocritically, to say the least. I smoke cigs. It is no different than the strung out addict, except my vice is legal, and it doesn't hurt me financially, nor my work and so far, my health hasn't been seriously affected. It does smell up my clothes and car though. I do know I am nearing a point where the vice has to stop, should I wish to have a chance to see old age. I've quit before, for long stretches, so I am confident I can do it again (so I tell myself). 

Yet, when we see an illegal drug addict, we see a gross self control issue, especially one strung out and looking like they went through a washing machine. What I think it comes down to, is they picked a vice that affects them disproportionately, to our vices. And some of the drugs, like Heroin, apparently, have a vice like grip on folks. And being illegal, cost a fortune to maintain their vice, so they spiral out of control (lose job, family, dignity). 
I have heard cigs (nicotine) have a similar hold on folks, but since I've quit before, I don't go crazy for a fix, nor am I at risk of getting a seizure. I just get passing waves of desire, maybe a little sweating, poor sleeps for about two weeks. 

This is why I advocate making drugs legal, across the board (supplemented with rehab centers). We've picked tobacco and alcohol as being 'ok' (legal), yet we've made others illegal. Once we did that, we consigned many folks to the dustbin. And the whole system we created to combat illegal drugs is ridiculous. We just dig our heals in at our failure to stem the flow of illegal drugs, and suggest we try harder (spend more money and lives), and the addicts try harder. And the telling proof of the folly of our path is we've come up with some high tech ways to stem the flow of drugs across our borders, and we have numerous ways to test folks, yet, we still have a huge problem. AND, we keep getting fresh new recruits (users), in spite of thousands dying every year via ODs. 

I recall in my youth, getting alcohol while underage was easy. I suspect it is much harder nowadays, as we have severe penalties for giving alcohol to minors. Has our rate of alcoholics decreased? Doubtful. I suspect (have no proof), that many who would be alcoholics have become pharma addicts (or both), given the millions who are on pain meds. We've just transferred the addiction from one legal supplier to another. 

We still cling to our puritan ways, and see a defect (a personal failure to maintain control) in someone addicted. If we saw them as a person with a broken arm, which in essence, is what ails them, we'd be better off (we can't see the injury like a broken arm because it is buried in their head).


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

melli said:


> Yep, I see it as a medical issue. No ifs or buts.
> Logically speaking, I see it as no different than someone who is morbidly obese and acquired diabetes as a result. Or a person who has fed themselves an endless greasy spoon diet, who needs a triple bypass. We all have our addictions. Some worse to our health than others. We are biological beings influenced by our genetics and environment.
> Emotionally speaking, try as I might to suppress my feelings, when I see a strung out addict, I want to tell them to shape up, get a grip. Obviously, I am a tad hypocritically, to say the least. I smoke cigs. It is no different than the strung out addict, except my vice is legal, and it doesn't hurt me financially, nor my work and so far, my health hasn't been seriously affected. It does smell up my clothes and car though. I do know I am nearing a point where the vice has to stop, should I wish to have a chance to see old age. I've quit before, for long stretches, so I am confident I can do it again (so I tell myself).
> 
> ...


Excellent post. There is definitely a personality type, I've never read about a definitive addiction gene, that is more susceptible to addiction. I believe addiction is a disease, and should be treated as such, too.

ETA: Addiction could at least start as a coping mechanism for a number of other diseases- anxiety, depression, bipolar, etc. or just general stress.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I see a lot of addiction as a result of drug control. 
Once the easy stuff like weed is a crime there's a pressure to find something new to get high on. 
But the new thing comes at more cost and with more side effects 
But soon those that want to control discover the new item and the cycle continues. 


So the newest drugs come with lots of side effects. 
And they cost more causing more crime. 
Weed couldn't cost much and cause much crime when anyone could grow it in their front yard. 

Lots of people like tomatoes but I don't see much crime associated with them.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

I haven't read the posts. The thread did ring a memory bell when it was posted. This is an article I read earlier this year about the cause of addiction. It's probably not what you think.

"this discovery is a profound challenge both to the right-wing view that addiction is a moral failing caused by too much hedonistic partying, and the liberal view that addiction is a disease taking place in a chemically hijacked brain. In fact, he argues, addiction is an adaptation. It’s not you. It’s your cage."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

The best way to stop the flow of drugs across the border would be to grow and manufacture them here. Instead of crazy criminals that want to kill us making money from drugs, Americans could make money from drugs. Think of the things Monsanto could do with poppies, marijuana and things like that. I think some of these problems are associated with the current acquisition systems. How many people go to buy some weed, and their dealer tells them they are fresh out, but they have cocaine? Then when they run out of coke, it's heroin. How many dealers lace their weed with something else? It's in their best interest to make people as addicted as possible. They can manipulate prices to make things more attractive, too. I think a lot of the pill thing started out because of the way we treat marijuana, it would be interesting to see what would happen if marijuana was legal and available on a broad scale. From what I understand, there are a lot of different grades of marijuana, some more intense, more long lasting, etc. If they were all readily available, maybe wouldn't be drawn to the other stuff as much.

I don't see drug use as a crime. Crimes are things like, getting messed up and running people over, mistreating children, stealing, robbing, murdering, things like that. I wonder how much perceived self worth plays in to this. If somebody goes out and buys weed, they are at that point a criminal. What is stealing to buy heroin at that point? 

As far as overdoses, a lot of that has to do with inconsistent product. Get some federal standards in place, and I bet you would see less ODs. 
Can't you see the boxes with the good looking models happily shooting up, and the various government warning labels, with an individual, accurately measured and consistent dose inside, in it's own HIV free syringe, that people are encouraged to dispose of properly without stigma? If you make people valuable parts of society, they might use a trash can once in a while. If they are already a criminal and a dirty junkie, what's throwing a needle on the ground? 

And the prices, imagine with America being the agricultural giant, feeding the world and all that, couldn't we grow dope cheaper than anyone on the planet? Would low prices lead to more addiction? Maybe. Would there be less crime? You could take out a lot of theft, extortion, organized crime would only have politics at that point, probably way less prostitution too. If women weren't in a position where they had to trade sex for drugs, would their birth rate go down? Would there be less children born already addicted, or with health and social problems as a result of having an addict mother and an unknown father?

It is probably hard to know how much the war on drugs has cost us. It seems that poor inner city people are always the subject of a lot of our spending debates. How many of these people wouldn't leave town for new opportunities, because they would be cut off from their regular supplier, one that they trust not to be an undercover agent? Some of these people have probably had to do things, because of their own, or maybe a family members drug problem, and these things might be gang related, might involve criminal activity. So they stay put, where they are safe, don't want to move to a different town, rival gang, criminal record, those things don't make one willing to break the routine, a routine that holds a lot of people back. If you took a large part of the financial basis for gang related activity out of our inner cities, and freed people up to move around and seek better situations, do you think that would change those people's overall outlook, which right now is pretty hopeless? 

Hopeless people are usually driven to alter their reality by chemical means, so it becomes a vicious circle. We need gangs to get fun recreational drugs, but gangs hold us back because potential employers don't like doing business in gangland, so we need more and harder drugs, and now we need to be a member of the gang to pay our drug debt, and now there is no way out. So now our entire neighborhood and everyone in it is hopeless.


----------



## MichaelZ (May 21, 2013)

I am not a fan of pot whatsoever, but it seems it should not be an illegal drug, but rather restricted like alcohol. I can not say all drugs should be legal - It is clear how destructive drugs like meth and heroin are, and for many, getting thrown in jail might save their life. On the other hand, putting illegal drug users in jail just helps to get them networking with other users. They get out and once they find their former jail-mates on the outside and start using again, they end up right back in jail since they must sell or steal to support the habit. It seems that drug offenders caught for using should go right to rehab unless they have committed some other crime. I help lead a jail bible study and have done so for 2+ years now. I don't think, in all that time, there was one attendee that was not in jail for something related to drugs or alcohol. When they get out, many, if not most end up back in. And we are there for those that stumble and fall as well as those that break free. But a few go straight with the help of the Lord, praise God! Bringing up another point: Faith-based rehab programs like Teen Challenge have a higher success rate.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

Irish Pixie said:


> Excellent post. There is definitely a personality type, I've never read about a definitive addiction gene, that is more susceptible to addiction. I believe addiction is a disease, and should be treated as such, too.
> 
> ETA: Addiction could at least start as a coping mechanism for a number of other diseases- anxiety, depression, bipolar, etc. or just general stress.


So true, many turn to self-medication via drugs. Then, unlike a doc turning off the spigot, they can't.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Ok make it harder for people to get Opioids thing is some people like me this is all we can Legally take for our pain. Me dealing with stronger pain yes my Doctor had to increase my dosage.

Had our house broke into to get my Medication. Put a stop to it letting the Druggies know their Freedom and Life is more important than my Medication and they have no longer been a problem.

Me I hate taking this stuff and would much rather have Marijuana but for now it is not legal and anymore because Marijuana crack down and being able to spot from the air everyone around here has went to Meth and there is no way I would take this into my body.

All my life I have been addicted to many things other than Drugs. And it was a matter of me wanting to quit. Most the time I would quit because it cost too much or I was going to loose my family.

big rockpile


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

big rockpile said:


> Ok make it harder for people to get Opioids thing is some people like me this is all we can Legally take for our pain. Me dealing with stronger pain yes my Doctor had to increase my dosage.
> 
> *Had our house broke into to get my Medication.* Put a stop to it letting the Druggies know their Freedom and Life is more important than my Medication and they have no longer been a problem.
> 
> ...


Sounds like you let someone know too much that they broke in over pills.


----------



## gilberte (Sep 25, 2004)

I'm sorry, I don't buy the addiction is a disease and not a choice. It's a choice to put the drug in your mouth or arm or whatever. Not a choice to get cancer or something like that.
As far as controlling it... make it all legal, get a good education plan in the school system starting in the early grades. Addicts get one shot at rehab on the public dime then they're on their own.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

gilberte said:


> I'm sorry, I don't buy the addiction is a disease and not a choice. It's a choice to put the drug in your mouth or arm or whatever. Not a choice to get cancer or something like that.
> As far as controlling it... make it all legal, get a good education plan in the school system starting in the early grades. Addicts get one shot at rehab on the public dime then they're on their own.


Is it a choice when your doctor says "here, take this for the pain", and never warns you about the addictive quality of the drug?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

There are hundreds of articles like this on the Internet. All level of government, the medical community, and pharma caused much of this epidemic. As usual, the government(s) will simply blame doctors and drug companies, and make them pay money to the government. We've seen this many times.



