Controversial Harsh idea

User avatar
douche
Posts: 2066
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:41 pm

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by douche » Mon Mar 20, 2023 4:16 pm

Olde Station Sub Shop in Phoenix. What a nightmare. Homeless encampments, human waste, vandalism, opioids, gunshots, it's got everything.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-wor ... an-crisis/

User avatar
Walla Walla Dawg II
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2021 12:29 am
Location: Southeastern Washington

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by Walla Walla Dawg II » Mon Mar 20, 2023 7:35 pm

douche wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2023 4:08 pm
D-train wrote:
Mon Jan 23, 2023 12:28 pm
I don't think my idea was clear enough. Just distribute fentanyl for free among the homeless and a couple years and about 10 thousand OD deaths later, poof, no more homeless. Humane self imposed extermination. What's the downside?
Is mass sterilization a harsh idea?
That would cost the tax payers more than the fentanyl.

User avatar
douche
Posts: 2066
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:41 pm

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by douche » Mon Mar 20, 2023 8:17 pm

Since when does cost figure into anything? Taxpayers are an endless source of income. 'Spend like drunken sailors,' is the accepted mantra in the political realm.

All joking aside, sterilization wouldn't work because the country would eventually run out of worker bees. And taxpayers.

But this fentanyl angle... D-train might be on to something.

1AB609CC00000578-3081191-Memorable_Shearer_is_best_known_for_voicing_Mr_Burns_since_1987_-a-30_1431592672663.jpg
1AB609CC00000578-3081191-Memorable_Shearer_is_best_known_for_voicing_Mr_Burns_since_1987_-a-30_1431592672663.jpg (56.32 KiB) Viewed 331 times

User avatar
Walla Walla Dawg II
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2021 12:29 am
Location: Southeastern Washington

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by Walla Walla Dawg II » Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:23 pm

douche wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2023 8:17 pm
Since when does cost figure into anything? Taxpayers are an endless source of income. 'Spend like drunken sailors,' is the accepted mantra in the political realm.

All joking aside, sterilization wouldn't work because the country would eventually run out of worker bees. And taxpayers.

But this fentanyl angle... D-train might be on to something.


1AB609CC00000578-3081191-Memorable_Shearer_is_best_known_for_voicing_Mr_Burns_since_1987_-a-30_1431592672663.jpg
Bullets would even be cheaper.

User avatar
douche
Posts: 2066
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:41 pm

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by douche » Tue Mar 21, 2023 2:11 am

They would be, but society frowns upon that sort of thing. Now if we could just get more people to use these:

336534598_114500131535625_2676187598899643920_n.jpg
336534598_114500131535625_2676187598899643920_n.jpg (47.94 KiB) Viewed 321 times

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by DanielVogelbach » Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:41 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Wed Mar 08, 2023 9:53 pm
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Mon Jan 23, 2023 4:17 am
Life in prison for a non-violent action is inhumane. Selling a drug is a voluntary transaction between two consenting parties. There is no violence or force involved until the cop shows up.

You don't fix drug addiction issues by criminalizing the substances. That never works. It might look like you fixed the problem, but all you really did was incarcerate a bunch of people, which costs the taxpayers tons of money. You're trading one problem for another. You're not getting to the root cause. The root cause is always the demand. Without the demand, there's no supply.

Here are some things that would help:

#1 - More opportunity. When people see opportunity to make money, start families, buy homes, take on hobbies, etc., then they're far less likely to mess around with drugs or commit crimes. When they feel like the system is failing them and there's no hope, then they are more likely to turn to drugs. Everyone has their own ideas on how to create more opportunity. I personally think the free market is best, and that would be without any central banks, fiat currency, or taxes.

#2 - More education. Sometimes people truly don't recognize the dangers. So, simply spreading awareness of how dangerous the drugs are will help to some degree. Doctors should consider the situation very carefully before recommending an opiate based medication. Patients should also be well educated before starting a regimen of opiates. Many addicts start out popping pills their doctor gave them. (hyrdrocodone, percocet, oxycontin)

#3 - Legalize the pharmaceutical versions. This won't curb demand, but it will curb deaths. One of the main reasons people die of overdoses is because they don't know how much they're taking. Each batch of street drugs has unknown potency. It would be better if addicts could just go to the store and pick up Oxycontin where they know exactly how much is in each pill. I don't personally think legalization adds much to the demand.
Fentanyl is currently illegal. If they made it legal, I still wouldn't go anywhere near it. (see point #1) Furthermore, legalization gets rid of the black market and eliminates a lot of crime and violence. When you make something illegal, it just creates an avenue for gangs, cartels, etc. to thrive.
This isn't the issue with Fentanyl though, right? This isn't two consenting adults. This is often times someone buying one thing, can even be a damn pain killer, that is laced with Fentanyl to make the drug more profitable for the seller, then the buyer dying. I played Co Ed softball with a gal that thought she was buying Anti Depressants. That was a very sad funeral. Sucks that she felt she had to get this on the street, and sucks worse that she died from something that was supposed to keep her from killing herself.

