Guest guest Posted May 19, 2000 Report Share Posted May 19, 2000 Hello Judith I apologize for being insulting, and completely withdraw the accusation of ignorance. I'm sorry, I was just a bit tired and pissed with Mikena when I wrote that. I realize Im not going to win much sympathy saying things like that. It's just I'm fed up with all those ppl out there who think they can practise medicient without a licence and tell psychologically ill ppl not to take meds. God alone knows how many deaths it causes - and this of course, is one of the worst offences of XA. It is just to me so absurd comparing using a prescribed drug as prescribed with scoring street drugs that I throw my hands up at the prospect of having to explain why. I also must say that I find the comparison insulting itself - I am most certainly NOT imo comparable to somebody scoring crack and smack in dark alleys. I am deeply insulted by this comparison, and hence I am often insulting in my responses. However, I do again wish to apologize for having been so. Pete -- In 12-step-freeegroups, Judith Stillwater <j_stillwater@e...> wrote: > Oh come one, my name is right there. It's an INSULT Pete. When have I > insulted you? and I'm NOT ignorant for disagreeing with you. MDs and PhDs > and all the other alphabet soup people disagree with each other, and not > because they are ignorant, but because there are a lot of different ways to > interpret data. > > If you think for one brief second that you are not expressing your own > biases, rather than some objective reality, then think again. It DOES lower > your credibility. > > Judith > > On Sat, 20 May 2000 01:21:05 -0000, 12-step-freeegroups wrote: > > > I dont think I called you ignorant Judith - it was in response to > > Mike's post - but if you REALLY think there is no difference between > > using street shit with a dealer's ass for a vending machine and > > taking > > a prescribed drug as prescribed, then imo you are ignorant. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said it Judith! A drug is a drug. > > > > > > > > > > > > > So do you guys never smoke, drink coffee, or do chocolate? Never > > take > > > > aspirin? > > > > > > > > Ignorance is ignorance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite > > > Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________ > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite > Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2000 Report Share Posted May 19, 2000 -----Original Message----- >On Fri, 19 May 2000 15:29:57 -0400, 12-step-freeegroups wrote: > >> Re vilification of illegal drug users, isn't it just wrong to break laws, >> even when the laws are bad ones? (Though I would make exceptions, like >the >> breaking of REALLY REALLY bad laws in the spirit of deliberate civil >> disobedience, when the purpose of the law-breaking is a public political >> statement.) Among other things, illegal drug users are providing funds to >> groups of people who sell illegal drugs, and a lot of these people are >> genuine villains -- the type who shoot customers, other dealers, and >> sometimes innocent bystanders just for kicks. > >I think drugs, sex and gambling are a huge part of the US economy. People >participate in this economy in legitimate, formalized ways and illegitimate, >informal ways. (Just as people participate in the construction economy >informally, eg, working for cash under the table.) > >I disagree with the idea that people who use illegal drugs are worse than >people who don't. And I don't have good evidence for that belief. It's part >of a general, larger belief that poor people, who have fewer resources >overall, are more likely to find themselves in the " informal " economy just >to make ends meet. Not because they're evil, just because they are willing >to do anything to feed their kids. And they do drugs more, because it sucks >being poor. > A while back I was on a grand jury for 3 months. We had a heck of a lot of felony drug cases presented to us. I distinctly did not get the impression that most of the 'perps' were desperate poor people trying to feed their children. Most of the street peddlers were single men under age 22. Many were members of gangs. Now I recognize that if they were really just doing it to buy food for their wives, children, mothers, or whoever, that our witnesses, generally cops, would not have bothered to tell us, even if they knew, but the overall impression of the lifestyle that I got was that these guys just liked to hang out and make easy money and be part of the 'cool' crowd. Some of the older people arrested for the various distribution offenses were not exactly well off; most of them had drug records going back years. Others were reported driving around in late-model Mercedes automobiles and the like. Sometimes evidence had been obtained by searching an apartment. In these cases what was described was not a household with children, but 2 or 3 young men 'sort of' living in the same place, one of whom could sometimes be singled out as the legal renter, or a childless unmarried couple. When an apartment was searched guns and ammunition were almost always found along with the drugs. A goodly number of our assault cases were also about drugs -- dealers shooting one another, shooting clients just to get the money without letting go of the drugs, and so on. A couple of our violent assaults were something like poor person A going after person B because B was selling drugs to someone important to A. When I say that somebody who uses illegal drugs is doing something wrong, one type of person I have in mind is the middleclass suburbanite who gets into his Acura and cruises downtown to one of the local projects or the youth center to buy some crack from a 17-year-old. Really now, what do you think of somebody who does that, when you consider what his money is supporting? I do agree with you that one of the root causes of all this crap going on is the illegality of the drugs, and that if everything was just flat-out legalized society would be better off (though some kind of measured, deliberate decriminalization and control would be better still.) And yes, the whole legal process is sleazy as hell. Dealers are almost always arrested through some kind of entrapment. The witnesses are almost always cops, except (rarely) when they are co-conspirator informants who made a deal with the DA. [Note: other kinds