Yasmine Bleeth: My battle with drugs (or, how my nose almost fell off - WOD Alert!)

Yahoo! News ^ | 1.23.03

[Eagle Eye]

Howcum the movies make street whores look like Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman when they really like YB's mug shot? Crack whores are a nasty site.

[Kevin Curry]

Wait a minute. Aren't drugs illegal? So how did this happen to this poor girl, when the WOD is everywhere?

Great point. Holland got rid of its WOD and no one uses drugs there anymore.

[Kevin Curry]

What's that you say? It's not the government's role to baby sit citizens?

It is not government's role to babysit responsible adult citizens. But irresponsible, self-indulgent, scofflaw, destructive children in adult bodies are another story. The government's job is to throw them into the hoosgow for "Timeout" so they don't steal from the rest of us.

[Eagle Eye]

Anyone who abuses drugs, alcohol, etc, and then steals should be prosecuted for stealing, just as should happen to thieves who steal without abusing drugs.

But should she go to jail for drinking her liver into rot, snorting coke until her nose rots off, or gambling herself into debt until the Mob takes it out on her thumbs and knees? No. Part of personal freedom is taking responsibility for one's actions.

I suspect you'd feel more comfortable in a Taliban-esque society where the whims of religious leaders compel those under that regime into strict 'moral' compliance with brutality as a consequence for not conforming.

Of course, you do know that you are to rational thought what Hillary is to morality, honesty, and decency?

[avenir]

Coke is an inanimate object with no inherent "power" or abilities.

I get your point about her choosing to use the substance. You are right, she made a choice.

I disagree with your assessment of coke as having no "inherent power or abilities". Cocaine Hydrochloride is an extremely powerful substance, and this story of Yasmeen's enslavement to it is just one of many.

Cocaine, the "thing" IS dangerous and DOES have inherent pharmacological power. The choice to be made about it is STAY AWAY FROM IT.

[Kevin Curry]

Wrong, beagle brain. Anyone who uses these substances places others at unacceptable risk of harm. Addictive, psychoactive substances have that quality. The idiots who indulge are also prone to denial, believing--falsely--that their brain-dead habits harm no one--including themselves. Waiting until the jackasses do cause harm merely guarantees that most will get away with never paying for their foolishness. The rest of us just fork over our money in the form of taxes and increased insurance premiums to pay for their "freedom." That is socialism, pure and simple.

The only way to resolve this is the good old capitalist way: by requiring insurance so the risk can be pooled and hedged against before the idiots destroy others and their property. Insurance should be comprehensive, covering everything from lost worker productivity, to funding turnstile rehab centers, to replacing the property of others stolen or destroyed, to paying for lives taken (which can never be truly compensated for).

If you want to blow dope or use cocaine recreationally, you should be required to buy and maintain druggie insurance. If you can't afford the insurance and you indulge, you should go to jail--hard and long. If an insurer cannot be found who is willing to insure the risk, then that drug should be outlawed totally. After all, if a private insurer is unwilling to fund a risk, the risk by defintion is too costly for society to bear.

So there's the deal, all you pro-dope closet socialists. Put your insurance money where you bong is.

I predict there will be no takers. Instead there will be misdirection as the pro-dopers do everything but admit dopers ought to be personally responsible for the consequences of their foolish indulgence. They want the freedom to indulge while requiring the taxpayer to pay for the consequences.

[Senator Pardek]

If you want to blow dope or use cocaine recreationally, you should be required to buy and maintain druggie insurance.

Does that include the very potent and dangerous drug ethanol, which can kill a first time user?

[Kevin Curry]

I knew there would be misdirection.

Of course it should. Will it? Unlikely. The external costs of alcohol use have become so heavily socialized in this country that the taxpayer is forever doomed to pay these costs.

What I find laughable is that you pro-druggie closet socialists don't realize how the butt crack of your illogic shows so obviously when you knee-jerk your way to the "alcohol is legal" misdirection argument. What you are REALLY arguing is that the costs of ALL drug abuse should be socialized.