> An Arizona drug company is preparing to spend as much as $4.5 million to potentially settle a lawsuit brought against it by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan alleging the company pushed doctors to prescribe its opioid painkiller beyond its intended use.
> 
> The potential settlement comes as states and municipalities increasingly are suing opioid drugmakers for allegedly helping to propel the nation's opioid epidemic. Nearly 1,400 Illinois residents died of overdoses from all types of opioids in 2015, according to the Illinois Department of Public Health. ChicagoTribune





> Opioids have taken a strong hold in many areas, including East Tennessee. Statewide, there was a 13.8 percent increase in drug overdose deaths related to opioid use.
> 
> Local prosecutors — District Attorneys General Tony Clark, Staubus and Dan Montgomery, from the First, Second and Third Judicial districts, respectively — have taken things into their own hands by suing:
> • Purdue Pharma Inc., a New York corporation with the principal place of business in Connecticut;
> ...


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

emdeengee said:


> *I think that we need to really determine how we see addiction - not just drugs but alcohol, gambling, etc. Is it an illness or is it a social issue? *


It helps to understand why addiction is not necessarily a lifetime affliction.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html?


----------



## MichaelZ (May 21, 2013)

Addicts can kick the habit. I know three personally who now are drug free, married with children, and holding steady jobs. All 3 came out of Teen Challenge. You would never know that they ever did drugs. And there are many more. See https://unshackled.org/listen/browse-all-programs/?q=drugs&years=&lang=english&order=date-desc for some cases there were declared "lost causes" by all the professionals.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

MichaelZ said:


> Addicts can kick the habit. I know three personally who now are drug free, married with children, and holding steady jobs. All 3 came out of Teen Challenge. You would never know that they ever did drugs. And there are many more. See https://unshackled.org/listen/browse-all-programs/?q=drugs&years=&lang=english&order=date-desc for some cases there were declared "lost causes" by all the professionals.


Did you read the article at the link? It provides a route to eliminating addiction.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

gilberte said:


> I'm sorry, I don't buy the addiction is a disease and not a choice. It's a choice to put the drug in your mouth or arm or whatever. Not a choice to get cancer or something like that..


You don't buy it because you don't have the problem. 
It wasn't that long ago that people belived other diseases like cancer were Devine retribution for choices. 
Making that choice IS part of the disease.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

AmericanStand said:


> You don't buy it because you don't have the problem.
> It wasn't that long ago that people belived other diseases like cancer were Devine retribution for choices.
> * Making that choice IS part of the disease.*


Not according to the study. So why do some escape addiction? The rat study gave the answer.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

C'mon folks. Step up. You only have your bias to lose.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

barnbilder said:


> I don't see drug use as a crime. Crimes are things like, getting messed up and running people over, mistreating children, stealing, robbing, murdering, things like that.


While the entire post was great, this point bears special attention. The common law standard for a crime is that for a crime to have occurred, there must be one or more individual identifiable victims (i.e., 'society' as a victim doesn't get it). Maritime law is much more arbitrary and in some situations is necessary (i.e., driving on the right side of the road) but has also been grossly misapplied to individual behavior in which no other person is harmed or threatened with harm. Unfortunately, with the leftward swing of the Supreme Court fairly early last century, the practice of bringing maritime law ashore has become permitted where it should not have been aside from a very few necessary application like necessary traffic laws.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

IndyDave said:


> I will stand by the argument that what one chooses to do which may be self-injurious without injuring others is none of the government's business, especially that of the federal government if it is neither a power granted in Article I, Section 8 or the defense of enumerated rights. I can also share in disdain for the fantastic number of cases of ailments like 'anxiety' which sprung up with the legalization for medical reasons, using a diagnosis which is largely subjective in nature to legally 'take a nip for medicinal purposes'. In my reckoning it reflects more on the stupidity of the law than anyone partaking, but still, it makes me shake my head.



As someone who suffers from an anxiety disorder I can assure you it is not subjective. But I have never used it to 'take a nip'. I deal with it in other ways. 

But please don't downplay anxiety. It is not a fun trip


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

melli said:


> Have a doc friend who occasionally chats about the pain med issue. She got out of family physician care, but when she was in it, she had many patients who came in with the sole intent to get a script for pain meds. Weeding out who needed them and who didn't is a bit like playing god. I don't blame docs who capitulate and just write the script, or they'd be with a patient for hours trying to suss out who is a liar and who needs it (I can see it now, sort of like a game in the examination room). Heck, if we blame docs, we should supply them with a lie detector machine and a panel of psychologists, and have them hook up all patients to lie detector and have the psychologists grill them, to see if they are indeed in need of a pain script. Docs are not in the business of looking for liars...they assume, rightly so, that the symptoms you present is the truth. I've never thought about lying to my doc (that would be counterproductive and dangerous). What if a doc got it wrong...that is a slippery slope if the doc you see is so jaded, they think you are a liar or worse, miss an underlying medical issue because they inferred your a liar, when you weren't.
> Docs up here are now given addiction counseling education to help them weed out the obvious cases, but obviously, it isn't working. And we've instituted a tracking system to make sure folks don't doctor shop for pain meds. But folks are creative, and figure out ways to circumvent the system. Then, we have folks who turn to street supplies. I wish we didn't have the nonsense, and an addicted person could, without shame or embarrassment, get help right at the beginning. I think the longer one is hooked, the harder it is to fix the situation.
> This whole opioid crisis reminds me of the 70's (or 60's?) when docs handed out benzos to mothers (Mother's little helper). It became an epidemic. We had millions of women hooked on benzos. A bunch of zombies. And if they mixed alcohol with their script, watch out. Then the medical establishment found out it wasn't a good thing, long term use of benzos is not healthy, and getting off them probably caused all those women more grief than if they'd never started in first place.
> 
> Can you imagine if we screened docs...the 'soft' ones (script writers) were sent packing, and we kept the 'strict' ones? No look of empathy on docs face, just a drill sergeant, as your doc sizes you up. He/she then launches in a tirade on how weak and pathetic you are, to shape up, and show some guts! Sometimes, that is what we need, but other times, perhaps not.



Totally agree with you except for 'Mothers Little Helper' (great song). I know several men, one quite close who got hooked on them. So it had no preference to gender.


----------



## Hitch (Oct 19, 2016)

I think the media is making this sound like a massive increase in heroin junkies by intermingling the term opioids. The problem is opioids are the same compounds found in common prescription drugs such as hydrocodone, oxycodone, percocet, etc. So what they're really reporting is an increase in prescription medication abuse, which shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. But by no means does it mean the US is under siege by a bunch of junkies shooting up.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

It is a tough issue. I don't think there is an answer. There is lots of $$$ to be made and that is what allows it to happen. That money can be used to buy of cops, border patrol etc. 

One concern I have is that we actually over regulate pain killers to people that need it. As an example my mother in law was diagnosed with terminal cancer. And talking to the nurse one day I learned they had to be careful with giving her pain medication. They did not want het to get addicted. That was one of those wth moments for me.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

keenataz said:


> It is a tough issue. I don't think there is an answer. There is lots of $$$ to be made and that is what allows it to happen. That money can be used to buy of cops, border patrol etc.
> 
> One concern I have is that we actually over regulate pain killers to people that need it. As an example my mother in law was diagnosed with terminal cancer. And talking to the nurse one day I learned they had to be careful with giving her pain medication. They did not want het to get addicted. That was one of those wth moments for me.


I've heard this before, and it boggles the mind. 

There is a real issue with opioids, many (most?) people start with a script for a real injury/illness, it becomes a habit, then an addiction, at some point the docs refuse to prescribe more so people start buying it illegally. They soon discover that it's much cheaper to buy heroin (also an opioid), and it all goes down hill from there. 

The bottom line is that real people are dying from this. There were 76 deaths (that could be verified) drug related overdose deaths in my small country alone last year. That's just overdoses, deaths attributed to drug use would be much, much higher.


----------



## Ann-NWIowa (Sep 28, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Let them all overdose?? What if we just stoped treating overdose "victims"? Tough love, so to speak. I bet I'm going to get flamed for the suggestion, but this cycle of enabling we have going on now sure ain't working.
> 
> 
> Seriously, I don't have an answer....


I think this bottom line tough love is the only answer. For juveniles, treatment and all the accompanying help available. For adults, maybe one intervention/treatment, then if they insist on choosing to use, they are on their own. If they choose to die, then unfortunately they will die. 

Being the mother and foster mother of two who started using in their early teens, this is just what happened. Treatment x2 for each of them, plus a halfway house for 9 months for each of them. Then when home and 18 we were informed they could do whatever they liked. We then told them it was true they could choose to use, BUT they could not live under our roof and use. There were several rough years before they got smart and quit using -- without any further input by us. Through their teen years our lives were consumed by their addictions and treatment processes, but during the same time we were in parents groups learning about addiction and tough love. Some parents would cry and say they couldn't let their kids hit bottom and at least two of those kids later ended up dead. Most of us got the message (and were worn out enough to listen) that you cannot fix an addict. We went the extra mile while they were teenagers with repeated treatment, taking them to meetings, etc., but when they decided to use as adults we were DONE. However, the treatment we forced on them as teens gave them what they needed to quit when they were ready. We feel blessed that they survived to quit, but were prepared for the knock on the door from the police telling us they hadn't. I'm also aware that they still have that addictive personality and its possible they will relapse, but I pray they don't.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

keenataz said:


> As someone who suffers from an anxiety disorder I can assure you it is not subjective. But I have never used it to 'take a nip'. I deal with it in other ways.
> 
> But please don't downplay anxiety. It is not a fun trip


Why does this have to be so difficult? For you and others who actually have an anxiety disorder, I wish you the best and you and your doctor can deal with it as you see fit with my blessing. My point is that it is a diagnosis which is virtually impossible to disprove and has led to numerous people who don't have a damned thing wrong with them other than jonesing for MJ suddenly finding a doctor who will give them this diagnosis which cannot be disproven so they can buy weed without having to look over their shoulders for the police. This also applies to the drug dealers who go to a state where they can pull such shenanigans.

Now, would you or Ms. Pixie please explain to me how this has anything to do with you or the reality of your own personal health issues?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

IndyDave said:


> Why does this have to be so difficult? For you and others who actually have an anxiety disorder, I wish you the best and you and your doctor can deal with it as you see fit with my blessing. My point is that it is a diagnosis which is virtually impossible to disprove and has led to numerous people who don't have a damned thing wrong with them other than jonesing for MJ suddenly finding a doctor who will give them this diagnosis which cannot be disproven so they can buy weed without having to look over their shoulders for the police. This also applies to the drug dealers who go to a state where they can pull such shenanigans.
> 
> Now, would you or Ms. Pixie please explain to me how this has anything to do with you or the reality of your own personal health issues?


Thank you, Dave!! 

