Controversial Harsh idea

[Michael K.]

Sure it sounds ridiculous, so is an anti depressant being laced with it, but they do it to cut costs, and people die, so yes, I think its a bad thing.

I think fentanyl is a serious issue. I also think that about 0.00000000000000000000000000001% of the world's cannabis supply is laced with fentanyl.

I don't know if the number is that low, but I do know that here in Walla Walla (po-dunk little spit of a city) we have been having A LOT of over-doses of fentanyl. What people are 'taking' to overdose, I don't know, but I can't believe it's only in the hard drugs.

It's a huge problem. I'm not sure I care what they are putting it in, it's a problem. Vogelbach's defense here is an odd one. I have seen nothing anywhere to suggest that people are willingly buying drugs laced with fentanyl. They are literally dying from taking something they don't know they are taking. Not sure how that makes selling drugs on the street a victimless crime.

[DanielVogelbach]

The remainder? They're the the exact opposite... immature, evil, conniving creatures whose default is nothing. No ambition. Path of least resistance. They give up on life, get hooked on drugs (or whatever else they can find) and then end up engaging in criminal behavior to support their pathetic lifestyle by exploiting others.

Are you talking about the politicians here?

Sure, them too. But I'm referring to most of the homeless. An entire segment of the population who have given up. They live on the streets, consume drugs and alcohol, living in a haze. Stealing to support their habits. Scaring people. Defecating on the street. Vandalizing property. Contributing nothing to society.

And not only are they not contributing, they're actually stealing from society. Stealing the notion that a person can walk downtown or to the corner store without feeling endangered.

I was joking about the politicians. I mean, they're indeed evil. But, I know you were focusing on people living on the streets.

Laziness is not desirable, but it's also not a crime. I think the free market presents the most opportunity, optimism, love, peace, and prosperity versus government and tyranny which bring despair, evil, war, sickness, and poverty. Basically, the more freedom we have, the less junkies and homeless we'll have.

Stealing is a crime. Vandalizing is a crime. There's no doubt that drugs contribute to these crimes. But, trading drugs for money is not a crime, because both parties agree to the transaction. It's really no different if someone wants to eat 4 slices of chocolate cake daily. If they're not using aggression towards you, then you can't morally use aggression against them. You can only try to convince them not to shoot the drugs or eat so much cake. In the free market you must sell your idea. No matter how good your idea is, you can't force it on anyone.

Ultimately, I think looking at the users or the suppliers as the root cause of the drug abuse issue is short-sighted. You gotta look at the systemic root causes. I'm not sure how good things can ever be in this world. I think there might be supernatural elements that dictate the mix of good and evil in a yin and yang fashion. So, we might always be dealing with some level of laziness in society. Somehow the drugs enter our world and cause all kinds of problems. On a spiritual level, this seems by design. But, in theory, if we could increase freedom, we could reduce the negative impact of these substances.

[DanielVogelbach]

I think fentanyl is a serious issue. I also think that about 0.00000000000000000000000000001% of the world's cannabis supply is laced with fentanyl.

I don't know if the number is that low, but I do know that here in Walla Walla (po-dunk little spit of a city) we have been having A LOT of over-doses of fentanyl. What people are 'taking' to overdose, I don't know, but I can't believe it's only in the hard drugs.

It's a huge problem. I'm not sure I care what they are putting it in, it's a problem. Vogelbach's defense here is an odd one. I have seen nothing anywhere to suggest that people are willingly buying drugs laced with fentanyl. They are literally dying from taking something they don't know they are taking. Not sure how that makes selling drugs on the street a victimless crime.

People aren't dying from fentanyl, because they're smoking weed. They're dying from fentanyl, because they're shooting fentanyl into their veins with a syringe. Heroin is considered a safe drug compared to fentanyl. Fentanyl is super deadly.

Weed is grown, cut, trimmed, cured, and sold. Often it's infused into candy or chocolate and sold as an edible. There's no extra step where you try to improve it by sprinkling in an opiate. No customer wants that. Pretty simple. You just sell the weed or the edible or the extract or whatever. Adding fentanyl would only add to the cost. This is different with opiates, where fentanyl is the cheapest, strongest one.

I have also heard of Xanax laced with fentanyl. I buy that one a lot more. But fentanyl in weed I think that's bogus or best case it happened for real one time and the media made a big deal about it. I don't know. It's a serious issue. I'm just not buying fentanyl laced cannabis. To, me, that's just as ridiculous as thinking your next Budweiser is going to be laced with opiates. That's just not the way it goes.

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

Weed is grown, cut, trimmed, cured, and sold. Often it's infused into candy or chocolate and sold as an edible. There's no extra step where you try to improve it by sprinkling in an opiate. No customer wants that. Pretty simple. You just sell the weed or the edible or the extract or whatever. Adding fentanyl would only add to the cost. This is different with opiates, where fentanyl is the cheapest, strongest one.

I recall back in the 80's some were infusing weed with Angel Dust and that caused a lot of people to O.D.
Please change your stance that people don't infuse weed with anything that may make the experience better, because they do.