of felonies tend to produce civilian witnesses because there are actual victims.] And any reasonably alert person is going to get the impression after hearing the first half-dozen or so presentations that the police are probably fabricating their pretext for a search on the street, as often as not. But the fact that the laws are bad doesn't make it ok to break them. Btw, I'd like to suggest that there is a difference between asserting that 'people who use illegal drugs are worse than people who don't' and saying that *other things being equal* it is better not to use illegal drugs. --wally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 Really interesting Wally. I also liked Mike's discussion of the harm reduction perspective, and the ways that different drugs are viewed through that lens. And I would agree with your final statement that, all things being equal, it's better to not do drugs at all. this is my 3rd reply to your post, but they all get so lengthy and convoluted that I end up trashing them. That's why I need a web page, so that I can consolidate the ideas I've been writing about here and distill them into something I can call my own world view. Judith Wally wrote: > A while back I was on a grand jury for 3 months. We had a heck of a lot of > felony drug cases presented to us. I distinctly did not get the impression > that most of the 'perps' were desperate poor people trying to feed their > children. Most of the street peddlers were single men under age 22. Many > were members of gangs. Now I recognize that if they were really just doing > it to buy food for their wives, children, mothers, or whoever, that our > witnesses, generally cops, would not have bothered to tell us, even if they > knew, but the overall impression of the lifestyle that I got was that these > guys just liked to hang out and make easy money and be part of the 'cool' > crowd. > > Some of the older people arrested for the various distribution offenses were > not exactly well off; most of them had drug records going back years. Others > were reported driving around in late-model Mercedes automobiles and the > like. Sometimes evidence had been obtained by searching an apartment. In > these cases what was described was not a household with children, but 2 or 3 > young men 'sort of' living in the same place, one of whom could sometimes be > singled out as the legal renter, or a childless unmarried couple. When an > apartment was searched guns and ammunition were almost always found along > with the drugs. > > A goodly number of our assault cases were also about drugs -- dealers > shooting one another, shooting clients just to get the money without letting > go of the drugs, and so on. A couple of our violent assaults were something > like poor person A going after person B because B was selling drugs to > someone important to A. > When I say that somebody who uses illegal drugs is doing something wrong, > one type of person I have in mind is the middleclass suburbanite who gets > into his Acura and cruises downtown to one of the local projects or the > youth center to buy some crack from a 17-year-old. Really now, what do you > think of somebody who does that, when you consider what his money is > supporting? > > I do agree with you that one of the root causes of all this crap going on is > the illegality of the drugs, and that if everything was just flat-out > legalized society would be better off (though some kind of measured, > deliberate decriminalization and control would be better still.) And yes, > the whole legal process is sleazy as hell. Dealers are almost always > arrested through some kind of entrapment. The witnesses are almost always > cops, except (rarely) when they are co-conspirator informants who made a > deal with the DA. [Note: other kinds of felonies tend to produce civilian > witnesses because there are actual victims.] And any reasonably alert person > is going to get the impression after hearing the first half-dozen or so > presentations that the police are probably fabricating their pretext for a > search on the street, as often as not. But the fact that the laws are bad > doesn't make it ok to break them. > > Btw, I'd like to suggest that there is a difference between asserting that > 'people who use illegal drugs are worse than people who don't' and saying > that *other things being equal* it is better not to use illegal drugs. > > --wally > _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 Joe: I'm glad you didn't stay out of the discussion. Your post is a good discussion of why we have different opinions here. The rancor between Pete and I is resolved. I think he understands that I sometimes just take things a little too personally, and I understand why he reacted the way he did to our discussion of the difference between legal and illegal drugs. So we know each other a little better now. I think it's *because* Pete is so open with his opinions that I feel safe in challenging him. Also, I know that, overall, I like and respect Pete, so any time that I challenge him, it is very specific. Judith On Sat, 20 May 2000 13:43:33 -0700, 12-step-freeegroups wrote: > I should probably stay out of this but I think I can see where part of the > problem may be. You are seeing the comparison of street drugs to > prescription drugs as if it is by implication tying you in to street > addicts and dealers and so on. This is a personal perspective because you > depend to some extent on prescription drugs yourself but do not have a > history, as far as I know, of taking such drugs in an excessive addictive > manner, nor a history of substance abuse of the street variety. So it is > understandable that you would see the comparison that way- in terms of your > own use of drugs. But Mike and others here including myself have experience > of serious drug dependence that included both street drugs and " legal " > drugs and found a great many similarities. And I think it is from that > perspective that Mike made that comment. The difference that I am aware of > is that prescribed drugs are normally uncontaminated with the various > poisonous things that street drugs may contain like rat poison and kitchen > cleaner, and of course anthrax bacteria!