I would also like to add that if you truly DO have an anxiety issue and truly DO want help with the problem, then Marijuana is not a good option.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811144/

"The psychiatric risks are well documented and include addiction, anxiety, and psychosis"

https://www.health.harvard.edu/mind-and-mood/medical-marijuana-and-the-mind

This is why medical marijuana for anxiety is ridiculous at best.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> Why does this have to be so difficult? For you and others who actually have an anxiety disorder, I wish you the best and you and your doctor can deal with it as you see fit with my blessing. My point is that it is a diagnosis which is virtually impossible to disprove and has led to numerous people who don't have a damned thing wrong with them other than jonesing for MJ suddenly finding a doctor who will give them this diagnosis which cannot be disproven so they can buy weed without having to look over their shoulders for the police. This also applies to the drug dealers who go to a state where they can pull such shenanigans.
> 
> Now, would you or Ms. Pixie please explain to me how this has anything to do with you or the reality of your own personal health issues?


I am a mental health care advocate. The lack of mental health care in this country is appalling, anxiety is mental health issue.

I never said I had an anxiety issue, and marijuana is a safe alternative for some rather than more conventional pharmaceuticals. Why do you have such a huge issue with some people _maybe_ getting medical marijuana that might not need it? What's it to you?

ETA: Or were you just bored and felt like arguing? LOL


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Thank you, Dave!!
> 
> *I would also like to add that if you truly DO have an anxiety issue and truly DO want help with the problem, then Marijuana is not a good option.*
> 
> ...


Bolding mine. I'm assuming you're a medical professional? What is your CV?


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> I am a mental health care advocate. The lack of mental health care in this country is appalling, anxiety is mental health issue.
> 
> I never said I had an anxiety issue, and marijuana is a safe alternative for some rather than more conventional pharmaceuticals. Why do you have such a huge issue with some people _maybe_ getting medical marijuana that might not need it? What's it to you?
> 
> ETA: Or were you just bored and felt like arguing? LOL


Interesting. As mental health goes, where do you draw the line of needing care between nuttier than a bucket of cashews to simply not living every waking moment in immeasurable bliss? What in your reckoning needs done about it?

As for the MJ, there is no maybe about it. When it is happening and adding to the local supply with a small enough separation from Yours Truly that I know for a fact that this is what is happening, there is no maybe about it. What is it to me you ask: Well, it is another asinine extension of a category of laws which are being used to circumvent the rights we are supposed to have as citizens with the added bonus of government agencies branching out into picking the winners and losers in the drug game in a way previously unexplored in our history in addition to creating some remarkably muddied waters, all while making life more difficult than ever for non-criminals with an aversion to pain. In my reckoning, the government needs out of the business altogether, but that doesn't mean that I am going to silently allow something this asinine to pass by.
No, I never get bored enough to enjoy arguing.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> Interesting. As mental health goes, where do you draw the line of needing care between nuttier than a bucket of cashews to simply not living every waking moment in immeasurable bliss? What in your reckoning needs done about it?
> 
> As for the MJ, there is no maybe about it. When it is happening and adding to the local supply with a small enough separation from Yours Truly that I know for a fact that this is what is happening, there is no maybe about it. What is it to me you ask: Well, it is another asinine extension of a category of laws which are being used to circumvent the rights we are supposed to have as citizens with the added bonus of government agencies branching out into picking the winners and losers in the drug game in a way previously unexplored in our history in addition to creating some remarkably muddied waters, all while making life more difficult than ever for non-criminals with an aversion to pain. In my reckoning, the government needs out of the business altogether, but that doesn't mean that I am going to silently allow something this asinine to pass by.
> No, I never get bored enough to enjoy arguing.


Blah, blah, blah. Government bad! Bad government! Bad bad government!

Your posts seem to indicate that you're breathing your own exhaust. I was right, you're bored and want to pontificate... Have at it. LOL


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Common sense isn't so common anymore


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> Blah, blah, blah. Government bad! Bad government! Bad bad government!
> 
> Your posts seem to indicate that you're breathing your own exhaust. I was right, you're bored and want to pontificate... Have at it. LOL


Even if this were completely true, it would seem that I am not alone in pontificating (which I may do even if I refuse to wear a mitre while doing so).

Since you jumped into a thread regarding addiction and what should be done about it, presumably including more or less government intervention, and insist on criticizing me for dealing with this subject-matter while introducing your own personal pet soapbox material, I would encourage you to start a thread on the subject of mental health. No, I am not being sarcastic. I can see potential for it being an interesting topic to explore and find myself curious about your perspective on it given that you have invested exponentially more time and effort into considering it than I have, and it has the potential to be a much more interesting topic of discussion when not being piggybacked on another subject with relatively minor overlap.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

( I ) never created any Drug Addicts....( I ) never used Drugs....( I ) know I am responsible for my actions....( I ) know my actions can get me into serious trouble.....( I ) should never have to pay any bills for any Drug Addicts.....Not one red cent.....You become a Drug Addict ? You pay for it....It's funny how Drug Addicts can always come up with money to buy the Drugs, But never have any money for Rehab, medical Bills or money to pay rent or buy food....and then expect Non-Drug Addict hard working honest taxpayers to foot all the Bills....To those Drug Addicts ( I ) say, [content deleted]*....each and everyone...and to those who think my money should be used on Drug Addicts ? Well you can [content deleted]* also...

*Edited by Shrek. Content originally in brackets exceeded HT profanity limits.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

IndyDave said:


> Even if this were completely true, it would seem that I am not alone in pontificating (which I may do even if I refuse to wear a mitre while doing so).
> 
> Since you jumped into a thread regarding addiction and what should be done about it, presumably including more or less government intervention, and insist on criticizing me for dealing with this subject-matter while introducing your own personal pet soapbox material, I would encourage you to start a thread on the subject of mental health. No, I am not being sarcastic. I can see potential for it being an interesting topic to explore and find myself curious about your perspective on it given that you have invested exponentially more time and effort into considering it than I have, and it has the potential to be a much more interesting topic of discussion when not being piggybacked on another subject with relatively minor overlap.


I hear crickets.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

IndyDave said:


> Interesting. As mental health goes, where do you draw the line of needing care between nuttier than a bucket of cashews to simply not living every waking moment in immeasurable bliss? What in your reckoning needs done about it?
> 
> As for the MJ, there is no maybe about it. When it is happening and adding to the local supply with a small enough separation from Yours Truly that I know for a fact that this is what is happening, there is no maybe about it. What is it to me you ask: Well, it is another asinine extension of a category of laws which are being used to circumvent the rights we are supposed to have as citizens with the added bonus of government agencies branching out into picking the winners and losers in the drug game in a way previously unexplored in our history in addition to creating some remarkably muddied waters, all while making life more difficult than ever for non-criminals with an aversion to pain. In my reckoning, the government needs out of the business altogether, but that doesn't mean that I am going to silently allow something this asinine to pass by.
> No, I never get bored enough to enjoy arguing.



Really didn't mean to start an argument. Just felt that you were saying people take anxiety to get pot. 

I believe you did mean some people so I was too sensitive. But there are many people who will claim a disease or condition to get certain drugs.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

rjburk said:


> ( I ) never created any Drug Addicts....( I ) never used Drugs....( I ) know I am responsible for my actions....( I ) know my actions can get me into serious trouble.....( I ) should never have to pay any bills for any Drug Addicts.....Not one red cent.....You become a Drug Addict ? You pay for it....It's funny how Drug Addicts can always come up with money to buy the Drugs, But never have any money for Rehab, medical Bills or money to pay rent or buy food....and then expect Non-Drug Addict hard working honest taxpayers to foot all the Bills....To those Drug Addicts ( I ) say, KISS MY grits....each and everyone...and to those who think my money should be used on Drug Addicts ? Well you can kiss the grits also...


Do people who get hooked by legal prescription pain killers should kiss your grits. Or how about 400 lb junk food junkies. Them too when they have a big jammer. Or the alcoholic who needs treatment?

A lot of grits kissing and not enough compassion. You seem like a swell guy.


----------



## Skamp (Apr 26, 2014)

Bottom up, top down hasn't worked or is in serious question. 

The teen challenge is a great example, but that is still late in the game. 

We are social creatures, behave as such. Spend as much time with the children as you can. And children is your children, grands.....nieces and nephews.....their friends and the neighborhood kids. Expose them to as many situations as you can. 

Sure fishing, sure soccer, sure karate. But don't forget up, on time and dressed snappy. Please and thank you. Flatulence ain't so funny in public. Stupid hurts. The arts, the sciences. 

Expose a young mind in a loving and firm way and they will grab something, or many things, and run. 

On the tax issue, I'd likely piss everybody off.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> Interesting. As mental health goes, where do you draw the line of needing care between nuttier than a bucket of cashews to simply not living every waking moment in immeasurable bliss? What in your reckoning needs done about it?
> 
> As for the MJ, there is no maybe about it. When it is happening and adding to the local supply with a small enough separation from Yours Truly that I know for a fact that this is what is happening, there is no maybe about it. What is it to me you ask: Well, it is another asinine extension of a category of laws which are being used to circumvent the rights we are supposed to have as citizens with the added bonus of government agencies branching out into picking the winners and losers in the drug game in a way previously unexplored in our history in addition to creating some remarkably muddied waters, all while making life more difficult than ever for non-criminals with an aversion to pain. In my reckoning, the government needs out of the business altogether, but that doesn't mean that I am going to silently allow something this asinine to pass by.
> No, I never get bored enough to enjoy arguing.





IndyDave said:


> I hear crickets.


First, you're under the mistaken impression that addiction is not a mental illness, it is. I was completely on topic. I also personally don't care if you believe that addiction is a disease/order. Not a whit. 

Second mistaken impression, that I (or anyone else) has to answer your question just because you demand it. BTW, the "crickets" post can be taken as baiting. Baiting is bad. Perhaps you should check the rules. Just sayin'.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Sounds like you let someone know too much that they broke in over pills.



Our Sons Girlfriend told her Mom whom broke in.

She is no longer welcome on our Property.

big rockpile


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

I'v


Irish Pixie said:


> First, you're under the mistaken impression that addiction is not a mental illness, it is. I was completely on topic. I also personally don't care if you believe that addiction is a disease/order. Not a whit.
> 
> Second mistaken impression, that I (or anyone else) has to answer your question just because you demand it. BTW, the "crickets" post can be taken as baiting. Baiting is bad. Perhaps you should check the rules. Just sayin'.


I've had many Addictions . Some I broke being in the Hospital. Some my Health will no longer allow. Then I was given a Choice Do with out or Die.

Do I still have the addictions? Sure but the Want is no longer there.

big rockpile


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Bolding mine. I'm assuming you're a medical professional? What is your CV?





Irish Pixie said:


> Second mistaken impression, that I (or anyone else) has to answer your question just because you demand it. BTW, the "crickets" post can be taken as baiting. Baiting is bad. Perhaps you should check the rules. Just sayin'.


Really? Just.......wow.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Really? Just.......wow.


Which post are you having a problem with? Perhaps I can explain it to you in a more easy to understand way.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Which post are you having a problem with? Perhaps I can explain it to you on a more easy to understand way.


