Posted on 04/21/2002 2:36:36 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:21 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
A man who told police he bit off his 2-year-old son's thumb, and apparently held it in his mouth for about six hours, was arrested for child abuse and aggravated assault, authorities said Sunday.
Police responding to a 911 call Saturday night found Raymond Jones running on a street naked, said police Sgt. Bill Knight.
Jones, 39, told detectives he had taken several hits of the hallucinogen PCP and had swallowed his son's thumb because he wanted to mix their DNA, Knight said.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
I don't do drugs and think those that do are idiots.
Hope that clears up the issue for you...
A man who told police he bit off his 2-year-old son's thumb, and apparently held it in his mouth for about six hours, was arrested for child abuse and aggravated assault, authorities said Sunday. Police responding to a 911 call Saturday night found Raymond Jones running on a street naked, said police Sgt. Bill Knight.Jones, 39, told detectives he had taken several hits of the hallucinogen PCP and had swallowed his son's thumb because he wanted to mix their DNA, Knight said.
However, Jones apparently had the thumb in his mouth rather than swallowing it, and coughed it out while he was being interviewed by police.
The child was found alone, several blocks away at the entrance of the trailer park where they lived.
Doctors were not able to reattach the thumb.
The Libertarian Party issued a press release: "It's all the fault of PCP being illegal that somehow forced Mr. Jones to act that way. Let's legalize PCP and then we can claim to be good people who turn a blind eye to evil."
The cost of protecting people from themselves is too great for the rest of us.
Prohibition was a hard lesson learned in the 1920's by many but some people just refuse to learn.
Indubitably. Consider that people a hundred years ago came to recognize the dangers of cocaine. They saw the users of the drug acting really weird and violent, and hence it became outlawed. Eventually, our society came to forget why it was that the drug was made illegal a century ago, and we as a nation had to learn these hard lessons all over again.
Perhaps a hundred years from now the term 'crack baby' might imply the horror of addiction to this drug, but then again maybe not. Perhaps the Libertarian Party will still be around with all 5,000 members sitting around in their cryogenic chambers, declaring that people should have a right to destroy themselves, their children, their communities, their society, and their civilization, and it's all a matter of being able to chime in with their motto: "Who cares? So what? Too bad!"
If you are trying to equate the effects of drugs on people with the effects of alcohol you are extremely naive.
One of us is...
Since I'm so naive, which directly kills more people each year? Which kills more innocent people each year due to intoxicated drivers?
I think that makes you a hypocrite.
I'm not a Libertarian either.
Someone ought to stomp on this miserable maggot (Jones) and put him out of his misery.
I told you not to suck your thumb!
--Boris
Boris suggests (seriously!): make a double feature of this film with Anthony Hopkins' superb performance in "Titus", a modern video based on Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus. I love the part where Hopkins enters in a brilliant white chef's uniform, complete with chef's hat...
--Boris
Alcoholics Anonymous doesn't really exist does it Because those people really aren't addicted
My point was Opium was legal here many years ago and the population mostly rejected it. 29% didn't get hooked.
You're in more danger from a no knock raid on your home and/or being in the crossfire from "random" drug war (between the government and/or gangs) than you are by someone being high killing you. Prohibition brought crime to America like America had never seen before. Al Capone for example
You act like the typical elitist leftist. "I can handle the freedom/responsibility but the other little people can't". "Therefore I'm going to make laws to protect you from yourself".
Much like guns The same argument is used. Just ask Diane Finestein (sp?) She carries a gun. But she wants everyone else to be blocked by law from doing so. Because she is superior and can handle the responsibility but "others" can't be trusted with something so dangerous.
Do a little study in America and abroad. Was more death and destruction done connected to drugs before or after the War on Drugs was declared and fought? Be honest.
Is that the last word?
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.