Issue 1: Reduced Penalty for Drug Offenses

[BStowers023]

I think all drugs should be legal. I think most people will continue to not be involved in most drugs, maybe some more weed users but whatever. I also think that everyone takes risks no matter what it is, legal or not, and the person taking the risk ultimately pays the biggest price most of the time. For a lot of risks dying is a possibility, I personally don’t care if someone dies taking a risk of their own free will. For the risks that other people could be getting hurt that’s where the government needs to enforce laws preventing such issues. In the same token I think suicide should be legal. I think people should have other avenues like they do now, but if you really want to die it really doesn’t matter if it’s legal anyway.

 

Exactly. I don't see what the issue is as long as you're not endangering others. I don't understand how the Govt can say it's okay for Alcohol to be legal but not anything else. Alcoholism is one of the deadliest (maybe the most deadly) addiction there is and kills more people than anything else (besides MAYBE heroin, I'll have Kerry look up the stats cause he likes that stuff). If you drive under the influence of anything, you should be punished just like with alcohol. If you're not endangering anyone else, who the fuck cares? The only people I think that care are the old people who watched reefer madness back in the 50s and were gullible (stupid) enough to think that movie is somehow based on any form of truth.

[street pilot]

That's just the summary, if you read further down it (pages 3-4 of this document https://www.sos.state.oh.us/globalassets/ballotboard/2018/2018issuesreport.pdf) clarifies it long form that it applies to drug convictions and drug convictions reclassified as other non-violent offenses.

 

As I read it, I do not see anywhere that it reduces sentences for Burglary, robbery, larceny, assault, etc. Assault and Robbery would be excluded because they are violent offenses anyway...but it doesn't exclude a person who has both a conviction for robbery and an conviction for drug possession from having the DP portion of his sentence reduced. It does exclude murderers, rapists, and child molesters from receiving any benefit of the bill. Section F covers who the reductions retroactivly apply to and it's pretty clear:

 

 

 

I will say that it's not worded the best so it sounds like everyone but rapists, murders, and kid fondilers are getting a break, but it's pretty upfront that the intent is specifically to target non-violent drug offenses.

 

But let's assume that it wasn't - the program is pretty specific about reducing the sentence 1/2 a day for every day that the individual participates in a rehabilitation or education program, so they don't get it automatically - the prisoner has to work for it. This is similar to what a parole board would consider without the actual hearing to make the determination, so is it really a problem if they are reducing the sentence for lesser crimes as long as the person is showing an effort to improve themselves?

 

I re-read the amendment. It's definitely a sentence reduction for all non-violent offenses, not just non-violent drug offenses, which is misdirection in my opinion. This issue is largely touted as drug related but it is more than that.

 

Since you seem to be in the know, how is this language different than current sentence reduction programs that you eluded to?

[street pilot]

I particularly love that we can give out Narcan like its Halloween candy now. We now forgo the death by respiratory arrest so that we can eventually get to the phase where their heart becomes so infected that it starts eating itself from the inside out. We put them all on a list where if they can stay clean for 6 months, a Cardiothoracic surgeon will slap a new valve or two in there for them, because that's a cheap surgery to have done. However, the vast majority never make it to that point (because they can't stay clean) and end up rotting away for weeks in an ICU while their entire system shuts down. That's also a cheap thing we as the taxpayer end up paying for.

 

You're right, but that's a separate issue than what is proposed on this ballot. These habitual Narcan runs are stealing EMT resources from other patients. Every life is valuable but how can you justify a third revival of a drug OD versus a contributing member of society who is having cardiac arrest? Needle exchanges or safe places to shoot up are starting to make more sense.

[Geeto67]

I re-read the amendment. It's definitely a sentence reduction for all non-violent offenses, not just non-violent drug offenses, which is misdirection in my opinion. This issue is largely touted as drug related but it is more than that.

 

Since you seem to be in the know, how is this language different than current sentence reduction programs that you eluded to?

 

 

Here is a good primer on this that will probably explain it better than I can:

https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Issue_1,_Drug_and_Criminal_Justice_Policies_Initiative_(2018)

 

but yes and no, it does include some "breaks" for non-drug, non-violent offenders but not all provisions of the issue apply to each class of convict equally.

 

from the above link:

 

This constitutional amendment [seeks] to:

 

- make offenses related to drug possession and use no more than misdemeanors;

 

- prohibit courts from ordering persons on probation for felonies be sent to prison for non-criminal probation violations;

 

- create a sentence credits program for inmates' participation in rehabilitative, work, or educational programs; and

 

- require the state to spend savings due to a reduction of inmates, resulting from Issue 1, on drug treatment, crime victim, and rehabilitation programs.

 

So non violent drug possession stops being a felony with long sentence (trafficking offenses are excluded) and non-violent convicts of any stripe can work to earn credits off their sentence by participating in programs. It's not advocating that all non-violent sentences be reduced to below felonies.

 

most political opponents of this (like Mike Dewine) tend to confuse possession and trafficking charges saying the fear is "a drug dealer carrying enough fentanyl to kill 10,000 people would avoid jail time and be sent back onto the streets with just a misdemeanor charge – free to peddle their poison again" except 1) misdemeanor charges still have jail time, they just don't carry heavy time, I think the maximum is 6 months; and 2) someone carrying that much weight or being caught dealing would probably be charged under a trafficking charge which is excluded from Issue 1. I also personally don't like when people say things like "enough heroin to cause X number to overdose" because heroin and cocaine tolerance is a moving target, often increasing or decreasing with use (cocaine is notorious for actually decreasing a user's tolerance the longer it is used, where heroin tolerance increases with use, but drops significantly with discontinuation of use (hence why a lot of celebs who get clean OD on small amounts when they relapse).

