I was young. I was getting drunk in a dive in old Baja Oklahoma. It was so long ago the jukebox was wailing “Mendocino.” It was so long ago the dancers all wore tassels and thongs. A strobe light throbbed like the end of sex so even if you stared you could only see about half of what all was going on.
Big Betty danced on a tiny stage across from the bar. Big Betty’s best dance was when her feet stayed still. She leaned forward, put her hands on her knees and made her big, world famous breasts spin circles in opposite directions just like the rotors on a Chinook helicopter. Every strobe flash was a snapshot. Between flashes, the light behind the bar made her silver tassels blur. Big Betty would lean right over her audience and the audience would lean back so close that if they opened their mouths they could taste Big Betty’s sweat.
One romantic offered Big Betty a drink from his bottle of beer. She took the bottle from his hand. Then disdaining a drink, just as she straightened to step back and dance with her feet again, Big Betty broke that bottle right across that romantic’s head. The romantic staggered back heartbroken but he did not fall. Somebody caught him and pushed him toward the front door. He stumbled out blinded by his own blood. He left a trail to follow but no one bothered. Some other dance aficionado stole that romantic’s space near the edge of the stage. Throughout the night, boots and work shoes ground the pieces of that bottle back down to sand.
Her Name Was Lynn
A Kiowa named Lynn danced for me, just for me, that night on my table while I pretended not to give a damn. I had been subtly admiring Lynn the Kiowa for at least weeks. She was little, beautiful and brown. When she shook her head in the flashing light her hair would explode like a startled murder of crows. Then it would all magically fall back to exactly the way it had been. Even in her stripper shoes she couldn’t have been much more than five-foot-two. I don’t know, maybe she was eighteen. She leered at me while she danced. She was flexible as a gymnast. She bent all the way over from the waist and put her face a foot from mine. She looked right through my eyes down to the Faustian depths of my soul. She wore that wanton look a woman wears when she tells you, “You can do anything you want.”
And, she asked me, “Do you have any crystal meth?”
That was the very first time I ever heard it called that. Now, I have heard it called speed, ice, amp, glass, new school, crunch, whizz, fatch, rocket fuel and of course crank; because in the old days men used to smuggle it in motorcycle crankcases. I know at least a dozen more names. Bikers have names for methamphetamine like Eskimos have names for snow. There are different names when it is almost clear, pale yellow, tinged with violet or when it is brown and crunchy like peanut butter.
And, what I saw that night makes more sense when you understand that Big Betty and Lynn and some fraction of the rest of the people there that night were making the most of their lives through the magic of meth.
What Is Meth
Psychoactive drugs resemble chemicals for which evolution has already reserved a place, or receptor, in the human brain. Amphetamines resemble adrenaline. They were isolated in Japan and issued to Japanese soldiers during the Russo-Japanese War. Twenty-five years later a Philadelphia pharmaceutical firm named Smith, Kline and French (SKF) pirated the Japanese research, patented the chemicals and started marketing a Benzedrine inhaler “for quick relief of cold symptoms.” College students discovered what else amphetamines could do and in the late 30s SKF started marketing benzedrine as a treatment for fatigue, narcolepsy and obesity. During World War II SKF sold 180 million Benzedrine tablets to the U.S. Army and the tablets were also routinely fed to American troops in Korea and Vietnam.
Benzedrine is the most common brand name for the molecule 1-phenyl-2-aminopropane. A molecule with the same atomic components that assembles those atoms a little differently is brand named Dexedrine. If you methylate the final nitrogen atom in Dexedrine you make a molecule that was originally branded as Methedrine. The methylation makes methamphetamine harder to metabolize than Dexedrine, which means that meth has a longer half-life, which means it provides a longer, fuller, more satisfying high.
After SKF’s patents expired in 1949 there was an explosion of amphetamine production and use. A scholar named David Courtwright called post-war America an “amphetamine democracy” because truck drivers, factory workers, students, housewives, politicians and celebrities all took amphetamines to help them lead better and more productive lives.
Cool Kids Do It
A New York society doctor named Max Jacobson got rich selling Dexedrine and methamphetamine to celebrities. His clients included Johnny Mathis, Yul Brenner, Truman Capote, Cecil B. DeMille, Eddie Fisher, Otto Preminger, Anthony Quinn, Tennessee Williams and dozens of politicians including John F. Kennedy. Jacobson injected Jack Kennedy with either Methedrine or Dexedrine before at least two of Kennedy’s debates with Richard Nixon in 1960. So while the very straight Nixon was obviously nervous and tentative under the hot lights in front of the television cameras Kennedy was focused, collected and supremely confidant.
American mommies got so hooked on amphetamine diet pills that early in 1973 the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs and the Food and Drug Administration began tighter regulation of the drugs. Coincidentally, around the same time, Smith Kline and French discovered a new disease among children. SKF found a surprisingly large number of American children suffered from a “complex and little-understood learning and behavior disorder called,” at first, “minimal brain dysfunction.”
The disease quickly became known as Attention Deficit Disorder. SKF scientists found that 69 percent of all hyperkinetic children who were fed “moderate doses” of Benzedrine and Dexedrine “improved.” A very important man named Dr. Leon Eisenberg, Chief of Psychiatric Services at Massachusetts General Hospital, was trotted out to testify to the press that there was “no indication of addiction or other drug induced emotional or psychological damage” found in hyperactive children treated with amphetamine.
Amphetamines were marketed as “the penicillin of children with learning disabilities.” An amphetamine named methylphenidate was branded as “Ritalin” and the healing began.
White Trash Drug
In the 70s cocaine, (a brand name coined by the Bayer Drug Company the same year Bayer coined the brand names Aspirin and Heroin) replaced amphetamines as a cure for celebrities’ insecurity and housewives’ chubbiness. But bennies, dex and meth remained firmly entrenched in the aspirations of the white working class. For decades in America, upward mobility and prosperity were connected, rightly or wrongly, with working longer and harder. Truck drivers, for example, were paid by the load. A trucker who drove 20 hours a day could make more money than one who only drove ten hours.
Piece work on a punch press machine is really only possible with the aid of some amphetamine. Grab a piece of metal from a box on your right, slip it into one of three dies, tap your right foot, flip the partially finished part into a second die, tap, slide it into a third die with your left hand, tap, toss the finished, or partially finished, piece into a box on your left and repeat 6,000 times. Don’t screw up. You might lose a hand. Concentrate. Concentrate. Go home. Live your real life. Try to sleep. Get up. Repeat.