- and are generally of a known > strength and composition. Street drugs vary enormously in these respects > and can be lethal simply because there was something mixed up in it that > shouldn't have been there. But apart from these differences, the action of > the two groups and the effects of taking them addictively have a lot in > common, both groups presenting serious problems for the addicted person. > And of the two, it is the prescribed drugs that have the greater withdrawal > problems, notably the barbiturates and benzos, that require medical > attention in many cases. When I was having a hospital detox, I noticed that > the opiate detox was straightforward but for the people who also had a > tanks dependence they had to be really careful and supervise them closely. > I'm a good candidate for the overlap- I spent the last half of my 18 year > addiction career as an opiate dependent person and it was virtually all on > legally obtainable codeine. I started on heroin and morphine but soon > decided that the lifestyle was not going to suit me- I had no desire to > have an expensive habit and have to break into buildings or sell myself or > whatever else in order to afford that so I adopted the codeine alternative. > Admittedly the effects were not quite as good as the heroin and morphine > but I could make up for that with large doses and easy affordability and > availability and no need to inject, steal, get arrested, etc. And I had > other prescribed drugs and over-the-counter medicines to supplement with > also. Plus of course I could use street drugs any time I wanted to as well, > but was not dependent on this. So in effect there was a difference in > lifestyle due to my careful planning of the route of my addiction, but in > practise, the actual effects and the dependence, I think I got very close > to the edge of the world anyway. I nearly died a few times, and people > close to me, doing the same things as me, did die. I still shared dirty > needles at some point and got hepatitis C. Yet after 18 years of dedicated > and chaotic drug abuse I had no drug convictions. That is my perspective on > it- an ex- " garbage head " . Or as they professionals at the hospital called > me, " poly-drug abuser " . I was actually offended when I first read that - I > realised they thought I would take anything! Then I realised they were right... > > Joe B. > _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 When I read Joe and Pete's post's, I realized that Dennis had had that problem also--he would take anything he could get. He insisted that he HAD to get something prescribed for him. During the time I was with him he took lithium, depakote, and other prescribed drugs. He bought valium on the street. He took all my codeine which was for my toothaches. He even had me go to the doctor and tell them I had a toothache when I didn't get some more because that had worked the first time. My father has been dead for 23 years and Dennis took all his prescriptions for Milltown even though they were over 30 years old. Some phenobarbital that was over 40 years old that was in my mother's things disappeared, and now I guess I know where they went also. Dennis wanted to go back to New York because he said he had a psychiatrist there who would give him anything he " needed " . When he died he had someone else's prescription for dilantin in his pocket. He probably was under the influence of some other drug all the time he was not drinking, but I am just beginning to look back and see what was really happening. Charlene - Re: Solid alcohol At 02:10 20/05/00 +0000, you wrote: >Hello Judith > >I apologize for being insulting, and completely withdraw the >accusation of ignorance. > >I'm sorry, I was just a bit tired and pissed with Mikena when I wrote >that. I realize Im not going to win much sympathy saying things like >that. It's just I'm fed up with all those ppl out there who think >they can practise medicient without a licence and tell >psychologically >ill ppl not to take meds. God alone knows how many deaths it causes - >and this of course, is one of the worst offences of XA. > >It is just to me so absurd comparing using a prescribed drug as >prescribed with scoring street drugs that I throw my hands up at the >prospect of having to explain why. I also must say that I find the >comparison insulting itself - I am most certainly NOT imo comparable >to somebody scoring crack and smack in dark alleys. I am deeply >insulted by this comparison, and hence I am often insulting in my >responses. However, I do again wish to apologize for having been so. > >Pete I should probably stay out of this but I think I can see where part of the problem may be. You are seeing the comparison of street drugs to prescription drugs as if it is by implication tying you in to street addicts and dealers and so on. This is a personal perspective because you depend to some extent on prescription drugs yourself but do not have a history, as far as I know, of taking such drugs in an excessive addictive manner, nor a history of substance abuse of the street variety. So it is understandable that you would see the comparison that way- in terms of your own use of drugs. But Mike and others here including myself have experience of serious drug dependence that included both street drugs and " legal " drugs and found a great many similarities. And I think it is from that perspective that Mike made that comment. The difference that I am aware of is that prescribed drugs are normally uncontaminated with the various poisonous things that street drugs may contain like rat poison and kitchen cleaner, and of course anthrax bacteria!