 

how does this stack up to other initiatives across the US? So far 9 states have passed similar measures, and Issue 1 is basically on par with them, most notably mirroring Mississippi, Utah, California, and Indiana's measures. Politically speaking it has been a mix of red and blue states, slightly favoring red states that have faced large epidemics. here is a good primer on measures in place:

 

http://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/drug-sentencing-trends.aspx

[Geeto67]

All 3 examples aren’t free to the non narcan using individual. If I fall off that ladder it isn’t free for me, speeding doesn’t get me a trip to the hospital, usually a citation. The cutting of the wrist thing may be something the writer has contemplated, but again to the hospital not free.

Now the Narcan, while not free, still manages to cost me money , but the recipient will not be presented a bill, or better yet not pay for this procedure. I enjoy the fact that the antidote is there, but taking death out of the equation with a free pass certainly doesn’t deter. If there were a free narcan style antidote for cliff diving, I would bet more people would be willing to take that risk as well.

 

Let's clear something up - Narcan kits are one of the cheapest most effective lifesaving items on the market today. Kits cost between $20 and $40. compared to an average cost of $30K per body to the municpality to clean up a dead body (regardless of cause of death) passing out even $10K worth of Narcan to prevent those deaths makes financial sense. It's addressing the problem in a preventative stage. You know what else the state gives out for free? first aid kits, why? because it shows to help reduce state health care costs as well.

 

But you know what's not free? getting EMTs to administer Narcan. Most counties in ohio will offer people the kits to keep in their home so as long as you have someone willing to administer the kit and not charge you for it - yeah it's free. But so is a good Samaritan helping you out of that car wreck and driving you to the hospital. And by the way your injuries from getting in a car wreck because you were speeding is paid for by the state if you are an uninsured motorist who can't pay his hospital bill, and it costs way more than $20-$40 (and ohio has an uninsured motorist problem). If you fall off that ladder and don't have health insurance and can't pay the bill - sure they will try to collect and ruin your credit rating but the state eventually pays for the treatment. Yeah the majority of outcomes with speeding don't end in accident, and also the majority of drug taking doesn't end in overdose. Still car accidents are a problem, and the more people that are taking drugs the more overdoses are a problem.

 

 

I was informed at a very young age that touching something hot would be,at the least,uncomfortable to me and was not good in many ways, and I have carried that with me to this day. Some people still have the urge to touch hot things.

 

Betcha you have still burned yourself as an adult though, probably doing something without thinking or not even knowing that thing was hot. Same kind of situation we are in here - thousands of people took legal prescription drugs because they had faith in their medical professional and no reason not to trust them and ended up with nasty drug habits.

[AngryBMW]

thousands of people took legal prescription drugs because they had faith in their medical professional and no reason not to trust them and ended up with nasty drug habits.

 

So you truly believe the majority of heroin users are drug addicts because of their Doctor...not their own personal choice?????

 

The doctor may have prescribed pain meds...but they did it because the client told them they were in pain and needed/wanted them. It's the individuals choice to take them. Just as it is the individuals choice to continue taking them when they are no longer in pain because they LIKE and WANT the feeling the meds provide. It is the individuals CHOICE to then try heroin because it's cheaper than the pills off the street.

 

If you feel the NEED for these meds after the prescription ends and you go to heroin...it's your choice and you are now an addict. Instead of heroin, or buying pills on the street, go to rehab.

 

Addiction is not a disease.

-Marc

[Cordell]

But you know what's not free? getting EMTs to administer Narcan. Most counties in ohio will offer people the kits to keep in their home so as long as you have someone willing to administer the kit and not charge you for it - yeah it's free. But so is a good Samaritan helping you out of that car wreck and driving you to the hospital. And by the way your injuries from getting in a car wreck because you were speeding is paid for by the state if you are an uninsured motorist who can't pay his hospital bill, and it costs way more than $20-$40 (and ohio has an uninsured motorist problem). If you fall off that ladder and don't have health insurance and can't pay the bill - sure they will try to collect and ruin your credit rating but the state eventually pays for the treatment. Yeah the majority of outcomes with speeding don't end in accident, and also the majority of drug taking doesn't end in overdose. Still car accidents are a problem, and the more people that are taking drugs the more overdoses are a problem.

.

 

People without insurance or any financial responsibility are also going to simply get sick and be a burden on society regardless if they do thing intentionally or not. While your “burden on society” argument is very closely tied to people overdosing on drugs, it’s just not that simple. That’s a much broader problem. Honestly letting things run their course and thin the herd over time would do wonders for strengthening our society, but nobody is going to get elected by letting worthless leaches on society die.

[street pilot]

 

So non violent drug possession stops being a felony with long sentence (trafficking offenses are excluded) and non-violent convicts of any stripe can work to earn credits off their sentence by participating in programs. It's not advocating that all non-violent sentences be reduced to below felonies.

 

I understand the amendment.

 

If passed, how would this amendment be different from current sentence reducing initiatives in place in the prison system today? Would this just make it a right to a reduced sentence, and today it's up to the discretion of the institution? You mentioned a parole board would make a similar determination today.