Or take the truck batteries off the pallet one by one and set them on the roller line. Drag the empty pallet to the other end of the line and restack the finished batteries. And, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat. Don’t think.
Or, the pre-eminent blue collar job, the job you had to know somebody to get. Scamper in front of a slowly moving line of cars and bolt on 52, or 56, or 61 bumpers an hour depending on how fast somebody a thousand miles away has decided the line must move that day. Do it hour after hour, day after day. Ask for overtime.
That was the seventies and the eighties. Those were the good, old days. Those were the jobs you could get before America became a “knowledge worker economy” and all the good, blue collar were assigned to slaves in China who live in dormitories.
Methland
After the jobs went away only the crank remained. Only the feeling of self-confidence and power methamphetamine promotes remained. And that is where Nick Reding picks up the story in his book Methland: The Death and Life of an American Small Town.
After methamphetamine use was increasingly criminalized in the early 1970s, after the flow of amphetamine from Mexico was interrupted, after the introduction of Sudafed made it comparatively easy to cook crank at home, after cocaine made powders chic, after freebase and crack, crank became a part of post-industrial American life. Crank became a get rich quick scheme. Crank became a cheap high. The line between buyers and sellers blurred. Motorcycle clubs in California and New Jersey competed for market share. The lingering effects of that competition persist today. Within the last five years even the New York Times and Newsweek have heard of crank.
Reding’s book is full of defects and it is still the best thing yet written on the subject because Nick Reding may be the first insider writer to actually notice the connection between methamphetamine abuse and the shattering of the American dream. Reding started looking at Oelwein, Iowa (it is pronounced Ol’ Wine) in 2005. Oelwein has a population of about 6,000 and before its disillusionment it was a quintessential American town. Most of Reding’s book is a sympathetic portrait of the people he met there.
Reding, who knows nothing about motorcycle clubs, still tries to be kind to a Sons of Silence patch holder named “Major.” Major worries about what his crank abuse might do or have done to his toddler son.
Reding tries to meet the county prosecutor, a man named Nathan Lein, halfway. The leading physician in Oelwein is a chain-smoking alcoholic named Clay Hallberg. A man named Roland Jarvis is such a grotesquely depraved crank fiend that the government should pay him to appear in anti-drug public service announcements.
The local Police Chief is a nut case named Jeremy Logan who intends to save Oelwein by telling his cops to “Assume everyone is guilty, and put the screws to them.”
Lori Arnold
Reding’s best source is a 45-year-old federal prisoner named Lori Arnold. Lori was born in the nearby town of Ottumwa and she is the sister of the character actor and comedian Tom Arnold. Tom Arnold might be best known as one of Roseanne Barr’s ex-husbands.
Lori Arnold started selling pharmaceutical grade methamphetamine in the 1970s and she is the former wife of a man named Floyd Stockdall. Stockdall was a former President of the Grim Reapers Motorcycle Club, from whom the Sons of Anarchy have borrowed their patch.
And the Grim Reapers, according to Reding, had a connection to a fairly well known meth lab in Southern California back in the 80s. Lori tried crystal, liked it, and gave some away to her friends. Her friends liked crank, too and within a month Lori was buying four ounces of meth in Long Beach for $2,500 and selling it for $10,000 in Iowa. Her business grew from there and by 1987 Lori, who dropped out of school in the 10th grade, owned a bar, a car dealership, 14 houses, 52 racehorses and a 144 acre horse farm. That was the same year most of the other farms in that part of Iowa were foreclosed and most of the railroad and meatpacking jobs disappeared.
Lori Arnold was an inspiration to her neighbors. But she liked her own product too much to get out. The feds caught her in 1990 and she wound up doing nine years.
By the time Lori Arnold got out of prison in 1999 most of the straight jobs had disappeared, the average wage had dropped to five dollars an hour and 80 percent of the jobs still left were held by undocumented Mexican immigrants. She went to work for Cargill, slicing up hogs in a room so cold she had to pour hot water over her rubber boots to keep her feet from going numb. And, since she was bright and desperate, Lori Arnold couldn’t help but notice that there was a racial divide between the high quality crank the Mexican workers used and the kitchen crank the white locals used. So like all good workers in the new knowledge worker economy, Lori Arnold used her mind.
By 2001, two years after she was sprung, Lori was selling so much Mexican crank to poor Iowa whites that she had to open another nightclub to launder all the money. Her success did not last long. On October 25th of that year she sold four ounces of meth to a local Iowa cop and returned to the penitentiary.
Trickle Down Economy
Since Methland was published last summer the reviews have been very mixed. Most of the critical reviews have scolded Reding for trying to do what this review has tried to do, which is to try to hint at “a unified theory of ‘the meaning of meth.’”
Scott Martelle for example, a journalism instructor at Chapman University who wrote the review for the Los Angeles Times, cannot bring himself to believe that methamphetamine abuse might be in any way connected to the shattering of the American dream. Martelle writes: “At first, Reding argues, meth was viewed as a crutch by local workers looking for a little boost to get through long double shifts. It’s not a persuasive argument. Substance abuse – from alcohol to pot to coke and now meth – in rural America has a lot of contributing factors, but the drive to work harder doesn’t seem likely to rank high among them.”
I think Reding’s argument is persuasive and I think it is about time somebody who can actually get a book published said it. Nick Reding has gone and looked and tried to sympathize so he understands that crank abuse is not the disease. Crank abuse, like Gin abuse in Dickens’ London, is a symptom of a disease that most cops, lawyers, judges, politicians, authors and, apparently, journalism instructors refuse to see. Reding sees what I see and so I think Methland deserves to be read.
You can get a copy on Amazon for $16.50.
Related posts:
November 16th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Thanks Rebel,
As usual, provacative and informative.
sled tramp
November 16th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Despite indulging in substance abuse during my wild and crazy years, never took anything more potent than LSD, Peyote, and Magic Mushroom. Try looking at your face in the mirror with snakes slithering all over it after dropping some acid. Some folks would freak while others, like myself, thought it highly amusing. One of my longtime biker friends was using and selling meth for a dozen year or so. Fortunately, he quit and got out of it altogether.
November 16th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
A good friend of mine used to cook his own quality meth at home (both in IL and AZ), but he was a fiend for the stuff and lost everything when the cops busted him. He spent a few years in federal prison and, after his release, he started working at his dad’s pawn shop where he worked from being a low-level peon to become the boss. He is a lucky man to have been delivered from the meth monster, but he is also a success story, in that he has fought and worked his ass off to overcome his past. Meth is a bad bitch, but with hard work and the help of family, friends, and (maybe most importantly) faith, it can be beat.
