Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

The Wet-House ConceptFollow

#27 May 06 2011 at 9:06 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
The only problem is that lawyers are like cockroaches.
I'm confident we can produce enough needles.
Raid is cheaper.
#28 May 06 2011 at 9:08 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,049 posts
Elinda wrote:
I thought this was about alcohol?

..and while I understand nicotine addiction is not the same as alcohol, the concept of letting the addicts indulge in their addictions in a safe place is better (or worse) than forcing them to an uncontrolled location to smoke...or drink, or shoot up, or eat paint, or whatever is a similar concept.

I don't know how any facility could legally allow illegal drug use, though we allow pot smoking and that's illegal.
Other countries have safe-injection sites. I seem to recall Switzerland used to have a drug park where users could go and be provided with drugs and wander around dazed and confused. I think it shut down a while ago, though.

I don't think an illegal drug area would fly in the US. And nicotine addiction is a completely different topic, as that has minimal effects on your behavior and ability to hold a job (well, until you develop health issues). Alcohol and hard drugs both do have a large effect.
#29 May 06 2011 at 9:10 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
They exist in the US, they just don't get federal funding.
#30 May 06 2011 at 9:21 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:


I don't think an illegal drug area would fly in the US. And nicotine addiction is a completely different topic, as that has minimal effects on your behavior and ability to hold a job (well, until you develop health issues). Alcohol and hard drugs both do have a large effect.
Yes, this is a valid point.

Knowing that someone is not going to be able to support themselves while using and/or under the influence, I'd think it would reinforce the argument for more traditional treatments that attempt to end the behavior versus this proposal that attempts to control the behavior.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#31 May 06 2011 at 9:32 AM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
******
20,024 posts
Can I get some clarification Ugly?

What I'm confused about is whether or not you want to bar the addicts who are "hopeless" from the facilities, and are we also talking about the IV drug users?

Because the whole point of these facilities is to stop the spread of HIV. I mean, yeah, they have counselors and such on site in the hopes that someone will come to them, but it's really all about the disease at this point.

Part of the problem is that, while HIV is most commonly spread through your own ill choices (sex w/o protection, sharing needles, etc.), there are innocent people who work in high risk jobs. In particular, those who work in hospitals (especially ERs). My dad dropped out of med school (with 1 semester to go) because he'd have to work in Trenton's municipal hospital's ER, per his scholarship, after graduation and this was during the height of the 70s HIV epidemic. This is after an accident meant he cut himself with a needle or scalpel that he was using on a cadaver, which led to a false-positive on an HIV test (and he had just married my mom, who already had two kids).

One of his friends from the same program actually went, and died a few years later after he got HIV from a patient that started thrashing when injected with a sedative. The doctor was stabbed with the needle. And I say stabbed, but it was just a small prick--unfortunately, the virus doesn't care how deep the wound is.

So, imo, any program that vastly reduces the spread of HIV among drug addicts is worth it. And that's without considering the rest of the ways they could spread the disease to someone else--before even considering whether or not they deserve our help. I'm ignoring those questions, because the fact that hard-working, necessary people like ER doctors have such a huge risk factor is enough for me to want these programs.

I'm just confused by what your argument actually is. Are you saying that people should always be welcome at the "needle clinics", but that they don't deserve medical treatment when they OD? Or are you saying that, once they've been determined as hopeless causes, they shouldn't even receive these goods anymore? Or were you only talking about the alcoholics from being kicked out?

[EDIT]

I thought I had heard about a US city starting one of these clinics, but I can't find anything about it so I guess not. I know there's one in... Vancouver?

Edited, May 6th 2011 11:36am by idiggory
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#32 May 06 2011 at 9:34 AM Rating: Decent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,268 posts
This kind of reminds me of that whole scam Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu pulled in India. Mother Theresa, she's more widely known as.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#33 May 06 2011 at 9:36 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
My thinking is that once someone hits the hopeless stage, we then help them remove themselves from any connection to society. Meeting their maker seems like the most sure fire way to do this, but I'm open to other ideas so long as it doesn't cost me financially long term.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#34 May 06 2011 at 9:42 AM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
******
20,024 posts
Quote:
My thinking is that once someone hits the hopeless stage, we then help them remove themselves from any connection to society. Meeting their maker seems like the most sure fire way to do this, but I'm open to other ideas so long as it doesn't cost me financially long term.


And how does that differ from murder exactly?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#35 May 06 2011 at 9:43 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
We put animals out of their misery. I don't see why we don't for people.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#36 May 06 2011 at 9:44 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,049 posts
idiggory wrote:
Quote:
My thinking is that once someone hits the hopeless stage, we then help them remove themselves from any connection to society. Meeting their maker seems like the most sure fire way to do this, but I'm open to other ideas so long as it doesn't cost me financially long term.