[Geeto67]

So you truly believe the majority of heroin users are drug addicts because of their Doctor...not their own personal choice?????

 

you are mis-characterizing it, but yes their Doctor was a contributing factor. I don't think their Dr intended to get them hooked on a very addictive drug, just treat their pain with an effective pain killer. There is some evidence that the medical community was mislead by the pharma companies making and marketing these drugs.

 

It's hard to argue with the numbers, the percentage of new heroin users that transitioned from legal opoids was hovering around 80% for the last decade or so. The roughly 20% that didn't is consistent with the overall numbers of users we saw in the 1990's prior to the wide marketing release of opoids as a prescription treatment in the US. So yeah, I firmly believe that the growth in heroin use is directly tied to use of prescription opoids. That's why it's an epidemic. Now, in the long term users the number introduced by legal opoids drops as those with the resources to seek treatment eventually do, but along that treatment journey are financial problems, survived overdoses, possible incarceration, and damaged health that requires expensive health care.

 

As a final note how much "choice" can you say a person has when they are chemically compelled to do something? once the addiction takes hold - can a person be said to really have a "choice" when they are physically compelled and even become sick when they don't get their fix?

 

The doctor may have prescribed pain meds...but they did it because the client told them they were in pain and needed/wanted them. It's the individuals choice to take them.

 

This is just stupid, you are smarter than this. Your argument here is literally the person chooses to trust their healthcare provider that their pills are safe and fuck them for making that choice because the pills are not safe. Under this logic nobody would receive medical care because nobody should trust their doctors aka "people we go to who are experts at medicine because we are not."

 

Just as it is the individuals choice to continue taking them when they are no longer in pain because they LIKE and WANT the feeling the meds provide. It is the individuals CHOICE to then try heroin because it's cheaper than the pills off the street.

 

you really have no concept of how chemical dependency and addiction works, do you? It isn't just that they "like" and "want" the feeling the meds provide - it's that the absence of the medicine in this system makes them physically ill, and depending on the dosage, feeling worse than they did before they were taking them and can even kill them. We colloquially call this dope sick, but it's known as physically dependency withdrawal. Furthermore, some people don't actually heal from the original pain, so stack that pain on top of the new pain caused by the addiction and it's a hell on earth. People can and have died from heroin withdrawal - that's why for years it was treated with methadone programs. But no, according to you people voluntarily chose this and weren't compelled by a literal horror show of pain from dependency.

 

If you feel the NEED for these meds after the prescription ends and you go to heroin...it's your choice and you are now an addict. Instead of heroin, or buying pills on the street, go to rehab.

 

The addiction doesn't magically set when you choose to take heroin over legal pain pills. It starts the moment any of these substances enter your body and gets worse the longer they are continuously introduced. Your LEGAL troubles start when you choose to go to heroin because your "legal" dealer, aka your doctor and pharmacy, cuts you off.

 

You aren't framing the choice correctly. To someone with a chemical dependency it's not "go to rehab or keep feeling Groovy" it's:

 

"Go to rehab, vomit a lot, potentially die, feel awful and in pain for a year (provided my original injury healed without pain otherwise feel pain for life) and then deal with the crushing cost of the rehab after and continued medical insurance costs OR keep taking this medication which is causing me to go broke and may kill me but makes the pain I feel bearable so I can at least keep my job and keep functioning day to day, and by the way my brain is chemically triggering cravings for it anyway so why fight it".

 

Doesn't seem like such an easy choice now does it?

 

Addiction is not a disease.

-Marc

Fuck you.

 

Whether it is a disease or not medically is not at issue. Technically breaking your arm isn't a disease either but the best treatment is still medical intervention and not incarceration. This has become the corrupted "chant" of people who lack the knowledge to understand the psychical effects and want to just blame the victims of psychical addiction and incarcerate them. you don't bring this up to debate disease vs repetitive pattern behavior or some other intellectual scientific debate - you do this to say "fuck you not my problem" to you fellow man.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Geeto67

[Geeto67]

I understand the amendment.

 

If passed, how would this amendment be different from current sentence reducing initiatives in place in the prison system today? Would this just make it a right to a reduced sentence, and today it's up to the discretion of the institution? You mentioned a parole board would make a similar determination today.

 

Ah, I see what you are asking.

 

Ok so most charges, violent and non violent, have a parole eligibility date attached to them. When you hit that date your case may begin to be reviewed for a parole board for early release from your sentence. The board can be made up of criminal justice professionals but there is no requirement and un-saavy community members sitting on the board are not uncommon. They review your record of activity in incarceration, the status of your victim, the nature of your crime, and various other factors like job skills, education level, etc.. and allow you to make an argument in support of your release.

 

There is no set guideline as to what certain things are "worth" in terms of parole eligibility, and no requirement that people do certain things (although some activities like job training and education do increase chances). The determination is completely subjective based on the opinions of the parole board members - even if a person has shown to have a spotless record and participated in every program offered, if the parole board doesn't like something he said at the hearing or how they look they can deny parole. It is also entirely likely you can not participate in any programs and just make a good argument and be granted parole, and in some cases parole boards will grant parole of convicts just because there isn't room in the system or other administrative reasons and they need to clear people out without reviewing their records.

 

The measure seeks to take the subjective-ness out of sentence reduction and incentivize prisoners to take advantage of the programs by saying we will give you a half day off your sentence for every day of eligible program in which you participate.