Good article, Rebel.
Troyez
November 16th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
good story Rebel it also hits close to home over here as my own son is currently doing 25 to life in federal holding with his OL doing 10 as well ..
November 16th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
That shit today made with ether, lithium from batteries, etc. IS shit. Back in the day I had truck drivers who would buy 1,000 “white crosses” in Mexico for $20.00. In the 70′s, they started marketing time release capsules by a company called RJS, and we called them “L.A. Turn Arounds” because theoretically a trucker could do both coasts and back. There was Desoxyn; so potent they took it off the market.
The military still issues 10mg Dexedrine at will, and they call them “go pills”. They are fairly harmless (unless you have an unlimited supply I guess).
In my day, “speed” was it. I loved it and could not get my hands on enough. Back then everyone had their own “personal best” and mine was 8 days up with no sleep. It was something then to be proud of. Coming down though was a bitch and you’d take so much your tolerance was so high, you simply could not get high anymore after 8 days.
Ahh, but then you’d go see Melissa and she’d give you one of those 724′s, make you some herbal tea and let you crash out in her place, and if you caught her at the right time, maybe you’d share her warm bed and arms……………
Addiction is a bitch. Been there done that. The “war on drugs” can’t be won Rebel. Drugs should be legalized and decriminalized like in certain European countries, you go register and you get quality heroin, medical attendance while you bone up a hit, and you get a prescription, a safe place to nod off.
People are safer, less deaths from overdose and way less crimes against persons.
Al Capone used to say “all we do is give the people what they want” when speaking of his criminal enterprise during prohibition. He was right, too.
It’s weird that yeah, I don’t want my kid to do the things I did. but I know he will. I can’t judge him, but I can tell him the truth.
I wasted a lot of years.
November 16th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Not Surprised:
“It’s weird that yeah, I don’t want my kid to do the things I did. but I know he will. I can’t judge him, but I can tell him the truth.
I wasted a lot of years”.
Ain’t THAT the truth…….Ain’t a day go by I don’t wish I could start over……I just wish all the people I’ve hurt and worse had never met me….
~sled tramp
November 16th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Thanks for an eloquent description of the unintended consequences of the “War on [some] Drugs”.
November 17th, 2009 at 7:55 am
Rebel:
I for one agree with you about Reding’s point. There’s a much-less destructive prescription drug available now called Provigil; it doesn’t have the really nasty side effects of crank – and although it might not keep you awake for 8 days, it’s damn effective at banishing mental fatigue on a shorter time scale. It was mainly brought to market for people with narcolepsy – but now I understand they’re selling far more of the stuff than narcoleptics can account for, even if every single one had a ‘scrip for the stuff. (Provigil is a Scheduled Drug – but only Schedule 4, not a highly restrictive category.)
A friend of mine has used it, and he calls it “clarity in a pill.” It has, I understand, gotten to be popular with people trying to cram more work and recreation into the meager 24 hours in every day. Kind of like Reding’s theory about why some people use meth.
Frankly – given that Provigil doesn’t raise blood pressure or heart rate, my personal feeling is that it’s probably safer than No-Doz or Vivarin or the like and – if this country weren’t so freaking uptight about such things – should probably be put into the same category as aspirin with a little bit of codeine is in Canada: you don’t need a prescription, but you do have to ask for it at the pharmacy counter, to keep people from swiping it off the store shelves.
November 17th, 2009 at 8:28 am
Seems as though we all have a story to tell when it comes to METH, I myself used to induldge, only in the snorting manner as I never found trust in the real freaks who mainlined or smoked and anyone who still has a tendancy to shoot and smoke the stuff.But back in the early days the white crosses,L.A. TURNAROUNDS would give me the best high and had alot of sleepless nights of enjoyment, although I do miss times like that I firmly believe this stuff people wish to call meth is the destruction of all who may have the bad misfortune not to put it down,sure have seen alot of good people go to waste over METH, SPEED or whatever else it may be called these days, and even in the 60′s and 70′s some lost there souls to this product,glad to hear the good stories of how some have become less fond of this now MENACE TO SOCIETY.
November 17th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Bennies, RJS’s Diet Pills. We would buy cross tops from truckers, get our old ladies to go to the doc for “diet pills”. and go 90 plus until we ran out. after about 3 days of sleep we started hunting for some more “speed”
The stuff we had was nothing compaired to the Meth that is on the streets today.
I guess we were lucky.
November 17th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Unified theory of meth is interesting concept although not sure you can separate it from unified theory of American values and how we view managment, workers, inputs/outputs, the value of vacations and time off, our “stuff”, knowledge economy and so on. And it’s even harder to get upper middle class university professors to look objectively at anything that questions American values.
Looks like an interesting read. I’ll pick it up.
November 17th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Dirty Bruin, Provigil is made by a French firm who opted to take subsidies under the U.S “Orphan Drug Act”. Basically because of its low side effects, it is given to many people whose hearts could not stand amphetamines.
Narcolepsy is more rare that Tourette’s Syndrome, and no US drug company has yet offered any remedy beyond amphetamines like Dexedrine, etc. and Congress passed laws offering funding to drug companies willing to develop drugs for which there is a very limited market.
It is a good drug; you can go to sleep when you want, but stay awake when you need to. People with MS or other debilitating disorders who take very high powered meds use Provigil. It is also very high in demand for those on chemo or who take high doses of pain killing drugs.
Thing is, if you do not have insurance, it will cost the shit out of you. 90 10mg Dexedrines (dextrostat generic) runs about 38.00.
Even with insurance you are likely looking at the highest co pay (40+) for a 30 day supply. You don’t seem to build the tolerance with Provigil as when using amphetamines, and there is no “crash”.
November 17th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
sled tramp:
My son’s mother got hooked on crack and was busted for 17 counts. I always looked at crack as a nigger drug, never touched it. He’s seen his share of the waste land; his mom is still “out there”, and he knows where I come from. I can only hope he is smarter than his ol’ man.
I am not opposed to recreational drugs by any means. Statistics say that only about 11% of those who drink are alcoholics. Me, I never could find the “off button”…I’ve given up my right to use successfully going on 16 years now (give or take a few planned and unplanned “relapses”) and though I would, like you, wish I could start over, I would not take anything for the lessons I’ve learned, albeit the hard way, battling my own self made demons.
