You can trace all those PCP scare stories back through time to the early days of heroin, pot, LSD etc. Each scare story just gets recycled for each new drug. Back in the day it took 10 men to subdue a black man who had just smoked a doobie.
-
PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe |
Death from LSD intoxication??? WTF I cant believe this article ...
- Thread starter Madhatter4
- Start date
You can trace all those PCP scare stories back through time to the early days of heroin, pot, LSD etc. Each scare story just gets recycled for each new drug. Back in the day it took 10 men to subdue a black man who had just smoked a doobie.
yucatanboy2
Bluelighter
First of all, loss of life is always sad and unnecessary (unless its someone who is a mass murderer or homicidal tyrant, then I'm all for it).
In terms of the cause of death, we can speculate, but need more info. Suffice to say that he did not die from LSD intoxication, but rather from complications resulting from his experience. He could have had pre-existing heart/health problems. He could have been cut and lost blood when going through the window, which would have exacerbated his health probems. He could have been tased/physically restrained in such a way that he died. People die from such experiences while not on LSD (yet another reason to comply with police requests).
We don't know.
In terms of harm reduction, we should remind ourselves and others about the facts of LSD and the recommendations that can be made in the name of harm reduction.
1) Death from LSD overdose is exceedingly rare or unknown, but it is a powerful and extremely potent hallucinogen that lasts a long time (8h+)
2) Dosages of LSD are often unknown and claims of "100 ug" etc. per hit are usually unfounded. Do not take more than 1 hit from a batch that you are unfamiliar with. High doses taken by an unexperienced user will lead to loss of reality, panic attacks, difficult experiencs, and possibly a situation described in this thread.
3) Set and setting are crucial. If you are in a negative mindset (for example: just broke up with someone, or are severly depressed), LSD is a terrible idea and can lead to a negative/difficult experience wherein you can be a danger to yourself and others. You need to also be in a safe physical environment (example: home, with nobody there that dissapproves of your use). Do not drive or go into public places where you could have problems interacting with the public and draw attention, leading to a confrontation with police.
4) Have a sitter/guide. Someone who is not intoxicated to help you during your experience if you have a difficult trip.
Its sad that this happened, lets just hope that it doesn't lead to the spread of more misinformation.
In terms of the cause of death, we can speculate, but need more info. Suffice to say that he did not die from LSD intoxication, but rather from complications resulting from his experience. He could have had pre-existing heart/health problems. He could have been cut and lost blood when going through the window, which would have exacerbated his health probems. He could have been tased/physically restrained in such a way that he died. People die from such experiences while not on LSD (yet another reason to comply with police requests).
We don't know.
In terms of harm reduction, we should remind ourselves and others about the facts of LSD and the recommendations that can be made in the name of harm reduction.
1) Death from LSD overdose is exceedingly rare or unknown, but it is a powerful and extremely potent hallucinogen that lasts a long time (8h+)
2) Dosages of LSD are often unknown and claims of "100 ug" etc. per hit are usually unfounded. Do not take more than 1 hit from a batch that you are unfamiliar with. High doses taken by an unexperienced user will lead to loss of reality, panic attacks, difficult experiencs, and possibly a situation described in this thread.
3) Set and setting are crucial. If you are in a negative mindset (for example: just broke up with someone, or are severly depressed), LSD is a terrible idea and can lead to a negative/difficult experience wherein you can be a danger to yourself and others. You need to also be in a safe physical environment (example: home, with nobody there that dissapproves of your use). Do not drive or go into public places where you could have problems interacting with the public and draw attention, leading to a confrontation with police.
4) Have a sitter/guide. Someone who is not intoxicated to help you during your experience if you have a difficult trip.
Its sad that this happened, lets just hope that it doesn't lead to the spread of more misinformation.
Serene_life
Greenlighter
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1
UPDATE:
Federal appeals court finds Broadview Heights police liable for 2007 death of 19-year-old
By James F. McCarty, The Plain Dealer
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on April 09, 2013 at 4:47 PM, updated April 09, 2013 at 6:06 PM
View/Post Comments
CINCINNATI, 0hio — A federal appeals court affirmed Tuesday that three Broadview Heights police officers were liable for the 2007 suffocation death of a 19-year-old college freshman from Brecksville.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the contention of the officers and the city that they are protected by a legal shield known as a "qualified immunity," which prevents police from being sued for damages unless they break the law.
"A reasonable officer should have known that subduing an unarmed, minimally dangerous, and mentally unstable individual with compressive body weight, head and body strikes, neck or chin restraints, and torso locks would violate that person’s clearly established right to be free from excessive force," the Cincinnati-based court concluded.
The ruling is another legal victory for Tanya Martin, who filed a wrongful death lawsuit in 2008 accusing the officers of using excessive force when arresting her son, William, causing his death.
And unless the appellate court decides to reconsider its ruling, the only recourse left for the officers would be with the U.S. Supreme Court.