- and are generally of a known strength and composition. Street drugs vary enormously in these respects and can be lethal simply because there was something mixed up in it that shouldn't have been there. But apart from these differences, the action of the two groups and the effects of taking them addictively have a lot in common, both groups presenting serious problems for the addicted person. And of the two, it is the prescribed drugs that have the greater withdrawal problems, notably the barbiturates and benzos, that require medical attention in many cases. When I was having a hospital detox, I noticed that the opiate detox was straightforward but for the people who also had a tanks dependence they had to be really careful and supervise them closely. I'm a good candidate for the overlap- I spent the last half of my 18 year addiction career as an opiate dependent person and it was virtually all on legally obtainable codeine. I started on heroin and morphine but soon decided that the lifestyle was not going to suit me- I had no desire to have an expensive habit and have to break into buildings or sell myself or whatever else in order to afford that so I adopted the codeine alternative. Admittedly the effects were not quite as good as the heroin and morphine but I could make up for that with large doses and easy affordability and availability and no need to inject, steal, get arrested, etc. And I had other prescribed drugs and over-the-counter medicines to supplement with also. Plus of course I could use street drugs any time I wanted to as well, but was not dependent on this. So in effect there was a difference in lifestyle due to my careful planning of the route of my addiction, but in practise, the actual effects and the dependence, I think I got very close to the edge of the world anyway. I nearly died a few times, and people close to me, doing the same things as me, did die. I still shared dirty needles at some point and got hepatitis C. Yet after 18 years of dedicated and chaotic drug abuse I had no drug convictions. That is my perspective on it- an ex- " garbage head " . Or as they professionals at the hospital called me, " poly-drug abuser " . I was actually offended when I first read that - I realised they thought I would take anything! Then I realised they were right... Joe B. -------------------------------- ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 Joe: Our drug histories our somewhat similar. One thing I'd like to point out is even when I was buying drugs on the street, they were often Pharmaceutical drugs. In other words they were available by prescription, contained no contaminants, and relieved me of the anxiety that I would be closing in on death from what we used to call " hot shots " . I really don't see much of a distinction between legal and non legal drugs. I guess this is because this country had so many unfair discriminatory laws on the books, that were only changed through civil disobedience. So lawbreakng to protest unfair laws is as American as Apple Pie and lin. Man, we are our own nation because of a powerful little document written by Jefferson in 1776. So as far as law goes, " when in the course of human events... " If our forefathers did not know that the only way freedom can sometimes be obtained is to take the offensive, overbearing law and shove it back in the face of the lawmakers. If this were not the case, we might still be bowing to an aristocracy, celebrating Guy Fawkes day instead of Independence day. In one of our yearly " Legalize Marijuana " rallies, which I have not been a part of in a number of years, the group in Boston, some dressed as patriots and some as British soldiers, dumped a number of crates into Boston Harbor, that was supposed to represent a few hundred pounds of Marijuana. Now, it wasn't real Marijuana. No self respecting pot head would waste that much grass. But although, I wasn't there, I saw the video and it was fun to watch. But drug laws were not the only laws that have to be challenged to be changed. When Parks, a black seamstress, refused to give her seat to a white man as required by law, she was a lawbreaking hero in the tradition of Henry and Hale! That courageous act of civil disobedience brough a City to its knees and it eventually caved in and changed the law. Another way drug laws are being subtly challenged is by " Jury Nullification. " In certain parts of the country juries are refusing to convict people convicted of drug crimes, especially if it is a simple possession case. So besides being legal, some prescription drugs are much more deadly than " street drugs. " I have said I was a garbage head. Over the course of 20+ years from 1966-1980, and then intermittently from 1991-2000, I have been physiologically addicted to Barbiturates, Tranquilizers, Codeine, Percodan, Vicodin, Heroin, Methadone, Alcohol, Nicotine and Quaaldes. I have been psychologically addicted to Amphetamines and Ritalin. Of all the withdrawals, many of them in hospitals, some on my own, the addiction that was the most brutal to kick that caused the most terror I have ever felt while in withdrawal, the only one which I almost didn't have the courage to stick out -- was the addiction to the Tranquilizer, Xanax. I didn't even need to go to shady doctors for these. I first used them after my first relapse, the rap on them was that they cause more euphoria than other Benzos. They were also in that year the 3rd most prescribed drug in the United States. The number 1 prescribed tranquilizer. The pharmaceutical companies managed to convince the doctors and the general public that they were much less addicting than Valium, which had gotten a bad reputation. It has taken until the last couple of years that physicians realize the addictiveness of the drug and many aware doctors refuse to prescribe it anymore. But the withdrawal was much worse than kicking Heroin. Basically, kicking Heroin is a piece of cake. If you can make it through 72 hours without using, you begin to feel better. After 1 week most people can function and go back to work. With Xanax, I stayed in the hospital 3 weeks and was still hallucinating and having night terrors my last few days. Sorry to say, when I left, I went back on and detoxed myself. It took another month to stop them completely and then about 3 months for most of the inner shakes to subside. Originally Mikena@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 At 02:10 20/05/00 +0000, you wrote: >Hello Judith > >I apologize for being insulting, and completely withdraw the >accusation of ignorance. > >I'm sorry, I was just a bit tired and pissed with Mikena when I wrote >that. I realize Im not going to win much sympathy saying things like >that. It's just I'm fed up with all those ppl out there who think >they can practise medicient without a licence and tell >psychologically >ill ppl not to take meds. God alone knows how many deaths it causes - >and this of course, is one of the worst offences of XA. > >It is just to me so absurd comparing using a prescribed drug as >prescribed with scoring street drugs that I throw my hands up at the >prospect of having to explain why. I also must say that I find the >comparison insulting itself - I am most certainly NOT imo comparable >to somebody scoring crack and smack in dark alleys. I am deeply >insulted by this