I worked at a treatment center on weekends awhile. I did service work in prisons. Drove the “wagon” around downtown at night picking up guys passed out in the alleys. But I did all this to help ME stay clean more than anything. I don’t judge people. Well, not on that basis anyway.
Addiction is politically correct: it does not care about your social status, gender, race or how much money you have.
I’ve lost some people I love. I’ve been to jail. I’ve gone through withdrawals strapped to a chair. Though I always had a choice, I exercise it today.
Man, if anybody else had done to me what I have done to myself, I’d shoot the fucker!
But I know I am not terminally unique, and there are hundreds of thousands with stories far worse than my own.
I don’t preach and when I am passed a joint, I take it and quickly hand it to the next guy. But those who know me know where I came from and that I will always listen and try to help, if asked. I’m a Nazi about my own recovery, but no one else’s.
Life is good. I know what it is like now to wake up instead of “come to” LOL
November 17th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Not Surprised,
Thanks for the note.It’s interesting the paths we choose.It’s difficult to talk about this sort of shit.I never became addicted to anything…maybe rocking a 19 year old ex LURP in smack withdrawal all night and giving him milk with chalk in it so he wouldn’t puke his guts up when I was 12 had something to do with it.Watched my best friend lose everything in his life to dope.Just never took.Not that I didn’t try despite my history though.Loved acid,we used to race from Vallejo to Fremont on window pane until I tried to get off my bike around 95.Needed a line or two just to get through back in those daze…I was always more the shoot and loot type.I have an allergy to cocaine.Nothing…nada, so I missed out on the 80′s LOL.I was good however with business,and gawd knows Oakland was the land of opportunity for everything ya shouldn’t do.
I was in my mid forties before I got away from everything.I’m like you in that I wouldn’t trade my experiences and demons for anything.They provide my future guidelines.
I figure today was payback.Got told I’m going to walk with this damn cane and a lot of pain for the duration.Figured I was due….Payback’s a bitch as they say.I’m one of those guys that got to where I enjoyed hurting people.I was good at it and I didn’t care.That’s the worst drug right there.I never sleep….
I don’t judge people except if I feel a vibe that’s wrong-which I’m good at-and I try to give strangers a shot.But as I’ve stated here once and awhile, I tend to stay with my own and while we love to party etc…it’s a lot different now.We’re kinda like Ranger School or the “Q” course.We’ve all been through the exact same thing so we know what to expect from each other.High attrition rate, but while it wore us out, we’re better for it.
Like I said, hard to explain.
sled tramp
November 17th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Rebel,
BTW….there was a strip club just south of Sacto in the mid 70′s called the “Sandbox”.One freezing night with a long way to go yet, we pulled in and hit the bar.I’ll never forget this one lithe little honey that sounds like “Lynn” waving her goods in my face.I know there’s a gawd cause just thinking about her now 35 years later does things that would warp a wishbone frame…….
sled tramp
November 18th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Dear Gringo 1 percenter,
I am sorry. Twenty-five years is a tragedy. The worse tragedy is that after the law took your son some group of lawyers and cops had a drink to celebrate what they had done. I think drug promiscuity should be treated as a public health problem, not as a law enforcement problem. The war on drugs is the worst thing to happen to America since the civil war. It makes less sense than human sacrifice. It is like treating poison ivy with a razor blade.
Stay strong,
Rebel
November 18th, 2009 at 9:20 am
Great review. Makes you think twice about politicians who, on one hand, romanticize “middle-America” while, on the other, they lay down the the groundwork for its destruction.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:30 am
Dear Not Surprised,
I guess I was always lucky with beans, whites and crank. Never got habituated. I never felt like I needed to get more intense –unless I was working that punch press or on that line or trying to find, engage and kill the enemies of the United States of America. Crank, especially, made me feel predatory and bullet proof, which is really the last way I need to be encouraged to feel. Afterwards, I always felt sad. Sometimes, when I came down I would feel sad and ashamed. I know many people really love crank. I was lucky that I never did. It was just not the drug for me. Through whatever accident of brain chemistry. Give me weed and wine anytime.
your pal,
Rebel
November 18th, 2009 at 10:41 am
Dear Gringo 1%:
I would echo what Rebel said, and I am very sorry. Me, it looks like my own words have become a self fulfilling prophecy.
My son is 15, an Honor Roll student but he got in a little trouble and is on probation.
I just got word today that Monday, he failed his first court ordered piss test and was positive for marijuana. Maybe this was the first time he tried it, I don’t know and it is too late for me to ask him why he didn’t’ come to me.
I don’t trust the Justice System and I know they don’t give two shits about my kid. He isn’t slick like me, nor is he a very good liar, but I hate to see his future mortgaged because of stupidity.
He’s already been approached for scholarships in music. Guess its time to call a good lawyer. At parties and stuff, he knows what happens, but when families are around, we usually herd the kids away from the adult stuff…
I don’t know maybe I am being a hypocrite. Maybe he thinks cause I got away with so much, he can too.
Sorry to rant, but its a good topic and Gringo 1%, LLR to you and your son man.
November 18th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Gringo 1%er,
My apologies….I meant to offer my sympathies when I read your son’s sentence.Somehow I went over.I have a grandson (number 5 so far) due Monday.Both my oldest and I are extremely careful to stay off the old days topic around that generation.But despite our best efforts, there’s always a chance of life going wrong.I never gave a shit about myself or the consequences of my actions after I turned 17 or so…I’m not religous at all.But Day and night I ask the great mystery to lay off my kids and grandkids and not let them ANYWHERE near my trail.
Not Surprised,
My youngest boy is going to be 15 in a month.He too is an honor student and a musical kid so I really heard your words.I’ve done everything I can to change for ten years primarily for my kids.He’s a really good kid as I’m sure your son is too.He’s had more than a few sit downs with my brothers and I about life,the old days and lessons learned.Still,I worry a bit.I took the path of telling him straight up what kind of man I used to be.The bad shit.Not all of it naturally but enough to show how far I’d come so he can see what’s important.
It’s not hypocritical what you’re saying.
With the grandson coming and a lot on my mind, I went for a couple hundred, no special destination today.Only way I can think.Because of what often is related by you guys,my fellow sophisticates,Sometimes I think differently about things.My spirit and head feel better but my hands are frozen meat clumps…..oh well….
November 18th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Thanks sled tramp. Like I said once, I will stand behind him, right or wrong. I appreciate you telling me about what you told your son. It isn’t “war stories” as if I am trying to glorify, it is a part of who I am and yes, I want him to learn from my mistakes not repeat them.
