America's Most Dangerous Drug

[KathleenElsie]

Bobby A. Greene:

Legalize it and tax it. This will break the back of the drug dealers.

I believe this has been tried before with other drugs. It has never worked.
Ask those people in the Europe where it is decriminalized if it works. The people on the drugs do not contribute to their society only take from it.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

catsrus:

As I said in my original post, one who has not lived with a meth addict cannot possibly know what it’s really about.

I have not ‘lived with’ a meth addict. But several members of my family and several friends have had serious addiction problems. The pattern which I knew was the same right across the board.

Certainly those people I knew who went into recovery and stayed with it, I agree, are admirable people. The others: no thank you.

 

[Bobby_A.Greene]

Adonis33:

Alcohol is a diaretic. When you drink alcohol you loose water. You body needs this water, and the first place it gets water is your brain. A hangover is not a “temporary withdrawl”, but your body telling you that you need to drink water. (I used to teach Health in HS).

One of the first signs of heat exhuastion is a headache - same thing.

Psychopharmocology Class, UMass: A hangover is a temporary withdrawal symptom, and being drunk is a temporary addiction. I have a B.A. in Psych, a B.A. in History, and an M.A. in History and I used to teach at A.A. workshops.

 

[Adonis33]

Bobby A. Greene:

Psychopharmocology Class, UMass: A hangover is a temporary withdrawal symptom, and being drunk is a temporary addiction. I have a B.A. in Psych, a B.A. in History, and an M.A. in History and I used to teach at A.A. workshops.

I do not know what they taught in Psychopharmocology, But every research I have studied indicates that Alcohol is a diaretic, and takes water from your body. The other effects are the cause of your body breaking the alcohol down.

I have never heard you theory before, although that in itself does not mean anything. If you could provide a link, or some references to research - I would be eager to go through it. If I am wrong, I need to be corrected.

Sorry for hijacking this thread.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

vern humphrey:

My bad example? You mean working all my life, providing for my children, remaining married to the same woman, never using drugs? That bad example?

Mr. Humphrey, I think he means something like getting up in the morning, reading about the addicts in the newspaper, and saying, “There, but for the grace of God, go I.” He can’t sense that you do that, and if you didn’t, that would be the sin of pride… which, if you never admitted it and offered it up for forgiveness, would be as deadly to your soul as any other could be, drug abuse and dealing included. Deadly sins are, of course, never victimless.

He probably doesn’t know that you make great efforts in your state to honestly look at the problems Arkansas faces and to change how the poor and disadvantaged are “helped” into something that will lead to more lasting and meaningful changes.

Drug addiction is not a “victimless” crime. A person who is addicted to drugs, alcohol, or even self-indulgence is prevented from contributing their full share to society. As I believe you, Mr. Humphrey, have said many times, the societal compact does go both ways. If we have any expectation that society owes us help when we are down and out, we have to ask ourselves what we owe society when we are not. Merely avoiding criminal behavior is not sufficient to fulfill our duty as citizens. We are duty-bound to make a positive contribution, if we can. A citizen who truly can’t contribute retains their dignity and right to be treated with dignity, but no citizen has the right to be a perpetual child.

You are so right about the 20-30 year olds who look a hard-ridden 60 in a matter of months. Of all the drugs that steal lives, meth seems to be the biggest thief of life of them all. It has gotten to the point in Oregon that we are going to put Sudafed (etc.) behind the pharmacist’s counter and limit legal distribution of meth precursers in general.

The war on drugs may need a new tack, but it should not be abandoned. The war on sin may be said to be a total failure, too, but to give up the fight would be to give in to despair. You can’t let your love for the sinner keep you from loving them enough to keep hating the sin.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Absolutely, we should help. But we should never lose sight of the fact that drugs ARE dangerous, and that some forms of “help” are merely enabling people to stay on drugs. More “help” in the form of legalizing drugs may cause more harm by orders of magnitude than the problems we now face.

We should also NOT regard drug users as helpless victims, any more than we should regard drunken wife-beaters that way – they do real damage to society.

