The fentanyl that’s around in US today is even worse
Apparently doesn’t feel as good as heroin, but hits harder (puts you to sleep) and only lasts 1-2 hours before you are back in withdrawl
An abscess is easy to drain. In requiem for a dream the guys arm was festering and he was like “ahhh what’s happening to my arm? Why is this happening?”
Clearly unaware it was an abscess… that is ridiculous. He was screaming in pain (in the film) though honestly I reckon if you were addicted to heavy doses of a powerful painkiller you PROBABLY wouldn’t feel that much pain while under the influence right?
I remember one of the WWE stars talking about his hydrocodone/oxycodone addiction saying “you could have shot me and I wouldn’t have felt it”
What if under the influence of crack the kid beats another kid into a coma in a psychosis induced rage?
I agree in principle personal use thst doesn’t affect anyone else shouldn’t be prosecuted
However it rarely pans out like this… that’s why I like Portuguls “case by case” approach to drug use and addiction
Some kid caught with one tablet at a party without a documented history of degenerate behaviour… log it on a non criminal record for future reference, intervene if a pattern starts to unfold…. Maybe a small fine (civil penalty) for being caught in public because we don’t want that stuff in public spaces. People who get caught GENERALLY are the people who have already lost comtrol, so if you are getting caught multiple times it really should make you question “why”.
Say kid steals 1000$ from his friend to buy weed (I actually know someone who did this, I hated him)… now it’s more serious even if it’s only pot… time for intervention and punishment
This line of logic assigning criminal penalty to your semantical use of victim considering context would likely have us all in jail at some point. In a scenario of responsibility of personal choice, the buck stops with the decision maker.
In a more direct analogy than the Walmart wading pool, I wouldn’t expect to see Anhueser-Busch executives in prison because someone’s son became an addict requiring massive financial and other support to fix either.
Then prosecute him for assault. I don’t understand the issue. We already have this scenario employed.
Same as alcohol. Drink at a bar, a restaurant, at home, at a concert et cetera and nobody cares. Go in to a drunk rage and start assaulting someone and it’s a problem.
I agree with an escalation process as mentioned before, but still believe the key should be uniformity for like crimes.
We’ve all seen kids get caught and wind up in much different scenarios for the exact same thing. Some a slap on the wrist and no long term alteration to their lives, others a penalty that takes them out of critical years of school and leaves them with a permanent life altering record.
I’m not saying just throw every criminal away and lose the key but standardize.
You could accurately take my view of separating criminal threats to society from society by imprisoning them through a standardized penalty system with an escalation component built in as an active form of separation and behavior monitoring and assessment (which we also already have directly in the form of probation).
The bones you’re mentioning are all there, they’re just applied kind of wonky and with conflicting views of why (separation, remediation, punishment itself, et cetera)
I sympathize with the situation. I’ve seen an image of “Fatherhood” where the father and the child were made of puzzle pieces. The child was a full puzzle, and the father had pieces missing, illustrated in a way you could tell he was putting himself into his child. A scenario described by @RT_Nomad would absolutely require the whole puzzle quickly.
However, I don’t see a scenario where two adults exchanging money and drugs willingly should be a crime. Regulate it the same way as alcohol. What happened here was a poor personal choice with sad outcomes, but that doesn’t necessitate criminal response.
Fake ID seems like a harmless thing however it’s a deeper issue here.
Adults lie cheat and steal and kids who have fake IDs even if it’s just to get inside a bar end up growing up to be these liers and cheaters in life.
I’m not saying they should go to prison, but there is red flags there.
I never had a fake ID, I walked into the bar with Kahonas, made myself look older in some way, if I got carded, so be it, if they served me, all right I got in! But I never told lies to get something I wanted.
I had one once… never became a liar/cheater, nor was I necessarily a bad kid… I wasn’t strait laced but I wasn’t “antisocial” either. I’d call myself straight laced today at 24. Not quite straight edge but close (I go out for drinks a few times per year for instance)
I was 17 and 11 months (drinking age 18 here for public venues)
If 17-18 year old me was told I’d essentially become a square at 24 he would have laughed 24 year old me out of the room!