The issue with Fentanly is far less about two consenting adults, and more one trying to make more money by putting shit in a product to boost the bottom line, and not doing it correctly, and actually KILLING their customers. So stupid I can't even wrap my head around it. That said, if my son so much as takes an ibuprofin from one of his team mates I have told him I will kill him myself. They call that shit "arm candy" on the baseball team. Fine, he is to take the shit I buy him at the store and ONLY the shit I bought him at the store.

I understand your point, but I promise you, the parent and HS coach in me is scared to death of this shit.
If the dealer misrepresents the product, then that's fraud and a crime. If the dealer says, "I have no idea what's in this shit", then there's no crime. In some cases, the fraud might occur a few levels upstream from the retail transaction to the person consuming the drug.

Fentanyl is considered to be much more dangerous than heroin. But, I still think if it was all pharmaceutical grade with the dosage listed on the package there would be a lot less overdoses.

Going after drug dealers is both immoral and ineffective. All they're doing is engaging in commerce. Now, if they're committing murders and such, that is a crime, but the actual act of selling goods for profit is never a crime. If you don't want people using fentanyl, then you can morally go on a crusade against it's use. You can work to add more love and opportunity to the world, which are the best combatants against drug addiction, depression, suicide, etc. What you can't morally do is take a non-violent person engaging in a consensual transaction and throw that person in a cage. Moreover, this strategy is ineffective. Obviously the "controlled substance" market is attractive to dealers. You have to change the market dynamics. Otherwise, if you rip one dealer off the streets, the next dealer comes right along behind them. Now, you have created a new problem where taxpayers have to pay for all of these non-violent drug offenders living in prison.

Michael K.
Posts: 11346
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by Michael K. » Tue Mar 28, 2023 2:57 pm

DanielVogelbach wrote:
Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:41 pm

If the dealer misrepresents the product, then that's fraud and a crime. If the dealer says, "I have no idea what's in this shit", then there's no crime. In some cases, the fraud might occur a few levels upstream from the retail transaction to the person consuming the drug.
THAT is what you think is going on? You are reading examples of people buying drugs, with NO CLUE what it is? Come one. They are buying anti depressents, weed, coke, you name it. It is LACED with a filler that is cheap, so the drug dealer can make more money. Then? People die. You are nucking futs if you think the majority of this is people buying drugs with no idea what it is, and then dying because they took it.
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:41 pm
Fentanyl is considered to be much more dangerous than heroin. But, I still think if it was all pharmaceutical grade with the dosage listed on the package there would be a lot less overdoses.
Odd, so you think that people that take drugs with the direction of a pharmacist would be less likely to die from it. Genius. Why don't more people think of that?
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:41 pm
Going after drug dealers is both immoral and ineffective. All they're doing is engaging in commerce. Now, if they're committing murders and such, that is a crime, but the actual act of selling goods for profit is never a crime. If you don't want people using fentanyl, then you can morally go on a crusade against it's use. You can work to add more love and opportunity to the world, which are the best combatants against drug addiction, depression, suicide, etc. What you can't morally do is take a non-violent person engaging in a consensual transaction and throw that person in a cage. Moreover, this strategy is ineffective. Obviously the "controlled substance" market is attractive to dealers. You have to change the market dynamics. Otherwise, if you rip one dealer off the streets, the next dealer comes right along behind them. Now, you have created a new problem where taxpayers have to pay for all of these non-violent drug offenders living in prison.
HUH? Might as well not arrest gang bangers that murder people, because there will just be another one after him that murders people? Do you work for the city of Seattle? Stop punishing crime, then there is no crime. Makes sense....to no one.