 

Overall it will:

-reduce the workload of the parole board,

 

- reduce the number of decisions they have to make for administrative or overcrowding reasons,

 

- reduce racism in the parole system by applying a uniform approach to all prisoners,

 

- while giving an incentive to prisoners to try and improve themselves.

 

It's basically taking something that's bureaucratic and making it more efficient at a level of prisoner that has a reduced risk for repeat offense or violent crime. For violent offenders, drug traffickers, murders et al, they will still have the old parole system, but with less administrative considerations and more time to review cases, the parole board might be able to make better decisions with those cases as well.

[Orion]

Addiction is not a disease.

 

Marc,

The majority of the medical community disagrees with you, sir.

 

 

EDIT: Allow me to say, however, that I struggled with the same belief that it was all about choice as a younger man, dealing with my mother's addictions. I didn't like the idea of letting her off the hook for her actions, especially since they personally affected me in a negative way. What helped me is understanding that many diseases have choices as their root cause. Diabetes, Heart Disease, COPD...diseases, yes? But for many people, they are brought about as a result of choices they have made in their lives. Would you withhold insulin for someone who developed type 2 later in their life, just because "fuck them, they made their choice"? What about something like Atorvastatin for high blood pressure/cholesterol? Those folks deal with those consequences, just like an addict who is trying to get clean does. And addicts, just like those folks, will deal with further consequences if they don't take the issue seriously. Understanding the issue as a disease does not absolve them of their responsibility in the matter. But it also allows a certain amount of understanding and compassion in the treatment of such. Some folks want to live in a more anarchist/libertarian society, where everyone is only ever beholden to their own personal responsibility, and if thats you, then more power to you. But the reality is that we don't currently live in that world, and others need help beyond each of our own social circles. Just allowing yourself some outside perspective may do you some good.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Orion

[SpaceGhost]

Marc,

The majority of the medical community disagrees with you, sir.

 

Truth

[zeitgeist57]

Addiction is a general descriptor to a physical dependency or proclivity to an outside stimulus, whether it's an introduced chemical or psychological stimulant.

 

DISEASE, bishes!

[87GT]

I am all for it. Since we are on the topic of heroin addiction you should watch this video. It can explain better than I can that addiction can be cured if you fix someone's environment.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ao8L-0nSYzg

[cdk 4219]

Let's clear something up - Narcan kits are one of the cheapest most effective lifesaving items on the market today. Kits cost between $20 and $40. compared to an average cost of $30K per body to the municpality to clean up a dead body (regardless of cause of death) passing out even $10K worth of Narcan to prevent those deaths makes financial sense. It's addressing the problem in a preventative stage. You know what else the state gives out for free? first aid kits, why? because it shows to help reduce state health care costs as well.

 

But you know what's not free? getting EMTs to administer Narcan. Most counties in ohio will offer people the kits to keep in their home so as long as you have someone willing to administer the kit and not charge you for it - yeah it's free. But so is a good Samaritan helping you out of that car wreck and driving you to the hospital. And by the way your injuries from getting in a car wreck because you were speeding is paid for by the state if you are an uninsured motorist who can't pay his hospital bill, and it costs way more than $20-$40 (and ohio has an uninsured motorist problem). If you fall off that ladder and don't have health insurance and can't pay the bill - sure they will try to collect and ruin your credit rating but the state eventually pays for the treatment. Yeah the majority of outcomes with speeding don't end in accident, and also the majority of drug taking doesn't end in overdose. Still car accidents are a problem, and the more people that are taking drugs the more overdoses are a problem.

 

 

 

 

Betcha you have still burned yourself as an adult though, probably doing something without thinking or not even knowing that thing was hot. Same kind of situation we are in here - thousands of people took legal prescription drugs because they had faith in their medical professional and no reason not to trust them and ended up with nasty drug habits.

 

You probably should donate some money to these causes that are near and dear to your heart. Oh wait, that should fall under somebody else’s responsibility. We should give these people a time out like they do for preschoolers. I think you need a time out as well.

[zeitgeist57]

https://www.ohio.com/akron/editorial/maureen-oconnor-look-closely-at-state-issue-1-its-a-disaster

 

Chief Justice O'Connor brings up some good points against the ballot initiative.

 

It is upsetting that our legislators can't come up with common-sense changes to drug laws or enforcement, that we need to come up with OH Constitutional amendments.

[Geeto67]

https://www.ohio.com/akron/editorial/maureen-oconnor-look-closely-at-state-issue-1-its-a-disaster

 

Chief Justice O'Connor brings up some good points against the ballot initiative.

 

It is upsetting that our legislators can't come up with common-sense changes to drug laws or enforcement, that we need to come up with OH Constitutional amendments.

 

Does she though? most of it is speculative....

 

"Ohio may end up with some of the most lenient drug crime laws in the nation if this proposed constitutional amendment passes"

 

Except not really, It's sort of a half truth.

 

There have been 11 other states that have passed similar laws (some that go even further toward leniency than proposed) and from the perspective of incarceration for a crime yes they are lenient - but that is kind of the point. Traditional incarceration policies have not been working to stem the issue at all and being lenient toward putting people in jail seems to be working in those 11 other states (most of whom are areas with an epidemic like problem). Where it is not lenient is investing in rehab and other programs to address the root cause of the problem - the addiction itself. It that regard it's fairly progressive and as those other 11 states show seems to be working to some degree.

 

Our state could easily become a magnet for substance abuse activity because there will be, in effect, very little criminal justice consequence to engaging in such behavior.

