• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Policy Oregon rolling back decriminalization of some drugs. Let’s go back to an utterly failed attempt?

SunriseChampion said:
.

It's a failed experiment in the North American context....for whatever reason. The reason doesn't matter. What matters is that it hasn't helped in the way that it was said it would.
Click to expand...
experiment that failed?

they didn’t go all the way with it that they were supposed to. They just said you can use the cartels drugs and we won’t arrest you. That’s where it ended.

Yes if that was the experiment, we didn’t even need to conduct it because of course it was going to fail.

This isn’t about drugs. This is about the fact that it has become too hard for people to help themselves and attain a better life. That bar used to be lower where ppl in distress could look at that bar and say "that is doable, if i take these steps and work hard I can have a better life.”

It doesn’t work like that anymore. There are millions of people that don’t do drugs, don’t do crime, are good hard working people and their lives are still miserable shit. They did their part; society didn’t keep up its end of the bargain to reward these honest people as once was.

So now, people look at that and say “fuck it, this mountain is unclimbable and those trying their best to climb it are all falling off the cliff anyways.” What’s the point of even trying to climb the mountain? Sure one lone climber that is the most elite and has a bit of luck will reach the summit. But one person reaching the highest of summits is not the game that we should be playing.

The correct game is many people, climbing and reaching a lower summit that might now be as high as the highest summit but it’s better than falling into the crevasse and rotting.

We’ve sacrificed everyone that tried to climb and discouraged those climbers that would attempt a climb all so that the most elite climber can reach the highest summit. Good for him. But the crevasse is filled with so many dead bodies it’s about to overflow.

What do we want as a community? The only way it’s ever going to get better is for those at the highest summit to climb down half way and toss a rope down to those in the crevasse.

not everyone is as strong of a climber and it doesn’t matter how hard they climb. We’re climbing the wrong mountain and they will perish.
 
Foreigner said:
I'm not having this debate with you. I just spent a year studying health policy in university and Purdue was a huge case study. They knowingly fudged data about addictiveness in their in-house studies, lied to the FDA, and gave doctors literature downplaying the addictiveness of oxy. They lied with impunity to profit. It was shown in court numerous times that the Sackler family knew every step of the way. The only reason why they didn't get charged with criminal negligence directly and thrown in prison was because of indemnity laws shielding pharma reps from direct responsibility.

I'm not saying Purdue was SOLELY responsible. Obviously the medical establishment is a huge system. But they were definitely liable for a huge part of it. The number of opioid addicts in the US skyrocketed in the 90s and a huge portion of them were former Rx drug users under an MD's care who were cut loose.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you are having the debate. Sounds like you drank the koolaid. Sure Purdue lied. But absolutely nothing overrides what a schedule 2 label means. Schedule 2 cancels all their sales pitches out. Sorry. It’s like you watching me sharpen a knife and slice through bone like butter, and I tell you the blade is dull, and you decide to believe what I tell you instead of what you saw with your own eyes so you grab the blade and cut your hand.

Secondly, if it wasn’t Purdue someone else was going to provide the dope no matter what. The dope was always there for the taking. For some reason people decided to start taking it more. Why?

Life is getting harder and harder by the generation for the last 3 generations.

Other opioids, illicit heroin, and all other drugs were there before oxy. This was going to happen no matter what and it has nothing to do with drugs, oxy, or a company. This happened beceuse each new generation is more fucked than the previous and ANY disease of despair they all have seem drastic increases.
 
SunriseChampion said:
Giving drugs to people who clearly need help (in whatever sphere of their life that may be) is not going to help anyone. Keeping someone alive so they can "live" a life of abject misery isn't compassionate.

I have friends who work in the industry (and yes, that's what it's become in Canada) and I don't mind telling you that shit has only got worse since the mass introduction of sanctioned drugs and drugs use...as heard from the people in the industry (though, anecdotally, from almost anyone).

Oregon are tripping fucking balls because the beast they have unleashed through a misguided attempt at compassion is fucking ugly. Unlucky for us northern cunts, we have yet to see the light.

You can't force people into helping themselves but you don't need to encourage their self-destructive behaviour.
I have ex-friends who are basically zombies because during their deepest pits of despair they clung to those in their lives who encouraged their self-destructive behaviour and discarded those of us who both understood their pain and suffering and also offered help.

