The US Opioid Epidemic

[Playball40]

I have always thought it needs to be dealt with compassionately. But you're right. Cocaine was the rich man's addiction, but somehow crack <cheaper smokable version of cocaine> had stiffer penalties than powder cocaine.

I'm sure at least 20 people have beaten me to it by now...

But I love how rich and middle class drug addicts are "victims" of an "epidemic" but poor people in the ghettos and the trailer parks are enemy combatants in the "war on drugs."

It's actually a little bit refreshing in a way... our knee-jerk reaction is to try and shoot our way out all our problems, unless the problem affects us PERSONALLY, and then suddenly we expect people to deal with us with compassion and sensitivity.

 

[funinspace]

Drug sales on the dark web is another reason why this epidemic will never end, and it makes more sense to legalize the shit. People are going to use dangerous substances, legal or not, and the widespread availability of narcotic drugs these days makes it extremely easy to purchase them. Legalization would allow for regulations and state sponsored sales centers. That's the only thing that makes sense to me. Making draconian laws that punish users, fill up prisons etc. doesn't ever solve this problem. Selling them legally would keep the price below that of illegal sales, and allow for taxation which could be used for rehab for those that want to try and change their behavior. Blaming the problem on Rx. opiods is stupid, imo.

https://www.wired.com/2015/08/crackdowns-havent-stopped-dark-webs-100m-yearly-drug-sales/

AFTER MORE THAN four years and two giant law enforcement busts, the Dark Web's drug market is still just as robust as it was during the Silk Road's heyday. In fact, according to a new study, it's now moving well over $100 million of illegal substances a year, and it's recovering from every new scam-induced setback and government crackdown faster than the last one.
Those are a few of the lessons from a deep-dive study into Dark Web black market sales statistics that a pair of Carnegie Mellon researchers plan to present at the Usenix Security conference Wednesday. From 2013 to early 2015, they used automated software to "scrape" the visible contents of 35 Dark Web markets, counting the number of feedback ratings that the major drug sites require buyers to leave after each sale and then multiplying them by the purchased item's listed price to gauge total sales volumes. The result is the most comprehensive—if still not fully complete—picture of how contraband narcotics sales have waned and waxed during the short history of the Dark Web's online economy.
The researchers' findings, which extend to January of this year, describe a market that's no longer explosively growing, as it did in the early days of Silk Road.

Read the rest of the link for more details.

Are you crazy!!! 16 years after Portugal decriminalized drug use, the country is a complete disaster....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-overdose-in-portugal/?utm_term=.d637a4b73608

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm sure at least 20 people have beaten me to it by now...

But I love how rich and middle class drug addicts are "victims" of an "epidemic" but poor people in the ghettos and the trailer parks are enemy combatants in the "war on drugs."

It's actually a little bit refreshing in a way... our knee-jerk reaction is to try and shoot our way out all our problems, unless the problem affects us PERSONALLY, and then suddenly we expect people to deal with us with compassion and sensitivity.

Nah, you love strawmen.

Addicts are victims. Dealers are akin to enemy combatants.

What muddies the waters is that poor addicts tend to turn to criminal ways to get the money to afford drugs. This leaves them sort of wearing two hats.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I have always thought it needs to be dealt with compassionately. But you're right. Cocaine was the rich man's addiction, but somehow crack <cheaper smokable version of cocaine> had stiffer penalties than powder cocaine.

It actually makes sense.

Cocaine is a rich man's drug. Said rich man probably can afford his cocaine. He harms his own health but it's unlikely that he harms anyone else.

Crack is a poor man's drug. A crack addict generally can't afford his crack on what he can earn. Thus he turns to crime, often things like mugging. Lots of others get harmed.

Look around. How many voters were harmed by cocaine? Very few. How many were harmed by crack? Lots and lots. Is it any wonder the politicians vote for tougher penalties for crack than for cocaine?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I'm sure at least 20 people have beaten me to it by now...

But I love how rich and middle class drug addicts are "victims" of an "epidemic" but poor people in the ghettos and the trailer parks are enemy combatants in the "war on drugs."

It's actually a little bit refreshing in a way... our knee-jerk reaction is to try and shoot our way out all our problems, unless the problem affects us PERSONALLY, and then suddenly we expect people to deal with us with compassion and sensitivity.

Nah, you love strawmen.

Addicts are victims. Dealers are akin to enemy combatants.

Uh huh...

Federal lawmakers enacted mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines for drug offenses in 1986 in an attempt to target high-level distributors, although they also impact lower-level drug defendants. Most states have adopted a similar approach to drug sentencing. These fixed sentences are based on the type of drug, the weight of the drug and the number of prior convictions.

For example, Kentucky, which has adopted similar mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines, has some of the toughest provisions. For simple possession, first offenders get 2 to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $20,000. In contrast, California has some of the lightest drug possession sentences: between $30 and $500 in fines and/or 15 to 180 days in jail.

And:

possession of a controlled substance is a felony offense, which means the sentence is one year or more incarceration. The typical possession of a controlled substance charge is a Class 4 felony offense for possession of cocaine, although heroin is becoming much more prevalent recently.

A Class 4 felony has a possible sentence of 1-3 years in the Department of Corrections (prison). The fine can be $25,000. Most Class 4 felony drug charges permit the court to sentence the defendant to probation and substance abuse treatment.

All controlled substances are classified by the Act as either Schedule I, Schedule II, Schedule III or Schedule IV substances.

A Schedule I controlled substance is defined as a substance that: 1) has high potential for abuse; and 2) has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or lacks accepted safety for use in treatment under medical supervision. See 720 ILCS 570/203.

The coup de grace:

Finally, possession of opiates is a felony criminal offense. OxyContin is the common name of the opiate oxycodone. Possession of oxycodone without a prescription is a felony offense.

And this has been the case for the last 15 years at least. The rhetoric from the "tough on crime" crowd is that opioid abusers are just as bad as cocaine users and that they should be charged as felons just like everyone else.

Now all of a sudden they're "victims" of an "epidemic" and the problem is the drugs, not the users.

What muddies the waters is that poor addicts tend to turn to criminal ways to get the money to afford drugs. This leaves them sort of wearing two hats.

And if it was just the criminality of drug addicts that was the problem, we wouldn't be having this discussion. But drug possession ITSELF is considered a felony punishable by up to 15 years of prison time, and I'm not even talking about possession with intent to sell.

Don't even try to spin this one. America is FAMOUS for setting a drug policy specifically designed to punish drug users. Now opioid abuse is becoming more widespread, and because it's affecting a higher class of citizens, those policies no longer seem like such a good idea.

 

[Playball40]

No. Possession of crack garnered a stiffer penalty than possession of powdered cocaine. I'm not talking about ancillary crimes.

And do you REALLY want to ask me how many people were harmed by powder cocaine?? Really?? I grew up in Miami in the 80's!

I have always thought it needs to be dealt with compassionately. But you're right. Cocaine was the rich man's addiction, but somehow crack <cheaper smokable version of cocaine> had stiffer penalties than powder cocaine.

It actually makes sense.

Cocaine is a rich man's drug. Said rich man probably can afford his cocaine. He harms his own health but it's unlikely that he harms anyone else.

Crack is a poor man's drug. A crack addict generally can't afford his crack on what he can earn. Thus he turns to crime, often things like mugging. Lots of others get harmed.

Look around. How many voters were harmed by cocaine? Very few. How many were harmed by crack? Lots and lots. Is it any wonder the politicians vote for tougher penalties for crack than for cocaine?