He is scared and admitted it. Good start. We meet with is PO tomorrow, which I think is better than the alternative which is issue a pick up order and no discussion.
L&R to you and your son sled tramp.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
i always figured some of the blame for my son rested on my head as the kid was raised in my house and perhaps he seen some shit he should not have seen , i cant say i was always a perfect role model but i did raise my kids in a middle class world and i have always had a tendency to spoil my kids , i always thought that was better than the shit the wife and i came from , kids grow up fast , theres things i should have done to change the path my son decided to take , but his path was my path as well as most of us here , when he started walkin and talkin like a man i was fuckin proud of him but my inaction is the cause in my mind , like i said kids grow up fast and before i knew it my kid was in his late twentys and had already been in the mix twice , he drew this kind of time because he wouldnt rat out his friends , he actually told the federal prosicuter to go fuck themselves , that alone makes me proud but on the other hand at my age i will never see him again in this world ..
i will say anyone sees this starting to happen to your kid , sit on him , do what you got to do to save your kid because nobody else is gonna do it .. respects and thanks for the kind words..
November 18th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Most of us try to give our kids those things we wished our parents had given us. Mine tried to wrap us in cotton wool. I encouraged mine to be independent. My parents were tee-totallers, I’m still a functiuoning alcoholic but my sons know how to drink responsibly. they don’t hit people when they get drunk like I used to. My younger brother was once lamenting some of our dad’s shortcomings. I told him the way I saw it was that the old man tried to do a better job than his old man, who had also been a violent alcoholic. I thought that, despite my numerous and frequent mistakes, I’d done a better job with mine, and my great hope is that if they ever sit still long enough to give me grandsons, hopefully they’ll be a little better as dads than I was.
We’ll never know what would have happened if we’d turned right instead of left on the day. Boys need to make their own mistakes, it’s what helps them learn to become men. They need to have their own secrets. We did. We do what we believe to be the best idea at the time. It’s all we can expect of ourselves and all that we can expect of our kids.
Respect to all the dads out there.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
My first post here, this topic definitely struck a chord with me. I grew up in a small NorCal town in Mendocino county that was a pot Mecca (still is) and ‘soft’ drugs have always been a second income for three generations in my family. Meth, Crank, Speed, Crystal and its many other names has taken the ballgame to a whole new level. One cousin in San Quentin, another cousin dead, another cousin strung out bouncing from binge to binge, aunts, uncles, numerous friends with meth problems. (and when I say cousin, these are like brothers – people I’ve known since birth) I have given this a lot of thought over the years, and whether you’re a buyer or a seller (and by the way, usually it’s both) I have come to the conclusion that it’s a much bigger picture and the behavioral drivers are much more basic…its about human greed and it’s about our great American capitalist culture – people want a better life, they want to feel better about their circumstances, they want joy, euphoria, money and material goods (trucker example is a good one)…Somebody already mentioned the measuring stick – a better life than their parents had. Well with Meth both can be achieved by using or selling, or both. One the one hand it sucks because we are programmed to ‘want’ and be satisfied quickly, on the other I am very thankful for my freedom and wouldn’t want to hold any other citizenship. And the jobs argument chicken/egg doesnt fly with me, yeah the lumber mill closed but meth would have been an issue regardless…right time, right place, just like crack in the inner city 90s.
The only ‘solution’ I could come up with is better distribution of wealth under the assumption that life would be ‘happier’ and people more ‘fulfilled’ or ‘satisfied’, but even then, people are innately greedy so I doubt that works too well. You get more, you want more.
We need to reset expectations in this country and change our culture – its OK to work at the gas station, drive an old Chevy, drink the local suds (not bud, miller or coors – buy local!), and watch the days go by with a slightly ugly and chubby woman ten years your elder with a couple ugly step kids. What’s that great old tune…something about love the one you’re with…it’s all this want for shit we don’t need, whether it’s money, love, highs or whatever that fuels the meth engine (and other drugs too for that matter). Settle for what you have. Keep it simple, know who you are and live life on your terms. Or if you need a good role model watch the movie Fight Club until you ‘get it’, fuck start your own fight club, thats a helluva rush to replace crank. This is something I think the MCs figured out a long time ago in terms of lifestyle but even some of them, then and now, lose their ideals because of greed.
Keep it up Rebel. Idealistic to the end, J
November 19th, 2009 at 6:23 am
I read the book a couple of months ago. I like your review and like you I appreciate that the author looked at the big picture. One important thing you left out is how the Big Pharma lobby in Washington fought attempts to deal with this plague.
I spent over 22 years in the NYPD. I was in the Narcotics Division during the height of the crack epidemic in the late 80′s. I worked in Harlem and some of the human depravity resulting from crack abuse that I witnessed was mind boggling. I never thought I was accomplishing much when I locked up those poor crack heads.
Our drug policies are terrible. The long prison sentences attached to drug offenses have enabled the growth of the prison industrial complex. It’s one of the few industries we have left in our hollowed out economy and a productive industry it’s not.
Can we legalize all drugs and let people run around whacked on stuff like PCP? I don’t think so bit there’s got to be a better way.
The book was well worth the time.
November 19th, 2009 at 6:42 am
Reading all these stories of all of the lives who are posting here reminds me of all my father or mother wanted me to be, and like all of you I wanted my own son to be a better more productive grown up than myself, in my case it turned out that way,no drugs, no arrests, no real problems to speak of as he was growing up so I consider myself a very lucky and proud man, but as he was growing up it always stuck in my mind how much of a pain in the ass I was for my parents,all you can do is try your damnedest then hope for the best because you can”t keep an eye on them 24-7 and it is also sad some wind up into trouble but never blame yourselves especially if you did all that a good parent could hope for, think back, did you do everything your parents asked of you?Kids have a mind of their own and all you can do is hope and pray, and always be there for them right or wrong.
November 19th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Dear Big Bagel,
This is a sign of the apocalypse. I am actually agreeing with a cop. Take me now Lord. I have seen it all.
Rebel
November 19th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Dear J,
I really liked your comment.
What I liked the most was when you mentioned working in a gas station. My old man’s only career advice to me was “Just get a job in a gas station.” I think the old boy actually thought you could get by in the world like that. Maybe he was right. If he was that America is long gone.
Now I am going to go read your comment again. Don’t be a stranger.
your pal,
Rebel
November 19th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Gringo 1%’er..
