Senator Pushes For $600 Million Response To Heroin Epidemic

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

I wish I had the same optimism, but man have we got some mountains to climb.
In an ideal world we would share tech to those that need it (for free) to sort out and replace old "income sources" with new ones, both beneficial to the land and its people.
But there are people in high places that would fight to (with other peoples lives) the death to keep their income streams and positions.
Profit over people is our reality unfortunately.

Well that's $600 million flushed down the toilet. You can't help a heroin addict 99% of them can't quit. Everyone I know that has done the drug ended up dead or in prison. I've lost family and friends to it. The drug steals peoples souls and they become a slave to it. The only alternative to locking them up or letting them stay on the street spreading disease is legalization through prescription. Most will not stop until they are dead or locked up. They do not care if they die. To them death is an end to the misery.

My 21 year old cousin is sitting in prison for stealing to support his habit. He still does the drug in prison. We were very close and my grandmother adored him. He broke into her house twice and cleaned her out.

My ex girlfriend got hooked on the stuff and drowned on her own vomit and died.

My step father started doing heroin after my mom divorced him. He died of leukemia which is cancer of the blood. I'm sure years of injecting had something to do with it. He was ony 38.

My other cousin turned to prostitution to support her habit. She was found naked in the street with a bullet in her head. Her killers were never found.

I have friends from high school that are sitting in prison from robbing people to support their habit.

It's been at epidemic proportions for a while here. It's in the suburbs my cousins high school was nicknamed heroin high.

I see this as a good step in the right direction, but it isn't going to fix the problem since we still aren't addressing the elephant in the room here that is the War on Drugs.

So lemme get this straight.

The reason there are drug addicts is because drugs are ILLEGAL.

Following that so called 'logic' the reason there is so much 'gun violence' is because guns are 'llegal'.

What the hell ever.

Waste of 600 million dollars.

Incarcerating people for doing drugs does way more harm than good. I read somewhere recently that over 1/2 of the current prison population in America is due to drug related issues.

I hate to break this, but making drugs illegal just doesn’t work. It seems Prohibition should have taught us that lesson (yes, alcohol is a drug). For all the big drug busts that the DEA has conducted, it hasn’t put a dent in the international drug trade. For those who want to do drugs, they’re gonna do it. PERIOD. Whether it’s legal or not makes little difference. Making a drug illegal simply drives the price up on the street; it doesn’t usually eliminate it. And if it does eliminate it, the users of that drug will simply find an alternative, which may be even worse than the original. I’ll bet if they legalized EVERYTHING tomorrow it wouldn’t put a dent in the percentage of those who do drugs, as opposed to those who don’t. What it may do, however, is drive down drug-related crime, make it less expensive for those who are going to do drugs anyway, and bring in a sizeable amount of tax revenue from legalized sales. It would also drive many of the big drug dealers out of business. It makes absolutely no sense that one of the most dangerous, addictive drugs of all (alcohol) is legal, while the rest is not.

According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) concerning drug-induced deaths, there were “16,651 deaths in the United States in 2010”. This figure “includes illicit or street drugs (e.g., heroin and coc aine), as well as legal prescription and over-the-counter drugs; alcohol is not included”.

Also, According to the CDC, excessive alcohol use “led to approximately 88,000 deaths...each year in the United States from 2006 – 2010...The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2010 were estimated at $249 billion, or $2.05 a drink”.

IMO, the bottom line is we’re fighting a War Against Drugs that cannot be won thru prohibition. We’d save a lot of money and spare a lot of folks from the stigma of having a prison record if we just treated the problem appropriately as a disease, not a crime.

Here's how you fix it.
First, decriminalize drugs. Then let the government sell said drugs... Yes, you heard that right. In order to buy drugs from one of these government stores, you must get a drug test proving you've recently used whichever drug you want to purchase and provide documentation of said drug test at purchase. Make sales outside of these government "stores" highly illegal... For example, if a store is built in a particular town, anyone caught selling (or buying) drugs in said town which could otherwise be bought at the store could be sentenced to life in prison. At the same time, have clinics set up to treat addiction for free. Whenever someone buys drugs from one of these locations, offer them free treatment for their addiction, should they want it. Offer, not force.
This will do several things: First, it will keep many people out of jail, and prevent many lives from being ruined. Second, it will reduce crime, and take major power and influence away from gangs, which often rely on drugs for a large portion of their income. Third, it will reduce the number of addicts, by allowing free addiction treatment to those who want it. Most addicts don't want to be addicts, and many will accept treatment. Treatment will be paid for by sales. Random people will not be allowed to just walk in and start using drugs, because the only people who will be allowed to buy are the ones who prove they already use. No positive drug test = absolutely no purchasing.

I am willing to bet that if such a system were put in place, the drug epidemic would come to a screeching halt within a few years.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus 13
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What happens if the fields are burned and neutralized with a solution that will not allow these crops to grow anymore? And allows new crops to grow instead? Science required

A policy like that usually isn't selective on the crops that are allowed to grow in soil. Science also says that ALL plants need the same nutrients, oxygen, sunlight, and CO2 to survive. How exactly is science going to accomplish such a thing?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I agree. And you are right. There are a several elephants in the room. The source of heroin is a problem. I'm glad we tried to address the opiate pill problem, but all we did was just cut off their supply then pretended like the problem would just evaporate. Now the politicians have to back peddle and act all surprised when this # happens.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
How exactly is science going to accomplish such a thing?

Large global project including:
removal and treatment of large amounts of sediment, then "transplant" of sediment from potential foreign locations to location of interest

drone chemical round clock to change or alter ground

or haarp the ground to churn or turn over large masses of ground sediment like miniature quakes

Aerial treatment of atmosphere to induce better farming weather conditions (chem trailing)

Upgraded-updated irrigation systems that include underground water tapping of streams, rivers or other near by underground water reservoirs to feed

Build large greenhouse like facilities (recycle plastic also) that can further enhance atmosphere controlled conditions & settings indoor to grow crops

BE OPTIMISTIC WITH YOUR SPECIES INTELLIGENCE & TECHNOLOGY And work as one. It can be done utilizing the global technology present...

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

You aren't understanding me. If it were possible to rig soil to prevent certain kinds of plants from being grown in them, don't you think they would have done that already for marijuana and the coca plant? Those two drugs are the top two drugs consumed in the US btw.

You are also making up science in your posts here. HAARP the ground? What does that mean? Chem trailing?

The consideration of terraforming another planet brings the data to mind. For how can any terraform another entire planet alter its atmospheres & grounds - waters or large fluid bodies etc. and the tech not be available to do it locally?

NAMASTE*******

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

Teraforming is still science fiction with our current level of technology, and that's if it's even possible at all.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

You are also making up science in your posts here. HAARP the ground? What does that mean? Chem trailing?

It means believe as you wish...

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

Sorry, science doesn't work on belief. If science can make it possible, there is a procedure that is repeatable, can be performed over and over, and will reproduce the same results every time.

originally posted by: neo96

I see this as a good step in the right direction, but it isn't going to fix the problem since we still aren't addressing the elephant in the room here that is the War on Drugs.

So lemme get this straight.

The reason there are drug addicts is because drugs are ILLEGAL.

Following that so called 'logic' the reason there is so much 'gun violence' is because guns are 'llegal'.

What the hell ever.

Waste of 600 million dollars.

No one ever said the reason that there are drug addicts is because drugs are illegal. The PROBLEM is that drugs being illegal makes the situation worse. That is something that is beyond obvious at this point. Anyone who still believes otherwise is being duped or refuses to update their thinking with new evidence.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Fantastic point. The government tends to take action that has unintended consequence.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I blame it on the short term thinking that pervades DC. Though I'm not sure I can think of a solution to that problem. Short term thinking is just a natural consequence of purposely rigging the government to have a high turnover of politicians. Plus I advocate for and even HIGHER turnover rate by asking for term limits for Congress. So I'm really not sure where to go with this problem...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

well....the cynic in me can't help but wonder if prescription opiates were moved to schedule II to funnel more customers to the Afghani opium products.

Im not a pill popper of any sort, but absolutely am against the movement of hydrocodone to schedule II. Pain relief is one of the gifts of modern medicine....and that was largely negated.

originally posted by: peacenotgreed
A town in Massachusetts stops arresting drug users

From the Gloucester Police Chief's FaceBook page:

- Any addict who walks into the police station with the remainder of their drug equipment (needles, etc) or drugs and asks for help will NOT be charged. Instead we will walk them through the system toward detox and recovery. We will assign them an "angel" who will be their guide through the process. Not in hours or days, but on the spot. Addison Gilbert and Lahey Clinic have committed to helping fast track people that walk into the police department so that they can be assessed quickly and the proper care can be administered quickly.

SOURCE

I grew up next to the city of Gloucester, and opiate abuse is really really bad there. From what I've heard, this program has helped lower the number of overdoses significantly. This police chief is a pioneer for starting a program like this (at least in this country) and police departments should implement similar policies IMMEDIATELY.

It was great to read something so logical. They have made narcan available in the local pharmacy and police will cover the cost of those that can't afford it. Gloucester's plan should immediately be in every city and town.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Krazysh0t

well....the cynic in me can't help but wonder if prescription opiates were moved to schedule II to funnel more customers to the Afghani opium products.

I know what you mean... That's why I said this after posting that link on the opiate market in Afghanistan:

Interpret that information however you want.

Im not a pill popper of any sort, but absolutely am against the movement of hydrocodone to schedule II. Pain relief is one of the gifts of modern medicine....and that was largely negated.

I think with the legalization of marijuana, it will relieve some of the addiction potential of opiates. Marijuana can be used to treat pain just as easily as opiates. Marijuana is also MUCH safer than opiates and not nearly as addictive. Thus we could use that to treat most pains and save the nasty stuff for the really bad cases.