Does that ever actually make a difference? I really have to wonder sometimes.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

keenataz said:


> Do people who get hooked by legal prescription pain killers should kiss your grits. Or how about 400 lb junk food junkies. Them too when they have a big jammer. Or the alcoholic who needs treatment?
> 
> A lot of grits kissing and not enough compassion. You seem like a swell guy.


People who get hooked on any drug do so by making a decision to keep using rather than stopping....all on them....

Anyone who eats themselves to 400 lbs. did so again by the choice they made....not my fault....

Alcoholics get that way on there own, I did not make them drink and it's not my job to pay for them to quit drinking.....

I have compassion for honest hard working taxpayers who are not drug addicts, drunks or fat butts.....my compassion is for the honest hard working taxpayers to keep more of the money they make so they can live better, I have ZERO compassion to take money from those same good people and make them support drug addicts, drunks and fat [butts]*....at some point in time all the drug addicts, drunks and fat asses have to be held accountable for what they do.....the good people should never have to carry them because they are Takers, not Makers....And if that hurts anybody's little feelings ? Oh well...tell someone who cares.....I don't.....




*Edited by Shrek. Content originally in brackets exceeded HT content limits and is only allowed as a purist discussion of burros on an equine topic.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

rjburk said:


> People who get hooked on any drug do so by making a decision to keep using rather than stopping....all on them....
> 
> Anyone who eats themselves to 400 lbs. did so again by the choice they made....not my fault....
> 
> ...


This is exactly it!! I couldn't have said it better myself.
Why should I have to shoulder the responsibility of someone else's stupid choices? I liked the "let em sink or swim" idea best. It's really the only responsible mode of action....all this coddling and enabling and "rehabilitation" the liberals advocate certainly hasn't proven effective. Methadone clinics are NOT the answer, snowflakes!


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

rjburk said:


> People who get hooked on any drug do so by making a decision to keep using rather than stopping....all on them....
> 
> Anyone who eats themselves to 400 lbs. did so again by the choice they made....not my fault....
> 
> ...


Judge not my friend.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> First, you're under the mistaken impression that addiction is not a mental illness, it is. I was completely on topic. I also personally don't care if you believe that addiction is a disease/order. Not a whit.
> 
> Second mistaken impression, that I (or anyone else) has to answer your question just because you demand it. BTW, the "crickets" post can be taken as baiting. Baiting is bad. Perhaps you should check the rules. Just sayin'.


First, I am not mistaken in the least. You may accept the medical model of deviance as an article of faith. I do not. You really don't have anything to add to this beyond presenting your personal opinion as fact, which it is not. I have no doubt that you don't care what I personally believe, but you have make it quite obvious that what you do care about is that I have challenged the opinions you have presented as facts. 

Second, again, you miss the mark. No, you, nor anyone else, is compelled to present an answer. That said, giving this as a result does tend to reinforce my tentative conclusion that you are unwilling to make an actual point because you don't have one. I was hoping for a response which would allow me to walk away from this discussion with a small modicum of respect for you. I have been disappointed before and I am sure it will happen again. 

Baiting? Seriously? My little outburst of impatience is baiting much in the same way that having assembled a Coleman canoe once makes me a shipwright.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

rjburk said:


> ( I ) never created any Drug Addicts....( I ) never used Drugs....( I ) know I am responsible for my actions....( I ) know my actions can get me into serious trouble.....( I ) should never have to pay any bills for any Drug Addicts.....Not one red cent.....You become a Drug Addict ? You pay for it....It's funny how Drug Addicts can always come up with money to buy the Drugs, But never have any money for Rehab, medical Bills or money to pay rent or buy food....and then expect Non-Drug Addict hard working honest taxpayers to foot all the Bills....To those Drug Addicts ( I ) say, [content deleted]*....each and everyone...and to those who think my money should be used on Drug Addicts ? Well you can [content deleted]* also...
> 
> *Edited by Shrek. Content originally in brackets exceeded HT profanity limits.


You do realize that addicts tend to steal to support their habit? So you are wanting them to steal whole lot more to pay for rehab? Cause legit rehab going to cost whole lot more than a dime bag on the street. Legit treatment also takes years and then after that requires a support system. Drying out the proverbial drunk isnt treatment.

I sure have no solution other than to offer free immediate treatment for any addict wanting it. From what I understnd, it can sometimes be very long wait to get into treatment and then not all treatment is created equal, some of it is just a way to scam Uncle Sam. But legit treatment is lot cheaper than continued crime spree to feed a habit, or paying crazy money to keep an addict in prison long term. Course guess the president of _Philippines has the answer of summary execution of anybody even suspected of being an addict or otherwise being involved in drug trade. Is that the answer some here prefer? Still cost you as taxpayer for the bullets..... unless you want the cops to manually kill them by choking or beating them to death with a stick?_

The addiction thing itsef, dont pretend to understand it, heck I dont even drink, just no desire to escape my own brain or "fit in". I've been around enough drunks to get that it exists. Probably been around people addicted to stronger stuff, just wasnt aware of it. I am not social person so try to limit interactions with people up close and personal as much as possible. Still dont really understand why they go that obviously self destructive route. Figure its a lot how they are wired I guess. Probably should just be happy I am not wired in same way. Sounds like a truly miserable existence. Course some might say same about way I live???


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> First, I am not mistaken in the least. You may accept the medical model of deviance as an article of faith. I do not. You really don't have anything to add to this beyond presenting your personal opinion as fact, which it is not. I have no doubt that you don't care what I personally believe, but you have make it quite obvious that what you do care about is that I have challenged the opinions you have presented as facts.
> 
> Second, again, you miss the mark. No, you, nor anyone else, is compelled to present an answer. That said, giving this as a result does tend to reinforce my tentative conclusion that you are unwilling to make an actual point because you don't have one. I was hoping for a response which would allow me to walk away from this discussion with a small modicum of respect for you. I have been disappointed before and I am sure it will happen again.
> 
> Baiting? Seriously? My little outburst of impatience is baiting much in the same way that having assembled a Coleman canoe once makes me a shipwright.


Please point out where I have stated my opinion as fact. Thanks.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

keenataz said:


> Judge not my friend.


FACTS are FACTS....not a Judgment.....It is a Fact that I don't make people use Drugs, It is a Fact I do not make people drink, It is a Fact I do not make people eat till they can't work or take care of themselves...All Facts, Not any type of Judgment.....It is also a Fact that I am not responsible for the people who do those things....Just a lot of Facts....I know Facts hurt a lot of people after 8 years of a president who blamed everything on others, but I know the difference....and I'm not buying the load of crap that I am somehow financially responsible for people who make no effort to be responsible humans....


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

HermitJohn said:


> You do realize that addicts tend to steal to support their habit? So you are wanting them to steal whole lot more to pay for rehab? Cause legit rehab going to cost whole lot more than a dime bag on the street. Legit treatment also takes years and then after that requires a support system. Drying out the proverbial drunk isnt treatment.
> 
> I sure have no solution other than to offer free immediate treatment for any addict wanting it. From what I understnd, it can sometimes be very long wait to get into treatment and then not all treatment is created equal, some of it is just a way to scam Uncle Sam. But legit treatment is lot cheaper than continued crime spree to feed a habit, or paying crazy money to keep an addict in prison long term. Course guess the president of _Philippines has the answer of summary execution of anybody even suspected of being an addict or otherwise being involved in drug trade. Is that the answer some here prefer? Still cost you as taxpayer for the bullets..... unless you want the cops to manually kill them by choking or beating them to death with a stick?_
> 
> The addiction thing itsef, dont pretend to understand it, heck I dont even drink, just no desire to escape my own brain or "fit in". I've been around enough drunks to get that it exists. Probably been around people addicted to stronger stuff, just wasnt aware of it. I am not social person so try to limit interactions with people up close and personal as much as possible. Still dont really understand why they go that obviously self destructive route. Figure its a lot how they are wired I guess. Probably should just be happy I am not wired in same way. Sounds like a truly miserable existence. Course some might say same about way I live???


And as long as the Makers have to keep paying for the Takers, nothing will change....Giving FREE stuff to addicts and drunks sends no message....other than they can keep doing it and never have to pay for it.....Enabling is all it is.....


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

rjburk said:


> And as long as the Makers have to keep paying for the Takers, nothing will change....Giving FREE stuff to addicts and drunks sends no message....other than they can keep doing it and never have to pay for it.....Enabling is all it is.....


I'm an atheist, but some religions understand better than others.

“As long as we live in a human society, we have to depend on each other. No one can survive as an island.”
_~ Dalai Lama_


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm an atheist, but some religions understand better than others.
> 
> “As long as we live in a human society, we have to depend on each other. No one can survive as an island.”
> _~ Dalai Lama_


That's fine and dandy if someone is on hard times but at least make an attempt to support yourself. I will also say there are plenty of people who do it all on their own. Taxes are a necessary evil but just because I make more than some lazy (person), why are they entitled to something they didn't pay for that hard working Americans did? I can't put my kid in a free preschool because she speaks English, I'm no longer active duty, and I make too much! I paid for it why can't I use it? Makes sense, keep the dirtbags voting for their handouts. Live in section 8 housing and drive a caddy, get food stamps and smoke dope all day. Glad hard working people wake up every day to support those who create the burden!


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> That's fine and dandy if someone is on hard times but at least make an attempt to support yourself. I will also say there are plenty of people who do it all on their own. Taxes are a necessary evil but just because I make more than some lazy (person), why are they entitled to something they didn't pay for that hard working Americans did? I can't put my kid in a free preschool because she speaks English, I'm no longer active duty, and I make too much! I paid for it why can't I use it? Makes sense, keep the dirtbags voting for their handouts. Live in section 8 housing and drive a caddy, get food stamps and smoke dope all day. Glad hard working people wake up every day to support those who create the burden!


Why do you think you should qualify for free preschool if you make too much money? I don't understand. There are qualifications for programs such as this, right? You don't qualify.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

How many people who feel ( we ) should pay for these people actually go out of their way to go help and donate extra money to help these people ? exactly....at anytime anyone who feels ( I ) should pay for these people can contact the IRS and start paying my share so I can keep my money.....I won't hold my breathe till that happens, because it won't....talk is cheap.....I have a Daughter and Granddaughter, should I be able to use my earned money to help them ? or should that same earned money be taken from me to help addicts and drunks ? as they say, A no brainer.....sorry addicts and drunks, your on your own....


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm an atheist, but some religions understand better than others.
> 
> “As long as we live in a human society, we have to depend on each other. No one can survive as an island.”
> _~ Dalai Lama_





Irish Pixie said:


> I'm an atheist, but some religions understand better than others.
> 
> “As long as we live in a human society, we have to depend on each other. No one can survive as an island.”
> _~ Dalai Lama_


I live on an Island, An Island full of honest hard working addiction free people....I gladly help those people because they carry the bigger burden of our society.....the addicts and drunks create that burden in our society.....and carry none of it....I survive just fine on my Island.....