I “lurk” around here almost every day but I don’t post too much because it’s generally a male-dominated forum but after reading your story (and everyone else’s) I felt compelled to post and wish you (and you other dads here) the best
When you wrote, “…that alone makes me proud but on the other hand at my age I will never see him again in this world ..” it broke my heart.
I’m a single mom of two boys, ages 20 and 12, and can’t EVEN IMAGINE what you’re going through. I consider their dad and I to be very lucky because I always thought our kids would get me back for everything I did to my mom; but so far, that hasn’t happened. *knock on wood* My oldest is so anti-drug/smoking/drinking it’s scary but my youngest is completely different and I already know he’s going to be a handful. Like you stated, you have to sit on them and I am. Fortunately, my ex is a good dad; we go through the standard visitation routine, they have a great step-mom and we’re all friends so I know that helps.
Please don’t blame yourself – being a good parent is THEE hardest thing in the world to pull off. Those little guys don’t come with an instruction manual and no one (I don’t care who you are) is perfect. They do what they want to do, they’re never wrong, and they won’t listen LOL.
To:
Sled Tramp – Congratulations Grandpa!
Not Surprised – Good luck to you and your son…I have a feeling that everything will be okay
Rebel – This is a great site. From what I’ve seen so far is that you are a gifted writer, very intelligent, and a pretty nice guy. Thank you.
Anyway, I’m not this religious Bible Thumper or anything but I do pray every night and I WILL pray for you guys…so don’t give up
PB
November 19th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Pretty Bitch, thank you for your kindness. Hope the testosterone here does not deter you from spreading more of your sunshine. It is appreciated and respected.
November 19th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Pretty Bitch,
Thanks for the congratulations.BTW, echoing Not Surprised….I’m not aware that opinions have a gender.My wife has LOTS of opinions.I treat hers with utmost respect (especially when she’s cleaning a weapon…).Looking forward to more of your posts.
sled tramp
November 20th, 2009 at 1:33 am
Big Bagel, we probably get more Cops posting here than we are aware of, but few have demonstrated the insight you have; fewer still have been civil under the best of circumstance.
So, in the interest of an exchange of ideas, I’d like to ask your thoughts on something.
You said :
“Can we legalize all drugs and let people run around whacked on stuff like PCP? I don’t think so bit there’s got to be a better way.”
Back in your day, the 80′s (and before) PCP was a staple in the “lower end” drug menu. We’ve all read the stories of bullets literally bouncing of guys on PCP, how they rip the bumpers off cars and go berserk and if I recall correctly, MACE was said not to be affective against someone high on PCP. ( I am being facetious).
At any rate, you hardly see any PCP. Crack shoved it to the side. But it is interesting that when you speak of the possibility of legalizing drugs, you would trot out PCP. My guess is that from your collective Cop training and experience, because of the violent and psychotic traits some exhibit while doing PCP, you would tag it as a leading contributor to assault, etc.
OK so lets take PCP off the table and deal with the present: the most abused substances are those intended for legal medical use, primarily because they are readily attainable. I cannot recall how many deaths have been attributed to time-release Oxycontin, but I am betting it 5 times that of PCP.
Drugs with no medicinal value; such as Heroin, Marijuana, LSD, crack, and non pharmaceutical amphetamines and powdered cocaine are the most physically addictive (except for LSD) and the most expensive to obtain, thus generating a two tier criminal sub-structure. Those who sell it illegally, those who buy it illegally and who often as not, resort to a third tier by committing crimes to obtain resources to continue their addiction.
3/5 of all crimes prosecuted at the Felony level, are drug related. 58% of all Emergency room deaths are from overdose. 38% of violent crimes against persons, and 41% of property crimes (such as B&E) are drug related. In Mexico alone since the past two years, 9,000 people have been murdered-not overdosed- in that countries “war on drugs” in a power struggle both between cartels and cartels and the Government. Whole towns haven been corrupted to the point that Mexican Military troops have been deployed in a revolving martial law scenario.
Every week we read about an ice chest full of heads down there somewhere. Entire ethnic (no offense) “street gangs” have built powerful and wealthy strongholds in every city, major or minor in the US, predicated primarily on drug traffic.
A solution? Battle the addiction, you dry up the demand. I’m not just talking about recovery or the bull shit drug education classes the Courts love to send people to. I am talking about allowing those who clearly are unable or unwilling to stop. Canada, Denmark and other countries have adopted successful policies whereby the 12% of drug users who make up the hard core population can be registered, obtain quality substances, use them ingest them or shoot them up under medical supervision in specific locales.
The “War On Drugs” cannot be won, period. I agree, total across the board legalization is the polar opposite of existing policy. So, somewhere in the middle must lie the answer.
In my city each Halloween, the County rounds up every registered sex offender (under penalty of revocation) and detains them in a large auditorium from 5 P.M until 11 P.M. I dont know if this is done elsewhere, but the idea is that you cannot “cure” a vast majority of these type offenders, just like you cannot “cure” chronic addicted substance abusers, but you CAN if laws were passed, monitor, council, sex offenders to the degree they maintain less of a threat to themselves and society while at the same time having some sort of quality of life. I do not advocate leniency for sex offenders, I’m illustrating a point.
In Denmark, Heroin when obtained by prescription and consumed under medical supervision is as legal as having a beer at the local pub. less disease, dramatically fewer overdoses, less crime, less violence, and you cannot stop them anyway.
Thus, the black market demand for such drugs dries up because the supky is controlled, dispensed and supervised by the Government really, in a non judgmental way. Also, reports indicate that regular attendance at one of these legal shooting galleries leads to more opportunities for trained intervention, and a higher success rate among addicts who desire to get clean, than conventional rehabs.
The Romans employed a sort of crude “aversion therapy” to alcoholics in their day. A live eel was placed in the goblet with the beverage and the person had to drink that or nothing.
The concept I propose is basically the eventual approach to prohibition. People never stopped drinking, they just went underground, and an entire illegitimate economy existed alongside the legitimate one, allowing certain groups to become extremely wealthy and in order to protect this wealth, they often became extremely deadly.
Then what? Alcohol was legalized, those who wanted to consume it had to be of a certain age, go to a specific licensed location or use it in their own homes. Did this eliminate alcoholism? No. But setting quality standards, exercising some sort of control by setting legal limits on both consumers and producers allowed the murder rate say in Chicago, to fall by 50%.
