Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Biden and his voters must be proud of all these Fentanyl deaths. They enabled the deaths through a wide open southern border and have no intention of doing anything to close the border and stop these preventable deaths.
The only one responsible for death is the addict themselves. I know that's horrible to hear but it's the truth. Closing the border would do nothing. Why don't we instead address the real problem...addicts. Why don't we get them the help they need instead of blaming everyone else.
The only one responsible for death is the addict themselves. I know that's horrible to hear but it's the truth. Closing the border would do nothing. Why don't we instead address the real problem...addicts. Why don't we get them the help they need instead of blaming everyone else.
This right here. The right seems to want to avoid people being responsible for thier choices and instead blame....the president? Like...for real? While the left wants to help people who have made a bad choice.
Its almost like the GOP stopped being the party of personal responsibility.
I once knew a good kid (one of my best friends kid) that had several serious operations on his leg.
The doctors over prescribed him with oxy and he couldn’t shake the addiction.
Fentanyl got him and it was just a damn shame.
I am not saying that this wasn’t his fault.
He blew it and paid the price.
I see OxyContin and fentanyl as a 1-2 punch.
The morgues are over filling.
Where have I heard of that before?
People went all in on the Covid emergency protocols but where are they when we allow this poison to come into the country?
The way some turn there eye and seem to allow this behavior is shocking.
The only one responsible for death is the addict themselves. I know that's horrible to hear but it's the truth. Closing the border would do nothing. Why don't we instead address the real problem...addicts. Why don't we get them the help they need instead of blaming everyone else.
Depends on how somebody comes to be addicted. Voluntarily delving into the drug screen and becoming hooked is clearly a personal responsibility issue, but this is not the sole and exclusive mechanism for addiction. Big pharma has settled some of the largest lawsuits in history (and did so comparatively recently) because they knew their products were causing adverse harm and pushed them anyway — in concert with unscrupulous physicians, in many cases. Then the government "crackdowns" happened, and a generation of addicts across the nation looked to the black market for their fix — a fatal tragedy that has struck twice in my own family. There's a bit of irony in that, of course, because the regulators of drugs are bought and paid for by the screwballs developing the products to begin with, and many of them obtain jobs or board appointments upon leaving the government mafia. Then there's the tertiary issue: forcible addiction — mostly commonly women and female children. This comes in two distinctly noteworthy (albeit not exclusive varieties): streetwalkers with abusive pimps, and victims of abject sex trafficking (much of which comes from the southern border and is being both directly and indirectly encouraged by the Biden administration and urban leftist governments).
But yes, we should treat addiction like more of a medical issue. This is of course secondary to the above considerations, however.
Depends on how somebody comes to be addicted. Voluntarily delving into the drug screen and becoming hooked is clearly a personal responsibility issue, but this is not the sole and exclusive mechanism for addiction. Big pharma has settled some of the largest lawsuits in history (and did so comparatively recently) because they knew their products were causing adverse harm and pushed them anyway — in concert with unscrupulous physicians, in many cases. Then the government "crackdowns" happened, and a generation of addicts across the nation looked to the black market for their fix — a fatal tragedy that has struck twice in my own family. There's a bit of irony in that, of course, because the regulators of drugs are bought and paid for by the screwballs developing the products to begin with, and many of them obtain jobs or board appointments upon leaving the government mafia. Then there's the tertiary issue: forcible addiction — mostly commonly women and female children. This comes in two distinctly noteworthy (albeit not exclusive varieties): streetwalkers with abusive pimps, and victims of abject sex trafficking (much of which comes from the southern border and is being both directly and indirectly encouraged by the Biden administration and urban leftist governments).
But yes, we should treat addiction like more of a medical issue. This is of course secondary to the above considerations, however.
It doesn't matter how someone becomes addicted. You treat the addiction. We will never stop drugs from coming in. And it's naïve to think we can.
It doesn't matter how someone becomes addicted. You treat the addiction. We will never stop drugs from coming in. And it's naïve to think we can.
You're conflating multiple factors here and then attempting to justify the conflation by emphasizing a shared commonality plucked from within a sea of variables. I'm unsure why. You don't see a distinction between a recreational user gone awry, a casualty of government malfeasance, and a 14-year-old victim held down and injected with <insert> against her will by cartels to ensure her compliance in her own physical abuse, as being worthy of nuanced consideration, discussion, and remediation, apart from the underlying addiction? That sentiment is startling, even if I generally agree with the latter three of your four statements.
You're conflating multiple factors here and then attempting to justify the conflation by emphasizing a shared commonality plucked from within a sea of variables. I'm unsure why. You don't see a distinction between a recreational user gone awry, a casualty of government malfeasance, and a 14-year-old victim held down and injected with <insert> against her will by cartels to ensure her compliance in her own physical abuse, as being worthy of nuanced consideration, discussion, and remediation, apart from the underlying addiction? That sentiment is startling, even if I generally agree with the latter three of your four statements.
Opioids are highly addictive. That’s not a drug you can use recreationally. And what does this have to do with someone given opioids against their will.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
