Skip to main content

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Should employers be allowed to test for nicotene or alcohol in your system? Or should the test be for under the influence while on the job? Whats next? Ibuprofen, birth control pills,broccoli?

No one should be at work under the influence of anything but is the invasion of your privacy justified. Is that basic human right not being taken? What could be more invasive to your privacy than being forced(and I don't care how you spin it it is forced) to give up your bodily fluids on demand. I don't think our founding fathers would say the circumstance warrants that invasion.


We prefer a plug of hair to bodily fluids. I don't care what people think about their right to privacy but when it comes to me standing on a ladder holding up an end of a 20' beam then I want to know without question that the guy holding up the other end is sober. We have no room for pot smokers at our company, additionally if someone is on prescription drugs that could possibly affect their abilities then we will not work them either.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.


not even you can believe the b.s. your slingin around this thread today... Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by onepatriot7:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.


not even you can believe the b.s. your slingin around this thread today... Big Grin


What I can't believe this batch of pro druggies on this forum. Good thing they obviously are not the majority of the US public, or all the drug laws would have already been repealed. I guess there's too much cheeto eating going on to successfully pass reform legislation Wink
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
What I can't believe this batch of pro druggies on this forum.


Being against the imprisonment of people who don't commit violent crime is not the same as being pro-drugs. I'm not advocating that anyone start using them.


and i only advocate the de-criminalization of marijuana, but, of course as a police officer, sassy equates marijuana equally with meth, crack, etc... i wonder if my buddy knows that the federal government still has citizens who receive an allotment of 300 marijuanna cigarettes each and every month provided through a federal medical marijuanna program that was deactivated by the Bush administration?
actually sassy, the majority of americans are pro-legalization. every state that has put it to a vote have legalized it overwhelmingly. incarceration doesnt help, drugs are just as prevalent in prison as they are on the street, just more expensive.

Over 1% of U.S. citizens are in jail or prison. That is over 2.3 million people, a higher percentage than any other country on earth. due to stiffer drug laws the prison population grew over 80% on the 90s, an increase of 86,000 per year. The annual cost to the taxpayers of this many inmates is $55 BILLION a year. 5.1 million americans are under community supervision (parole or probation), that is 1 out of every 45 citizens. over half of this 7.4 million people were arrested on NON-VIOLENT drug charges.
has this detered drug use? no. Remember the basic principle that if something is banned it becomes more popular. (*side note: where i work banned tobacco use. the percentage of tobacco users has rose from 40% to almost 70% of the workers).

so, incarceration doesnt deter drug use, capitol punishment also wouldnt deter use, just make offenders more violent. legalization, regulation and taxation is the ONLY answer.
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.
Wow!! dolemite you are right on with this post!! It's just all about job security. that's all!!
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.
Yeah, Right. That's really laughable. Just lock um up for life if you catch them with joint and we can pay there lodging and food till they die. makes good sense to me........NOT!!!
quote:
Originally posted by tcf531:
actually sassy, the majority of americans are pro-legalization. every state that has put it to a vote have legalized it overwhelmingly. incarceration doesnt help, drugs are just as prevalent in prison as they are on the street, just more expensive.

Over 1% of U.S. citizens are in jail or prison. That is over 2.3 million people, a higher percentage than any other country on earth. due to stiffer drug laws the prison population grew over 80% on the 90s, an increase of 86,000 per year. The annual cost to the taxpayers of this many inmates is $55 BILLION a year. 5.1 million americans are under community supervision (parole or probation), that is 1 out of every 45 citizens. over half of this 7.4 million people were arrested on NON-VIOLENT drug charges.
has this detered drug use? no. Remember the basic principle that if something is banned it becomes more popular. (*side note: where i work banned tobacco use. the percentage of tobacco users has rose from 40% to almost 70% of the workers).

so, incarceration doesnt deter drug use, capitol punishment also wouldnt deter use, just make offenders more violent. legalization, regulation and taxation is the ONLY answer.


excellent post, that's exactly what i was trying to get at earlier, the war on drugs is about nothing more than money and job security for more law enforcement.
quote:
Originally posted by tcf531:
actually sassy, the majority of americans are pro-legalization. every state that has put it to a vote have legalized it overwhelmingly. incarceration doesnt help, drugs are just as prevalent in prison as they are on the street, just more expensive.