Here in Arkansas, we have put the Sudafed behind the counter and are pushing to have it re-formulated. How much good that will do remains to be seen. I have seen a checkout clerk simply ring up a multiple package buy as several single packet buys. I know that at one time it was difficult for cookers to get anhydrous ammonia – now they can make it by using scuba tanks for pressure.

I wish I had a solution, but I don’t. I do, however fear that “legalization” will let a genie out of the bottle and we won’t get him back in.

 

[Bobby_A.Greene]

Adonis33:

I do not know what they taught in Psychopharmocology, But every research I have studied indicates that Alcohol is a diaretic, and takes water from your body.

Diaretic, well yes of course. Tea is a diaretic also, but one doesn’t get a hangover from an overindulgence of Tea.

As you know alcohol is addictive. The hangover is the result of the addictive effects of alcohol, as you correctly pointed out, the body trying rid itself of the alcohol, by breaking it down then expulsing it through exhalation, urination, vomitus, diarhea, profuse sweating, with the accompanying headache, etc. The body does the same thing when it is addicted to meth or heroin (or anything).

Alcohol is addictive, but not as addictive as meth or heroin. So it takes a while of constant alcohol consumption before you permantly addict your self to alcohol, which is alcoholism.

Alcoholism is simply the addiction to alcohol. (It’s an addiction not a disease!).

 

[vern_humphrey]

Bobby A. Greene:

Diaretic, well yes of course. Tea is a diaretic also, but one doesn’t get a hangover from an overindulgence of Tea.

As you know alcohol is addictive. The hangover is the result of the addictive effects of alcohol, as you correctly pointed out, the body trying rid itself of the alcohol, by breaking it down then expulsing it through exhalation, urination, vomitus, diarhea, profuse sweating, with the accompanying headache, etc. The body does the same thing when it is addicted to meth or heroin (or anything).

Alcohol is addictive, but not as addictive as meth or heroin. So it takes a while of constant alcohol consumption before you permantly addict your self to alcohol, which is alcoholism.

Alcoholism is simply the addiction to alcohol. (It’s an addiction not a disease!).

Perhaps the parable of the skydiver wouldn’t be out of place here.

An instructor took up a student to 12,000 feet and told him to jump.

“But I don’t have a parachute!! I’ll be killed!”

“Nonsense,” said the instructor. “You jumped out of bed this morning, and that didn’t hurt you, did it?”

When we compare alchol and its effects with crystal meth, we are comparing jumping out of bed with jumping from an airplane in flight.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

vern humphrey:

Absolutely, we should help. But we should never lose sight of the fact that … some forms of “help” are merely enabling people to stay on drugs.

The discipline which we exercise in determining what kind of help we give is something we can control. Everything else is out of our control. And that is so important to learn. We can’t change addicts. We can only model healthy behaviour which includes self-protection.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Ani Ibi:

The discipline which we exercise in determining what kind of help we give is something we can control. Everything else is out of our control. And that is so important to learn. We can’t change addicts. We can only model healthy behaviour which includes self-protection.

And some times our actions are justifiable self-defense. I may have mentioned a case where I was asked to help obtain clemency for a man who raped and brutally beat a woman while under the influence of drugs. He then dragged her unconscious body up a railroad embankment and left her with both arms draped over the tracks. She lost both arms and suffered permanent brain damage from the beating.

I concluded in this case that the best treatment for this person was to keep him locked up.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

vern humphrey:

Absolutely, we should help. But we should never lose sight of the fact that drugs ARE dangerous, and that some forms of “help” are merely enabling people to stay on drugs. More “help” in the form of legalizing drugs may cause more harm by orders of magnitude than the problems we now face.

We should also NOT regard drug users as helpless victims, any more than we should regard drunken wife-beaters that way – they do real damage to society.

Here in Arkansas, we have put the Sudafed behind the counter and are pushing to have it re-formulated. How much good that will do remains to be seen. I have seen a checkout clerk simply ring up a multiple package buy as several single packet buys. I know that at one time it was difficult for cookers to get anhydrous ammonia – now they can make it by using scuba tanks for pressure.