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Why do you think you should qualify for free preschool if you make too much money? I don't understand. There are qualifications for programs such as this, right? You don't qualify.


BECAUSE MY TAX DOLLARS PAY FOR IT! Would you buy me a car pay for gas and insurance because I couldn't afford it? Doubtful. Would you buy a gym membership and not use it? Many do but that wasn't their intentions. Why should I pay for something I cannot use? That's the point, qualifications or not, it's not right.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

rjburk said:


> How many people who feel ( we ) should pay for these people actually go out of their way to go help and donate extra money to help these people ?


I do, actually. A lot.



> as they say, A no brainer.....sorry addicts and drunks, your on your own....


You may wish that, but they aren't. All of our tax money is still going to help them, isn't it? 
Luckily it isn't just your decision.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

rjburk said:


> How many people who feel ( we ) should pay for these people actually go out of their way to go help and donate extra money to help these people ? exactly....at anytime anyone who feels ( I ) should pay for these people can contact the IRS and start paying my share so I can keep my money.....I won't hold my breathe till that happens, because it won't....talk is cheap.....I have a Daughter and Granddaughter, should I be able to use my earned money to help them ? or should that same earned money be taken from me to help addicts and drunks ? as they say, A no brainer.....sorry addicts and drunks, your on your own....


As a matter of fact, I do donate extra money monthly to programs both locally and nationally to help others.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> BECAUSE MY TAX DOLLARS PAY FOR IT! Would you buy me a car pay for gas and insurance because I couldn't afford it? Doubtful. Would you buy a gym membership and not use it? Many do but that wasn't their intentions. Why should I pay for something I cannot use? That's the point, qualifications or not, it's not right.


So? You don't qualify for it because you make too much money.

ETA: You should contact the people in your state legislature, I'm sure if they stopped trying to implement law that was unconstitutional, and then had to try to support it in federal court, there would be more many for programs like totally free preschool.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm an atheist, but some religions understand better than others.
> 
> “As long as we live in a human society, we have to depend on each other. No one can survive as an island.”
> _~ Dalai Lama_


Jesus Christ was a notable humanitarian and the savior that I would bet most people posting on HT profess to follow.
*
Mark 10:21-1 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.*

And yet....


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> BECAUSE MY TAX DOLLARS PAY FOR IT! Would you buy me a car pay for gas and insurance because I couldn't afford it? Doubtful. Would you buy a gym membership and not use it? Many do but that wasn't their intentions. Why should I pay for something I cannot use? That's the point, qualifications or not, it's not right.


My tax dollars pay for it too but I don't have kids in schools. I supported public schools even when my kids were in private school or homeschooled. My tax dollars help pay for roads in Texas that I will never drive on.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> As a matter of fact, I do donate extra money monthly to programs both locally and nationally to help others.


And that is fine with me and can continue to throw your money away, ( your choice ) I should not be forced to do so.....should be ( my Choice )


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

rjburk said:


> And that is fine with me and can continue to throw your money away, ( your choice ) I should not be forced to do so.....should be ( my Choice )


Whether it's fine with you or not, you posited that the people here saying we should help the less fortunate don't actually help them themselves. And you were wrong.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

rjburk said:


> And that is fine with me and can continue to throw your money away, ( your choice ) I should not be forced to do so.....should be ( my Choice )


You have a choice as well- don't pay your taxes. Let us know how that goes, K? :grin:


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Lisa in WA said:


> I do, actually. A lot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And you just hit the nail on the head........It should be my decision on how my earned money is spent.....You can spend yours how you want and I will spend mine how I want...pretty simple....


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Lisa in WA said:


> My tax dollars pay for it too but I don't have kids in schools. I supported public schools even when my kids were in private school or homeschooled. My tax dollars help pay for roads in Texas that I will never drive on.


exactly and that's why the system is broken.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> You have a choice as well- don't pay your taxes. Let us know how that goes, K? :grin:


( I ) should have a choice on my earned money being wasted on addicts and drunks....You should have the same choice, You can pay my share.... I pay taxes and have for 40+ years, ( I ) should have more say so on how that money is spent, same as you....the people who want to pay for the addicts and drunks should be taxed more or as I said contact the IRS and pay my share, But you nor anyone who feels as you do will do that....


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

rjburk said:


> And you just hit the nail on the head........It should be my decision on how my earned money is spent.....You can spend yours how you want and I will spend mine how I want...pretty simple....


You just think I hit the nail on the head but I just pointed out a fact.
We all pay taxes that go to things that don't necessarily benefit us. 
If you don't like it, don't pay taxes.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

rjburk said:


> ( I ) should have a choice on my earned money being wasted on addicts and drunks....You should have the same choice, You can pay my share.... I pay taxes and have for 40+ years, ( I ) should have more say so on how that money is spent, same as you....the people who want to pay for the addicts and drunks should be taxed more or as I said contact the IRS and pay my share, But you nor anyone who feels as you do will do that....


I put my money where my mouth is by donating to programs that help those less fortunate than I.

After you pay your taxes (federal and state) you have no say where the money goes. Period. I also pay a lot in federal and state taxes, I'm not paying yours as well. You have a choice, don't pay taxes.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

rjburk said:


> ( I ) should have a choice on my earned money being wasted on addicts and drunks....You should have the same choice, You can pay my share.... I pay taxes and have for 40+ years, ( I ) should have more say so on how that money is spent, same as you....the people who want to pay for the addicts and drunks should be taxed more or as I said contact the IRS and pay my share, But you nor anyone who feels as you do will do that....


Nope, you're right. I already pay quite a lot in taxes and donate a lot to charities.
Sadly for you, you will continue to help fund the causes you despise.
I have to do the same.
You think I want my tax money spent so egregiously to protect the person (and his numerous offspring from numerous wives) occupying the White House right now?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> exactly and that's why the system is broken.


Nope.
I have a vested interest (as do you and all of us) in having an educated populace. In having a solid interstate highway system to promote commerce and travel. This is why e have taxes and have always have had taxes. To benefit the country as a whole. You may not agree with how every dollar is spent, but no one can be. That's just life. Suck it up, buttercup.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> I put my money where my mouth is by donating to programs that help those less fortunate than I.
> 
> After you pay your taxes (federal and state) you have no say where the money goes. Period. I also pay a lot in federal and state taxes, I'm not paying yours as well. You have a choice, don't pay taxes.


Again....Please give me one plausible reason why it is my financially responsibility to pay for addicts, drunks and obese people ? there is none.....you can play the ( don't pay taxes ) if you want, that is just a way to make a distraction about the question I asked.....for which you have no answer......you can play bait and switch, but it is just that....


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

rjburk said:


> Again....Please give me one plausible reason why it is my financially responsibility to pay for addicts, drunks and obese people ? there is none.....you can play the ( don't pay taxes ) if you want, that is just a way to make a distraction about the question I asked.....for which you have no answer......you can play bait and switch, but it is just that....


Bottom line is because we live in a society of many, all with different abilities. And you do have a choice to pay taxes, simply because you don't _like_ either choice doesn't mean there isn't one.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> Bottom line is because we live in a society of many, all with different abilities. And you do have a choice to pay taxes, simply because you don't _like_ either choice doesn't mean there isn't one.


still waiting ????????


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

rjburk said:


> still waiting ????????


I suggest not holding your breath, I answered you.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

rjburk said:


> LMAO....so now we are attacking Trump ? LMAO, are you a bleeding heart Liberal ? Sounds like it, since you opened that door I will oblige, Please tell me why a man who himself professed to be a great Constitutional Law Professor won't show his school records ? Michelle Obama turned in her Law License rather than face prosecution, Obama and his money whore Hillary funneled weapons to Muslim Terrorists and four Americans were Murdered and they walk away scott free....Please tell me why Obama's AG flunkie Eric Holder was not fired for giving weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels and a Border Patrol Agent was murdered with one of those weapons ? You have some gall picking on Trump when the last Traitor in the WH created more havoc.....Your the type that is what's wrong in America, You attack someone who has not been responsible for any of the types of things Obama did....your attack is petty and useless like all Liberals...you do realize I am also paying Secret Service to protect Obama and Hillary ? you can't answer my questions about thos thread so you keep changing the subject, typical liberal...


Mine was a rhetorical question in the same line of "reasoning" that you were using to say you shouldn't have to pay for things you don't agree with. I didn't attack Trump at all, I merely said I didn't like him so why should I have to pay for protecting him.

In fact, I actually DO agree that it's my responsibility to contribute to paying for him protection even though I don't like him.


Please take your wild-eyed, bat-poop crazy bullhockey back to the dark room where it belongs. And learn how to debate or don't bother indulging.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Lisa in WA said:


> Nope.
> I have a vested interest (as do you and all of us) in having an educated populace. In having a solid interstate highway system to promote commerce and travel. This is why e have taxes and have always have had taxes. To benefit the country as a whole. You may not agree with how every dollar is spent, but no one can be. That's just life. Suck it up, buttercup.


On the contrary it is a choice where my tax dollars go. I can't help that the non contributing idiots vote in people that keep the handouts going. I vote against them but we incentivize laziness and being dependent on the gooberment. Why do you think there was so much backlash over Trump. Because those with their hands out might be forced to go back to work instead of protesting. There were no riots over Obama because anyone who would had to go to work! I actually hound all my legislature that represents me and tell them often we need to stop funding all this crap. Infrastructure off my tax dollars is one thing, halfway houses and drug rehab does nothing for me. I can make a grown man decision and stay off the crap so can anyone else. I don't agree with my taxes going up for a stadium either when those clowns make millions, build your own stadium. We allow these idiot politicians, conservative and liberals to spend our hard earned money foolishly. So yes you do have a choice, it's called voting, it just doesn't always work the way you want.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> On the contrary it is a choice where my tax dollars go. I can't help that the non contributing idiots vote in people that keep the handouts going. I vote against them but we incentivize laziness and being dependent on the gooberment. Why do you think there was so much backlash over Trump. Because those with their hands out might be forced to go back to work instead of protesting. There were no riots over Obama because anyone who would had to go to work! I actually hound all my legislature that represents me and tell them often we need to stop funding all this crap. Infrastructure off my tax dollars is one thing, halfway houses and drug rehab does nothing for me. I can make a grown ass man decision and stay off the crap so can anyone else. I don't agree with my taxes going up for a stadium either when those clowns make millions, build your own stadium. We allow these idiot politicians, conservative and liberals to spend our hard earned money foolishly. So yes you do have a choice, it's called voting, it just doesn't always work the way you want.