 

Except in those other states this has not borne out to be the case. Montana's drug intervention program (launched in 2016) is already bearing out results and they at one point had one of the largest methamphetamine epidemics. This is pure speculation and it actually smells a little bit of the republican party line more than a researched talking point.

 

 

The adoption of Issue 1 will have a devastating consequence on our drug courts. We know, through multiple studies, that drug courts are highly effective but only when they combine the “carrot” of treatment and support with the “stick” of judicial accountability, including incarceration when needed. The courts will be unable to incentivize an addict’s participation in drug court because the “carrot” of not having a felony conviction record is gone. There would be no felony!

 

She literally confuses the Felony charge for being the carrot and not the stick. I mean read this again - it's pretzel logic. She's right the court is effective with the carrot of treatment and support and issue 1 actually seeks to increase that, she's wrong about the stick part or that a felony is a form of "carrot".

 

But here is the thing 1) Issue 1 would require the sentence in probation and 2) mandatory treatment comes with it's own penalty. If the person refuses treatment, the probation is lifted and the incarceration is applied. Also if you refuse to go to court ordered treatment it has it's own criminal penalty for failing to obey a court order. Is it the hefty penalty of a felony? no, actually it's the Sheriff collecting the person and putting them into involuntary treatment and incarcerating them for a year.

 

Is there a weakness here? yes, ohio has something called Casey's law: "Under Casey’s law, a person suffering from drug or alcohol abuse will not be ordered to undergo involuntary treatment unless that person presents an imminent threat of danger to their self, family or others as a result of alcohol or drug abuse, or there exists a substantial likelihood of such a threat of danger in the near future", which means the court may be prohibited from ordering involuntary treatment unless the standard of harm to themselves or others is met. But that's not a problem with issue 1, that's a problem with another law that needs to be changed. which leads me to....

 

To make matters worse, Issue 1 would freeze our criminal drug offense laws in time. It expressly mandates that its provisions be implemented based on the laws in effect on Jan. 1, 2018. Our General Assembly couldn’t, by passing a statute, fix all that is wrong with Issue 1

 

She's right that the general assembly wouldn't have time to fix all that needs to be fixed before jan 1 2018. She's wrong about it being frozen in time though, and the bill could easily be amended with a later implementation date to provide time for the bill to be adjusted.

 

Now let's introduce partisan politics in it. Maureen is a republican. And not just any republican, she is both a former Prosecutor (1995-1997) and one who has a score of .92 on the Adam Bonica and Michael Woodruff Ideology scale. For comparison, most ohio republicans scored .062 where 1 is an extremest conservative 0 is non-partisan and any negative number is progressive. The Prosecutors office has already openly opposed this measure, and some speculate it is because it will actually mean budget cuts to their office and a reduction in staff and workload. Most Ohio republicans have gotten behind the opposition of Issue 1 because of the optics of it being "soft on crime".

 

We have already heard the exact same speculative and specious rhetoric from Mike DeWine, Robert Sprague, Don Fraser (and his daughter Shea), and other notable local republicans. All people connected to the prosecution and drug court side of the issue who stand to benefit from the status quo. Nothing is new here - the opposition to it is just more "tough on crime" politicking than it is seeking to be a solution to a very real problem ohioans are facing.

[spectragod]

My problem, fentanyl and carfentanyl possession becomes a misdemeanor. And then ask yourself, how exactly does a non violent first time offender wind up in prison, either it's not your first offense, or there are other circumstances in conjunction with your possession charge.

 

Do we as a collective have a addiction issue in the U.S., yep, we also have a lot of people who can't pass a drug test because they use and no one will hire them, seems like a simple choice for recreational users, what's more important, drugs or a career, I think we know the answer...........

 

Maybe we should, as the U.S., offer, free college for as long as you would like, free EBT cards (no limit), free homes, free cell phones, free cable, free utilities, free cars, monthly check ( say 5k?), free drugs (we can make it all legal), how long till the country shut down and we ran out of money?

 

Stop living for the weekend or your high, make a future and a life for yourself and stop walking around in a daze, spewing out what you believe are your constitutional rights..

 

Sorry for the puddles I left from the melting snowflakes, rant off.............

[Geeto67]

My problem, fentanyl and carfentanyl possession becomes a misdemeanor. And then ask yourself, how exactly does a non violent first time offender wind up in prison, either it's not your first offense, or there are other circumstances in conjunction with your possession charge.

 

Prison isn't working for addicts, and the majority of low level possession isn't suppliers pushing weight - it's recreational addicts.

 

If they are a repeat (3rd offense) offender then treatment isn't working for them either and you can feel free to spend on incarceration and it will come with a heavy sentence. This isn't a measure to clear out the lifetime junkies - it's there to stem the tide of people coming into it from the prescription opoid crisis, very few of whom actually end up long term users.

 

If there are other circumstances that put them in prison, then those aren't going to be non-violent circumstances, and maybe removing them from society for a while is best, they will still get treatment and they won't be out walking the streets.

 

 

Do we as a collective have a addiction issue in the U.S., yep, we also have a lot of people who can't pass a drug test because they use and no one will hire them, seems like a simple choice for recreational users, what's more important, drugs or a career, I think we know the answer...........