User avatar
douche
Posts: 2066
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:41 pm

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by douche » Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:08 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Tue Mar 28, 2023 2:57 pm
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:41 pm
Going after drug dealers is both immoral and ineffective. All they're doing is engaging in commerce. Now, if they're committing murders and such, that is a crime, but the actual act of selling goods for profit is never a crime. If you don't want people using fentanyl, then you can morally go on a crusade against it's use. You can work to add more love and opportunity to the world, which are the best combatants against drug addiction, depression, suicide, etc. What you can't morally do is take a non-violent person engaging in a consensual transaction and throw that person in a cage. Moreover, this strategy is ineffective. Obviously the "controlled substance" market is attractive to dealers. You have to change the market dynamics. Otherwise, if you rip one dealer off the streets, the next dealer comes right along behind them. Now, you have created a new problem where taxpayers have to pay for all of these non-violent drug offenders living in prison.
HUH? Might as well not arrest gang bangers that murder people, because there will just be another one after him that murders people? Do you work for the city of Seattle? Stop punishing crime, then there is no crime. Makes sense....to no one.
He actually states that murder is a crime.

Michael K.
Posts: 11346
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by Michael K. » Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:32 pm

douche wrote:
Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:08 pm
Michael K. wrote:
Tue Mar 28, 2023 2:57 pm
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:41 pm
Going after drug dealers is both immoral and ineffective. All they're doing is engaging in commerce. Now, if they're committing murders and such, that is a crime, but the actual act of selling goods for profit is never a crime. If you don't want people using fentanyl, then you can morally go on a crusade against it's use. You can work to add more love and opportunity to the world, which are the best combatants against drug addiction, depression, suicide, etc. What you can't morally do is take a non-violent person engaging in a consensual transaction and throw that person in a cage. Moreover, this strategy is ineffective. Obviously the "controlled substance" market is attractive to dealers. You have to change the market dynamics. Otherwise, if you rip one dealer off the streets, the next dealer comes right along behind them. Now, you have created a new problem where taxpayers have to pay for all of these non-violent drug offenders living in prison.
HUH? Might as well not arrest gang bangers that murder people, because there will just be another one after him that murders people? Do you work for the city of Seattle? Stop punishing crime, then there is no crime. Makes sense....to no one.
He actually states that murder is a crime.
I get that. But also acts like if we just stop punishing drug dealers it won't be a crime anymore. Deciding to not punish petty theft has made it so much better in the Streets of Seattle right? Making drugs legal wouldn't stop the number of deaths, just make them easier to come by. His logic was, don't punish the drug dealer, because as soon as you do, another one pops up. Isn't that the same for Gang Bangers shooting people?

User avatar
Walla Walla Dawg II
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2021 12:29 am
Location: Southeastern Washington

Re: Controversial Harsh idea

Post by Walla Walla Dawg II » Tue Mar 28, 2023 5:02 pm

douche wrote:
Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:08 pm
Michael K. wrote:
Tue Mar 28, 2023 2:57 pm
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:41 pm
Going after drug dealers is both immoral and ineffective. All they're doing is engaging in commerce. Now, if they're committing murders and such, that is a crime, but the actual act of selling goods for profit is never a crime. If you don't want people using fentanyl, then you can morally go on a crusade against it's use. You can work to add more love and opportunity to the world, which are the best combatants against drug addiction, depression, suicide, etc. What you can't morally do is take a non-violent person engaging in a consensual transaction and throw that person in a cage. Moreover, this strategy is ineffective. Obviously the "controlled substance" market is attractive to dealers. You have to change the market dynamics. Otherwise, if you rip one dealer off the streets, the next dealer comes right along behind them. Now, you have created a new problem where taxpayers have to pay for all of these non-violent drug offenders living in prison.
HUH? Might as well not arrest gang bangers that murder people, because there will just be another one after him that murders people? Do you work for the city of Seattle? Stop punishing crime, then there is no crime. Makes sense....to no one.
He actually states that murder is a crime.
I'd argue that he says that "selling goods for profit is never a crime".
What is a "good" in his world?

What about enriched uranium? If my neighbor purchased a couple pounds of this product and it caused me to get cancer, I would argue that his purchase affected my rights.....even though he was only purchasing a "good".

What about all the people that may partake in this "drug dealers" pot that was laced with fentanyl?
Someone purchases it, hides it, overdoses on it and never becomes that same person again, or dies. Years later his kids find this "good" and do the same thing.


I have recently used fentanyl.
Yeah, me right?

It was administered by the hospital when I had my hip replaced. This drug is so powerful, that every time I dozed off, the equipment they had me hooked up to started to ring. The staff doesn't want anyone to fall asleep while on this shit. What does that tell you about this designer-drug? It tells me that it's so powerful that even when administered by trained professionals, its EXTREMELY DANGEROUS.

But yeah, as long as it's considered commerce between two consulting adults.....fine.

Post Reply