Morality cannot be legislated. And of course the hypocrisy of the fact that more deaths are caused by cigarettes than all illegal drugs combined is proof that people DO have the right to destroy themselves, should they choose to do so. The medical community responded to the tobacco epidemic and now, smokers are in the minority. Making cigarettes illegal or declaring a War on Cigarettes” did not achieve this just as the War on Drugs has not abated the flow, the rate of use, or the number of rising new addicts.
Your comments?
November 20th, 2009 at 3:56 am
I agree with you. I think the Danish model you wrote about would be a good way to go. The thing is heroin is an opiate. You go off and nod out somewhere. I ran into people who sniffed a couple of bags of heroin a day and had a stable habit. They did it for years and were able to maintain a somewhat normal life. Marijuana’s an easy one to legalize too. Crack, crank, PCP…these drugs would be a lot harder to deal with if they were legalized because of the behavior they produce.
BTW I don’t think PCP is a big threat today but I do know someone who recently responded to a tractor trailer being stuck under an elevated subway. He was helping the driver out and the guy suddenly did a 180 on him. Out of the blue he started sweating, acting bizarre and getting violent. He ended up locking him up. The guy was whacked on PCP. He drove a long distance to NY from another state. How’s that for a scary thought?
November 20th, 2009 at 8:52 am
Not Surprised,
Had I known you and Rebel were around back when and this site was up, or at least you two writing on the cave walls….I would have spent a lot less money on college….
Copy the above and send it to D.C. That was very,very well written.
sled tramp
November 20th, 2009 at 10:10 am
Ah, yes, the wasted youth & some of adulthood… I’m another ‘success story’, if you will. I wasn’t a ‘scab infested addict’, but as many of the other’s have indicated, I had my share of problems with different things. Also, as indicated in the comments, it is most advantageous, I hope, to tell your kids the truth, good and bad.
Great article, by the way! (I was starting to ramble…)
November 20th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Big Bagel, good of you to reciprocate. In the Danish model, people sign in at a sort of clinic and are not administered any of their drug of choice except when given it in what ever manner prescribed, be it orally or by injection, and then under clinical conditions. They are supervised, monitored just as a patient in a hospital would be. They agree to remain under this supervision until the effect of the drug has worn off.
So the idea that their is a drive through window where you can order a diet drink, two bags of smack and a burger isn’t accurate.
And further, anyone who is NOT on the registry who is in possession of a certain amount of whatever drugs apply, is subject to that countries existing drug laws. registrants never get quantities of the drug to “share” like school kids who sell their Ritalin.
So basically, here is how it breaks down:
Those who are at the chronic level almost always register and the compliance rate is phenomenal. This is a step up from the Methadone Clinics in this country. The exception being that the registrant is not given a supply he can take away from the facility. About 6,000 people a year die from Methadone, legally prescribed, in the US each year primarily due to mixing the drug with other drugs, such as Valium, Klonnopin or alcohol.
Again the Danish model does not attempt to replace Heroin with Methadone, it allows the registrant to receive a regulated dosage, provides him with medical supervision while under its influence, and allows “pharmaceutical quality” Heroin to be used. consequently, the death rate from overdose has dropped dramatically, the court dockets remain clear, and the rate of violent crimes associated with illicit trade has all but disappeared.
On the other hand, those who fall into the “gap” (to use your words, a “stable habit”) can legally obtain a certain amount for personal use. These are people who, in the past, would by necessity resort to criminal action to acquire their supply. These people also always have the option of registering.
Even before all of this was in place, the willingness of the Danish government to issue without restraint, free hypodermic needles has cut well into the outbreak of AIDS and Hepatitis B.
Economically, the cost of administering such a program vs. the cost of waging a “War On Drugs” is significant enough by eliminating Emergency Room admissions, Police and Court personnel costs, not to mention the saving of human lives, to more than warrant its continuance. In short, an entire sub culture of death, violence, and human misery has been virtually obliterated.
Obviously, minors are excluded, people cannot toke up or hit up at work, but instead of being the dregs of a society, these people are cared for instead of warehoused.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:28 am
sled tramp, as always I appreciate your comments as well.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Dear Not Suprised:
That’s about as good and cogent a summary of things as I’ve ever heard, and I’m in a position to hear from top specialists in the field–physicians and scientists– on a pretty regular basis. I especially like that in your discussions you take into account the varying pharmacological and behavioral properties of different substances, and was curious as to whether in Denmark these arrangements are only for opiates, or extend to cocaine and stimulants as well?
Square Verbose Doc
November 20th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Doc: Let me clarify one thing. The approach taken by the Danish government is that addiction is a disease, not a crime. Responsibility for drug issues rests with the Registry of National Health instead of the DEA, as in this country.
ALL drugs that are usually considered illicit are illegal in Denmark. Their use is not. In other words, personal use and possession of amounts consistent with personal use if prosecuted at all, will most likley be a fine.
Manufacture, sales and distribution are still very much illegal in Denmark. PCP, Exstasy, and Meth are illegal and not considered drugs that fall under the therapeutic treatment programs, but again, small amounts are not considered high crime priorities.
So use of hard drugs is considered a disease and not a crime, while possession of large amounts IS considered a crime. Last year however out of the entire population, less than 16,000 persons were convicted of criminal drug crimes and only 50% were sentenced to jail or prison, with the average sentence being less than 18 months. The absolute maximum penalty for any drug crime is 16 years. This is generally automatically reduced by 30% then can further be shortened.
Another chief difference between the US and Denmark (as well as other European countries) is that municipalities rather than federal authorities are 100% responsible for both interdiction and treatment, and the laws do vary among the countries 16 regions. there does not exist a federal agency in Denmark assigned to deal with drug problems. However, laws are passed at Parliamentary levels but administered regionally, with a great deal of latitude being given to local authorities.
As example the legal drinking age is 18. But this pertains to purchase and ability to inhabit bars. Kids can drink at home or in a public park with no problems, even if under age.
Drugs are different. The most severe penalties in Denmark are reserved for sales to minors.
Denmark still favors drug education, recovery efforts, as well as punitive measures for criminal infractions. Treatment is never compulsory, and is 100% free. Some times a person will opt for treatment vs. active jail time, however if granted by the Court.
In major population centers like Copenhagen, etc, volunteer teams of “street lawyers” circulate among the drug users advocating their rights and serve as a stop gap for overzealous Police. So to there is an “evangelical” approach in Denmark whereby State employees very much do reach out (some would say recruit) addicts on the fringes and offer them assistance with housing, treatment and other social services.