Over 1% of U.S. citizens are in jail or prison. That is over 2.3 million people, a higher percentage than any other country on earth. due to stiffer drug laws the prison population grew over 80% on the 90s, an increase of 86,000 per year. The annual cost to the taxpayers of this many inmates is $55 BILLION a year. 5.1 million americans are under community supervision (parole or probation), that is 1 out of every 45 citizens. over half of this 7.4 million people were arrested on NON-VIOLENT drug charges.
has this detered drug use? no. Remember the basic principle that if something is banned it becomes more popular. (*side note: where i work banned tobacco use. the percentage of tobacco users has rose from 40% to almost 70% of the workers).

so, incarceration doesnt deter drug use, capitol punishment also wouldnt deter use, just make offenders more violent. legalization, regulation and taxation is the ONLY answer.


Yeah...that's why it's legal now...because so many people want it legal...NOT.

The people who want drugs legalized while very vocal (especially on anonymous forums), do not represent the wishes of the majority.
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.
Yeah, Right. That's really laughable. Just lock um up for life if you catch them with joint and we can pay there lodging and food till they die. makes good sense to me........NOT!!!


Why does that attitude not surprise me? Oh, I know...nevermind Wink
Why does everyone keep saying our drug laws are to tough? The U.S. has some of the most relaxed drug laws in the World.

Drug Laws Abroad

Countries with a hardline stance on drugs

Death penalty

Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand.


Heavy prison sentences

Cyprus: zero tolerance policy towards drugs and possession will usually lead to a hefty fine or even life imprisonment

Greece: possession of even small quantities of drugs can lead to lengthy and even life imprisonment

South East Asia: sentences of 40 to 50 years are not uncommon


Harsh sentences

India: 10 years for smoking cannabis

Italy: Up to 20 years imprisonment

Jamaica: Drug offences result in mandatory prison sentences and large fines. Possession of even small quantities can lead to imprisonment

Morocco: Maximum of 10 years imprisonment plus a fine.

Spain: Sentences for carrying can be up to 12 years

Tunisia: Possession of even a small amount of drugs could cost you a term in prison, while more serious charges may even result in 20 years imprisonment plus a fine

Turkey: Up to 20 years imprisonment

Venezuela: Drug carriers face minimum 10-year prison sentences in harsh conditions

Source: Drug Laws Abroad
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
[QUOTE]

And as for prostitution, that's already going on in many forms. Most men only ask a woman out on a date for one reason (and we know what that is) and most women want to be taken care of and have everything paid for. Most men only get married for steady, um, "love" and to have stability in their lives, and women get married because they want financial security. It's all just a form of fancy bartering that has nothing to do with love really, so what's the difference? Legalize all of it.


Ok, so this is off topic from the drug part but your argument makes no sense. Not all women get married to have someone to take care of them, there are still some strong independent women out there who have their own lives and want to share it with the one they fall in love with.
As for the part about men only wanting "steady love" that is crap too. I have been married 4 times and from my experience the "love" was always a lot more "steady" while I was single not to mention there was always some variety mixed in. I married my current wife because she's the perfect woman, I'm in love with her, she's my best friend, and I don;t want anyone else. If more stability is what I wanted then I would have remained single. As for the "steady love" thing, girlfriends and booty calls are as easily replenishable as the air we breath, as for stability what could be more stable than being single and knowing for a fact that when you get home from work that you are not going to find that the PMS calendar was off, that you left your clothes on the bathroom floor that morning and have a spouse that is irritated with you, or to plan all day to come home and just have dinner and go to bed only to find out when you get home that you're going to visit the inlaws instead. With that said, if being in love was not in the equation I would have remained single.
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.
Yeah, Right. That's really laughable. Just lock um up for life if you catch them with joint and we can pay there lodging and food till they die. makes good sense to me........NOT!!!


Why does that attitude not surprise me? Oh, I know...nevermind Wink
Not an attitude, a fact!! I am not going to go into why I think law enforcement is a joke just watch cops or first 48 and see who actually solves most crimes. Not them for sure!!
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.
Yeah, Right. That's really laughable. Just lock um up for life if you catch them with joint and we can pay there lodging and food till they die. makes good sense to me........NOT!!!


Why does that attitude not surprise me? Oh, I know...nevermind Wink
Not an attitude, a fact!! I am not going to go into why I think law enforcement is a joke just watch cops or first 48 and see who actually solves most crimes. Not them for sure!!


Hate to bust your bubble...naw I don't...but yes, that is an attitude. An attitude is a perceived state of mind that represents an individual's degree of like or dislike for an item, statement or idea. It has nothing to do with whether the attitude is based on fact or fiction.

