“The way to help people who have these issues is to give them information. At some point, it’s individual responsibility.”
TomorrowWorld’s decision hints at a broader debate in America: Is it best to urge abstention and take a hard line against drug users? Or is it better to accept drug use as an entrenched practice, treat addicts and teach others to imbibe intoxicants more safely?
In a departure from a policy of zero tolerance towards drugs,
TomorrowWorld concertgoers will somehow be given both messages.
... a nonprofit drug education group will be giving advice, not only on the dangers of drug abuse, but also on how those who choose to take party drugs can use them more safely.
I wish I could say I was optimistic, that this will work.
64 comments:
Ask any heroin, coke, meth, opiate addict; Eventually, and it doesn't take a long time, you are just doing the drug to "feel normal". And w/ the tolerance issue, more of the drug. Methadone is a failure because addicts have learned if you take it w/ a benzo drug[Clonopin for example] it's the same effect as heroin, oxy, etc.
Cannabis should be legal, and all of the wasted fucking money spent enforcing cannabis laws, spent on education and treatment for hard drugs. There will ALWAYS be abuse. However, I don't think we should be teaching the "responsible" use of hard drugs. Keith Richards used heroin for decades. He was like a pharmacist. Always measuring carefully the dosage. He learned that addicts would use more and more. They would not get higher[or lower], just pass out or OD. The vast majority of people can use any drug and not get addicted or OD. That doesn't need to be "taught."
Every Morning I Awake With the Faint Hope That -- As I Drive to Work -- I Will See the Bodies of the Corrupt Hanging From the Lamp Posts Lining the Street, Small Feral Children Joyfully Beating at Them With Sticks. My Hangover Would Dissipate Into Joy That Freedom Was Coming Back.
Vodka, Candy Cigarettes and Rope. Lots of Rope.
That is My Societal Issue.
The Bodies of Corrupt Politicians on Cold Steel Tables, Their Organs Harvested for the Afflicted.
Their Heads Shaved to make Wigs for Cancer Patients, Their Eyebrows Shaved Just Because.
Cannabis should be legal, and all of the wasted fucking money spent enforcing cannabis laws, spent on education and treatment for hard drugs.
Church right there.
Laboratory Monkeys and Rats Released, to Be Replaced By Senators and Representatives and Tax Collectors. Gallons of Suspicious Chemicals Pumped Into Them Endlessly, and Someone There to Make Measurements and Charts and Say "Hmmmmm: the Results Are Inconclusive. More Chemicals."
Bulldozers, Mass Graves, Medicinal Marijuana.
This Nation Needs a Collective Fever Dream.
Especially the tax collectors - the most reviled semi-humans throughout history. Only thing lower than a tax collector is a liberal or a liberal lawyer.
The lessons of Pinnochio's "Pleasure Island" got lost somewhere.
I see an opportunity.
Liberty Should Have a Zero Tolerance Policy.
Pleasure Island is also called Pelosi-land.
Liberate yourself.
The Tongues of the Media Ruthlessly Removed From Their Mouths and Made Into Gloves To Be Worn By Those Digging the Trenches Where the Blood Will Flow.
The Fingers of the Media Smashed to Pulp with Ball Peen Hammers. They Shall Not Speak; They Shall Not Tweet.
It Is Too Late For the Guilty to Repent.We Will Build a Majestic Volcano Fired By Coal Into Which We Will Cast Them, Wailing and Weeping as They Fall.
Good Coffee This Morning.
If you're looking to find a solution to the problem of late adolescent kids drinking, drugging and having sex in all sorts of sordid and over the top ways...
Good luck!
Religion and shame kept us a bit in line when we were kids.
A bit.
Also added a some fuel to the fire.
I saw something recently that interested me. It was a claim along these lines: that most users of illicit drugs don't experience the terrible problems; but the minority who do, experience terrible problems.
With marijuana, I think it's probably true that most pot-users get along fairly well in life. But can this really be true with heroin, cocaine, etc.?
I wish I could say I was optimistic that this will work.
When evaluating a new drug the FDA's standard is 'more effective/less harmful side effects than current treatment(s)'. It's a good standard under which drug legaliztion would be considered a success.
Nothing we can do will make harmful drug use disappear. The best thing we can do is take the billions in profits away from those who cut people's heads off to establish market control and shoot children in our streets.
"Zero Tolerance" is a debilitating addiction that destroys the user's ability to think, reason or make wise choices. The addiction requires intervention, and possibly incarceration if that doesn't work.
I have a zero tolerance approach to zero tolerance.
Politicians Crave the Drug of Power, and They Will Pimp Out Liberty to Get It.
With marijuana, I think it's probably true that most pot-users get along fairly well in life. But can this really be true with heroin, cocaine, etc.?
I think it depends on how casual the use is, as well as whether or not one has the personality/genes of an addict.
Which brings up another issue. What if we could do genetic screening to determine which people are more likely to become addicts? How would that affect policy?
President Carlos Danger Knows What is Best For You.
I have a zero tolerance approach to zero tolerance.
If you're part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
...
Or something.
I first tried pot at 15, and since then I've known hundreds of users of drugs of all kinds. Now in my 50's I still know many of them. The vast majority turned out just fine, a few crashed and burned. Of those I still know about, virtually all use less than they did whjen they were young. I'd say a minority have stopped using anything, about half of the rest still drink, and the other half use drugs very sparingly, usually only pot, and some prescription pills. They seem to handle it just fine as a recreation activity.
Me? I'm tripping my ass off 24/7. I put meth in my coffee every morning and then I talk you all, but I'm still not as messed up as betamax.
What if we could do genetic screening to determine which people are more likely to become Corrupt Politicians?
What if Ted Kennedy Had Been Smothered in His Crib?
Mary Jo Kopechne For President.
Dots WANT to Be Connected. Do Not Say 'No' to Dots.
I've got nothing against the capital letter, but there comes a time...
I used to smoke pot. I came to the realization that it makes you stupid. I have friends that get up in the morning and fire one up, and it's also the last thing they do before retiring for the evening. All of them make absolutely stupid decisions constantly.
Turning the country into the Land of the Lotus-Eaters doesn't sound like a good idea.
And it didn't to Homer, either.
ndspinelli said...
Ask any heroin, coke, meth, opiate addict; Eventually, and it doesn't take a long time, you are just doing the drug to "feel normal"
If they're like drunks, they'll tell you anything they think will work for them.
" All of them make absolutely stupid decisions constantly."
I think that qualifies as "alluding" to TOP, which is prohibited here.
I don't smoke pot anymore either, because it does make me so stupid and uncomfortable now, but it didn't do that back in the day, when I actually was stupid. It does make me horny, but maybe that just another form of stupid.
No, bags, you're not stupid when you get horny. However, man has only a certain amount of blood in his system. Therefore, when you get an erection, which is your penis filling full of blood, you simply have less blood circulating in your brain. Only one of those entities can do the thinking for you.
AllenS, PhD
The other thing that occurs to me is that this is a very different problem in a society where survival is seldom at issue, where work isn't truly necessary to live, and in fact, you can be without work, without income, and get along in life fairly well, considering.
Human society hasn't always been like that; and it isn't, now, in a lot of places. In such circumstances, would a good hard dose of undiluted reality have made a difference?
Let's face it: one of the major things we do in our society is protect large numbers of people from reality. Lots of people--often well connected people--get into terrible situations, only to be bailed out. If you grow up reasonably well off, perhaps mummy and daddy do it for you.
If you are the right sort, Hollywood and the media help. (Today I heard Alec Baldwin do a bit on my NPR-station promoting pledging $. That he is not ostracized, given his bad behavior...another example.)
This protection-from-reality is national policy--because it buys votes. You signed a too-good-to-be-true mortgage? Poor thing, not your fault! They gave you too many documents to read, and unreasonably expected you to read them!
And, mark my words, the next protection-from-reality gambit will be bailing out the student-loan bubble. And so forth and so on.
Now, I'll anticipate the counter: which is, that at some point, we all like being protected from reality, and we all get our share of it. No doubt.
But my point isn't too hard to grasp: it all has consequences, mainly infantilizing us; and, it can't go on forever.
(It occurs to me that I'm presenting a political corollary to a theology of suffering. Save that for another time.)
I'm wondering how much of our drug problem is a product of too much protection from reality? Isn't that important to know, before we add more protection?
Father Fox, like helicopter parents, we now have a helicopter government and with more drones.
And, mark my words, the next protection-from-reality gambit will be bailing out the student-loan bubble. And so forth and so on.
That won't happen now for several reasons.
First, the government is now on the hook for most of the loans, and they cannot afford another hit. Or rather, they won't pay one for people who aren't already worth large fortunes. (Bankers will always get bailed out.)
Second, the government likes having this endless flow of money to the education indoctrination centers. It keeps the right kind of people employed, doing the right kind of work, i.e. making people think that intellectual development MUST mean voting for the likes of Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, etc.
Third, the present regime, both Democratic and Republican, loves serfs, and student loans contribute to the creation of more debt slaves.
They won't "bail out" student debt holders. Instead they will continue to get people to take out more and more loans they can't possibly repay, because it's just too damned good a scam otherwise.
Who knew AllenS was piled higher and deeper?
Father, Going back to the caves, man has sought to escape reality. It is not all bad. Only when it gets out of hand does it become bad. You're preachin' to the choir vis a' vis this post and teaching responsible use of hard drugs. That's insanity. The problem is a horrible misuse of resources. Young people will always experiment. We should not "teach" them how to "responsibly" experiment w/ hard drugs. That is one misuse of limited resources.
Methadras, Helicopter parents were virtually nonexistent 50 years ago. Now they're rampant. And let's be honest, it's mostly moms that are helicopters. An outlet for their control freakishness.
edutcher, I have calmed down, and I apologize. As I read your comment again it is much less anti cannabis as it has been in the past. I thought you were talking about the Greek Homer, not Simpson. When I saw that you were speaking of the latter, I realized @ least you were showing some humor on the topic, which is a step forward. Substance abuse has hurt my family terribly. It has hurt your family terribly. That is a our common bond. I am deleting my comment because it was out of line and an overreaction. Hopefully, we can proceed w/ the civility we have had here.
AllenS, Never think w/ the little head.
Icepick said...
That won't happen now for several reasons.
First, the government is now on the hook for most of the loans, and they cannot afford another hit.
Uh, taxpayers are on the hook, not the government.
Rather, their plan is to selectively bail out their constituency by forgiving student debt for government employees. Obama and the left see government employees as a better class of citizen than the rest of us. Somehow they remain selfless public servants despite their ability to make million off sweetheart deals and political favors. And private sector employees remain selfish bastards despite producing virtually everything Americans need to live.
I'm sure it's completely coincidental government dependents are their electoral base.
More on capital letters --
Capitalization is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack
off a horse or helping your uncle jack off a horse.
Can you tell which head I'm using?
nd, my only point was, if junkies are anything like drunks, they'll say whatever it takes to get you to do what they want.
YMMV, of course.
Marshal, tax payers, aka subjects, are just something the government harvests. You can hear this whenever they speak of a tax cut being the government giving something to people.
Wait, where is this reality of which you speak? Yours is nothing like mine, and people like Ritmo live so far outside of both that they can't find it with a GPS. If you want to tell me that I and Harry Reid share the same reality, then I must advise you to put down the crack pipe.
AllenS: "...when you get an erection, which is your penis filling full of blood,..."
Are you sure about that?, It feels more like tickly concrete.
It occurs to me that I'm presenting a political corollary to a theology of suffering...
Sometimes I mix things up in my head not too dissimilar from that.
For instance, last night, it occurred to me that there might be a silver lining to Cruz so call "stunt".
How contrasting is the image of "wako bird" Cruz on the senate floor, unflappably making sense for 21 hours, to the images of Miley Cirrus twerks, and subsequent pretzel like intellectual contortions the cultural elite has tried to explain it away.
Do people separate these images and explanations to the extent that they are completely unrelated in their minds? considering how both come in thru the same channels?
ed, Absolutely. But, my comment was about those who have seen the light and are in recovery. You can search long and hard to find more blunt and hard truths than @ an AA or NA meeting. And, if you try that horseshit manipulation/lying there, they call you on it. That's why many prefer therapy. You can bullshit a shrink, you can't bullshit another addict.
"I saw something recently that interested me. It was a claim along these lines: that most users of illicit drugs don't experience the terrible problems; but the minority who do, experience terrible problems."
Fr. Fox, this reminded me (along with ST saying that shame and religion kept us in line as kids) of how I decided to understand religious moral rules and the infallibility of scripture when I was younger.
It was basically this... The rule or passage of scripture may not be for *me*, but when I follow it I help strengthen those who need to follow it. Most rules in the bible seem to be about sins against our own bodies (after all, how do they hurt God?) so following them is just smart. It's a good way to avoid problems.
But certainly some things seem out-of-date or as if they don't really apply to me.
So even if I don't see a way that I'm hurt by whatever it is, there's the "causing others to stumble" issue. And am I really so selfish that I refuse to restrain my own desires and urges *knowing* that other people would be injured by following my example? (Think drinking in front of an alcoholic.)
I was pretty young when I reasoned that out. It hurt me not at all to strictly follow the rules. So what was my excuse?
(The same sort of thing could be applied to all of the socially liberal "who needs a dad or husband" encouragements not to be so disciplined or uptight in your own life pushed by privileged people who manage their own lives quite conservatively and thus never reap the consequences of the "personal freedom" they preach.)
Icepick said...
Marshal, tax payers, aka subjects, are just something the government harvests.