I wish I had a solution, but I don’t. I do, however fear that “legalization” will let a genie out of the bottle and we won’t get him back in.

Hence why I put “help” in quotes. Intending to help and helping are not the same thing. What impresses me about you is your determination to do what actually helps, rather than continuing to do what we wish would help without examination of alternatives.

Mind you, I am in favor of imposing fines on those who won’t wear seatbelts. Why? Because when a person gets in an accident at 35 mph and puts their head through a windshield, they expect society to pay for their head injury, which be assured their savings will not. They expect society to make up the tax difference from their lost wages. Where we expect something from society, we have to realize society is going to expect something in return, if only just to pay for it.

I also think it is at very least a near occasion of sin to self-medicate for pyschic or emotional pain… I don’t care if your “drug” of choice is alcohol, drugs, or twinkies, you are running a very high risk of shortening your life and liveliness if you go down that road. Alcohol, when it is not used for self-medication, has a long history of appropriate use. Orthodox Jews consume alcohol every week, and yet alcoholism is rare in that community. My mom and dad had a beer and a shot essentially every day of their adult lives except during Advent and Lent, and I do not know of a single instance in which either were drunk, in my presence or otherwise. Science tells us that their “use pattern” is probably beneficial to their health. While I will concede that it may be possible for marijuana to be used in that manner, I challenge anyone to find me one user of meth that can make that claim.

I think it needs to be said that being a victim and being guilty are not mutually exclusive… neither are being worthy of pity and worthy of punishment. Just because a pusher & user needs drug treatment does not mean they do not deserve to do jail time. Whether society finds that providing or imposing either is a practically available choice is another matter, but it isn’t a terrible thing to send people to jail for serious violations of law. We do have a societal compact, and part of that is that we either abide by the laws passed by our elected officials, or we refuse to do so and accept the stated consequences. Does intent and circumstance need to be taken into account? Of course… and that is why we have judges. Is the system perfect? Well, of course not. But to paraphrase Mark Twain, if the system were to be perfect, none of us could be allowed to participate.

 

[oat_soda]

Treatment works, incarceration doesn’t. Americans like being tough instead of compassionate.

i have to agree with you here. durg addicts have a sickness which needs treatment. we shouldn’t demonize them and think the answer is to enforce tougher laws.

something over 90% of all crimes are drug related. but i don’t know if that means you make them legal. for example look at abortion. if something is inheriently evil like drugs, pornography, contraceptives, …etc., it should be illegal.

the fact that they are illegal does provide for organized crime and violence. maybe we should see that drug use is a symptom of a larger problem -the break down of the family. i think we should attack the problem at it’s source and promote healthy loving families. contraception, homosexuality, pornography, divorse, secularism, only exasterbate the problem.

 

[vern_humphrey]

oat soda:

i have to agree with you here. durg addicts have a sickness which needs treatment. we shouldn’t demonize them and think the answer is to enforce tougher laws.

something over 90% of all crimes are drug related. but i don’t know if that means you make them legal. for example look at abortion. if something is inheriently evil like drugs, pornography, contraceptives, …etc., it should be illegal.

the fact that they are illegal does provide for organized crime and violence. maybe we should see that drug use is a symptom of a larger problem -the break down of the family. i think we should attack the problem at it’s source and promote healthy loving families. contraception, homosexuality, pornography, divorse, secularism, only exasterbate the problem.

On the other hand it is users who create the demand. It is users who commit the crimes. And users are usually pushers.

If we had treatment in jail, or more effective treatment, it seems to me that would be the best way to go.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

vern humphrey:

On the other hand it is users who create the demand. It is users who commit the crimes. And users are usually pushers.

If we had treatment in jail, or more effective treatment, it seems to me that would be the best way to go.

Yes; although I would not give preferential availability to offenders. I would not like someone to think they need to hold up a convenience store or to endanger minors to get themselves into treatment, since drug users who have gotten a clue as to their position are desparate enough to do that. Whether in or out of prison, treatment needs to be paid for by the person in treatment, even if by in-person means, like community service. That which is offered for nothing tends to be viewed as being available to be squandered.

