1 charged in Ecstasy death(DA targets suspected seller of pill that killed teen-ager)

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ^ | 9/8/01 | Marylynne Pitz

[Dane]

A Beaver County man was charged with homicide yesterday for allegedly selling the Ecstasy pill that killed an Ambridge Area High School student in May.

Greg Ludwig, 19, of Rochester was arraigned on charges of third-degree murder and drug delivery in the death of Brandy French, 16.

[Dane]

FYI

[ChadGore]

bump

[A.J.Armitage]

This proves drugs are bad. We knew that. That doesn't mean they should be illegal.

[Dane]

While the group kept checking on French, Dinuno told authorities, Maranuk, Paula Wilson, 18, and her boyfriend, Robert Sontag, 21, both of Fair Oaks, Beaver County, went outside to smoke marijuana.

How can that be? Marijuana is just a benign little weed that does not associate itself with other drugs.< /sarcasm >

[ThJ1800]

I can certainly understand and support prosecuting this guy, but I think that they should prosecute the 17yr old girl as well.

However, I would like to focus on two thing mentioned in the article: 1)adding that because the drug is made in clandestine labs, "You don't know what goes into [it]."; and 2)In 1985, the United States outlawed manufacture, possession and sale of the drug, which is made in dirty, makeshift labs in Europe, particularly Belgium and the Netherlands.

1. Since it we have know idea what's in it, because it is made in clandestine labs, would it not be a good idea to decriminalize this drug and regulate the manufacture of it, since these clandstine labs are a product of a prohibition existing since 1985.

2. This drug was first synthesized in 1914, but it was not prohibited until 1985. I would like to know what the addiction rates from 1914 to 1985 were compared to the addiction rates from 1985 to the present.

[Liberal Classic]

Is this tragic? Yes.

Could something like this have happened with alcohol? Yes.

[ThJ1800]

These comes from the DEA's own website: In the late 1970s, MDMA was used to facilitate psychotherapy by a small group of therapists in the United States. Illicit use of the drug did not become popular until the late 1980s and early 1990s.

According to the DEA, illicit use of the drug did not become popular, until after the prohibition had begun in 1985.

[Dane]

According to the DEA, illicit use of the drug did not become popular, until after the prohibition had begun in 1985

So? The drug culture, in which marijuana is an integral part of, and which appeared in the mid 60's clawed on to ecstasy and we are seeing the effects(death). The drug culture would have clawed on to ecstasy if it was legal or not. Having ecstasy as a non-validated(illegal) recreational drug will help reduce the deaths, IMHO, except for anarchic Libertarian people who think that anything illegal is automaticlly good and should be taken in mass quantities.

[A.J.Armitage]

Having ecstasy as a non-validated(illegal) recreational drug

Contrary to what you seem to think, not arresting people for doing something is not a sign of moral approval of it.

[Hidy]

You Second Amendment defenders should take note.

If the guy who sold the drug that someone used to harm themselves can be found guilty of ANYTHING except selling drugs, then everyone who sells a firearm that someone else uses to kill himself (or others) with, is also guilty of murder or manslaughter or whatever the state chooses to charge him with.

We must be advocates for the rights of others or face the time when there are no advocates for our own rights.

[Dane]

You Second Amendment defenders should take note.

I do and I also notice people who try to say that the right to bear firearms(2nd amendment) and doing drugs are on the same moral plane.

Sorry Hidy I don't see a right to do drugs in the Constitution.

[A.J.Armitage]

I do and I also notice people who try to say that the right to bear firearms(2nd amendment) and doing drugs are on the same moral plane.

That's not the point. The point is, the actions of the government would be the same.

Sorry Hidy I don't see a right to do drugs in the Constitution.

I don't see a right to bungee jump in the Constitution either.

[Sandy]

I would like to know what the addiction rates from 1914 to 1985 were compared to the addiction rates from 1985 to the present.

Ecstasy is not addictive at all. A "frequent" user probably uses the drug once a week (twice-a-week, tops). It takes about a week for the body to replenish its serotonin after a person uses x. You're not going to get high from the drug if your serotonin hasn't been replenished first. That's just the way the drug works. Of course, now that the drug is illegal, who knows what the hell people are really taking. My comments refer to the real drug, not the black-market stuff.

[Dane]

That's not the point(Libertarians putting drugs and firearms on the same moral plane). The point is, the actions of the government would be the same

Oh yes it is. Many Libertarians on FR equate the 2nd amendment right to bear firearms with "the right to do drugs".

I don't see a right to bungee jump in the Constitution either.

Nor should it be, it is up to the states(per 10th amendment) to regulate bungee jumping any way they want.

[southern rock]

Nor should it be, it is up to the states(per 10th amendment) to regulate bungee jumping any way they want.

Sorry, only an individual can decide wether he wants to bungee jump or not. It's not up to the state OR fed!

[ThJ1800]

The drug culture would have clawed on to ecstasy if it was legal or not.

As I menioned in post #5, I would like to know the addiction rate from 1914 to 1985 as compared to the addiction rates from 1985 to the present. I would also like to know the demographics of the addiction.: what age groups are using it, etc. From many articles, it would appear that those using the drug are primarily those who are between the ages of 14 and 25. I am willing to bet that addiction rates soared after 1985, particularly in the 90's, when many young people began to find out about this drug.

Having ecstasy as a non-validated(illegal) recreational drug will help reduce the deaths,...

Really? Could we look at some facts of death rates due to MDMA from 1914 to 1985, I am sure that they are less than the death rates from 1985 to the present. I am also quite sure that higher death rates are caused by the proliferation of the drug, which has been caused by its prohibition, as opposed to the 1970's when the use of this drug was restricted to psychotherapy patients and was not prohibit for use by the federal government, ie, when it was legal.

[ThJ1800]

Of course, now that the drug is illegal, who knows what the hell people are really taking. My comments refer to the real drug, not the black-market stuff.

And this black-market is a direct result of prohibition.

[Sandy]

Did you miss my reply? The drug is not addictive.

[Blade]

If the goal is to reduce drug related deaths at the expense of people's rights, then the DA should quit targeting ecstacy and go after the alchohol merchants.