And how does that differ from murder exactly?
Seems to me it's more like assisted suicide than actively killing someone.
#37 May 06 2011 at 9:48 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
idiggory wrote:
Quote:
My thinking is that once someone hits the hopeless stage, we then help them remove themselves from any connection to society. Meeting their maker seems like the most sure fire way to do this, but I'm open to other ideas so long as it doesn't cost me financially long term.


And how does that differ from murder exactly?
Seems to me it's more like assisted suicide than actively killing someone.
Which is controversial and probably requires consent for it to even be considered in a legal grey area.
#38 May 06 2011 at 9:48 AM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
******
20,024 posts
Quote:
Seems to me it's more like assisted suicide than actively killing someone.


If you could still consider the addict a rational agent, I would agree. But the nature of addiction is generally seen as being when the desire for the fix is too overwhelmingly strong for your rational capability to oppose it.

That, to me, looks more like murder. You knew exactly what was going to happen when you gave them the massive syringe, and you knew they weren't in a position to rationally comprehend that they were killing themselves. Nor were they in a position to turn down the drugs.

If we are talking about after a stint in rehab, when they have been detoxed and gone through therapy, it might be a different story. But while they are still in the thick of addiction, I'm going with murder.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#39 May 06 2011 at 9:51 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
idiggory wrote:
Quote:
My thinking is that once someone hits the hopeless stage, we then help them remove themselves from any connection to society. Meeting their maker seems like the most sure fire way to do this, but I'm open to other ideas so long as it doesn't cost me financially long term.


And how does that differ from murder exactly?
I don't know, does it? I don't really care if it does or not. I thought I was quite clear earlier on that my "humanity" only goes so far. Maybe you need to reread my posts thoroughly, so as not to miss some of the finer details I discussed. Most specifically, the caveats I stated.

Edited, May 6th 2011 12:53pm by Uglysasquatch
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#40 May 06 2011 at 10:05 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
We put animals out of their misery. I don't see why we don't for people.
Really?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#41 May 06 2011 at 10:07 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
We put animals out of their misery. I don't see why we don't for people.
Really?
Really. Although, I assume he's talking about assisted suicide and not from the point where I am.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#42 May 06 2011 at 10:13 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
We put animals out of their misery. I don't see why we don't for people.
Really?
Really. Although, I assume he's talking about assisted suicide and not from the point where I am.
I guess the difference I see is animals are not people. We don't bestow upon them the right to life....and other stuff.

But mostly, I just don't think the majority of addicts would agree to death as a method to 'kick-the-habit'.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#43 May 06 2011 at 10:15 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
We put animals out of their misery. I don't see why we don't for people.
Really?
Really. Although, I assume he's talking about assisted suicide and not from the point where I am.
No, I agree with you completely on this, Ugly. I don't want to spend money on people that cycle through rehab and jail.

I don't think the wet-house concept is a bad idea, but its useless for junkies.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#44 May 06 2011 at 10:16 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
Well good luck with that.
#45 May 06 2011 at 10:17 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
When they help foot the bill, I'll care again what their opinion is. I'm not for just doing this as a free for all though, just to the ones who have had help and refused to take the steps they need to, to utilize that help.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#46 May 06 2011 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
I still don't see where that would actually be less expensive except in fantasyland.
#47 May 06 2011 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Well good luck with that.
I don't think either of us are naive enough to think what we'd like to see will ever happen. Doesn't mean we can't express our opinions or even try to help them actually happen. We can dream to you know.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#48 May 06 2011 at 10:20 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Well good luck with that.
I don't think either of us are naive enough to think what we'd like to see will ever happen. Doesn't mean we can't express our opinions or even try to help them actually happen. We can dream to you know.
I guess if you want to lobby for a hunting season on trial lawyers you'd best get crackin'
#49 May 06 2011 at 10:20 AM Rating: Decent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Sweetums wrote:
I still don't see where that would actually be less expensive except in fantasyland.
Really? How can you not see that if we remove a dependent from the equation, that we'd be spending less.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#50 May 06 2011 at 10:21 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Elinda wrote:
I guess the difference I see is animals are not people.
You're right as well; I've never seen a chicken go back to its coup and beat a hen to death because she didn't bring corn for him to eat.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#51 May 06 2011 at 10:22 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,512 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
I still don't see where that would actually be less expensive except in fantasyland.
Really? How can you not see that if we remove a dependent from the equation, that we'd be spending less.
Can't really get rid of lawyers. Kind of like why the death penalty is more expensive than letting criminals rot in jail for the rest of their life.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 204 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (204)