'Absurd' case? Prosecutors think not

St. Petersburg Times ^ | August 9, 2007 | Carrie Weimar

[Ender Wiggin]

You walk out of the door of the pharmacy and you can be busted for drug possession?

If on the way you dump the bottle into a baggie, yes, that’s what it looks like. keep them in the same bottle and you are legal (ecxept for this guy had pot, too, which would be a problem).

[Gay State Conservative]

Who cares...You and your kind will always be here...

I've seen what drugs can do to you...and to a city.Twenty plus years in a big city ER teaches you a lot.And BTW,not all "drugs" are addictive and how can you be sure that you'll never become addicted to Vicodin given what you've stated?

[MEGoody]

No, you are misreading the story somehow.

I think you are right. When I first read it, it sounded to me like there were two separate incidents with hydrocone (Vicadin).

[MEGoody]

I may be wrong, but I believe we are talking about one incident.

I've read it again, and I believe you are correct. When I first read it, it sounded like two separate incidents with hydrocone.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Looks like something is being left out of this story.

How could a jury not know that having a prescription for a drug is legal?

[HYPOCRACY]

Oh yes all drugs are addictive. If sex is addictive and sports are addictive, how can you say that drugs aren’t. Anyway, it’s not about drugs. It’s about the empowerment of people who view an non sentient substance as EVIL.

Your argument is no different than people who say “I’ve seen guns destroy a city from 20 years in an ER”.

Drugs can be bad for your health. People can use drugs for nefarious purposes. People should also be able to put the drugs they need to take in a container that helps them keep track of what drugs they need to take.

You know what, I should also be able to take a prescription pain reliever that my friend has, if I have a backache or a headache and it’s none of your preachy business.

If I become addicted to Vicoden, I will make sure I let you know. If you become addicted to soapboxes, make sure you let me know.

[kalee]

You’re correct there weren’t any drug laws but I beg to differ with you on the problem of addiction. In the 19th century Morphine (injected) and Laudanum, a mixture of opium, saffron, cinnamon and alcohol that was ingested orally, were widely prescribed and were highly addictive. Laudanum was sort of the 19th century equivalent of prozac today and was most often prescribed for women.

IIRC Robert Louis Stevenson, Samuel Coleridge and Percy Shelley experimented with it. Stevenson was most likely an addict.
This was a new phenomenon as morphine was a pretty recent discovery and their drug use was considered bohemian and a acceptable trait of the artistic class.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyles famous character Sherlock Holmes was a drug addict. Doyle hinted at the addiction in early works but described it in great detail in the opening scenes of The Sign of Four.

[ran20]

With our huge budget problems the war on drugs is something that imo we can’t afford. Even those conservatives and liberals who want to socially engineer the populus and create a drug free utopia.. will have to pare down their ambitions.

[jeddavis]

The problems we had with drugs 100 years ago were miniscule compared to what we have now, both in terms of cost and in terms of effects on our constitutional freedoms. The cost to the individual drug users is not worth worrying about in my estimation other than the question of idiots selling drugs to kids and, in theory at least, cops shouldn’t be able to get to somebody doing that in time to save him.

[New Perspective]

In evaluating any policy, you have to look at the whole picture.

This is the whole picture.

I spent weeks next to infants who were addicted to crack and other drugs. Drugs are illegal for a reason, because there is NOTHING GOOD that comes from them.

And don't give me any of those "It costs us more to enforce the drugs laws" crap. Drugs are not the problem because they are illegal and are sold on the black market. Drugs are a problem because they are drugs with no positive qualities.

[coloradan]

Wow, no broad brushes there!

[Old Student]

“I’m not planning on retiring in this country, btw.”

That’s kind of funny. I’ve seen a few countries, and learned about a lot more, and for all it’s warts, I’ve not seen anyplace better than the USA. To each his own, I guess.

[Jabba the Nutt]

Who said anything good came from drugs? That's not the argument. The question is whether the damage that prohibition creates is worse than the damage from the possible greater use of drugs that may come with re-legalization.

I think you make my point well, that the cost of prohibition is ignored.

[Ditter]

I was called for jury duty recently and somewhere I heard the phrase “he who talks, walks”. Meaning that during the question and answer period, the jurors who responds to the questions doesn’t get picked. If you sit there with a pleasant look on your face, and say nothing, you will get picked.