I was a teenager before and for a very short time after 9/11.
9/11 changed everything. So much govt oversight, lockdowns, security measures that had never existed before were the new norm. It’s hard to describe now but there was a certain sense of “free” before which definitely ended. Including youth mischief.
School yard fights were a 15 minute detention and forced handshake at the end or a referral to the football coach if appropriate.
Playing hooky was just a thing kids do. Cue Ferris Bueller.
Keg parties were a poorly kept secret most parents more or less monitored vs freaked out about.
Senior pranks were funny, not tickets to jail and so on.
I had a fake ID at 16 and used to buy beer with it all the time.
The reason attitudes around fake IDs shifted circa 2002 was because of 9/11 and perceived terror threats leveraged through potential alternate identities to come in to our country and attack us.
So I suppose the question could be what context catching someone with a fake ID should be applied. The possession of a fake ID itself, or the manner in which is was used? Hijacking a plane vs. spending lawn mowing money on a case of beer for example.
I believe there will be room for disagreement on how to apply uniformity to sentencing if we get granular, but there should be uniformity non the less as codifying legal response begins. As mentioned earlier, make it commensurate to the threat and intent.
Most of the people I ran with back then are no good.
Some of them are good people and all but I would not trust them. They are wheeling dealing etc and hard to trust. I don’t even recall folks in my crew who had fake IDs but there were older guys who had them.
To this day, I don’t get involved with people I knew growing up in anything except I’ll say hi to them or maybe a drink.
It’s interesting how much you really don’t know about people until they get caught. I’ve seen people appear to have the good life with expensive toys it’s usually (not always) some type of lie and scam. I’m not into expensive toys at all. I’ve seen this fairly tale life that looks all too good only to crash and burn from lies and debt.
It’s not shifting anything. I’m putting things in the context of reality, not some libertarian utopia. Your position is an if position. My position is the way it is position. You know you wouldn’t want drug dealers selling drugs in front of your house whether legal or illegal, and you know this. When property values go down, now you have victims.
Why are you assuming drug dealers would be selling drugs in front of houses? Alcohol, a drug, has been legal my entire life. Replete with addiction, poor state dependent decision making, violence, early death, deadly accidents et cetera. I have yet to see anyone sell alcohol in front of my house.
Decreasing property value isn’t a crime. I live in an established, “close-in” neighborhood in a popular and growing town. My values are relatively stable considering the location however the town is small enough that any increase in inventory, even extra jurisdictional assuming similar property value and marketshare, temporarily dips my market value.
Does this mean the land developers are criminals? The original landowners selling to the developers? Are both complicit? The city and county govts for allowing the zoning?
Id legalize all drugs. Drugs and drug related crimes account for like 60% of the prison population (pulled out of my ass). Legalize it, regulate it, tax it, i dont give a shit. Just look at pot. I lived in a state where its totally legal and state sponsored and i currently live in a state where possessing an ounce will get you a felony charge. I have no desire to smoke pot in either place. Who cares? People who want to shoot heroin are shooting heroin. Legality is not the determining factor, but it does fill the prisons up.
I didn’t assume anything. Where did I say that? I said you wouldn’t want them selling drugs in front of your house. Am I wrong? I get it if you don’t want to answer as you are in deflection mode.
And BTW, they do sell drugs in front of houses, so there’s that.
But you wouldn’t want that to happen to you, now would you?
Exactly. You answered my questions without answering them. But maybe it’s OK with you that the consequences of your utopian vision are visited upon others.
In federal not state. State is majority violent crime.
So that revenue can go to increase police funding and social programs as a result of increased addiction and the consequences that go with it. We do have a shortage of drug damaged infants.
You’d rather trip over homeless addicts and avoid stepping on needles on your way to getting ice cream with the kids?