It's a failed experiment in the North American context....for whatever reason. The reason doesn't matter. What matters is that it hasn't helped in the way that it was said it would.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily think the governments of the world care about self destructive behavior. If they did alcohol would be illegal and replaced by hundreds of other less toxic substances, but we decided to capitalize on alcohol, because it's easily produced. It's not really about how much damage the drugs can do to the people, it's about how much the government can tell people what to do (oppression) without people getting angry because "they care", no, they really don't, it's another way for the suits to control your everyday life.
 
LucidSDreamr said:
Other opioids, illicit heroin, and all other drugs were there before oxy. This was going to happen no matter what and it has nothing to do with drugs, oxy, or a company. This happened beceuse each new generation is more fucked than the previous and ANY disease of despair they all have seem drastic increases.
Click to expand...

It's true that there were always opioid addicts. The thing is, because Oxy was Rx only, research has been able to clinically track how many new addicts were created directly because of Rx Oxy in the USA... and the number is in the millions. That's not even considering patients who sold their Rx's to third parties. We're talking the patients themselves becoming new addicts.

It doesn't matter that a drug is schedule 2... that is not a magic bullet that protects patients. Stimulants are also schedule 2 but they are given out like candy. Doctors respond to health policy, and Purdue cranked the levers of health policy hardcore. Have you bothered to look at the court transcripts? They bought off regulators and paid off regional health authorities to alter the literature that was given to doctors about the drug. They falsely claimed that the addiction factor was way lower than other opioids like morphine and codeine, which was why doctors should begin to Rx Oxy over all others. Meanwhile Oxy was MORE addictive. The court records show that Purdue knew this at the time they misinformed doctors. Their in-house data that was subpoenaed showed that they knew before the drug even went to market.

There's no "koolaid" bud. It's called empirical research. Your equivocations are boring and ignorant. "There has always been opiate addiction"... yeah, so let's just dump gasoline on the fire I guess? No big deal?

So back to my original point. Pharmaceutical companies factor court losses into their profit margins. It's "baked in" to drug valuations. So I say that we make their losses even steeper if they want to fuck with people's health like this. Then those finances can be transferred to the creation of comprehensive addiction programs like what Portugal has. We have the means to fund complete drug recovery, we just have to take it from the parasites who are causing addiction.
 
Last edited:
Foreigner said:
It's true that there were always opioid addicts. The thing is, because Oxy was Rx only, research has been able to clinically track how many new addicts were created directly because of Rx Oxy in the USA... and the number is in the millions. That's not even considering patients who sold their Rx's to third parties. We're talking the patients themselves becoming new addicts.

It doesn't matter that a drug is schedule 2... that is not a magic bullet that protects patients. Stimulants are also schedule 2 but they are given out like candy. Doctors respond to health policy, and Purdue cranked the levers of health policy hardcore. Have you bothered to look at the court transcripts? They bought off regulators and paid off regional health authorities to alter the literature that was given to doctors about the drug. They falsely claimed that the addiction factor was way lower than other opioids like morphine and codeine, which was why doctors should begin to Rx Oxy over all others. Meanwhile Oxy was MORE addictive. The court records show that Purdue knew this at the time they misinformed doctors. Their in-house data that was subpoenaed showed that they knew before the drug even went to market.

There's no "koolaid" bud. It's called empirical research. Your equivocations are boring and ignorant. "There has always been opiate addiction"... yeah, so let's just dump gasoline on the fire I guess? No big deal?

So back to my original point. Pharmaceutical companies factor court losses into their profit margins. It's "baked in" to drug valuations. So I say that we make their losses even steeper if they want to fuck with people's health like this. Then those finances can be transferred to the creation of comprehensive addiction programs like what Portugal has. We have the means to fund complete drug recovery, we just have to take it from the parasites who are causing addiction.
Click to expand...
I don’t care what a pamphlet, white paper, or biased data or rigged studies concluded or says. You can write me another essay but none of it overrides this:

every doctor knows goddamn well what schedule 2 means. Every regulatory agency knows goddamn well what schedule 2 means.

they were all getting rich off it and knew exactly what they were doing. Pumping schedule 2 drugs out into the country like water.