The officers’ lawyer, Frank Scialdone, declined to comment Tuesday.
Martin's lawyer, S. Michael Lear, said the ruling means the case will be returned to U.S. District Judge Solomon Oliver, the original judge on the case, who will schedule the wrongful death lawsuit for trial.
Officers scuffled with the teen in August 2007 after being called to investigate reports of a naked man acting strangely, yelling for help, and entering an apartment uninvited. He knocked off the glasses of one officer and bit another officer’s finger.
In court documents, the officers confirmed that they wrestled with Martin, who had been released from a private drug and alcohol recovery clinic the day before, in an attempt to subdue him. But they denied causing his death.
Then-Cuyahoga County Coroner Frank Miller ruled that Martin died as a result of an acute psychotic episode brought on by LSD. But the forensic pathologist who conducted the autopsy overruled Miller, citing the death as asphyxiation.
Oliver, the first judge to rule on the case, determined there was "sufficient evidence to show that the officers’ use of force was objectively unreasonable," and that the city was negligent in its hiring, training and supervision of the officers.
Oliver also found that a reasonable jury could conclude that the officers "acted with malice, bad faith or recklessness" during their arrest of Martin.
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/04/post_127.html
Federal appeals court finds Broadview Heights police liable for 2007 death of 19-year-old
By James F. McCarty, The Plain Dealer
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on April 09, 2013 at 4:47 PM, updated April 09, 2013 at 6:06 PM
View/Post Comments
CINCINNATI, 0hio — A federal appeals court affirmed Tuesday that three Broadview Heights police officers were liable for the 2007 suffocation death of a 19-year-old college freshman from Brecksville.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the contention of the officers and the city that they are protected by a legal shield known as a "qualified immunity," which prevents police from being sued for damages unless they break the law.
"A reasonable officer should have known that subduing an unarmed, minimally dangerous, and mentally unstable individual with compressive body weight, head and body strikes, neck or chin restraints, and torso locks would violate that person’s clearly established right to be free from excessive force," the Cincinnati-based court concluded.
The ruling is another legal victory for Tanya Martin, who filed a wrongful death lawsuit in 2008 accusing the officers of using excessive force when arresting her son, William, causing his death.
And unless the appellate court decides to reconsider its ruling, the only recourse left for the officers would be with the U.S. Supreme Court.
The officers’ lawyer, Frank Scialdone, declined to comment Tuesday.
Martin's lawyer, S. Michael Lear, said the ruling means the case will be returned to U.S. District Judge Solomon Oliver, the original judge on the case, who will schedule the wrongful death lawsuit for trial.
Officers scuffled with the teen in August 2007 after being called to investigate reports of a naked man acting strangely, yelling for help, and entering an apartment uninvited. He knocked off the glasses of one officer and bit another officer’s finger.
In court documents, the officers confirmed that they wrestled with Martin, who had been released from a private drug and alcohol recovery clinic the day before, in an attempt to subdue him. But they denied causing his death.
Then-Cuyahoga County Coroner Frank Miller ruled that Martin died as a result of an acute psychotic episode brought on by LSD. But the forensic pathologist who conducted the autopsy overruled Miller, citing the death as asphyxiation.
Oliver, the first judge to rule on the case, determined there was "sufficient evidence to show that the officers’ use of force was objectively unreasonable," and that the city was negligent in its hiring, training and supervision of the officers.
Oliver also found that a reasonable jury could conclude that the officers "acted with malice, bad faith or recklessness" during their arrest of Martin.
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/04/post_127.html
Excellent outcome for civil liberty. Doesn't make this poor guy any less dead but it's great that the police have accepted repsonsibility.
I read the initial post before realising the date was some time back, but the first thing I said was, this is a death in custody or a death during arrest. It is patently NOT an LSD fatality. Yes the guy was tripping, yes he was a nuisance, no, he did not die from LSD intoxication, he died from heart failure due to exursion brought on in an attempt to resist arrest.
If I neck half a tab of acid then get run over 10 minutes later, they find LSD in my system, suddenly I'm an acid casualty? Rubbish! Come on, just coz we take drugs does not make us all idiots!
I read the initial post before realising the date was some time back, but the first thing I said was, this is a death in custody or a death during arrest. It is patently NOT an LSD fatality. Yes the guy was tripping, yes he was a nuisance, no, he did not die from LSD intoxication, he died from heart failure due to exursion brought on in an attempt to resist arrest.
If I neck half a tab of acid then get run over 10 minutes later, they find LSD in my system, suddenly I'm an acid casualty? Rubbish! Come on, just coz we take drugs does not make us all idiots!
kidklmx
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 16, 2012
- Messages
- 1,311
Hmm, good news indeed. It's also a clear case why wearable cameras should be a standard part of an officer's loadout (despite a whole slew of backlash because of privacy and such), things like this will not happen as much.
Those pretty lights! They're MESMERIZING!
Those pretty lights! They're MESMERIZING!