 

If addiction was a choice. But it isn't. Once your body is physically addicted to something like fentanyl or Heroin or any other opoid - not taking it makes you very sick. It requires medical intervention and a treatment program. You can't just decide to stop taking it one day and everything is fine. The "recreational" users we are talking about here aren't recreational like marijuana, they are functional addicts, people who are chemically addicted but whose lives have not spiraled out of control yet. There are plenty of cases of people having functional heroin and opoiod addiction for years, even decades, just are there are alcoholics who can do the same. It will catch up to them eventually either through financial or legal trouble, so why not take the approach that when they get caught up in legal trouble we get them the medical treatment they need.

 

Maybe we should, as the U.S., offer, free college for as long as you would like, free EBT cards (no limit), free homes, free cell phones, free cable, free utilities, free cars, monthly check ( say 5k?), free drugs (we can make it all legal), how long till the country shut down and we ran out of money?

 

Stop living for the weekend or your high, make a future and a life for yourself and stop walking around in a daze, spewing out what you believe are your constitutional rights..

 

Sorry for the puddles I left from the melting snowflakes, rant off.............

 

Blah Blah Blah....the scary socialist is in the window, whaaa whaaa....The "war on drugs" has only proven to do one thing - turn public money into private money through the privatized prision system. It hasn't helped the victims, it hasn't helped those incarcerated, it hasn't helped society.

 

The correct way to fight this isn't through the end user, it's electing law makers who will actually do something about the Pharmaceutical industry's transgressions against the American public. Regulate them, and you stem the tide of new users and then treatment and lenient drug sentencing isn't necessary anymore. Find politicians who don't take pharma money and actually want to stop it at the source. We don't have an epidemic because people suddenly think Heroin is more fun than netflix, we have an epidemic because these drug companies mislead the doctors, mislead the patients, paid lots of money for healthcare providers to push these drugs unnecessarily, and is now making money hand over fist manufacturing the drugs needed to treat the addiction (methadone).

 

or continue bitching about red scare and snowflakes and other such nonsense...choice is yours.

[spectragod]

Prison isn't working for addicts, and the majority of low level possession isn't suppliers pushing weight - it's recreational addicts.

 

If they are a repeat (3rd offense) offender then treatment isn't working for them either and you can feel free to spend on incarceration and it will come with a heavy sentence. This isn't a measure to clear out the lifetime junkies - it's there to stem the tide of people coming into it from the prescription opoid crisis, very few of whom actually end up long term users.

 

If there are other circumstances that put them in prison, then those aren't going to be non-violent circumstances, and maybe removing them from society for a while is best, they will still get treatment and they won't be out walking the streets.

 

 

 

 

If addiction was a choice. But it isn't. Once your body is physically addicted to something like fentanyl or Heroin or any other opoid - not taking it makes you very sick. It requires medical intervention and a treatment program. You can't just decide to stop taking it one day and everything is fine. The "recreational" users we are talking about here aren't recreational like marijuana, they are functional addicts, people who are chemically addicted but whose lives have not spiraled out of control yet. There are plenty of cases of people having functional heroin and opoiod addiction for years, even decades, just are there are alcoholics who can do the same. It will catch up to them eventually either through financial or legal trouble, so why not take the approach that when they get caught up in legal trouble we get them the medical treatment they need.

 

 

 

Blah Blah Blah....the scary socialist is in the window, whaaa whaaa....The "war on drugs" has only proven to do one thing - turn public money into private money through the privatized prision system. It hasn't helped the victims, it hasn't helped those incarcerated, it hasn't helped society.

 

The correct way to fight this isn't through the end user, it's electing law makers who will actually do something about the Pharmaceutical industry's transgressions against the American public. Regulate them, and you stem the tide of new users and then treatment and lenient drug sentencing isn't necessary anymore. Find politicians who don't take pharma money and actually want to stop it at the source. We don't have an epidemic because people suddenly think Heroin is more fun than netflix, we have an epidemic because these drug companies mislead the doctors, mislead the patients, paid lots of money for healthcare providers to push these drugs unnecessarily, and is now making money hand over fist manufacturing the drugs needed to treat the addiction (methadone).

 

or continue bitching about red scare and snowflakes and other such nonsense...choice is yours.

 

Good lord, where to start...........

 

Actually, possessing certain narcotics in a "school zone" will get you jammed up, recreational or not, kinda like going on a military base or federal building with a gun. Or better yet, possession of fentanyl and a gun.

 

Addiction in most cases is a choice, a lot of addicts were merely recreational users, and became hooked, it has nothing to do with pharmaceutical companies, private prisons, aliens, what ever bullshit your trying to spew.

 

I'm not worried about what ever socialist crap your referring to, I don't care. When your junkie friend tries to rob me or break into my house, I'll cure their addiction, and I haven't seen a whole lot of success stories, but I'm sure you have a video of someone claiming how big money companies cured them but it cost them everything, blah blah blah, if YOU choose to stick a needle in your arm, then YOU caused YOUR addiction, and the majority of users started just that way, wanna know how I know, because we know a lot of them by name, see them all the time, we know where they came from and how they got hooked, not some made up shit you believe. Back to blocking you, do you even own a car?

[RedRocket1647545505]

If addiction was a choice. But it isn't. Once your body is physically addicted to something like fentanyl or Heroin or any other opoid - not taking it makes you very sick. It requires medical intervention and a treatment program.

 

I agree that addiction isn't a choice. However, taking more than the prescribed dose is, and a lot of times (read: not all) that's why people get into trouble. People can't seem to follow simple dosing instructions. If 1-2 tabs every 6 hours for severe pain is good, then 3-4 tabs every 6 hours must be even better. Fast forward one month, and Voila, you're chemically dependent/addicted.