We also need to get away from a culture that worships the self. When a person thinks they are responsible only to themselves, that they have no one to depend on and no one depending on them, it is much easier to fool oneself into thinking that drug use is less dangerous than it is or that it will solve problems that it will only make worse.

Real economic and educational opportunities for the poor and disadvantaged are also very important. People who think they have nothing to lose, nothing to gain, and no reason to hold their head up are willing to do some fairly unimaginable things. But the opportunities have to be real, as you have often said.

 

[vern_humphrey]

BLB_Oregon:

Yes; although I would not give preferential availability to offenders. I would not like someone to think they need to hold up a convenience store or to endanger minors to get themselves into treatment, since drug users who have gotten a clue as to their position are desparate enough to do that. Whether in or out of prison, treatment needs to be paid for by the person in treatment, even if by in-person means, like community service. That which is offered for nothing tends to be viewed as being available to be squandered.

You are right. A person who commits a crime due to drugs should be treated as any other criminal. I would offer drug treatment in prison, though, because such a high percentage of criminals are drug addicts.

Still, I am reminded of some courses in criminology I took when stationed at Fort Polk. The instructor was the chief sociologist in the Louisiana State penal system. He used to say things like, “When you start to rehabilitate someone, you should ask yourself if he was ever habilitated to begin with.”

And, “Rehabilitation is often a crutch – it’s something we do to or for criminals. A lot of criminals justify their crimes to themselves by saying, ‘Well, THEY never rehabilitated me.’”

BLB_Oregon:

We also need to get away from a culture that worships the self. When a person thinks they are responsible only to themselves, that they have no one to depend on and no one depending on them, it is much easier to fool oneself into thinking that drug use is less dangerous than it is or that it will solve problems that it will only make worse.

I wish I knew how to do that. As I pointed out, “education” in this realm consists of things like shame and guilt. I don’t do a lot of things I might do because I would feel shame and guilt if I did them. That is the essense of the “Inner-directed Man” – the person who has a code and lives up to it.

But things like shame and guilt aren’t politically correct anymore.

BLB_Oregon:

Real economic and educational opportunities for the poor and disadvantaged are also very important. People who think they have nothing to lose, nothing to gain, and no reason to hold their head up are willing to do some fairly unimaginable things. But the opportunities have to be real, as you have often said.

The FIRST step in solving our problems is to provide a first-class education to EVERY child. We have failed to do that, and the poor are the ones who get the worst schools.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

vern humphrey:

I wish I knew how to do that. As I pointed out, “education” in this realm consists of things like shame and guilt. I don’t do a lot of things I might do because I would feel shame and guilt if I did them. That is the essense of the “Inner-directed Man” – the person who has a code and lives up to it.

But things like shame and guilt aren’t politically correct anymore.

I don’t think that shame and guilt are the essence of an inner-directed person. I do think that an appropriate sense of guilt is necessary for a proper formation of conscience, but it is a mistake to stop there. I think that it is that tack that gave guilt a bad name.

The greatest contributions to society are not guilt or shame-driven, but gratitude-driven, connection-driven, grace-driven. They flow out of a proper knowledge of what one has to contribute and the tremendous amount that one has recieved. There has to be a sense that “My gifts are mine to use for all, myself included, not mine to waste or mine to use for myself only.”

Possibly the starting point is to convince people of how important they are and what that means in terms of duty to self and others. To be cynical about your self-worth is as tragic as to be unduly impressed with it.

 

[vern_humphrey]

BLB_Oregon:

I don’t think that shame and guilt are the essence of an inner-directed person. I do think that an appropriate sense of guilt is necessary for a proper formation of conscience, but it is a mistake to stop there. I think that it is that tack that gave guilt a bad name.

Shame and guilt are virtually the definition of the inner-directed man. And it’s a practical approach – remember that bad behavior has rewards. If I steal, I get free money. If I take drugs, I feel good and the other kids think I’m cool. If I lie, I avoid punishment for what I did. And so on.