That's a good way of thinking about it. It's always amazed me leftists believe it's their right to decide how much of our money we should be allowed to keep. Worse is that of the two people trying to control my money they seem to believe I'm the greedy one. Bizarre.
Are you sure about that?, It feels more like tickly concrete
Well, I'm pretty sure that it's not actually a bone.
Here's the problem with drug legalization that I haven't quite figured out yet.
Our society increasingly discards old social mores and traditions in favor of the more enlightened "now." Because drugs are illegal, there is a societal or community pressure not to use drugs. That keeps many from not partaking (or at least not indulging) But how long would that continue if they were legal and advertised and marketed?
I don't worry about my own family, because we keep many rules that normal society thinks archaic, but what about the "go with the flow" parents? How does the entire community fare? Where do we end up as a society when a stigma is destroyed?
I don't know. I'm just thinking out loud.
Birches said...Where do we end up as a society when a stigma is destroyed? But how long would that continue if they were legal and advertised and marketed?
There's quite a stigma on cigarettes, a legal product, and advertising that product is restricted. As a result use is declining. There's no reason why these mechanisms couldn't be applied to recreational drugs.
I think the social stigma is pretty weak already, but if legalization reduced that stigma, I think it would be mostly among adults. I think there is a good case to be made that among the young, the stigma is part of the attraction. The other thing is that, as with cigarettes, stigma can be generated independent of legality. It is, after all, legal to use the N-word, but we have virtually wiped that out, among whites anyway.
Stigma can be created independent of legality I agree. But the stigma is perpetuated by our pop culture, especially in the instance of the n word. Smoking is also protrayed somewhat negatively by pop culture, but mostly neutral --- the government and middle class values are more responsible for a smoking stigma.
I'm not so sure our current pop culture would present drug use in that same negative light. Think about how pot use is portrayed currently. I swear every sitcom has to do a bit where the adult "accidently" eats a special brownie and hilarity ensues. . . imagine the hilarity that will ensue when dad drops a little acid. Its gold, Jerry!
I do think some drugs will always have some negative social stigma. Crack will always be negative because of its attachment to the Black Innercity just as Meth is for rural white trash.
But heroin, cocaine? I'm not so sure.
Out here in California, where it is legal now, and is advertised openly everywhere, I have not noticed an increase prevalence. I actually sense a little negative vibe growing among the young where pot is starting to be seen as something old codgy boomers do. It's not really as cool as it once was. Also I think the new commercials playing now that make fun of pot smokers as losers is having an effect. Being seen as stupid or unsexy is a powerful message among the young - well among everyone actually.
I haven't read the whole thread... but, Bagoh, you can be so fucking funny sometimes. Thank you!!!
I hope you are right, Bagoh. Now that pot is legal here, more than ever I smell pot around town.
Back a few months while I was parking my bike at the shops, I smelled the skunk weed and noticed a guy slip back into "Native Foods." He was only guy around and he was clearly one of the chefs.
I won't be eating there again.
I don't want idiot pot smokers making my foods.
ndspinelli said...
"Father, Going back to the caves, man has sought to escape reality."
Well, yes, but that's not what I meant. Building a house (or living in a cave) isn't the "protection from reality" I mean.
I mean when people run up debts, and someone magically makes it go away for them.
Or someone makes a wreck of his or her family, and everyone is supposed to pretend it never happened.
Or someone commits a crime, but never pays for it.
You get the idea?
Father, That's what I understood you to be saying. My "going back to the caves" was only meant that people have doing this as long as they have been around. Animals also self medicate. You are preachin' to the choir on the personal responsibility. I came from a family of addicts and enablers, the ugly twins of the dysfunctional world. I was neither and felt like a man w/o a family. I saw faux pride cover up the financial, employment, etc. problems. I was the one who pointed them out, that said they were unacceptable. I took family to rehab. I was the asshole. I know EXACTLY what you were saying. My middle name is "Personal Responsibility." Actually, "Personal" is my middle name and "Responsibility" my confirmation name. Do they still have confirmation names?
In reality, my confirmation name is Anthony. I was confirmed @ St. Anthony's Church in Bristol, Ct. However, @ the time I was a huge Wally Cleaver fan. I wanted my confirmation name to be Wally. My old man always wanted to be a diplomat. He didn't think Wally was appropriate. Wally's real name was Tony Dow. But, of course his given name was Anthony. There you go, Nick, your confirmation name is Anthony. Maybe my old man should have been a con man.
I have known heroin users whose only real problem was getting constipated. They went to work, did their jobs and got high on weekends.
They used Metamucil.
It was cheap in Thailand.
Post a Comment