I actually agree with you more than you might think. I strongly believe in a social safety net but I've seen it abused and I don't like it either. I've already said that I dont have any answers to the addiction problem but I don't believe in continuing to allow a person to indulge in irresponsible behavior at the taxpayers expense. My sister is a nurse and one of her clients was a drug addict who contracted Hep C and was given Harvoni to cure it at $96,000 for the treatment. He was cured. And then indicated to her he was going right back to doing what had gotten him Hep C in the first place and assumed he'd just be treated again.
I don't know what the answer is but I do believe we have some good reasons to intervene and help get people straight for the protection of the rest of us if nothing else.
Where the cut off should be, I don't really know.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Please remember, you are in GC and if you've had comments edited or deleted, it might be a good idea to review the rules.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

While I don't advocate opioid abuse and am sympathetic for the families of overdose victims, I don't like where this is headed.

The government has been putting pressure on doctors to the point where my doctor can't prescribe opioids (reporting obligations her office can't afford to do). That means I have to be referred to a pain clinic if I ever need opioids. Be that as it may, that pressure has reduced opioid prescriptions by 18% nationwide. I was amazed it was that much (almost 1 in 5 pills). But the government responded that it wasn't good enough.

That tells me that there's something the government wants that they haven't gotten yet. I don't think it's the number of pills being prescribed, because prescription cuts don't impress them. I'd like to know what they're after before deciding whether it's a good thing.

A lot of people objected to the ACA possibly putting the government between patients & doctors, but this opioid thing is putting government between patients & doctors in a way that the ACA never could. It's not looking good from where I sit.

The thing is that I don't know what's in my future, but a slow painful death is definitely a possibility. If that happens I don't want to be told that I can't have appropriate pain medication because some people used to abuse it.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

I think most people posting in this thread are addicted to the internet...


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

oneraddad said:


> I think most people posting in this thread are addicted to the internet...


Don't be a curmudgeon. 

Who will pay for my internet addiction rehab?!


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Lisa in WA said:


> Who will pay for my internet addiction rehab?!


Resistance is futile.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

rjburk said:


> Again....Please give me one plausible reason why it is my financially responsibility to pay for addicts, drunks and obese people ? there is none.....you can play the ( don't pay taxes ) if you want, that is just a way to make a distraction about the question I asked.....for which you have no answer......you can play bait and switch, but it is just that....


 Has it ever occurred to you that those people are tired of paying for your lifestyle ?
That with just a few adjustments in the rules it could be your lifestyle that was seen as a drag on society ?


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> Has it ever occurred to you that those people are tired of paying for your lifestyle ?
> That with just a few adjustments in the rules it could be your lifestyle that was seen as a drag on society ?


Whose paying for my lifestyle? Oh that's right, me! How's that a burden? Tweak some rules, I still work and still pay my taxes and bills, still not a burden. Give the dirtbags free healthcare, I still pay my premiums. How are you going to adjust the rules to where the working class lifestyle is a burden on society? There is zero logic in that statement.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

wr said:


> Please remember, you are in GC and if you've had comments edited or deleted, it might be a good idea to review the rules.


Hey, my whole post is gone. What happened???

Oh yeah, I havent posted in this thread yet.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Nevada said:


> While I don't advocate opioid abuse and am sympathetic for the families of overdose victims, I don't like where this is headed.
> 
> The government has been putting pressure on doctors to the point where my doctor can't prescribe opioids (reporting obligations her office can't afford to do). That means I have to be referred to a pain clinic if I ever need opioids. Be that as it may, that pressure has reduced opioid prescriptions by 18% nationwide. I was amazed it was that much (almost 1 in 5 pills). But the government responded that it wasn't good enough.
> 
> ...


This is a big problem. My BIL is one of those that abuse opiods. He has been arrested several times now for PI because of it. It has gotten to where now he has to have the med in his system at the time of the visit ot they wont give him another refill.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

rjburk said:


> ( I ) should have a choice on my earned money being wasted on addicts and drunks....You should have the same choice, You can pay my share.... I pay taxes and have for 40+ years, ( I ) should have more say so on how that money is spent, same as you....the people who want to pay for the addicts and drunks should be taxed more or as I said contact the IRS and pay my share, But you nor anyone who feels as you do will do that....


You want an opt-out clause on taxes? 
There is none. A while back, folks paid few taxes and as result, there were few services. Over time, at the blessing of the voters, they raised taxes to cover more things...way of the world. Now, you want to roll back the clock. Fine, start a superpac and raise money for candidates who support your position. 
I used to bristle at those who fed at the trough of the taxpayer, and those who defrauded it. I even used to ignore an alcoholic/addict begging for money, for another bottle/hit. Then, I realized I don't know these people, what their issue is, other than the pit they find themselves in. And my distaste for their direction in life had a negative impact on me. So, now I do give freely without judging them. Like I said pages back, we are judging drug addicted folks. We treat them with contempt. And using our tax dollars so they can feed their addiction does seem like a smack in the face, until you stop judging them. I think we collectively stopped looking at them as humans. Yes, some will never be saved, they have dug a hole so deep, they will never recover. I have hope my tax dollars can save a few. It will benefit me over the long road. 
I try to see an addict as a person similar to one who has a broken arm...would you not help a person with broken arm?


----------



## gilberte (Sep 25, 2004)

If I came across a feller with a broken arm I would help him. If, when he got out of the ER he smashed his arm with a hammer and broke it again (on purpose), I'd tell him good luck and be on my way.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Whose paying for my lifestyle? Oh that's right, me! How's that a burden? Tweak some rules, I still work and still pay my taxes and bills, still not a burden. Give the dirtbags free healthcare, I still pay my premiums. How are you going to adjust the rules to where the working class lifestyle is a burden on society? There is zero logic in that statement.


Lol I will take that as a No. 
I don't know much about your lifestyle so I can't comment on the tweaks it would take to turn your lifestyle into a social pariah. 
But the fact that you can't imagine them reveals your sense of self righteousness. 

A place to start might be with drug freedom. If all drugs were a right suddenly those dealers , growers and manufactoers would instantly be considered outstanding contributors to society. 
Follow that thought and see where it takes you.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

AmericanStand said:


> Lol I will take that as a No.
> I don't know much about your lifestyle so I can't comment on the tweaks it would take to turn your lifestyle into a social pariah.
> But the fact that you can't imagine them reveals your sense of self righteousness.
> 
> ...


This idea holds merit, as much as I don't love the thought. By making dealers and growers contributing members of society we would be clearing up a few issues. Less folks getting a free ride, less organized crime, more folks paying more taxes. By legalizing, we may even be rid of a few of the big time druggies this way also, by letting those who are hell-bent on destroying themselves do so legally.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> Lol I will take that as a No.
> I don't know much about your lifestyle so I can't comment on the tweaks it would take to turn your lifestyle into a social pariah.
> But the fact that you can't imagine them reveals your sense of self righteousness.
> 
> ...


Good on them if they change it, then they can pay taxes as well and support the people they hook. Still doesn't change the fact I would be working and paying my share of taxes. Self righteousness? Because I work, pay taxes, and don't take handouts? Yeah I guess I can be proud of that fact if I want. It shows self reliance. So once again even if it was all legal and they finally contributed to society how would that make me a burden? Your logic is still flawed. Think that through all the way.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Good on them if they change it, then they can pay taxes as well and support the people they hook. Still doesn't change the fact I would be working and paying my share of taxes. Self righteousness? Because I work, pay taxes, and don't take handouts? Yeah I guess I can be proud of that fact if I want. It shows self reliance. So once again even if it was all legal and they finally contributed to society how would that make me a burden? Your logic is still flawed. Think that through all the way.



Lol you don't get it it's one of those things were you just refuse to see yourself from another viewpoint. 
What do you do for income ? How do you live ?
I bet those two things you are so proud of are based on handouts and being a burden on society. 
I bet just some tiny adjustments of the law could reveal that. 
After all the brewers were outstanding contributors and hard working tradesmen till prohibition. 
The makers and sellers of heroin were fine people helping society till some congressmen tweeted a law.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> Lol you don't get it it's one of those things were you just refuse to see yourself from another viewpoint.
> What do you do for income ? How do you live ?
> I bet those two things you are so proud of are based on handouts and being a burden on society.
> I bet just some tiny adjustments of the law could reveal that.
> ...


You bet? You can bet all day long because my line of work isn't based on handouts. Good effort but your still wrong. Maybe if I was a cop there wouldn't be as many raids because it's legal but there's still traffic violations and drunk drivers and so on. Still not sure how tweaking a law is going to hurt me working on heavy equipment or raising cattle. My land and house are paid for which I pay taxes on. I receive no subsidies. So where is a small adjustment of a law going to make me a burden on society? It's not, once again nice try, but you are still wrong. Let's make raising cattle illegal, ok, I have food for awhile, let's ban diesel fuel and tractors, good luck doing anything. Let's jack up the cost of fuel, did that, still paid my taxes and didn't get a dime from the government. So please enlighten me how tweaking a law is going to reverse my impact on society?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Let's jack up the cost of fuel, did that, still paid my taxes and didn't get a dime from the government.


You're not the only one who paid his taxes and never took a dime from government. I worked a productive career, yet never got welfare, food stamps, or even unemployment. I'm grateful that I had an opportunity to live a lot better than those who turned up homeless or were forced to rely on government assistance. But I don't resent those people.

I retired in a lot better shape than some people I know. I'm grateful for that too.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Nevada said:


> You're not the only one who paid his taxes and never took a dime from government. I worked a productive career, yet never got welfare, food stamps, or even unemployment. I'm grateful that I had an opportunity to live a lot better than those who turned up homeless or were forced to rely on government assistance. But I don't resent those people.
> 
> I retired in a lot better shape than some people I know. I'm grateful for that too.


Never claimed to be the only one. But I don't think it is fair to continue foolish spending on those who contribute nothing and refuse to try to support themselves. I know plenty of people who fell on hard times but did what they had to to make it and are better off today and only used the programs short term. That's how it is supposed to be done, not live in section 8 housing forever and drive a caddy.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Still not sure how tweaking a law is going to hurt me working on heavy equipment or raising cattle. My land and house are paid for which I pay taxes on. I receive no subsidies. So where is a small adjustment of a law going to make me a burden on society? ....?


 OMG the truth comes out and reveals that you are practically a felon. 
Many people think raising cows is immoral. Obviously the damage you have done to the land with cows and enabling heavy equipment is evidence of your lack or morals and your willingness to take advantage of society. 
Of course a law needs to be passed making Raising cows a felony and fining you at least $100,000 per cow you have ever raised for the damage they did. 
As for all that heavy machinery stuff , the horror of it boggles the mind! The death penalty isn't good enough for people like you. 


Ok please understand those are not the views of AmericanStand. But there are people that feel that way. 
All that it would take is literally a few words on paper. 
Now do yo understand what I ment about how little it would take to change how society views your lifestyle ?


