It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chris Christie Ties Heroin Epidemic To Obama

page: 3
23
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Addicts have a small part of there brain wired differently, addicts need to satisfy a craving, the need is to have the quick fix to feel that surge of hormones towards the pleasure point in the brain. Many people drink and do drugs, not all drinkers and users are addicts.

Oh and plz people go educate yourself before spouting your opinion, its 2015 we know so much more.

Also people who have had brain trauma to a certain degree can have there brain affected in a way that they become easier targets to addiction.

Knowledge is your friend




posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Evil_Santa
a reply to: AutOmatIc

Congratulations to you on getting clean.

What were you addicted to again?


Thank you, and I never did say. I was addicted to : Alcohol, coc aine, heroin, smoked crack for a year, methamphetamines, pain medications, marijuana (yes it can be addictive), most opiates...and was pretty much open to do or try most anything. I never went to rehab, never got arrested, never went to a doctor, just one day decided enough was enough and stopped, cold turkey, and have been making the choice every day since to not drink alcohol or do illegal drugs.

I am living proof that it is possible. No laws will be able to force people to make such choices, but some people aren't strong enough to be able to do what I did and just stop so they need help. I don't believe our current system of just jailing people is helping at all.

But I also know that the "war on drugs" has always been a joke. They are everywhere. More laws won't stop them. Christie can say all he wants but I don't think he would ever be able to help if that's his plan.
edit on 24-8-2015 by AutOmatIc because: spelling



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: JimNasium

Ah, you beat me to the punch!

With sources to boot!

And a meme that I just found and I thought about Your avatar.. Enjoy

www.quickmeme.com...

namaste



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 03:17 AM
link   

edit on 25-8-2015 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

It was inevitable. You tighten your grip on these things and people will just go to other, and most likely, unsafer alternatives.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 06:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Can we then say the same about the war on poverty?

Or is that too cruel to cut?


Hun, I'd like to get rid of just about any "war on [insert intangible object]". They are just huge money sinks and I think it is going about solving the problem the wrong way by trying to use a violent term to combat a problem that probably requires a bit of finesse.


And drug addiction is a strange disease. It's the only one I know you have to volunteer yourself to get.


The problem is that many drug addicts are TERRIFIED to admit to being addicted because if they do that means they lose everything and could possibly be arrested. The way the laws work, we punish people for using. So they are scared to come forward and admit they have a problem. They then turn around and use until they get caught. We send them to jail and a half-assed rehab program (that doesn't work because you can buy any drug you want in jail). Then they get back on the streets with their lives ruined because they have a criminal record. Rinse and repeat.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So instead of saying, "Hey, they chose to take that first hit and the subsequent and everyone around them who loves them wants them to get help ..."

You want to blame the system for all of it.

People get clean under their own power voluntarily without getting arrested. It does happen. They get help and go through rehab with support of loved ones.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So instead of saying, "Hey, they chose to take that first hit and the subsequent and everyone around them who loves them wants them to get help ..."

You want to blame the system for all of it.

People get clean under their own power voluntarily without getting arrested. It does happen. They get help and go through rehab with support of loved ones.



All I have to do is point to Portugal. Drug addiction has been dropping like a rock since they decriminalized all drugs.

Why hardly anyone dies from a drug overdose in Portugal


Portugal decriminalized the use of all drugs in 2001. Weed, coc aine, heroin, you name it -- Portugal decided to treat possession and use of small quantities of these drugs as a public health issue, not a criminal one. The drugs were still illegal, of course. But now getting caught with them meant a small fine and maybe a referral to a treatment program -- not jail time and a criminal record.


So how did that turn out for them?


But in Portugal, the numbers paint a different story. The prevalence of past-year and past-month drug use among young adults has fallen since 2001, according to statistics compiled by the Transform Drug Policy Foundation, which advocates on behalf of ending the war on drugs. Overall adult use is down slightly too. And new HIV cases among drug users are way down.

Now, numbers just released from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction paint an even more vivid picture of life under decriminalization: drug overdose deaths in Portugal are the second-lowest in the European Union.



