To: i-node who wrote (651492 ) 4/14/2012 8:18:26 PM From: Brumar89 Read Replies (1) | Respond to Here's a contradiction ... why call legal painkiller addiction a big problem when the addicts aren't being jailed if they have prescriptions and can keep their jobs, which is seemingly what you want for other addicted people?a) I think marijuana, an absolutely harmless drug, should be flat out legalized, but regulated in the way we regulate alcohol; en.wikipedia.org c) All property seized by law enforcement authorities should become by law the property of a trust established for the treatment of drug dependency including substitution therapies which are effective (Suboxone; Methadone); d) A small portion of the money saved from not prosecuting marijuana crimes should be used to fund a nationwide database which contains every Rx issued for opiates or benzos to eliminate doctor shopping and to allow enforcement action against physicians who are over-prescribing these medications, the source of untold misery and death in this country. It sounds like you want to expand the war on painkiller abuse. Why? Especially in light of your posts supporting leaving addicts alone, letting them work in professional jobs and so on. And the savings would be savings by local county and state govts which handle most marijuana crimes. Why not let them keep any marijuana prosecution savings (assuming they're material) to spend on roads or whatever? e) Expansion and standardization of Drug Court programs as they have been shown to be effective in some areas. Possession of dangerous drugs would still be illegal but handled by more competent law enforcement authorities. No person should receive a felony conviction for simple possession of any substance, PERIOD. f) I would not oppose drug maintenance programs for cocaine and opiate addicts with the goal being to transition to substitution therapies where available; Opiate substitution programs can take a nonproductive addict and make them able to work, pay taxes, and eventually get off drugs altogether. These have been effective where they have been tried; g) Eliminate ALL mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes as well as the application of three-strikes laws (Louisiana recently gave a man life in prison for possession of marijuana with intent to distribution, 4th offense. Ridiculous.) h) Expand the number of addiction medicine specialists, who are few and far between. What would they do? Shouldn't demand for services produce more such specialists in time, if more are needed?i) Encourage the development of limited- and non-abusable alternatives to opiates. The revised formulations of some opiates have resulted in a reduction in the most dangerous forms of abuse -- injection and snorting. Does this mean we'd spend money developing less dangerous ways for opiate addicts to use drugs? How would we get them to use them and distribute them to addicts? This sounds like we'd actually be getting the government involved in drug use in a new way. The main point is that there is a lot that can be done and we're not doing anything. I don't know, there are drug courts, there are methadone programs ... at least some places. Marijuana is 'decriminalized' in 12 states - which doesn't mean flat out legal, we have medical marijuana in some states - which works out to defacto legal. Because of those doctors who write prescriptions so easily ... which I think you wanted to crack down on re.painkillers.