By the way if you raised cows in Texas and made a living workin on heavy machinery you can hardy claim not to have been subsidized by the government.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> OMG the truth comes out and reveals that you are practically a felon.
> Many people think raising cows is immoral. Obviously the damage you have done to the land with cows and enabling heavy equipment is evidence of your lack or morals and your willingness to take advantage of society.
> Of course a law needs to be passed making Raising cows a felony and fining you at least $100,000 per cow you have ever raised for the damage they did.
> As for all that heavy machinery stuff , the horror of it boggles the mind! The death penalty isn't good enough for people like you.
> ...


Without raising cows or any animal for that matter for food would result in lots of crops going to waste and hunger. Second I do not take any and I mean any subsidies from the government, no land grants, erosion control BS, conservation money, nothing. I repair equipment for a company that is not subsidized in any way, I also work for a customer that is not. So to those who feel how you said in the beginning, shut down all heavy equipment and see how the roads look after a month or year. The road contractors may be subsidized but I'm not. I also don't work for road contractors ever. I actually work in a coal mine where ALL the coal goes to Mexico. So again the likelihood of raising cattle becoming illegal with exception of Berkeley California is slim and closer to none. The likelihood of equipment going away is equally as slim. Could it be changed? Sure. Is it anywhere remotely realistic, not a chance in hell. So once again your wrong.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

hunter63 said:


> I think they should all be legal.....take the robbing, stealing and dealing out of the picture.
> Tax the product.
> 
> Then let Darwin sort it out.


 I started to like this post, but I am not to sure about the Darwin part. I think drugs should be legal in a free society. I also think people should be held responsible for any crimes they commit while high. The money saved by not dealing drug use as a crime, and the money raised by taxing drugs should be used for treatment centers, other programs to offer help for those who want it, education about the dangers involved in drug use, and just as importantly how to get help

Jim


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Tx if you can't see how heavily subsidized your lifestyle is I'm sure I will never get you to see how close a thing being legal or criminal can be. 
And if you can't imagine congress. Criminalizing your farm and repair operations I think you have far more faith in your government than most people. 

You are right I was wrong to try to show you a different viewpoint.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> Tx if you can't see how heavily subsidized your lifestyle is I'm sure I will never get you to see how close a thing being legal or criminal can be.
> And if you can't imagine congress. Criminalizing your farm and repair operations I think you have far more faith in your government than most people.
> 
> You are right I was wrong to try to show you a different viewpoint.


MY lifestyle is not. Others who do the same thing as me sure. Congress criminalize farming? Are you serious? How ignorant can you really be? Criminalize repair facilities and equipment? You really cannot be that ignorant to believe that a majority of people think the government would ban farming. I don't have a whole lot of faith in my government either but I'm not stupid either. Once again get rid of equipment and repair places and the infrastructure of this country will fail. No more high rises, over passes, much needed road construction after a winter up north. What do you do with the animals when the government bans farming? Kill them all? Release them? So we have an over abundance of waste and rotting carcasses to spread disease? Do you truly believe the crap your shoveling? Yes many farmers and ranchers do accept subsidies, most of them in the corn belt. I however do not. I will admit I supplement my income by selling hunts on my property. As far as anything being close to criminal raising animals for food is no where near being criminal, except Berkeley commifornia. Owning, operating, and repairing equipment is also no where near being illegal. There isn't even legislation on it. The HPA has been tied up since January, I wouldnt be too concerned with the government getting in a hurry to pass a law. More importantly this is where your logic fails more than anything: Iowa, Nebraska, Illinois, Kansas, Indiana, Texas, Oklahoma, California, Wisconsin, and so many more are huge producers of not only crops but cattle, chickens, pigs, dairy operations(California being the largest producer). So really how ignorant are you to believe the gooberment would shut down a huge source of food and revenue based on exports. Have a blessed night.

If you want though I will agree that you are right and I take subsidies and the gooberment pays for my house and food stamps. Will that make you happy.


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

Jim Bunton said:


> I started to like this post, but I am not to sure about the Darwin part. I think drugs should be legal in a free society. I also think people should be held responsible for any crimes they commit while high. The money saved by not dealing drug use as a crime, and the money raised by taxing drugs should be used for treatment centers, other programs to offer help for those who want it, education about the dangers involved in drug use, and just as importantly how to get help
> 
> Jim


You don't have to like The Darwin part...It's my opinion...I sure you have yours.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

If you're doing any farming, somewhere upline, your product, or whatever it is used for, is being sold in a grocery store. Grocery stores accept food stamps. Food stamps are clearly part of what outrages you so badly. However, the food stamps are cashed in by Walmart, and the money is sent to big suppliers, who forward it to small suppliers, who forward it to you. Part of your income is being subsidized by food stamps.

Equipment repair? Who is paying the equipment owners, with what money from where? If any of the work is being paid for by taxes and part of your income includes that tax money.....Any "infrastructure" work is paid for by the government. Does the government actually earn the money they spend? Or do they just print some more....which means that every dollar that's printed diminishes the value of all the dollars already in existence. Including mine. Hey, that means that there's a guy in NC whose dollar won't buy as much as it did last year, because he's subsidizing some road work, and the construction company has to pay to have a piece of machinery repaired....in Texas.

Or, not only is the government subsidizing that work, but every single person in America is too. Nobody is totally self-sustaining, so get over it.

As to the original topic, I'm reminded of the words of John Bradford. "There, but for the grace of God, go I" Some of you guys need to get off your high horse and realize that the unfortunate among us are just that...unfortunate. Drug addiction is genetic, meaning it can appear an any family, regardless of how self-righteous and generally outraged they are.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

We continually have threads in this forum about how government has just made some part of farming or ranching. 
Am I the only one that fears for the possibilities ?


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Never claimed to be the only one. But I don't think it is fair to continue foolish spending on those who contribute nothing and refuse to try to support themselves. I know plenty of people who fell on hard times but did what they had to to make it and are better off today and only used the programs short term. That's how it is supposed to be done, not live in section 8 housing forever and drive a caddy.


They can't contribute because they have a disease. What % of section 8 housing folks drive a caddy? 
I hear that unsupported refrain (no link?) all the time, about how some welfare recipient is abusing the system, driving a caddy, living the good life...I suspect that is a rarity..I bet most of them are scraping by, barely able to afford food, nevermind heat. And a number of them will never get out of the system because the system doesn't really care if you do, given the support one gets. A couple hundred bucks does not turn a life around. Or one's dignity is not served when one has to reach into their wallet for food-stamps (glad to hear we don't have that north of 49). 
Look at the financial records of the US....welfare support for working age individuals is minimal relative other services government supplies, yet they are the whipping boy for reining in government spending. 

Clem pointed out some subsidized aspects of your work. I can think of hundreds of ways you are subsidized by government. I bet if we added it all up, you get more handouts from government than a welfare recipient.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

Your absolutely correct, how could my logic be so wrong. My apologies.


----------



## hunter63 (Jan 4, 2005)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Your absolutely correct, how could my logic be so wrong. My apologies.


Well Played.....LOL


----------



## farmerman77 (Jun 14, 2017)

ShannonR said:


> Let them all overdose?? What if we just stoped treating overdose "victims"? Tough love, so to speak. I bet I'm going to get flamed for the suggestion, but this cycle of enabling we have going on now sure ain't working.
> 
> 
> Seriously, I don't have an answer....


wow


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

farmerman77 said:


> wow


I know, right?


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Where did I say that I'm so sure of the impossibility of abuse? Can you point it out? Thanks.
> 
> I don't know the specifics of what you're talking about, and to be honest, it's none of my business. If a licensed physician wrote the 'script it is being monitored.


There are doctors with highway billboards offering scripts for medical pot. One doctor had written tens of thousands of prescriptions. Not just pot scripts. Another doctor had written tens of times more oxi pain medications than the average physician. Doctor shopping is common. I know a guy that his only known health issue is acid reflux. He let his business fall apart while he sat around high, so maybe he suffered from self induced depression. He had a prescription for pot.
Most of the folks I know that voted to legalize medical pot, did so because we thought it would be to lessen end of life pain. Not for an infected toenail.

Sounds like a few folks here think we shouldn't have restricted alcohol from our native population either. That "freedom" had/has some awful consequences.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

farmerman77 said:


> wow


Welcome. Don't let the comments or attitudes in this section and especially this thread color your thoughts too much about this forum. Most are willing to offer help and advice without too much judgement.


----------



## krackin (Nov 2, 2014)

gilberte said:


> I'm sorry, I don't buy the addiction is a disease and not a choice. It's a choice to put the drug in your mouth or arm or whatever. Not a choice to get cancer or something like that.
> As far as controlling it... make it all legal, get a good education plan in the school system starting in the early grades. Addicts get one shot at rehab on the public dime then they're on their own.



It is not a disease at all. It is a self-inflicted condition.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

krackin said:


> It is not a disease at all. It is a self-inflicted condition.


Maybe you can tell that to the guy I met the other day. Early 50's. Worked construction most of his life. Primarily roofing. He fell off a ladder a couple of years ago and messed up his back. A couple surgeries and a bunch of pain pills later he makes daily trips 45 miles round trip to the nearest methadone clinic to try to
beat his addiction. Yep, it's what he decided to do to himself.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

mmoetc said:


> Maybe you can tell that to the guy I met the other day. Early 50's. Worked construction most of his life. Primarily roofing. He fell off a ladder a couple of years ago and messed up his back. A couple surgeries and a bunch of pain pills later he makes daily trips 45 miles round trip to the nearest methadone clinic to try to
> beat his addiction. Yep, it's what he decided to do to himself.


Hmnnn....so he hurt his back.....got addicted to pain pills, but now is going to a methadone clinic to get off the pills ? lots of questions here for me.....at the point he knew he (wanted) the pills rather than (needing) them, did he seek help at that point ? or did he just keep ( wanting ) the pills until he created so much harm in his life he went for help ? sounds as though his back at some point got better, but he wanted the pills ? which means he let it get out of hand ? His ( back injury ) did not make him an addict.....I have seen the same basic scenario and they had a choice like the guy you described.....addiction is not a disease...and yes, He decided to keep using.....


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

rjburk said:


> Hmnnn....so he hurt his back.....got addicted to pain pills, but now is going to a methadone clinic to get off the pills ? lots of questions here for me.....at the point he knew he (wanted) the pills rather than (needing) them, did he seek help at that point ? or did he just keep ( wanting ) the pills until he created so much harm in his life he went for help ? sounds as though his back at some point got better, but he wanted the pills ? which means he let it get out of hand ? His ( back injury ) did not make him an addict.....I have seen the same basic scenario and they had a choice like the guy you described.....addiction is not a disease...and yes, He decided to keep using.....


It's not "wanting" the pills. It's ones body needing the pills to bond to chemical receptors to make life bearable. It's not a choice. It's a biological imperative. He sought help. He's getting help. He didn't choose to get addicted to opioids. Biology is a fascinating thing. Drugs don't affect everyone the same. Some choose, some have no choice. 