Perhaps more significantly, the report notes that the use of "legal highs" -- like so-called "synthetic" marijuana, "bath salts" and the like -- is lower in Portugal than in any of the other countries for which reliable data exists. This makes a lot of intuitive sense: why bother with fake weed or dangerous designer drugs when you can get the real stuff? This is arguably a positive development for public health in the sense that many of the designer drugs that people develop to skirt existing drug laws have terrible and often deadly side effects.


Criminalizing a disease should be an affront to god. That is just inhumane... Heck it might as well be cruel and unusual. It's beyond common sense at this point.
edit on 25-8-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 07:47 AM
link   
I wonder how many drug addicts started with prescriptions for pain killers written by their doctors in treatment for real pain...

and umm....

Christie is old enough to remember Iran/Contra and how it opened up the US for an onslaught of illegal drugs ( the ends justify the means after all), and gee good ole Ollie North is seen as a hero to many even today!!!

Western nations have fought for the right to sell opium in other countries!!
www.encyclopedia.com...

drugs, the use (weather under the doctor's care of not), their manufacture (either from big pharm, or basement labs), their distribution (weather through obamacare, or the street peddler), along with the treatment of their abusers (weather treatment or prison), all are big money makers, and it seems like gov't often have their hands in the pot throughout it.
they have a hand in creating the problem that they then declare war on, and well, them and their buddies also have put themselves in position to profit as that war plays out.....

hillary isn't the only one who thinks she should be above the law!!!!



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It is an affront to God. If one chooses to believe in such things.

The injustice of imprisoning a drug addict for being a drug addict is appalling. The further injustice of the addiction being caused by an illicit trade that government agencies have a global interest in, and have complete global ownership of, is unconscionable.

Would we imprison people for having the flu? Cancer? What if the imprisoning authority is what gave you cancer to begin with?

Its absolutely terrible. Terrible that we would do this to our own family and neighbors. All because we want to express moral outrage. Not because we actually care, but because we want to express moral outrage.

spit.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Exactly! Well said. People with addictions need help, not to be locked away from society.


Its absolutely terrible. Terrible that we would do this to our own family and neighbors. All because we want to express moral outrage. Not because we actually care, but because we want to express moral outrage.


This sums up the argument PERFECTLY.
edit on 25-8-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   
And talk about brains being rewired different, we seem to have a whole class of drugs now- antidepressants, ect- that are doing just that, and yes, those who are having them prescribed seem to be addicted to me since it's claimed that it's dangerous to just stop them cold turkey or without doctor supervision.

it's okay to be addicted, as long as the drug companies, the doctors, the gov't get their cut of the profits!



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Chris Christie Ties Heroin Epidemic To Obama

This man is literally on a quest to make me hate him. So apparently Christie wants to bring back the 1980's tough on drugs approach to drug laws, even though it's been all but proven that those laws made things worse. First the ad:


Out of curiosity, do you remember all the crap our main stream press and democrats used to tie to Bush?



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBulk

Out of curiosity, is that all you read of the OP? Just asking because the question you asked me makes you appear to be uninformed as to what the article was talking about. Not to mention it's a red herring fallacy.
edit on 25-8-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Who cares what Chris Christie has to say? It's not like he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the election or even sticking around until the primary vote.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TheBulk

Out of curiosity, is that all you read of the OP? Just asking because the question you asked me makes you appear to be uninformed as to what the article was talking about. Not to mention it's a red herring fallacy.


I just ask because Obama, his supporters and the media regularly tied Bush to ridiculous things. What's good for the goose.....



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBulk

Oh I know why you ask; it's just that your comparison doesn't apply here because the OP isn't complaining about Christie blaming the epidemic on Obama. It is more than that. This is why you look uninformed on the OP. Though by all means, continue to put your foot in your mouth.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Maybe whomever decided to invade Afghanistan and policies thereafter is more responsible for the heroin epidemic..production and export drastically increased since.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Christie has already proven over and over (aside from other things) that he is ineffective. He makes it appear as though he 'makes things happen', but it's all smoke & mirror illusions... he is totally ineffective.



posted on Aug, 25 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh

Thats why both democrats and republicans are a bunch of clowns... And worse are the people who believe them and follow them! baaaahhh baaahh (sheep for wake up sheeple!)



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join