Author Topic: Vancouver Tries Free Heroin Program (Read 3425 times)

TexMurphy · « **Reply #150 on:** March 17, 2005, 09:35:47 AM »

To some extend I think you are totally right when you say its "hardwired in". I know at least for alcohol addiction (dont see a reason why it should be different with drugs) one is in a higher risk group if one has an addict in the familly, genetically in the familly.

Though I do think its genetical for everyone. I mean everyone can get addicted (some just are in a bigger risk group) and the way I see only thing that can prevent one from getting hooked is the attitude towards drugs that one has from early childhood.

I dont say my attitude is the right one, just that it works for me. Mine is "just tobaco and alcohol". I really dont have any desire (nor have I ever had) to use any other substances.

Though Im very aware of the fact that I can get hooked on alcohol just like Im on tobaco. I know Im in a relativly high risk group due to high tollerance and tbh through out my life I have had times when Ive been worried about my consumption.

I know that heroin is the worst kind of addiction there is but any addiction can ruin ones life, totally, christ even internet addiction can ruin ones life.

So Im always humble towards the risks (never think this cant happen to me) and have clear lines I draw and dont push them. That is my attitude towards drugs and alcohol and one that works for me. It working for me doesnt mean it works for everyone but most likely some more people then just me.

If I was to ever get kids then it is that attitude Id raise them with.

Tex

StSanta · « **Reply #151 on:** March 17, 2005, 11:22:34 AM »

Quote

You can't use reason when it comes to addiction. I believe it is hardwired in.

lazs [/B]

I think there are ****loads of addicts out there. No necessarily drug addicts, but people sharing a common psychological makeup that has been/is good for something in relation to the survival of the species.

The majority of these people find either healthy or at least not too damaging ways of manifesting this urge, craving, need or whatever you wish to call it. Some collect stamps. Others race cars or become fighter pilots, pushing things as far as they can.

This 'addictive personality' is common in BASE jumpers. It's a very dangerous sport - there are many stochastic variables that cannot be controlled. You can pack perfectly only to have pilot chute hesitation and smack you're gone. Still people jump off fixed objects.

Still people drive race cars. Or take planes for the enjoyment of it. Or arrange a garden, fixes up cars, whatever.

Before judging addicts, it is well worth considering the basic psychological mechanism behind it.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #152 on:** March 17, 2005, 12:51:30 PM »

There's only the difference that nobody mugs pensioners in order to get some race fuel. Stamp collectors do not spread deadly diseases among them through thier hobby. Gardening doesn't shorten the lifespan of the gardener.

A drug addict is a totally worthless individual to the society. He can't work, he can't take care of himself. He can, however, commit deadly crimes to finance drugs. He can cause deadly accidents through DUI for example. He can destroy the lives of everyone that care about him. He can and will cost to the society through healthcare services (his own and his victims.) Thieving junkies cause our insurance bills raise all the time.

It's something that can't be accepted in a society no matter what the reasons were.

Nash · « **Reply #153 on:** March 17, 2005, 01:32:20 PM »

Unless....

Unless they give the drugs away. And that brings us back to doe!

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, Sol, La, Tee, Doe!

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #154 on:** March 17, 2005, 01:38:28 PM »

Yes Nash then we'd see a sharp rise in OD's and a much smaller problem afterwards.

How many people do you think would adopt this habit if everyone knew getting the stuff was for granted?

Nash · « **Reply #155 on:** March 17, 2005, 01:48:37 PM »

Oh, maybe the same ratio as people who drank during prohabition to those who drank after.

A much smaller number overall, but perhaps the same percentage?

capt. apathy · « **Reply #156 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:16:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Yes Nash then we'd see a sharp rise in OD's and a much smaller problem afterwards.

How many people do you think would adopt this habit if everyone knew getting the stuff was for granted?

likely not too many if you gave it away for free and put the body count on the front page of the news paper.

today you can talk all you want about 'lives ruined by drugs', but aside from being ignorant, kids aren't stupid.

they can see that most of the problems caused by drugs today are actually caused by the drugs being illegal, not the drugs themselves. the guy that lost his family and house didn't lose it because he grew pot, he lost it because the gov't took it when they caught him growing pot. (see the difference? if not this conversation is pointless.)

if you give them the dope they want, or at the very least don't put any obstacles between them and their dope, then the consequences can only be blamed on the junkie and the dope. a clear message.

as it is today the life of a junkie is fairly pointless. giving them the dope or at least legalizing it gives value to the life of a junkie. because some peoples only purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others. at least thats a purpose.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #157 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:22:31 PM »

There's just one problem. Dope is illegal for a reason.

Too large usage would cause collateral damage inevitably and effectively paralyze the society.

Junkies can't maintain themselves, they have to be maintained.

mora · « **Reply #158 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:22:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by capt. apathy
likely not too many if you gave it away for free and put the body count on the front page of the news paper.

Yes, and the fact that most OD's happen because the purity of the street heroin varies greatly. So most likely there would be less death, no matter if you consider it to be positive or negative.

mora · « **Reply #159 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:23:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Junkies can't maintain themselves, they have to be maintained.

Agreed.

capt. apathy · « **Reply #160 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:29:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mora
Yes, and the fact that most OD's happen because the purity of the street heroin varies greatly. So most likely there would be less death, no matter if you consider it to be positive or negative.

are you saying that- a number of the deaths from heroin use are caused by the laws that make it illegal (and therefore unpredictable in purity) and not so much by the properties of the drug itself?

mora · « **Reply #161 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:33:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by capt. apathy
are you saying that- a number of the deaths from heroin use are caused by the laws that make it illegal (and therefore unpredictable in purity) and not so much by the properties of the drug itself?

I'm saying that it makes over dosing more likely. It's a helluva poison nevertheless.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #162 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:55:00 PM »

http://fun.from.hell.pl/2004-01-19/anticannabisspot.mpeg

Maverick · « **Reply #163 on:** March 17, 2005, 02:57:49 PM »

Pure dope or not, the amount used is not static for long. Read what Nash posted. to get the "high" you'll need more.

mora · « **Reply #164 on:** March 17, 2005, 03:03:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
Pure dope or not, the amount used is not static for long. Read what Nash posted. to get the "high" you'll need more.

Yes the bodys tolerance of heroin grows when it's used constantly. Usually OD's happen after a break when a junkie shoots the 'usual amount'. If it's more pure than before an OD is more likely.

I'm certainly not saying that OD's don't happen even if the purity is constant.