Here's a little reading material.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851054/


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

melli said:


> They can't contribute because they have a disease. What % of section 8 housing folks drive a caddy?
> I hear that unsupported refrain (no link?) all the time, about how some welfare recipient is abusing the system, driving a caddy, living the good life...I suspect that is a rarity..I bet most of them are scraping by, barely able to afford food, nevermind heat. And a number of them will never get out of the system because the system doesn't really care if you do, given the support one gets. A couple hundred bucks does not turn a life around. Or one's dignity is not served when one has to reach into their wallet for food-stamps (glad to hear we don't have that north of 49).
> Look at the financial records of the US....welfare support for working age individuals is minimal relative other services government supplies, yet they are the whipping boy for reining in government spending.
> .


 I used to work at a food pantry we had several clients arrive in Caddys. 

We had one lady who often arrived in a Mercedes wearing a gorgeous mink coat,
She lived in. A mansion too. 

All things left her by her husband that she had the use of for her life but went to the kids at her death. 
Couldn't sell any of it. 
She worked at walmart trying to keep up with the upkeep bills. 
And yes she was on welfare foot stamps. 
Lots of welfare people driving fancy cars. One house keeper that made $100 cash a week drove a Lincoln navigater. 
She hated it cause of gas milage but her employer required her to drive it because the pets enjoyed going for rides. Yet she was expected to pay for gas for any trip she did anything of her own on 
Lots of. Cheep old Caddys out there. 
Lots of people that a rich aunt let's drive their caddy once a week.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mmoetc said:


> It's not "wanting" the pills. It's ones body needing the pills to bond to chemical receptors to make life bearable. It's not a choice. It's a biological imperative. He sought help. He's getting help. He didn't choose to get addicted to opioids. Biology is a fascinating thing. Drugs don't affect everyone the same. Some choose, some have no choice.
> 
> Here's a little reading material.
> 
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851054/


The facts in the ncbi articles are just going to confuse some posters. They have their minds made up about opioid addiction, and no amount of medical fact on chemical dependency in the brain is going to change that.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

krackin said:


> It is not a disease at all. It is a self-inflicted condition.


Perhaps in the very beginning of taking the drug. But 5-10 years ago when doctors were prescribing opioids with abandon, not many knew how additive it was. And if you really want to educate yourself on chemical dependency, mmoetc linked a ncbi article that explains it.


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> The facts in the ncbi articles are just going to confuse some posters. They have their minds made up about opioid addiction, and no amount of medical fact on chemical dependency in the brain is going to change that.


When someone quits ( needing ) a drug and then starts ( wanting ) it that is when that person has a choice, keep ( wanting ) it or getting help to stop the want....If you continue with the ( want ) and damage or destroy your life before you realize you should have stopped long ago, that is one them...you can't blame anyone else....nor should a non-addicted person be held financially responsible for them....No reformed clean addict has ever approached me and said, Hey, here's 500 bucks because your hard earned money paid for all of my rehab, housing, food and medical care....I appreciate it...


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

rjburk said:


> When someone quits ( needing ) a drug and then starts ( wanting ) it that is when that person has a choice, keep ( wanting ) it or getting help to stop the want....If you continue with the ( want ) and damage or destroy your life before you realize you should have stopped long ago, that is one them...you can't blame anyone else....nor should a non-addicted person be held financially responsible for them....No reformed clean addict has ever approached me and said, Hey, here's 500 bucks because your hard earned money paid for all of my rehab, housing, food and medical care....I appreciate it...


The body and brain often can't tell the difference between need and want. I've never met anyone addicted to anything who ever said they woke up one morning and said "Today I decide to become an addict."


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

rjburk said:


> When someone quits ( needing ) a drug and then starts ( wanting ) it that is when that person has a choice, keep ( wanting ) it or getting help to stop the want....If you continue with the ( want ) and damage or destroy your life before you realize you should have stopped long ago, that is one them...you can't blame anyone else....nor should a non-addicted person be held financially responsible for them....No reformed clean addict has ever approached me and said, Hey, here's 500 bucks because your hard earned money paid for all of my rehab, housing, food and medical care....I appreciate it...


Did you read the linked article?


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

rjburk said:


> When someone quits ( needing ) a drug and then starts ( wanting ) it that is when that person has a choice, keep ( wanting ) it or getting help to stop the want....If you continue with the ( want ) and damage or destroy your life before you realize you should have stopped long ago, that is one them...you can't blame anyone else....nor should a non-addicted person be held financially responsible for them....No reformed clean addict has ever approached me and said, Hey, here's 500 bucks because your hard earned money paid for all of my rehab, housing, food and medical care....I appreciate it...


They can keep their money as far as I am concerned. Would be glad to hear of an addict who got off the pill. Likely means they are back to paying taxes...paying it forward. I'm paying not only for folks to get help but pensions, and a whole host of things. Later, when I retire, the younger gen will be paying part of my pension and medical care, if I need it. 
The first paragraph is bit confusing for me...you say they have a choice, but then the second sentence suggests they don't or they went past the point of no return. Once your brain is hooked, there is no choice. Your physiologically dependent. If it was so easy to say X number of pills, and you cross a line from non-addicted to addicted, then we could say, you get X number of pills minus one...lol
I don't think it works that way though...


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

Just because it can be easy to get does not mean we should all run and get some....it's a choice and when people make bad choices


mmoetc said:


> The body and brain often can't tell the difference between need and want. I've never met anyone addicted to anything who ever said they woke up one morning and said "Today I decide to become an addict."


LOL......IF you are not smart enough to figure the difference between ( want ) and ( need ) or can't see the signs that your ( wants ) are destroying you ? then you should not expect other people who do know the difference to support you...


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

melli said:


> They can keep their money as far as I am concerned. Would be glad to hear of an addict who got off the pill. Likely means they are back to paying taxes...paying it forward. I'm paying not only for folks to get help but pensions, and a whole host of things. Later, when I retire, the younger gen will be paying part of my pension and medical care, if I need it.
> The first paragraph is bit confusing for me...you say they have a choice, but then the second sentence suggests they don't or they went past the point of no return. Once your brain is hooked, there is no choice. Your physiologically dependent. If it was so easy to say X number of pills, and you cross a line from non-addicted to addicted, then we could say, you get X number of pills minus one...lol
> I don't think it works that way though...


There is always a choice.....Always, If you make the choice to continue destroying your life, That is your choice....and I am not responsible for it....I don't want to pay for addicts anymore than I want to pay for the baby factory welfare queens....I know some of my taxes pay for both, does not mean I have to like it, support it or be quiet about it...


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

haypoint said:


> There are doctors with highway billboards offering scripts for medical pot. One doctor had written tens of thousands of prescriptions. Not just pot scripts. Another doctor had written tens of times more oxi pain medications than the average physician. Doctor shopping is common. I know a guy that his only known health issue is acid reflux. He let his business fall apart while he sat around high, so maybe he suffered from self induced depression. He had a prescription for pot.
> Most of the folks I know that voted to legalize medical pot, did so because we thought it would be to lessen end of life pain. Not for an infected toenail.
> 
> Sounds like a few folks here think we shouldn't have restricted alcohol from our native population either. That "freedom" had/has some awful consequences.




You shouldn't need a prescription to consume marijuana. What are you scared of ?


----------



## rjburk (Jul 19, 2017)

oneraddad said:


> You shouldn't need a prescription to consume marijuana. What are you scared of ?


Go look at the number of Deaths and Injuries in Colorado already due to high drivers....everyone should be scared of that....One Death from any Drunk or Dope Head is one too many....


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)




----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

rjburk said:


> Go look at the number of Deaths and Injuries in Colorado already due to high drivers....everyone should be scared of that....One Death from any Drunk or Dope Head is one too many....


So you're for banning alcohol too?


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

I've been smoking pot for 45 of my 60 years on earth and have never had a ticket or been in an accident that was my fault. I also drank alcohol for 25 years and never had a DUI.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

AmericanStand said:


> Lol I will take that as a No.
> I don't know much about your lifestyle so I can't comment on the tweaks it would take to turn your lifestyle into a social pariah.
> But the fact that you can't imagine them reveals your sense of self righteousness.
> 
> ...


I can see it now. 

_If you bought bad marijuana from Billy Bob dealer and had a bad reaction to it you may be entitled to compensation. Call xxx-xxxx law firm to get your settlement NOW.... _


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

mreynolds said:


> I can see it now.
> 
> _If you bought bad marijuana from Billy Bob dealer and had a bad reaction to it you may be entitled to compensation. Call xxx-xxxx law firm to get your settlement NOW.... _


Like the radio needs another lawyer commercial!


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

mreynolds said:


> I can see it now.
> 
> _If you bought bad marijuana from Billy Bob dealer and had a bad reaction to it you may be entitled to compensation. Call xxx-xxxx law firm to get your settlement NOW.... _


And ole Billy Bob dealer's commercial would be aired right after.. LOL


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> Like the radio needs another lawyer commercial!


Bad thing is am getting to the age I can actually call some of them lol.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Lisa in WA said:


> So you're for banning alcohol too?


Not to mention that driving impaired is already illegal...


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

haypoint said:


> There are doctors with highway billboards offering scripts for medical pot. One doctor had written tens of thousands of prescriptions. Not just pot scripts. Another doctor had written tens of times more oxi pain medications than the average physician. Doctor shopping is common. I know a guy that his only known health issue is acid reflux. He let his business fall apart while he sat around high, so maybe he suffered from self induced depression. He had a prescription for pot.
> Most of the folks I know that voted to legalize medical pot, did so because we thought it would be to lessen end of life pain. Not for an infected toenail.
> 
> Sounds like a few folks here think we shouldn't have restricted alcohol from our native population either. That "freedom" had/has some awful consequences.



Are you saying you would make alcohol illegal for native Americans? Not other citizens...just NA's?


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Lisa in WA said:


> Are you saying you would make alcohol illegal for native Americans? Not other citizens...just NA's?


Thank you for seeing the complexity of drug and alcohol laws. Some people are predisposed to addiction, others are not. Just as most college students give up binge drinking, others fall into a life of drunkenness. DNA differences among NA and many Asians reduces the ability to metabolize alcohol as rapidly as many Europeans. The tendency towards alcohol abuse is markedly higher, too. Laws based on ethnic background is as common as it is unacceptable.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

oneraddad said:


> You shouldn't need a prescription to consume marijuana. What are you scared of ?


For me, there is nothing to be afraid of. I can take it or leave it. I choose to leave it. However, for some, perhaps many, pot is addictive. I know seemingly good women that when faced with choosing between her husband and family will choose having sex with whomever will supply her with pot. While we normally associate heroin as the addictive drug of prostitutes, a great number are seeking 420 friendly. Perhaps the same could be said of booze.


----------