 

I don't know how we arrived where we are, but people in this country have this irrational idea that they can and should be pain-free. BREAKING NEWS: Pain has never killed anyone. It's annoying and if left uncontrolled, it can be debilitating, but it will not kill you. I get families in all the time that will ask me,

 

"Are they in pain?"

 

"Well, Karen, they broke their femur, pelvis, 9 ribs, humerus, 6 vertebrae, we've zipped open their abdomen and played with their insides, and we've shoved a tube in every opening in their body. Yea, they're probably in some pain."

 

"Oh, I don't want them to be in any pain."

 

"Well, neither do I, but I also don't want them to be a heroin addict when they get out of here. I can decrease their levels, but I can't, and won't, get rid of it completely. Pain is a powerful motivator."

 

Its my belief that the start of the prescription opioid epidemic (or at least part of it) started because of CMS reimbursement and it's failing funding. Whatever genius thought it was a good idea to tie hospital and physician reimbursement to patient satisfaction is truly a special person. The survey they send patients after a hospital stay used to include a question that was something to the tune of, 'Was your pain controlled?' These questions are scored in an All-or-Nothing basis. So if your patient stated their pain was controlled 95% of the time; the hospital and physician still failed, and they won't be reimbursed for that portion of it. So of course they're going to start handing out narcs like candy; they want paid. I can't blame them. Blame your .gov for tying these stupid surveys into their paychecks.

 

I'm told they've since removed that particular question from the survey, but the surveys themselves are still a dumb idea. I'm all for allowing the patient to make SOME decisions about their own personal care, but allowing them to dictate nearly every process is ridiculous. They didn't go to school to be a physician, and they shouldn't be allowed to make physician decisions.

 

'Do you want us to fix you?'

 

YES NO (Circle one)

[Geeto67]

Good lord, where to start...........

 

Actually, possessing certain narcotics in a "school zone" will get you jammed up, recreational or not, kinda like going on a military base or federal building with a gun. Or better yet, possession of fentanyl and a gun.

 

What's your point? that Issue 1 won't put those people in jail for multiple years? or that those are exclusions - You got 75% of the way there but didn't make the final point you were trying to make.

 

Addiction in most cases is a choice, a lot of addicts were merely recreational users, and became hooked, it has nothing to do with pharmaceutical companies, private prisons, aliens, what ever bullshit your trying to spew.

 

 

Between 2013 and now 83-85% of new heroin users came in through legal pharmaceutical drugs. You can claim it's a recreational choice all you want, but the reality is recreational addicts who chose to start with heroin or fentanyl are a small portion of opoid addicts and their numbers haven't really been increasing, but the numbers on addicts who started with legal prescription opoids and moved into this is growing fast enough to call it an epidemic.

 

 

....wanna know how I know, because we know a lot of them by name, see them all the time, we know where they came from and how they got hooked, not some made up shit you believe. Back to blocking you, do you even own a car?

 

So all the evidence you need is just what you see in your small world and nothing that happened before you were a LEO or what is happening on the national stage matters, just because in your little beat you see a bunch of constantly in trouble junkies and you think that is the sum total of the entire problem. If you can't see it with your own two eye's it's made up.

 

 

Look I am not saying the work you do isn't important, or that what you see isn't happening. I am just saying that this problem goes beyond whatever same 6 people you run into on your small regular beat. Since 1996 (the same year Oxycontin was brought to market) the use of illegal opoids has increased dramatically - more than we have ever seen before, and the majority is tied to legal opoids. You can do your own homework on this you don't have to take my word for it, the horrible part about this epidemic is that it's going to continue to happen whether you believe it what is causing/contributing to it or not.

 

 

 

I agree that addiction isn't a choice. However, taking more than the prescribed dose is, and a lot of times (read: not all) that's why people get into trouble. People can't seem to follow simple dosing instructions. If 1-2 tabs every 6 hours for severe pain is good, then 3-4 tabs every 6 hours must be even better. Fast forward one month, and Voila, you're chemically dependent/addicted.

 

I understand and I mostly agree....however.....It is an undisputed fact that Perdue Pharma (the maker of oxycontin) lied to Physicians, Hospitals, and the American public at large about how addictive it was while heavily marketing it for ALL types of pain releif that the standard pain meds at the time were not addressing. The Justice Department investigated this in 2007 and made a recommendation that the majority of it's executives face multiple count felonies for this fraud. The "W" Bush administration, heavily funded by the pharma industry, elected instead to charge 3 executive with misdemeanor mislabeling charges to which they plead to. It was an amazing travesty of justice to the American people, think about it - this company was allowed to knowing lie about the addictive properties of it's medicine, actively worked to hide and suppress real information about the drug's addictive properties, pay dr's generously to prescribe it telling them it's safe for a lot of things, and then got to avoid taking any responsibility for creating this huge mess by paying a small fee on failing to put it on the label. We can't go back and charge them for those felony charges retroactively, The "W" administration fucked all of american by letting these guys off the hook.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/health/purdue-opioids-oxycontin.html

 

Now lets put this in perspective - Don't you think the company that lied about how addictive the drug was, and hid the fact that not taking it will cause you pain, contributed to the situation of people abusing their prescriptions by taking more than prescribed? Do you think a dr would have prescribed this medication for the majority of cases if he knew that in the majority of patients it would make their pain management more difficult by causing withdrawal pain and carrying a high likelihood of addiction? It's easy to point the finger and say "well it's the patient's fault for taking more than prescribed" if we knew about these concerns before hand, but I somehow think that the drug would not have been as widely prescribed and the dosage and regimen would have been completely different if everyone knew the trust upfront and hadn't been actively mislead by the drug companies, and maybe we wouldn't have near the problem we have now.

