| Fentanyl crisis: Drug overdoses claim unprecedented 914 lives in B.C. in 2016 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/overdose-death-statistics-2016-1.3941224 |
execution of drug dealers - swift, harsh and public
Public shaming of drug addicts - Do you think its a deterant to drug use?
- Thread starter Angel4Truth
- Start date
execution of drug dealers - swift, harsh and public
Because it's the most effective policy at actually mitigating the harm.
Drug use is self-destructive, not in itself an attack on another. Moving it off the street and into a controlled environment, you can reduce the impact both on the addict, and on the people they might be in a position to hurt.
What do you propose?
I propose that we make drunkenness (not drinking itself, but getting drunk) and getting high illegal.
kgov.com/pot
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Why? What do you think this is going to accomplish?
maybe save some of those 50,000 lives:
| NEW YORK — More than 50,000 Americans died from drug overdoses last year, the most ever. The disastrous tally has been pushed to new heights by soaring abuse of heroin and prescription painkillers, a class of drugs known as opioids. Heroin deaths rose 23 percent in one year, to 12,989, slightly higher than the number of gun homicides, according to government data released Thursday. Deaths from synthetic opioids, including illicit fentanyl, rose 73 percent to 9,580. And prescription painkillers took the highest toll, but posted the smallest increase. Abuse of drugs like Oxycontin and Vicodin killed 17,536, an increase of 4 percent. https://www.statnews.com/2016/12/09/opoid-overdose-deaths-us/ |
Because of how destructive such actions are.
When you are drunk or high, you lose control of your faculties.
From kgov.com/pot (and this applies to any drug or substance):
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Or, more likely, since drug addicts can't just stop, it will likely drive them further underground, forcing them to use more illicit sources, and increase the death toll.
No doubt. But, the question is, what is the best way to control the damage without impinging needlessly on personal freedom. There's a lot that's swept up in what you described, including fairly benign drinking at home, or responsible drinking in controlled contexts, and self-destructive addiction that most people don't intentionally get themselves into, and that is better mitigated with safe access to treatment.
sure they can, if their supply is stopped
If you recall from above, I said that drinking is fine. Being drunk is not. Getting high is not.
You're only thinking of those who partake of such substances. What about the people around them? In the Bible, immediately after the Flood, Noah got drunk, and guess what happened? One of his sons, Ham, had sexual relations with Noah's wife, Ham's mother. Noah could not protect his wife from such acts because he was drunk.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Have you been drunk?
Ah, so you think that one should always be sober because they have a duty at all times to be ready to protect someone?
No thanks.
I think I posted about this somewhere before but there is a corner in PA that wants to start labeling drug overdose deaths as homicide.
Do you agree with that? If yes, break it down, would it apply to the doctor that started their scripts and if they chose to take more than described or start adding getting it on the street to fill in to make it to the next prescription?
Do you think doctors should heavily monitor those they give opiates to and when and how do the doctors become the killers?
ok, you break it down also, under what conditions?
There are probably a lot of cases where that's appropriate. Especially when dealers are selling adulterated product. This is one of the risks of not having a clean, reliable supply through a legal channel.
You actually believe thats the answer to this scourge? To create a way for more people to partake?
They have the freedom to follow the law or go to jail.
You control the damage by putting them in jail or a psych ward, so they cant hurt themselves and others.
nothing wrong with starting scrips
doctors are responsible for monitoring patient's medication usage
outside the doctor's control
yep
when they fail to uphold their responsibilities