Posted on 08/14/2007 6:50:18 AM PDT by Jabba the Nutt
Some places, you can throw a superball out the window and it will bounce off 12 people who are that stupid.
WTF? Those little containers with compartments for the days of the week are illegal?
I saw that line and thought ‘legal mal-practice’. What defense attorney would not bring out the legality of possessing Vicodin WITH a prescription?
Yep. Your mom or grandmom’s pill dispensor, to remind them of what they have to take at what time, is a felony. What’s more, some a$$hole cop that you picked on in high school can incarcerate your mom or grandmom on that. Sickening how much the WAR ON DRUGS, has empowered idiots to ruin the lives of Americans. Stalinism, no more, no less.
Yes.
Yes, the law seems to be enforced for the benefit of special interests. Certain classes of people seem to be exempt; politicians (D's), illegal aliens and often the rich or poor. Only the middle class is left to bear the brunt.
What P-O's me off, is the lack of action of the GOP to stand up for the rule of law, when they have the opportunity to do so AND it would benefit them politically, if they did so.
After the Florida election debacle, the GOP had a majority of the FL House and a 2/3's majority of the FL Senate. The Florida GOP could've impeached several members of the Florida Supreme Court for their atrocious decisions on the election, creating national chaos, indecision and poisoning American politics that still plague us. Nada, zip, zilch, nothing.
The Texas House should have brought impeachment proceedings against prosecutor Ronnie Earl, who obviously has been abusing his power as prosecutor for decades. This abuse puts Tom Delay at risk still for criminal activity. It's total nonsense. What did Bush do about the out of control prosecutor Fitzgerald in the Plame Flame-out? Zip, zilch, nada.
The GOP should be sued by contributors for political malpractice. They ought get their Political Party ticket taken away, due to neglience, corruption and incompetence.
To be 100% frank with you, I would have difficulty feeling sympathy if all of our drug and alcohol addicts were to die from their self abuse. Yes, I would be sympathetic to their relatives and I would understand their emotions but I am disgusted with these parasites who think we must take care of them.
I am totally fed up with their stealing, robbing and killing to support their sickening addictions. None of them were forced to abuse drugs or alcohol, it was all done by their own freewill.
Now you are saying that we should make all their addictions legal and non criminal. Who do you think is going to feed them, keep them from wandering out into the streets in a dazed mind-set. Who is going to feed their children when they are too drugged out to do it? What kind of an example are they setting for their children? What do we do with them when they get behind the wheel of an automobile and cause an accident?
What you are talking about is the 1 in 10,000th person who can occasionally use drugs and control their desire for more.
What do we do with the little child who finds some of Moms meth and tastes it to see what it is.
I am interested in your answers to these questions.
Well I had surgery once and was prescribed forty high power pain killers to take two at a time every four hours as needed. Filled the script. Walked about campus with the nearly full bottle with me for a couple days, only took three the whole time. So, by your reasoning, I must have been a drug dealer because I had 37 pills on me and some people actually sell those pills illegally? ABSURD!
Vicodin is bad news. If you can avoid it, do so. Causes long term damage to numerous organs, most strikingly the ears.
So, the little pill carriers with the little separate compartments, the ones they sell at the pharmacy, are illegal to use?
“And regarding this case...just because the guy had a [gun permit] it doesn’t mean he wasn’t intending to [murder someone].”
Hope that helps.
If the guy was innocent, Berman would be asking "What would he have to snitch about?"
O'Hara spent two years of a 25-year sentence in prison after a jury found him guilty of trafficking in hydrocone. He was arrested by Tampa International Airport police in 2004 after they found the Vicodin and a small amount of marijuana in his illegally parked bread truck.
Ah, so he's done this kind of thing in the past.
He gets no sympathy from me. He should go to trial.
Separately, their are problems and costs that are created by the law. Drug prohibition is a law. There are many costs associated with the attempt to enforce this law. One cost related to your picture of a junkie injecting is called the "iron law of prohibition". This is from economics and predicts that when a substance is outlawed, the black market in this substance will focus on the more concentrated forms of the substance. Look at Alcohol Prohibition. Was Al Capone focused on beer or wine? No, the focus was on whisky, bathtub gin, etc. So, the more damaging forms of the substance are pushed.
So, the junkie in your picture is injecting the drug, instead of smoking, drinking or eating it. That's a cost of prohibition.
I fully admit that breaking some of things apart is difficult and a matter of art. For example, there are crimes committed by drug abusers. How do you break apart the percent of crimes committed, due to the high cost of drugs due to prohibition and crime committed due the the lessening of inhibitions brought about by taking drugs and the number of crimes that would have happened anyway, because drug abusers and criminals may have a lot of overlap?
It is undeniable that drug prohibition creates crimes that wouldn't happen otherwise. The hyperprofits created by drug prohibition create crime and violence. In an illegal market, the violent are favored to win the competition. The money creates corruption of police, courts, prison officials, border police, customs, DEA, etc. The illegal drug market creates reasons for these violent drug gangs to co-operate with terrorists.
The trump card played by the drug prohibition supporters is that drug use and abuse would sky-rocket, if drugs were re-legalized. This assumes that that there is a huge number of Americans out there, who are not now taking currently illegal drugs, but will start, if drugs were legalized. So, instead of a picture of this junkie loser injecting himself, we'll see your kid's kindergarten teacher injecting herself in class. I just don't think that number is large at all.
And I think, if we can focus on the drug abusers and be able to forget about the whole prohibition mess and the criminalization of otherwise normal people, we could minimize the drug problem.
My point is that the costs of drug prohibition are never broken out, never added up, indeed are almost never recognized. In evaluating any policy, you have to look at the whole picture.
“So, the little pill carriers with the little separate compartments, the ones they sell at the pharmacy, are illegal to use?”
From what I was told, yeah, for prescription drugs. At home I don’t see how they’d know, but at an airport or customs desk, they’ll want to know what all the pretty tabs are and where you got them and here the scrip for them is.
You might want to ask your pharmacist, now that you bring it up I’ll wait until Friday (when the pretty pharmacist is on duty) and ask.
Let me get this straight. A doctor writes you a prescription for a legal product. A drug company manufacturers said product, sells it to a pharmacy, which then dispenses it to you. You walk out of the door of the pharmacy and you can be busted for drug possession?
Why can't the company be busted for manufacturing and the pharmacy busted for possession?
Amazing.
I may be wrong, but I believe we are talking about one incident.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.