And if you're basing your opinion of law enforcement off television programming, you really need to get some accurate information.
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.
Yeah, Right. That's really laughable. Just lock um up for life if you catch them with joint and we can pay there lodging and food till they die. makes good sense to me........NOT!!!


Why does that attitude not surprise me? Oh, I know...nevermind Wink
Not an attitude, a fact!! I am not going to go into why I think law enforcement is a joke just watch cops or first 48 and see who actually solves most crimes. Not them for sure!!


Hate to bust your bubble...naw I don't...but yes, that is an attitude. An attitude is a perceived state of mind that represents an individual's degree of like or dislike for an item, statement or idea. It has nothing to do with whether the attitude is based on fact or fiction.

And if you're basing your opinion of law enforcement off television programming, you really need to get some accurate information.
Hmmm hit a nerve eh!! Blah Blah Blah!!! Whatever, this guys are just the clean up crews after the fact. Never there when U actually need them, never.
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Bossplayr1966:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
I take reports every day of theft, assaults and robberies fueled by drug abuse. Drug abuse is not a victimless crime.


There are a few things to point out here.

First, by your own admission, you take reports every day. If criminalizing drugs reduced drug users committing other crimes, you wouldn't be taking reports every day.

Second, the fact that some of the people who commit real crime are also drug users does not justify criminal treatment of drug users who don't commit violent crimes. I fully support any effort to target violent offenders. I don't support targeting non-violent actions.


Re-read my statement. The reports I was talking about are the result of drug abuse. Yes, there are reports that have no connection to drug abuse, but they are a small minority of the reports we take.


But people are going to continue to use illicit drugs anyway. The laws aren't stopping them now. So legal or not, your reports volume won't change.


The penalties now are laughable. If proper punishment was meted out, we'd not have a problem with drug abuse.
Yeah, Right. That's really laughable. Just lock um up for life if you catch them with joint and we can pay there lodging and food till they die. makes good sense to me........NOT!!!


Why does that attitude not surprise me? Oh, I know...nevermind Wink
Not an attitude, a fact!! I am not going to go into why I think law enforcement is a joke just watch cops or first 48 and see who actually solves most crimes. Not them for sure!!


Hate to bust your bubble...naw I don't...but yes, that is an attitude. An attitude is a perceived state of mind that represents an individual's degree of like or dislike for an item, statement or idea. It has nothing to do with whether the attitude is based on fact or fiction.

And if you're basing your opinion of law enforcement off television programming, you really need to get some accurate information.
Hmmm hit a nerve eh!! Blah Blah Blah!!! Whatever, this guys are just the clean up crews after the fact. Never there when U actually need them, never.


If you want the cops there 24/7/365 so that they'll be there when "u actually need them", you're gonna need to increase the tax base a mite. One cop per citizen will be a bit expensive Big Grin

Or, for $250,000 per year, I'll be your personal body guard...but I get nights, weekends and holidays off. You'll have to handle the other times yourself. Wink
quote:
Originally posted by BFred07:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
[QUOTE]

And as for prostitution, that's already going on in many forms. Most men only ask a woman out on a date for one reason (and we know what that is) and most women want to be taken care of and have everything paid for. Most men only get married for steady, um, "love" and to have stability in their lives, and women get married because they want financial security. It's all just a form of fancy bartering that has nothing to do with love really, so what's the difference? Legalize all of it.


Ok, so this is off topic from the drug part but your argument makes no sense. Not all women get married to have someone to take care of them, there are still some strong independent women out there who have their own lives and want to share it with the one they fall in love with.
As for the part about men only wanting "steady love" that is crap too. I have been married 4 times and from my experience the "love" was always a lot more "steady" while I was single not to mention there was always some variety mixed in. I married my current wife because she's the perfect woman, I'm in love with her, she's my best friend, and I don;t want anyone else. If more stability is what I wanted then I would have remained single. As for the "steady love" thing, girlfriends and booty calls are as easily replenishable as the air we breath, as for stability what could be more stable than being single and knowing for a fact that when you get home from work that you are not going to find that the PMS calendar was off, that you left your clothes on the bathroom floor that morning and have a spouse that is irritated with you, or to plan all day to come home and just have dinner and go to bed only to find out when you get home that you're going to visit the inlaws instead. With that said, if being in love was not in the equation I would have remained single.