 

 

 

...."Pain is a powerful motivator."

I agree, and this is kind of what this issue turns around. Opiates cause the patient pain when the patient stops taking them, and withdrawal sickness or dope sickness has absolutely killed people. So the patient takes the opiate to turn a debilitating pain into a manageable pain, but then finds that the longer they take the pain starts backsliding to debilitating, and if they stop the get to debilitating pain quick and plus have to deal with dope sickness on top - so they take more trying to stay ahead of the pain so they can do their job, pick up their kids, and generally get some semblance of normal in their life. And maybe long term their original pain heals and goes away, they are still stuck trying to keep the dope sickness at bay till they go broke, get caught, or overdose.

 

I don't know that everybody want's to be "pain free" but near everybody wants their pain to be managed so they can at least get back to the majority of their life activities. It's a little unfair to say people's expectations are too high when the drug it self is adding to their pin long term.

 

Its my belief that the start of the prescription opioid epidemic (or at least part of it) started because of CMS reimbursement and it's failing funding. Whatever genius thought it was a good idea to tie hospital and physician reimbursement to patient satisfaction is truly a special person. The survey they send patients after a hospital stay used to include a question that was something to the tune of, 'Was your pain controlled?' These questions are scored in an All-or-Nothing basis. So if your patient stated their pain was controlled 95% of the time; the hospital and physician still failed, and they won't be reimbursed for that portion of it. So of course they're going to start handing out narcs like candy; they want paid. I can't blame them. Blame your .gov for tying these stupid surveys into their paychecks.

 

I'm told they've since removed that particular question from the survey, but the surveys themselves are still a dumb idea. I'm all for allowing the patient to make SOME decisions about their own personal care, but allowing them to dictate nearly every process is ridiculous. They didn't go to school to be a physician, and they shouldn't be allowed to make physician decisions.

 

'Do you want us to fix you?'

 

YES NO (Circle one)

 

yeah, maybe that's part of it too, how much a part? i don't know. It certainly provides an incentive for Dr's to provide a drug that was very effective short term in alleviating pain but they were lied to about it's addictive properties.

[Cordell]

I think Kerry is writing these dissertations trying to get a doctorate in Columbus Racing. If I read all your posts can I get a bachelors degree?

[Geeto67]

I think Kerry is writing these dissertations trying to get a doctorate in Columbus Racing. If I read all your posts can I get a bachelors degree?

 

I just really believe in Issue 1 and I would like to see people get behind it.

 

The traditional approach isn't working, it's costing you, me, and every one else who pays taxes in this city and state a lot of money and there is no end in sight. That's money that could be going to schools and roads.

 

All the people advocating against Issue 1 are the people whose livelihood relies on incarcerating people, who profit from it, or who gain political points for being "hard on crime". They don't have an alternate solution, just want to keep doing what isn't working.

 

Sorry Cordell, no bachelors degree, but if you vote for Issue 1 i'll buy you a cup of coffee.

[El Karacho1647545492]

So you truly believe the majority of heroin users are drug addicts because of their Doctor...not their own personal choice?????

 

The doctor may have prescribed pain meds...but they did it because the client told them they were in pain and needed/wanted them. It's the individuals choice to take them. Just as it is the individuals choice to continue taking them when they are no longer in pain because they LIKE and WANT the feeling the meds provide. It is the individuals CHOICE to then try heroin because it's cheaper than the pills off the street.

 

If you feel the NEED for these meds after the prescription ends and you go to heroin...it's your choice and you are now an addict. Instead of heroin, or buying pills on the street, go to rehab.

 

Addiction is not a disease.

-Marc

 

My best friend played football through high school and college. Before he was legally able to make his own medical decisions, he was prescribed percocet for persistent spine issues (much like how before I was old enough to make my own legal medical decisions, I was prescribed Vioxx to help with rotator cuff issues). Doctors told his parents it was safe and non-addictive. When he got to college his coaches told him he needed to put on weight to become an OL instead of a LB. He wanted to succeed and play at the highest level, but his body kept giving out on him. They crammed him full of more percocet. His football friends and coaches surrounded him with the culture that you play through the pain and if the pain becomes too much, here's a magic pill that'll help get your football career on track.

 

 

His reliance on pills was, in most ways, his choice, but all our choices are informed by those we know and trust; parents, friends, doctors, coaches, all the trusted people in his life basically. By the time heroin came into the picture for him, he'd been addicted to these allegedly non-addictive pills for 5 years, and was continuing to have them prescribed to him. His body couldn't survive without it. His detox, which he committed himself to, lasted a week. He had to throw out the shoes he wore there because the garbage that came out of his body made them smell so bad. He's not touched the junk for a long time, but addiction IS a disease. It's something he'll always have in the back of his mind. "I never want to do H again, but I can't describe to you what an amazing thing it is to actually be on it. All the pain I'd lived with for years went away. It's very difficult to walk away from that and continue living with the pain."

 

 

I'm happy that you've had a life that allows you the comfort of your opinion. Please be respectful enough of other people's different experiences and realize that not everyone has been so fortunate as you.