comparison, and hence I am often insulting in my >responses. However, I do again wish to apologize for having been so. > >Pete I should probably stay out of this but I think I can see where part of the problem may be. You are seeing the comparison of street drugs to prescription drugs as if it is by implication tying you in to street addicts and dealers and so on. This is a personal perspective because you depend to some extent on prescription drugs yourself but do not have a history, as far as I know, of taking such drugs in an excessive addictive manner, nor a history of substance abuse of the street variety. So it is understandable that you would see the comparison that way- in terms of your own use of drugs. But Mike and others here including myself have experience of serious drug dependence that included both street drugs and " legal " drugs and found a great many similarities. And I think it is from that perspective that Mike made that comment. The difference that I am aware of is that prescribed drugs are normally uncontaminated with the various poisonous things that street drugs may contain like rat poison and kitchen cleaner, and of course anthrax bacteria!- and are generally of a known strength and composition. Street drugs vary enormously in these respects and can be lethal simply because there was something mixed up in it that shouldn't have been there. But apart from these differences, the action of the two groups and the effects of taking them addictively have a lot in common, both groups presenting serious problems for the addicted person. And of the two, it is the prescribed drugs that have the greater withdrawal problems, notably the barbiturates and benzos, that require medical attention in many cases. When I was having a hospital detox, I noticed that the opiate detox was straightforward but for the people who also had a tanks dependence they had to be really careful and supervise them closely. I'm a good candidate for the overlap- I spent the last half of my 18 year addiction career as an opiate dependent person and it was virtually all on legally obtainable codeine. I started on heroin and morphine but soon decided that the lifestyle was not going to suit me- I had no desire to have an expensive habit and have to break into buildings or sell myself or whatever else in order to afford that so I adopted the codeine alternative. Admittedly the effects were not quite as good as the heroin and morphine but I could make up for that with large doses and easy affordability and availability and no need to inject, steal, get arrested, etc. And I had other prescribed drugs and over-the-counter medicines to supplement with also. Plus of course I could use street drugs any time I wanted to as well, but was not dependent on this. So in effect there was a difference in lifestyle due to my careful planning of the route of my addiction, but in practise, the actual effects and the dependence, I think I got very close to the edge of the world anyway. I nearly died a few times, and people close to me, doing the same things as me, did die. I still shared dirty needles at some point and got hepatitis C. Yet after 18 years of dedicated and chaotic drug abuse I had no drug convictions. That is my perspective on it- an ex- " garbage head " . Or as they professionals at the hospital called me, " poly-drug abuser " . I was actually offended when I first read that - I realised they thought I would take anything! Then I realised they were right... Joe B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 Wally, I sat on grand jury also a couple years ago and we also were subjected to many drug dealing cases. I may have written this before but we asked one young fellow if he used the drugs he sold and he said " Hell no, I wouldn't have any money left. I keep my money and sell it to the white guys who come down to buy it. " Words to that effect. We learned that the dealers hold an average of $1,000.00 in cash in carrying around money, buy new SVU's every year, and wear designer clothes. They are in and out of jail yearly, plea their sentences down to indict other dealers. They supply to their girlfriends (who get addicted and pregnant and end up on welfare), white college kids, and other upwardly mobile professionals. They have no desire to get out of that racket because jail time is short on the average and the money's good, real good. I'm not sure even if legalizing all the stuff would help. These young entrepreneurs would find a way to sell it cheaper than the government and with alot less hoops to jump through. Re: Solid alcohol > > -----Original Message----- > > > > >On Fri, 19 May 2000 15:29:57 -0400, 12-step-freeegroups wrote: > > > >> Re vilification of illegal drug users, isn't it just wrong to break > laws, > >> even when the laws are bad ones? (Though I would make exceptions, like > >the > >> breaking of REALLY REALLY bad laws in the spirit of deliberate civil > >> disobedience, when the purpose of the law-breaking is a public political > >> statement.) Among other things, illegal drug users are providing funds > to > >> groups of people who sell illegal drugs, and a lot of these people are > >> genuine villains -- the type who shoot customers, other dealers, and > >> sometimes innocent bystanders just for kicks. > > > >I think drugs, sex and gambling are a huge part of the US economy. People > >participate in this economy in legitimate, formalized ways and > illegitimate, > >informal ways. (Just as people participate in the construction economy > >informally, eg, working for cash under the table.) > > > >I disagree with the idea that people who use illegal drugs are worse than > >people who don't. And I don't have good evidence for that belief. It's part > >of a general, larger belief that poor people, who have fewer resources > >overall, are more likely to find themselves in the " informal " economy just > >to make ends meet. Not because they're evil, just because they are willing > >to do anything to feed their kids. And they do drugs more, because it sucks > >being poor. > > > > > A while back I was on a grand jury for 3 months. We had a heck of a lot of > felony drug cases presented to us. I distinctly did not get the impression > that most of the 'perps' were desperate poor people trying to feed their > children. Most of the street peddlers were single men under age 22. Many > were members of gangs. Now I