Guilt and shame add negative consequences to these behaviors.

BLB_Oregon:

The greatest contributions to society are not guilt or shame-driven, but gratitude-driven, connection-driven, grace-driven. They flow out of a proper knowledge of what one has to contribute and the tremendous amount that one has recieved. There has to be a sense that “My gifts are mine to use for all, myself included, not mine to waste or mine to use for myself only.”

True – but those contributions are NOT made by criminals or drug pushers. You have to have a basic character BEFORE you become a contributor. The basic foundation of character is a self-image as a person who does NOT do bad things – and when, being human, we violate that self-image, there are built-in negative consequences.

BLB_Oregon:

Possibly the starting point is to convince people of how important they are and what that means in terms of duty to self and others. To be cynical about your self-worth is as tragic as to be unduly impressed with it.

Possibly – but remember that recent studies show that young killers have high self-esteem. So high that they feel justified in killing those who offend them.

 

[Jay74]

My sister has been in drug rehab for the past two months over meth. It turned her into a sociopath.

Horrible drug.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Jay74:

My sister has been in drug rehab for the past two months over meth. It turned her into a sociopath.

Horrible drug.

That’s exactly what meth does – users become paranoid and dangerous.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

vern humphrey:

Shame and guilt are virtually the definition of the inner-directed man. And it’s a practical approach – remember that bad behavior has rewards. If I steal, I get free money. If I take drugs, I feel good and the other kids think I’m cool. If I lie, I avoid punishment for what I did. And so on.

Guilt and shame add negative consequences to these behaviors.

…those contributions are NOT made by criminals or drug pushers. You have to have a basic character BEFORE you become a contributor. The basic foundation of character is a self-image as a person who does NOT do bad things – and when, being human, we violate that self-image, there are built-in negative consequences.

Possibly – but remember that recent studies show that young killers have high self-esteem. So high that they feel justified in killing those who offend them.

I would like to agree that you can’t become a contributor without a basic sense of integrity, but obviously there are too many tragic examples to the contrary. If the histories are true, JFK would be an example. I am sure you could come up with a dozen, without thinking twice.

Bad behavior, generally speaking, only has rewards in a shallow sense. That is why you, in reality, would not lie or cheat or steal, even if you knew you could get away with it. The ideal is that one does good not so much to avoid hell as to recognize the glory that is Heaven. As I said… the behavior I am talking about is gratitude-driven, connection-driven, grace-driven. Whether the person would call it that or not, they do good because they are open to Grace.

I purposely am not using the phrase “self esteem” because it has a psychological definition that is somewhat different than what I am talking about. (I probably shouldn’t use “inner-directed man” for the same reason.) I mean that a person needs to appreciate their true worth and place in the world. You can’t have that in any true sense and then go out and start killing people. If your “self-esteem” doesn’t also call humility into the equation, it is not what I am talking about.

A person does have to have the capacity for shame and guilt to form their conscience correctly. You have to recognize that there are behaviors that are contrary to your sense of integrity, things that you avoid doing even if you could avoid being caught simply because they are wrong. But if a conscience is properly formed, sin is not just penalty-risking act, but a violation of the relationship with one’s self, one’s fellows, and with God. You aren’t faithful to your wife, for instance, primarily because she owns a cast iron skillet. This is true of a good marriage: you are faithful because you love her (in the verb sense). If you want to argue that no wife in her right mind hears a few sweet nothings and throws out the skillet… well, I’ll buy that. The baser considerations do hold their sway, when our better selves might otherwise waver.

I am talking about a level of functioning that is not the common lot, but I think it is possible to have a society that is both disciplined and kind. It requires education about the self, the development of emotional intelligence, spiritual intelligence. It is the stuff of the world’s wisdom literature. Not an easy prescription, but let’s face it: Easy doesn’t cut it. Guilt, shame, punishment… these have their places. But they can’t be the whole answer. That’s no way to live. That isn’t good enough. That isn’t all we were made for… and really, isn’t that the Good News?