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

Student, 16, overdoses on suspected fentanyl-laced marijuana at Connecticut high school, police say
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/16 ... -rcna15302

Fentanyl-Laced Marijuana Eyed In Cape Cod Near-Death
https://patch.com/massachusetts/marthas ... near-death

New fears of marijuana laced with the synthetic opiate fentanyl has police departments across the state keeping their eyes and ears open.
https://www.facebook.com/Boston25News/p ... 398623122/

Fentanyl-Laced Marijuana Eyed In Cape Cod Near-Death
https://www.facebook.com/FalmouthPolice ... 494751502/


Let's put this to rest.
They do lace weed with Fentanyl!

[douche]

Basically, the more freedom we have, the less junkies and homeless we'll have.

Ultimately, I think looking at the users or the suppliers as the root cause of the drug abuse issue is short-sighted. You gotta look at the systemic root causes.

Couldn't it just as easily go the other way? More freedom = more junkies and more homeless. Can people be trusted to govern themselves?

What are the systemic root causes of drug abuse? I think most people are trying to escape. From something. Different for everyone... escape from responsibilities, escape from abuse, etc. And some people simply have addictive personalities. So long as drugs are available, there will be people around to consume/abuse them.

Unless people can get a handle on their individual lives, nothing changes. Regardless of level of freedom. Or drug use.

If there were no laws (and thus, plenty of freedom), would people drink and drive more? Or less?

Would they consume more drugs? Or fewer drugs?

[DanielVogelbach]

Couldn't it just as easily go the other way? More freedom = more junkies and more homeless. Can people be trusted to govern themselves?

No, it can't go the other way. Human nature is human nature, and nothing changes when you call it "government". If you don't trust the average person to be honest and spend their money wisely, then why do you trust the government?

It should be the exact opposite. If you don't trust people, then make sure there is no "government". Evil, greed, and envy will always seek out the power of "government". Bad actors in society can only cause so much damage by themselves. But, if you allow them to use the power of government, then they can wreak havoc on a massive scale. And, they do. Basically all of the problems in society are legislated into existence. This is why the more government you can eliminate, the less problems you will see in terms of war, poverty, drug abuse, etc.

What are the systemic root causes of drug abuse? I think most people are trying to escape. From something. Different for everyone... escape from responsibilities, escape from abuse, etc. And some people simply have addictive personalities. So long as drugs are available, there will be people around to consume/abuse them.

The root cause of almost every problem in society is government and central banks.

I agree that it's not really possible to eliminate all drug use. Drugs exist, and human nature is human nature. But, the more love and opportunity in the world, then the less negativity there will be. I personally am more into the philosophy than the activism. I don't really care about changing the world. I also think there might be supernatural forces behind it all anyway, so you can't really change the balance of good and evil.

Unless people can get a handle on their individual lives, nothing changes. Regardless of level of freedom. Or drug use.

Government and central banks make it very difficult for anyone to get a handle on their individual lives. The scale of the extortion is so massive.

If there were no laws (and thus, plenty of freedom), would people drink and drive more? Or less?

Would they consume more drugs? Or fewer drugs?

There is always natural law. The point is that selling and consuming drugs is non aggressive behavior.

Historically prohibition or legalization does little to change demand. But, even if you're able to change behavior in a way that you think is good, it still doesn't justify using immoral means. Theft is an actual crime, but even with theft most would agree that chopping off someone's hand for petty theft is immoral. It would definitely reduce crime, but the punishment is too extreme. With a drug transaction, there is not even a crime being committed between the consenting parties, so any amount of punishment is immoral. On top of that, you might "reduce drug use", but you've cost the taxpayers infinitely more money to fund the war on drugs and incarcerate all of the non-violent offenders.

[Grandma Lynn]

D.V. Selling killer drugs is unhumane! You said way back
that prison for selling it is unhumane.
How about those who produce it?

[DanielVogelbach]

D.V. Selling killer drugs is unhumane! You said way back
that prison for selling it is unhumane.
How about those who produce it?

Certainly selling dangerous drugs doesn't win you any humanitarian awards. But, neither does selling donuts. Alcohol is the elephant in the room, as it kills more than fentanyl.

There's a difference between something you don't like in society versus something where using aggression is morally okay. It makes perfect sense to oppose the use of opiates. The same goes for gambling, prostitution, or adultery. But, when there's consent between participants, then using aggression can't morally be justified.

The principle extends to everything else a person might choose to do. You can try to convince them to eat healthy and spend their money practically. But, ultimately you can't force them. They can be fat, lazy, and stupid. But, as long as they're peaceful, then you can't morally use aggression to force them to do anything.

This basic principle of freedom is what gives society the best chance to prevail against any type of evil. Unfortunately, most people think it's totally okay for an "authority" to use aggression towards peaceful people. This is why most people don't see taxation as theft. The whole thing is an extortion racket and the war on drugs is a complete joke. Billions of dollars are spent on law enforcement and prisons, and the streets are still filled with junkies. Fentanyl is probably invented by the CIA.

[douche]

I don't trust the government, but I don't trust that people can handle freedom and make good decisions without laws either. People will do whatever they want if there are no repercussions. And a lot of their behavior would be of the bad kind.

Sure, selling and consuming drugs is a non-aggressive behavior, until said junkie needs to steal or use force to support his habit. Same with drinking and driving... all good until some drunk kills kills someone with their vehicle.

I agree with you in the sense that government is a sham. I also agree that prohibition doesn't work and that the 'war on drugs' is a farce.