recognize that if they were really just doing > it to buy food for their wives, children, mothers, or whoever, that our > witnesses, generally cops, would not have bothered to tell us, even if they > knew, but the overall impression of the lifestyle that I got was that these > guys just liked to hang out and make easy money and be part of the 'cool' > crowd. > > Some of the older people arrested for the various distribution offenses were > not exactly well off; most of them had drug records going back years. Others > were reported driving around in late-model Mercedes automobiles and the > like. Sometimes evidence had been obtained by searching an apartment. In > these cases what was described was not a household with children, but 2 or 3 > young men 'sort of' living in the same place, one of whom could sometimes be > singled out as the legal renter, or a childless unmarried couple. When an > apartment was searched guns and ammunition were almost always found along > with the drugs. > > A goodly number of our assault cases were also about drugs -- dealers > shooting one another, shooting clients just to get the money without letting > go of the drugs, and so on. A couple of our violent assaults were something > like poor person A going after person B because B was selling drugs to > someone important to A. > > When I say that somebody who uses illegal drugs is doing something wrong, > one type of person I have in mind is the middleclass suburbanite who gets > into his Acura and cruises downtown to one of the local projects or the > youth center to buy some crack from a 17-year-old. Really now, what do you > think of somebody who does that, when you consider what his money is > supporting? > > I do agree with you that one of the root causes of all this crap going on is > the illegality of the drugs, and that if everything was just flat-out > legalized society would be better off (though some kind of measured, > deliberate decriminalization and control would be better still.) And yes, > the whole legal process is sleazy as hell. Dealers are almost always > arrested through some kind of entrapment. The witnesses are almost always > cops, except (rarely) when they are co-conspirator informants who made a > deal with the DA. [Note: other kinds of felonies tend to produce civilian > witnesses because there are actual victims.] And any reasonably alert person > is going to get the impression after hearing the first half-dozen or so > presentations that the police are probably fabricating their pretext for a > search on the street, as often as not. But the fact that the laws are bad > doesn't make it ok to break them. > > Btw, I'd like to suggest that there is a difference between asserting that > 'people who use illegal drugs are worse than people who don't' and saying > that *other things being equal* it is better not to use illegal drugs. > > --wally > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations. > Remember the good 'ol days > http://click./1/4053/2/_/4324/_/958801890/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 What's wrong with this picture? Many cancer patients have found relief from the nausea and other side effects of chemo and radiation therapy but cannot get it legally. But doctors continue to pour morphine into them, a far more addictive drug. jan Re: Solid alcohol > In one of our yearly " Legalize Marijuana " rallies, which I have not been > a part of in a number of years, the group in Boston, some dressed as > patriots and some as British soldiers, dumped a number of crates into > Boston Harbor, that was supposed to represent a few hundred pounds of > Marijuana. Now, it wasn't real Marijuana. No self respecting pot head > would waste that much grass. But although, I wasn't there, I saw the > video and it was fun to watch. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2000 Report Share Posted May 20, 2000 I forgot to stick in marijuana that cancer patients find relief in. Re: Solid alcohol > > > > In one of our yearly " Legalize Marijuana " rallies, which I have not been > > a part of in a number of years, the group in Boston, some dressed as > > patriots and some as British soldiers, dumped a number of crates into > > Boston Harbor, that was supposed to represent a few hundred pounds of > > Marijuana. Now, it wasn't real Marijuana. No self respecting pot head > > would waste that much grass. But although, I wasn't there, I saw the > > video and it was fun to watch. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 72% off on Name brand Watches! > Come and buy today and get free shipping! > http://click./1/4011/2/_/4324/_/958872161/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2000 Report Share Posted May 21, 2000 I am not *sure* that legalization would help, but I think there are good reasons to believe that it probably would. (1) The national experience with alcohol Prohibition. Some of the big-time bootleggers transfered their expertise into other areas, of course, but violent crime associated with the bootlegging of alcohol just about vanished immediately with the end of prohibition. With current tax rates on alcohol and cigarettes a great deal of money could potentially still be made by undercutting price floors set by government tax policy, but it isn't happening much. Users generally prefer to pay more rather than incur the risks of illegal dealings. (2) Methadone maintenance is well known to be a good way to get motivated heroin addicts out of trouble quickly. In other countries programs for providing legal heroin to addicts have seemed to work pretty well, except for the fact that such programs tend to get shut down as a result of pressure from USA fanatics. [such programs are discussed in the book " Drug Crazy " by Mike Gray] (3) European countries with more enlightened attitudes than ours seem to have fewer problems (Netherlands, Denmark...) (4) Part of the attractiveness of illegal drugs to young people is the glamour that results from the mere fact that they are forbidden. (5) Illegality makes it hard to find role models for responsible drug use. (6) Making drugs illegal carries the implication that they are inherently dangerous, which increases the likelihood that a user will expect them to be powerful, and as a result 'lose control.' (7) Making drugs a lot cheaper and easier to get would obviously reduce crimes committed to get money for drugs. One could