[AnalogReigns]

I remember her on Nash Bridges and she always looked haggard. That she would have been in her late 20s then is amazing--I figured 40ish. Sad what addiction can do.

I hope she is done with it...but it takes more than a loving husband, it takes a loving Savior to conquer such things.

Christian FReepers should pray for Yasmine.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Keep telling the truth on these pro-drug lunatics. They're worse than a pack of Democrats.

[philman_36]

I was trying to make a specific point. "It's all about image". Such an unflattering "image" of her isn't it.
Read my other comments for a complete picture.
At this point you don't seem to get it.

[philman_36]

Howcum the movies make street whores look like Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman when they really like YB's mug shot?
'Cause "ugly" don't sell.

[philman_36]

But irresponsible, self-indulgent, scofflaw, destructive children in adult bodies are another story.
Are you implying that YB fits that criteria?
The government's job is to throw them into the hoosgow for "Timeout" so they don't steal from the rest of us.
What did YB steal? Are you barking up the wrong tree?

[philman_36]

I knew there would be misdirection.
And you've provided some of it yourself.
...so they don't steal from the rest of us.
What was stolen from you?

[philman_36]

Keep telling the truth on these pro-drug lunatics.
Do not adjust your television set...

[philman_36]

I saved you for last.
I disagree with your assessment of coke as having no "inherent power or abilities". Cocaine Hydrochloride is an extremely powerful substance, and this story of Yasmeen's enslavement to it is just one of many.
Insane! So what if it is an extremely powerful substance? Dynamite is an extremely powerful substance too, but it wont do a damned thing by itself unless it isn't stored properly and "it" can't enslave anybody either.
And as far as enslavement, enslavement requires cognition, which cocaine doesn't have. YB indentured herself in her desire to "feel good", by whatever means, if there is any form of enslavement going on. The cocaine didn't have a thing to do with it. Again, no cognition exists in cocaine!
Cocaine, the "thing" IS dangerous and DOES have inherent pharmacological power.
Cocaine has pharmacological efficacy (the power to produce an effect), not power in the manner in which you're implying.
Besides, how can a "thing" be dangerous in and of itself? A number of "things" can be considered dangerous (even five gallon bucket to a toddler if it's partially filled with water). By your thinking a car, the "thing" IS dangerous. Some outside action is usually required before the "thing" actually becomes harmful or deadly.
The choice to be made about it is STAY AWAY FROM IT.
You can recommend that "choice", but it isn't reality. Folks have been saying "stay away from it" for years and it isn't working is it?

You're just a little too liberal (modern day usage) in your thinking for me.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Some people just don't get it. Sad.

[philman_36]

Some people just don't get it.
If you explain "it" I might. Did I miss an implied sarcasm or was there something else?

[Liberal Classic]

If you want to blow dope or use cocaine recreationally, you should be required to buy and maintain druggie insurance. If you can't afford the insurance and you indulge, you should go to jail--hard and long. If an insurer cannot be found who is willing to insure the risk, then that drug should be outlawed totally. After all, if a private insurer is unwilling to fund a risk, the risk by defintion is too costly for society to bear.

Believe it or not, I find this to be sensible.

This seems to be to be similar in concept to state governments mandating a minimum level of liability insurance for motor vehicles. The government makes as a requirement for obtaining a license to drive on public roads a policy to cover a minimum level of fiduciary coverage for accidents that may happen.

I predict there will be no takers. Instead there will be misdirection as the pro-dopers do everything but admit dopers ought to be personally responsible for the consequences of their foolish indulgence. They want the freedom to indulge while requiring the taxpayer to pay for the consequences.

Sorry to disappoint you. I strongly believe that with the freedom to do these things comes the resonsibility in part to not pass a financial burden on to the taxpayer, or any private citizen.

[mamelukesabre]

You know what coca-cola really means?

It's hyphenated for a reason. It originally contained TWO active ingredients. coca and cola. Now it is only cola. So what is coca? It's what the locals called the plant that they extract cocaine from. That's why coke is called coke. It used to have coke(cocaine) in it.