To: Lazamataz
I have a friend of many years who was a heavy meth user. The drug virtually destroyed his brain and nervous system. Eventually, he got involved with a strong willed woman who got him to stop, but the damage was too profound to ever recover from. For as long as he lives (which won't be much longer), the taxpayers will be paying for his upkeep and care. Anyone who would claim that meth is a harmless recreational drug, to be equated with pot, or is OK because "doctors prescribe it", is full of ****.
31 posted on
02/22/2004 7:08:35 AM PST by
Fresh Wind
(Who would a terrorist vote for?)
To: Fresh Wind
I have a friend of many years who was a heavy meth user. The drug virtually destroyed his brain and nervous system. Eventually, he got involved with a strong willed woman who got him to stop, but the damage was too profound to ever recover from. For as long as he lives (which won't be much longer), the taxpayers will be paying for his upkeep and care.Could you please detail the damage and the necessary upkeep?
32 posted on
02/22/2004 7:09:54 AM PST by
Lazamataz
(Dangerously is the Sahara dust.)
To: Fresh Wind
"Anyone who would claim that meth is a harmless recreational drug, to be equated with pot, or is OK because "doctors prescribe it", is full of ****." I assume this remark is directed at me, because I'm the only one on this thread to bring up the fact that meth used to be legally prescribed by doctors.
Nowhere in my post did I say meth was OK when it was legally prescribed. All I said was the legal version of meth was a lot safer than the homemade poison being made now. And there were a lot less addicts.
34 posted on
02/22/2004 7:17:07 AM PST by
Vigilantcitizen
(W'04 Herman Cain for Senate.)
To: Fresh Wind
I have a friend of many years who was a heavy meth user. The drug virtually destroyed his brain and nervous system. Eventually, he got involved with a strong willed woman who got him to stop, but the damage was too profound to ever recover from. For as long as he lives (which won't be much longer), the taxpayers will be paying for his upkeep and care. Anyone who would claim that meth is a harmless recreational drug, to be equated with pot, or is OK because "doctors prescribe it", is full of ****.
How un libertarian and statist of you to post such trash!!! </sarc>
44 posted on
02/22/2004 8:01:19 AM PST by
dennisw
(“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”)
To: Fresh Wind
Anyone who would claim that meth is a harmless recreational drug, to be equated with pot, or is OK because "doctors prescribe it", is full of ****.
I don't think anyone, whether or not you are for the WOD or not, claims that...
To: Fresh Wind
I was a heavy meth user for several years in the 80s. I never sunk to the depths that the people in the article reached. I was able to stop, but saw other friends sink farther into what can only be described as paranoia.
I was at some old drug buddy's house in downtown Long Beach about 12 years ago. He and his roommate had found a Standard & Poor's online user guide or something in the dumpster behind their apartment. They were convinced that they had uncovered a plot to topple Wall Street and no amount of logical thinking could sway them from this belief.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson