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.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy
If a person makes the deliberate, conscious decision to use drugs that have ill effects or addictive qualities then they should be responsible for themselves.
It should not be the responsibility of the government to nanny adults.
Attachment Disorder is defined as the condition in which individuals have difficulty forming lasting relationships. They often show nearly a complete lack of ability to be genuinely affectionate with others. They typically fail to develop a conscience and do not learn to trust.
Attachment Disorder Symptoms
Superficially engaging & charming
Lack of eye contact on parents’ terms
Indiscriminately affectionate with strangers
Not affectionate on parents’ terms (not ‘cuddly’)
Destructive to self, others and material things (‘accident prone’)
Cruelty to animals
Lying about the obvious (‘crazy’ lying)
Stealing
No impulse controls (frequently acts hyperactive)
Learning Lags
Lack of cause-and-effect thinking
Lack of conscience
Abnormal eating patterns
Poor peer relationships
Preoccupation with fire
Preoccupation with blood & gore
Persistent nonsense questions & chatter
Inappropriately demanding & clingy
Abnormal speech patterns
Triangulation of adults
False allegations of abuse
Presumptive entitlement issues
Parents appear hostile and angry
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy
If a person makes the deliberate, conscious decision to use drugs that have ill effects or addictive qualities then they should be responsible for themselves.
It should not be the responsibility of the government to nanny adults.
Exactly. Nature has failsafes in place to self correct these problem if mankind would only set aside the arrogance involved in artificially blocking nature's course. I've always been highly amused at the fact that any country with legal abortion uses the old "it's their body, so it is their choice" argument to justify it's legality, yet watch how the same nincompoops bend over backward to save others from their choices when such choice only directly impact the sole individual who decides to hang a needle out of their arm or tie a rope from their rafters.
If someone wishes to exit this world, we should hold the door open for them, not waste precious time and resources that could be used on people who are actually productive, valued members of society in trying to save these idjits from their own lunacy.
"The majority of recreational drug users don’t have a drug problem. So, advocating treatment for such individuals – as if this is a compassionate alternative – is really ignorance parading as compassion."
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy
If a person makes the deliberate, conscious decision to use drugs that have ill effects or addictive qualities then they should be responsible for themselves.
It should not be the responsibility of the government to nanny adults.
originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy
I haven't gotten through all the posts. I will, so I ask your pardon if this perspective has been offered.
Addictions to substances and processes (think video game addiction, or sex addiction) are a symptom of underlying disorders, largely societal. (I acknowledge that there has always been a small percentage of 'addicts' in the world.)
Dr. Gabor Mate theorizes that the underlying cause, if you will, is the prevalence of attachment disorders in Western societies.
originally posted by: MerkabaTribeEntity
I have a couple of points to make to those advocating mandatory treatment for those arrested for personal drug use.
In fact, Dr. Carl Hart, Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Columbia University, has already articulated my first point, and he said it better than I could;
"The majority of recreational drug users don’t have a drug problem. So, advocating treatment for such individuals – as if this is a compassionate alternative – is really ignorance parading as compassion."
My other point is this - often times when individuals are up in front of the courts charged with personal drug possession, they are offered two options; Either you go to jail, or you go into treatment - whether you need it or not.
This approach skews otherwise valuable data on the numbers of problematic drug users actually seeking treatment.
As I've previously mentioned I'm an active, and somewhat successful, cannabis law reform activist, and one argument I often hear perpetuated by prohibitionists is "look how many young people are in treatment for cannabis use, it's a dangerous drug and anyone who uses it will develop psychosis and need treatment, the data proves it".
The data doesn't mean squat when the majority of those in treatment are only there because it was a favourable alternative to incarceration.
originally posted by: MerkabaTribeEntity
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy
SWIM was once arrested and charged for possession of 0.03g of henna tainted resin (he didn't even know it was on his person at the time), although things seem to be improving muchly in recent years.
originally posted by: 0001391
Prohibition is wrong, it never works and needs to be stopped. It is a gross human rights violation to dictate what people can do with their bodies.
Any crime associated with drug use which is not directly a result of prohibition would already be crime (assault, theft, etc).
For all of human history plants and drugs were commodities like anything else and as many still are. Prohibition only benefits corrupt government, black markets and gangs.
We don't need to "legalize" substances which are not inherently "illegal" in the natural world. We need to end prohibition.
If people want to spend tax dollars on drug rehabs that's up to them I guess but would be better left to charities in my opinion. Law enforcement could focus on real crime, contents of people's blood stream notwithstanding.
Declaring nature "against the law" is obnoxious and arrogant.
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
I live in a beautiful part of Britain but like everywhere we have our own problems with drugs.
Some days there have been all our available ambulances treating people in a catatonic state under the influence of synthetic drugs (which were recently criminalised).
Because of the stress to our paramedic service the informal advice now is that if the person is not in immediate danger, and you feel safe to do so, please wait with them for the reasonably short period it takes for the effects to wear off, and/or put them in the recovery position if they are laying on their back for example. I've done this a few times and after 20 minutes or so when they can talk again, keep them safe until they are able to look after themselves again.
Today, walking home from shopping, I saw a girl slouched on the floor off her head on something. I made contact, she could just about make eye contact and nod to my questions so I sat with her to make sure she was safe. Once she came around I gave her water from my shopping plus a cake for the energy boost, then helped her to the nearby homeless refuge.
I swear, she broke my heart, no older than 18 and vulnerable in such a mess.
Anyway it got me thinking and basic residential drug/alcohol detox rehab in my area averages around £1000 per week with typical stays being up to 3 months depending on condition. There are next to zero bed spaces available on the NHS though, so the average addict is unlikely to be able to fund it privately. This causes a circle effect of crime, imprisonment, released to homelessness, then back to the drugs and crime.
I then looked at the average costs of keeping a prisoner in the UK. It costs an initial average of £65,000 to imprison a person in this country once police, court costs and all the other steps are taken into account. After that it costs a further £40,000 for each year they spend incarcerated.
It's dead money. What a crappy business model, keep them off the streets in prisons with easy access to drugs, release them then rinse and repeat because their lives are still a mess.
I can only speak for myself but I would prefer my taxes being spent treating these people with a view to them becoming contributing members of society again. Heck, that initial 65 grand imprisoning someone would easily pay for 3 months residential rehab, aftercare support, and set up in a nice room in a shared house to try rebuild their lives...and with decent change left over.
If prison offered proper detox and rehab that would even be a start, but I think treatment which is cheaper than punishment is the obvious no brainer to solve these tragic societal issues.
All thoughts welcome, even if you think I'm a liberal do-gooder who knows nothing, it's always interesting to hear opposing views.