go on and on. The benefits of legalization seem to me to be so numerous and obvious that I consider current policies to be a kind of social madness, fully comparable to the witch-hunting craze of the late Middle Ages. -- wally Re: Solid alcohol > >Wally, I sat on grand jury also a couple years ago and we also were >subjected to many drug dealing cases. I may have written this before but we >asked one young fellow if he used the drugs he sold and he said " Hell no, I >wouldn't have any money left. I keep my money and sell it to the white guys >who come down to buy it. " Words to that effect. We learned that the >dealers hold an average of $1,000.00 in cash in carrying around money, buy >new SVU's every year, and wear designer clothes. They are in and out of >jail yearly, plea their sentences down to indict other dealers. They >supply to their girlfriends (who get addicted and pregnant and end up on >welfare), white college kids, and other upwardly mobile professionals. They >have no desire to get out of that racket because jail time is short on the >average and the money's good, real good. I'm not sure even if legalizing >all the stuff would help. These young entrepreneurs would find a way to >sell it cheaper than the government and with alot less hoops to jump >through. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2000 Report Share Posted May 21, 2000 On Sun, 21 May 2000 02:04:45 -0400, 12-step-freeegroups wrote: > One could go on and on. The benefits of legalization seem to me to be so > numerous and obvious that I consider current policies to be a kind of social > madness, fully comparable to the witch-hunting craze of the late Middle > Ages. That's a good comparison. Judith _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2000 Report Share Posted May 21, 2000 > > > > > I should probably stay out of this but I think I can see where part > of the > problem may be. You are seeing the comparison of street > drugs > to > prescription drugs as if it is by implication tying you in to > street > addicts and dealers and so on. This is a personal > perspective > because you > depend to some extent on prescription drugs yourself > but > do not have a > history, as far as I know, of taking such drugs in an > excessive addictive > manner, nor a history of substance abuse of the > street variety. So it is > understandable that you would see the > comparison that way- in terms of your > own use of drugs. But Mike > and > others here including myself have experience > of serious drug > dependence that included both street drugs and " legal " > > drugs and found a great many similarities. And I think it is from > that > > perspective that Mike made that comment. The difference that I am > aware of > > is that prescribed drugs are normally uncontaminated with the > various > > poisonous things that street drugs may contain like rat poison and > kitchen > > cleaner, and of course anthrax bacteria!- and are generally of a > known > > strength and composition. Street drugs vary enormously in these > respects > > and can be lethal simply because there was something mixed up in it > that > > shouldn't have been there. But apart from these differences, the > action of > > the two groups and the effects of taking them addictively have a > lot > in > > common, both groups presenting serious problems for the addicted > person. > > And of the two, it is the prescribed drugs that have the greater > withdrawal > > problems, notably the barbiturates and benzos, that require medical > > attention in many cases. When I was having a hospital detox, I > noticed that > > the opiate detox was straightforward but for the people who also > had > a > > tanks dependence they had to be really careful and supervise them > closely. > > I'm a good candidate for the overlap- I spent the last half of my > 18 > year > > addiction career as an opiate dependent person and it was virtually > all on > > legally obtainable codeine. I started on heroin and morphine but > soon > > decided that the lifestyle was not going to suit me- I had no > desire > to > > have an expensive habit and have to break into buildings or sell > myself or > > whatever else in order to afford that so I adopted the codeine > alternative. > > Admittedly the effects were not quite as good as the heroin and > morphine > > but I could make up for that with large doses and easy > affordability > and > > availability and no need to inject, steal, get arrested, etc. And I > had > > other prescribed drugs and over-the-counter medicines to supplement > with > > also. Plus of course I could use street drugs any time I wanted to > as well, > > but was not dependent on this. So in effect there was a difference > in > > lifestyle due to my careful planning of the route of my addiction, > but in > > practise, the actual effects and the dependence, I think I got very > close > > to the edge of the world anyway. I nearly died a few times, and > people > > close to me, doing the same things as me, did die. I still shared > dirty > > needles at some point and got hepatitis C. Yet after 18 years of > dedicated > > and chaotic drug abuse I had no drug convictions. That is my > perspective on > > it- an ex- " garbage head " . Or as they professionals at the hospital > called > > me, " poly-drug abuser " . I was actually offended when I first read > that - I > > realised they thought I would take anything! Then I realised they > were right... > > > > Joe B. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Up to 60% OFF food! > Buy Now and Shipping is Free. > http://click./1/4016/2/_/4324/_/958954041/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2000 Report Share Posted May 22, 2000 Now Pete, your nastiness is coing out. more and more. But noone willl say anything to you and do you know why? Anyway I'll be sending copies of your posts to Ken. What the hell gives you the right for putting me down for smoking cigarretes! I know what your " probem " is and I could make some nasty comments about that one. But I won't. You are lower than I thought you were. You are ruining this list!! You are ruining it for a lot of people with your selfishness. Why don't you think the rules apply to you.? I didn' t think t it was appropriate to put down another person's addiction. You remind me of the asshoes in AA who when they stop smoking, think everyone should. I think from your bullying, and just your lack of humanity in genral, you probably fit in very well in whatever step group you went to. Although, I can't see it being alcohol or drugs. What else is left-gambling-Pete the suave Bond of England. Nah, I don't think so. Anyway, get a life and live me the hell alone! Originally Mikena@... > > > > > I should probably stay out of this but I think I can see where part > of the > problem may be. You are seeing the comparison of street > drugs > to > prescription drugs as if it is by implication tying you in to > street > addicts and dealers and so on. This is a personal > perspective > because you > depend to some extent on prescription drugs yourself > but > do not have a > history, as far as I know, of taking such drugs in an > excessive addictive > manner, nor a history of substance abuse of the > street variety. So it is > understandable that you would see the > comparison that way- in terms of your > own use of drugs. But Mike > and > others here including myself have experience > of serious drug > dependence that included both street drugs and " legal " > > drugs and found a great many similarities. And I think it is from > that > > perspective that Mike made that comment. The difference that I am > aware of > > is that prescribed drugs are normally uncontaminated with the > various > > poisonous things that street drugs may contain like rat poison and > kitchen > > cleaner, and of course anthrax bacteria!- and are generally of a > known > > strength and composition. Street drugs vary enormously in these > respects > > and can be lethal simply because there was something mixed up in it > that > > shouldn't have been there. But apart from these differences, the > action of > > the two groups and the effects of taking them addictively have a > lot > in > > common, both groups presenting serious problems for the addicted > person. > > And of the two, it is the prescribed drugs that have the greater > withdrawal > > problems, notably the barbiturates and benzos, that require medical > > attention in many cases. When I was having a hospital detox, I > noticed that > > the opiate detox was straightforward but for the people who also > had > a > > tanks dependence they had to be really careful and supervise them > closely. > > I'm a good candidate for the overlap- I spent the last half of my > 18 > year > > addiction career as an opiate dependent person and it was virtually > all on > > legally obtainable codeine. I started on heroin and morphine but > soon > > decided that the lifestyle was not going to suit me- I had no > desire > to > > have an expensive habit and have to break into buildings or sell > myself or > > whatever else in order to afford that so I adopted the codeine > alternative. > > Admittedly the effects were not quite as good as the heroin and > morphine > > but I could make up for that with large doses and easy > affordability > and > > availability and no need to inject, steal, get arrested, etc. And I > had > > other prescribed drugs and over-the-counter medicines to supplement > with > > also. Plus of course I could use street drugs any time I wanted to > as well, > > but was not dependent on this. So in effect there was a difference > in > > lifestyle due to my careful planning of the route of my addiction, > but in > > practise, the actual effects and the dependence, I think I got very > close > > to the edge of the world anyway. I nearly died a few times, and > people > > close to me, doing the same things as me, did die. I still shared > dirty > > needles at some point and got hepatitis C. Yet after 18 years of > dedicated > > and chaotic drug abuse I had no drug convictions. That is my > perspective on > > it- an ex- " garbage head " . Or as they professionals at the hospital > called > > me, " poly-drug abuser " . I was actually offended when I first read > that - I > > realised they thought I would take anything! Then I realised they > were right... > > > > Joe B. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Up to 60% OFF food! > Buy Now and Shipping is Free. > http://click./1/4016/2/_/4324/_/958954041/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Missing old school friends? Find them here: http://click./1/4055/2/_/4324/_/958968584/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 23, 2000 Report Share Posted May 23, 2000 > Now Pete, your nastiness is coing out. more and more. But noone will> say anything to you and do you know why? Anyway I'll be sending copies> of your posts to Ken. So you reckon youre the only one with the balls to say what they think? Rather vain Mike - and Ken reads the posts anyway dork. To date, youre the only one that there have been calls to ice - and not just by me. > > What the hell gives you the right for putting me down for smoking > cigarretes! The same thing that allows you to compare using meds as prescribed to scoring street shit. > > I know what your " probem " is and I could make some nasty comments about> that one. But I won't. You are lower than I thought you were. Nice bit of passive aggression there. Ok, what *is* my problem? > > You are ruining this list!! You are ruining it for a lot of people > with your selfishness. Why don't you think the rules apply to you.? Speak for yourself. what rules am I breaking exactly? Youre an 12-step apologist on a 12-step-free list - the only one out of order is you. > > I didn' t think it was appropriate to put down another person's > addiction. Nor to denigrate legitimate use of meds Mike. > > You remind me of the asshoes in AA who when they stop smoking, think > everyone should. Bit like the ones who still smoke and tell ppl to avoid meds eh? > I think from your bullying, and just your lack of humanity in general,> you probably fit in very well in whatever step group you went to. Nice attempt to build up your credibility as non-stepper - a little late tho. I'sd stick to those cutesy pizza posts for ingratian purposes if I were you. > > Although, I can't see it being alcohol or drugs. > > What else is left-gambling-Pete the suave Bond of England. Nah, I> don't think so. So, whose showing addiction prejudice now? and the inverted kind apparently. > > Anyway, get a life and live me the hell alone! Mike, I preferred the macho " you'll never drive me off this list " - you claimed to have a teflon ass - and I made stuff stick. Something to ponder I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.