You also so keep ducking my whole point about WHY so many people started to take these drugs in the early 2000s. Opioids were always there before oxy and given out even more liberally than oxy. Hydrocodone was not even schedule 2 before oxy and was there for whoever asked for it. Codiene was sold OTC. Yet the multitudes of people did not start taking these drugs until the American dream went to shit.

If oxy wasn’t there the exact same thing would’ve happened because all the other opioids were also given out for absolutely nothing and anyone that wanted them….but ppl didn’t want them until society went to shit.
 
LucidSDreamr said:
I don’t care what a pamphlet, white paper, or biased data or rigged studies concluded or says. You can write me another essay but none of it overrides this:
Click to expand...

Then there's no point in talking to you further. You're steeped up to your eyeballs in the logical fallacy of false equivalence.

Chinese opium addiction in the 1890s, Afghani opium in the global trade, heroin addiction in the US, Oxy addiction under Purdue pharma... who cares about talking about any of these. It's all addiction!!!!!!! All the same!!! Addiction has always existed!!! Don't blame anyone!!!

I also never said anywhere that opioid addiction in the US started with Oxy. I said Oxy made it worse. But you don't know how to read so I expect you to just wave your hand and repeat whatever bullshit you just said over and over.

Bored now. :rolleyes:
 
If I'm in a profession that's based on evidence and research, and it's also a profession that has a drug scheduling system that set up heroin and marijuana as schedule 1 and fentanyl as schedule 2, is it really that logical to care about oxy being schedule 2 when people are showing me studies that show it's less addictive than other opiates?
 
Foreigner said:
Oh well, then I guess some drug users will just have to deal with revolving door rehab. I'm okay with that as long as the surrounding society remains civilized.
Click to expand...
Dude this is some classist shit 😭 if somebody doesn't want to do something (rehab in this case) that costs taxpayers money, they should be allowed to decline it. The surrounding society is not civilized, we're dehumanizing people and tossing them in a useless cycle of wasted money and time. Can you tell me how that's better than somebody getting high?
 
Foreigner said:
. I said Oxy made it worse.
Click to expand...
I got you making ad hom attacks now instead of attacking my argument you keep ducking for the 3rd time. You’re losing here and you resorting to personal attacks shows that.

oxy didn’t make it worse. The death of the American dream made it worse. For the 3rd time you’ve ignored that point.

Do you think we’d be where we are (fentanyl) if oxy never came along?

Do you think we’d be where we are if oxy was not de facto banned?
 
Last edited:
Antares said:
If I'm in a profession that's based on evidence and research, and it's also a profession that has a drug scheduling system that set up heroin and marijuana as schedule 1 and fentanyl as schedule 2, is it really that logical to care about oxy being schedule 2 when people are showing me studies that show it's less addictive than other opiates?
Click to expand...

The scheduling doesn’t only take into account how addictive it is. It isn’t supposed to mean that schedule 1 is more addictive than schedule 2. Schedule 2 can be more addictive than schedule 1.

Both schedules 1 and 2 should be considered to be in the same bracket/upper end of the spectrum of addictivness.

The distinction as to why we have the drugs into either 1 or 2 comes down to whether it is deemed to have potential medical benefit or not; not ranking which drugs are more addictive than others out of all the addictive drugs.
 
That's true, but you'd have to be braindead to say that fentanyl has medical benefit while heroin has zero, or that cannabis has zero. The point is the DEA's scheduling is stupid, inconsistent, and ignores legitimate research that has been done both in this country and in others. If I were a doctor I would never value that over a study, even knowing that studies can be BS like these ones were.
 
Antares said:
That's true, but you'd have to be braindead to say that fentanyl has medical benefit while heroin has zero, or that cannabis has zero. The point is the DEA's scheduling is stupid, inconsistent, and ignores legitimate research that has been done both in this country and in others.
Click to expand...
It's really more of a fear thing with heroin and weed. Once the government has called them demons, they can't really go back and say "this stuff is good for you" without looking like morons. And that scares them because if they're wrong about one thing, they can be wrong in other circumstances. It's fear of the drugs themselves because we've been fed so much mongering, and fear from the government of being called out for being wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top