My post was meant to be sort of bait (and I have a feeling you knew that). You should know that this "liberal" (I disagree with that label) is all about being an independent woman. I was just having a little fun with what ferrellj said in his post. I don't have a problem with strip clubs, gambling or prostitution because all are personal decisions that harm no one else.

Now, I admit I was having a little fun but there is some truth to dating/marriage-are-really-just-forms-of-prostitution, and you know it.

And I'm curious about something, Fred. You've been married 4 times and said the current wife is the "perfect woman". Didn't you think the other 3 were perfect at one time too?

quote:
I have been married 4 times and from my experience the "love" was always a lot more "steady" while I was single not to mention there was always some variety mixed in. I married my current wife because she's the perfect woman, I'm in love with her, she's my best friend, and I don;t want anyone else. If more stability is what I wanted then I would have remained single. As for the "steady love" thing, girlfriends and booty calls are as easily replenishable as the air we breath, as for stability what could be more stable than being single and knowing for a fact that when you get home from work that you are not going to find that the PMS calendar was off, that you left your clothes on the bathroom floor that morning and have a spouse that is irritated with you, or to plan all day to come home and just have dinner and go to bed only to find out when you get home that you're going to visit the inlaws instead.


LOL! Love it! Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BFred07:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Buttercup:
[QUOTE]


My post was meant to be sort of bait (and I have a feeling you knew that). You should know that this "liberal" (I disagree with that label) is all about being an independent woman. I was just having a little fun with what ferrellj said in his post. I don't have a problem with strip clubs, gambling or prostitution because all are personal decisions that harm no one else.

Now, I admit I was having a little fun but there is some truth to dating/marriage-are-really-just-forms-of-prostitution, and you know it.

And I'm curious about something, Fred. You've been married 4 times and said the current wife is the "perfect woman". Didn't you think the other 3 were perfect at one time too?


No, I never thought the other ones were the "perfect woman". The first one I can mark up as teenage stupidity as we ran off and got married while we were in high school. The other two I thought at one point or the other had their awesome traits but it didn't take me long to just not like them very much. My current wife has it all, she's the only one of the herd that might actually be smarter than me, she's independent and hangs around because she wants to not because she "needs" me, she's witty, funny, interesting, a good cook, and the list could go on all day but added to all that she's pretty and to top it all off she's my best friend so yes she's the perfect woman even from a logical standpoint.
As for the whole thing about dating and marriage being a form of prostitution I am sure for SOME people there might be SOME truth to it. I know that it didn't take long to figure out that #'s 1 and 2 just wanted someone to take care of them, #2 was just a straight out gold digger. I didn't stay married to number 3 long enough to know but I doubt it was the case there. My current wife has no need for anyone to take care of her. When we met she was a fairly successful single lady with one child. I would say that for her and her child to have moved in together with me and my 3 kids was in any way someone's idea of being taken care of then they would need to have their head examined.

Now darnit, I've gotten off topic from the drug thing so i'll throw this in for good measure. #2 was on more prescription drugs than I can count (I didn't know this until after we were married and I went to get a one a day vitamin from my usually bare medicine cabinet and found all the shelves stuffed full, should have annulled that one) She was way over-prescribed, she went to some quack Dr over in the medical mall in Muscle Shoals and that Dr had given her prescriptions for Xanax (90 per month), lorcet, methadone, seroquel, lexapro,some muscle relaxer that I cannot remember the name of, and a few other drugs for mental health. Personally I think that if it is not criminal for a Dr to prescribe so much crap that it should be and this Dr should be locked away as I understand he is popular with people looking for pain killers and such. Anyway, she was on what I guess you would call a "good spell" while we were dating and I had no clue about the drug abuse or that she was crazy and have to wonder that if she would not have been on so many drugs would her mental issues have even existed. She had been diagnosed with several different things. The only ones I can remember are bi-polar disorder and paranoid personality disorder but there was a whole list of other things followed by the word "disorder". After a suicide attempt (not her first, there was another before we met). She was off of all the drugs for a couple of months and seemed to be doing a lot better but after a couple months her Dr starting giving her the prescriptions again, even xanax which was what she used for the suicide attempt. On the first day of taking the meds again she regressed back into her crazy ways and I filed for divorce a few weeks later.
My point is that Dr's who over-prescribe these type meds so much should be held accountable. I realize that Dr's are like everyone else and sometimes make honest mistakes and I do not think if their mistake costs someone life or limb that they should loose everything but at the same time the Dr's who send their patients away with goodie bags filled with scripts for pain killers, xanax, etc should be punished severely as they are no better than a street corner drug dealer.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×