The language of the Danish approach is that drug addicted individuals are “our most vulnerable citizens”, and very strict oversight by federal authorities regulates service rendered by municipalities. As an example, a person requesting intake or treatment must be served within 14 days.
Vending machines with pharmaceutical grade sterile hypodermic needles are prominently placed throughout major cities. Or, persons can enter any pharmacy an exchange used needles for new ones, no questions asked.
The US State Dept. lists Denmark as one of the safest countries for tourism. Violent crime is almost non existent.
November 20th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Dear Not Surprised:
Thanks for the further information. The Danish approach is a sane, humane, and rational approach.
To get Americans to accept these approaches is a real challenge; it is hard to get people past the (tiresome) debates about whether addiction is a disease–mainly because of the false belief that calling something a disease removes all personal responsibility for one’s behavior. I feel that we in the medical profession would do well to skirt this debate all together by using different language, describing an approach like that used in Denmark as one that prioritizes “harm reduction” and insisting that whether or not one agrees that addiction is a disease, it ends up being a medical problem best addressed within a medical model.
Harm reduction is well within a medical model, and who in his or her right mind wouldn’t want to reduce harm?
Square Verbose Doc
November 20th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Doc: I know a hundred guys named Doc, but you are the first who was actively i the medical rofession; I did not know this until very recently.
Having said all I have, let me summarize. The Danes got a jump start on the rest of Europe when they adopted their original policies in 1955. However, most European countries have variations of or extensions of the Danish Model.
There will never be total eradication. In the largest industrialized democracy in the world, the very best the United States has been able to do is interdict about 12% (in its best year and by its own estimates) of the flow and manufacturing of illegal substances.
Put those numbers in perspective say, and imagine one of your fellow Doctors with a clientele that exhibited an 88% mortality rate under his care. Imagine a business model that after 30 years, could only post a 12% market saturation, despite having zero competitors.
Imagine investing millions of dollars and realizing a net loss of .88 cents on the dollar.
Would continuing seem like a sound decision? The best definition of insanity is doing the same things over and over, yet expecting a different result.
There was a time (as you know) when the mentally ill were conveniently “removed” from polite society with little or no effort at treatment. Dorothea Dix and others lobbied for humane treatment and forever changed the landscape of mental health care in this country.
For all our homegrown depravity, Americans love their pleasant delusion that we are some sort of moral compass to the rest of the world. Yet in the land of the free, more persons per capita languish behind bars than any other progressive nation on this planet. Even corrupt, poverty stricken and drug infested Mexico refuses to honor extradition with us if the accused stands a chance of facing the death penalty.
Though in my years, I have seen major advances: I recall when I was in High School a Texas Judge sentenced a man to 99 years for a single joint, The U.S. is light years behind the progressive and seemingly effective measures adopted by the European Union.
November 21st, 2009 at 8:02 am
Not Surprised,
I wish you could get your summary of the Danish and other European models to our government, and I wish they would listen to you.
Doctors in the UK prescribe heroin as a strong painkiller for terminal patients, the way they (used to) prescribe morphine in this country. I dunno how they regulate and classify drugs in the UK, but they consider heroin just another widely misused prescription drug and continue to provide it to both cancer patients and junkies.
YYZ Skinhead
November 21st, 2009 at 8:15 am
Dear Not Surprised:
The Square Verbose Doc is an actual doc. I’m a psychiatrist, and I also do brain research on how addictive drugs work in the brain.
If I had a screening test for an illness that caught only 12% of cases, I’d not be justified in using that test, especially if its use caused harm.
A word on extradition and the death penalty, since you mentioned it. I’m a fairly law and order guy–probably more than many on this site –(though I’m opposed to the death penalty and as I’ve mentioned I’m an ACLU supporter). But I have to say that one an eye-opener in recent years was reading about cases in which DNA and other evidence obviously exonerated people on death row but the prosecutors kept fighting for to sustain their convictions. I understand we have an adversarial system, but they’d rather kill an innocent man than have a verdict reversed?
99 years for a joint; that man was obviously a victim of the so called “culture wars.” For most of my adult life, I’ve thought many of the most ridiculous aspects of politics on both sides of the spectrum can be explained by realizing that liberals and conservatives have continued to fight over who was “right” and who was “wrong” in the 60′s and 70′s rather than than try to arrive at sound public policies.
When they stop trying to win the Culture Wars and start paying attention to the consequences of pulic policy, maybe then there will be progress.
Ever upward,
Square Verbose Doc
November 21st, 2009 at 9:32 am
Square Verbose Doc,
For most of my adult life, I’ve thought many of the most ridiculous aspects of politics on both sides of the spectrum can be explained by realizing that liberals and conservatives have continued to fight over who was “right” and who was “wrong” in the 60’s and 70’s rather than than try to arrive at sound public policies.
That was why I became a centrist. I worked with Democrats in the 1990s and Republicans in the 2000s. Their agendas are different but their “inner workings” are the same. The left is too spineless and the right is too totalitarian. Most moderates would probably prefer “junkie” drugs to be prescribed and dispensed through pharmacies. It would cost us a lot less than imprisoning them (and showing them how to be criminals while in prison).
YYZ Skinhead
November 21st, 2009 at 11:04 am
YKZ:
I wish the would listen too. Most European Union member countries are socialist democracies whereas the US is a capitalist republic. There is simply too much profit to be derived from human misery.
An interesting side-bar since you mentioned Heroin. “Heroin” was the trademark name of a drug compound marketed to treat Opium addiction.
November 21st, 2009 at 11:27 am
Doc:
The DNA “reluctance” as it pertains to over turning cases is little more than a clash between two opposing professional hierarchies: Legal and Scientific. Convictions are not predicated on scientific facts which are “observed,tested replicated”, but on convincing a jury of twelve laymen “beyond a reasonable doubt”; the standard at the felony level.
“Reasonable” and “doubt” do not even belong in the same sentence together.
“Proof” is not a legal term but a scientific one. Anything subjective can be manipulated.
For all the political corruption rampant in the state of Illinois, the previous Governor (who was waist deep in a scandalous trail), used the powers of his office to grant a permanent stay of executions in that state until such time as the courts could provide sufficient data that Illinois was not in fact sending innocent persons to their deaths. He had no issue with the penalty of death; just the “burden of proof” standard vs. the relatively large number of cases nationally that had been over turned with DNA evidence.
November 21st, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Not Surprised: This reminds me of the old line about the difference between “theory” and “practice.” In theory – I believe that there are crimes which absolutely deserve the death penalty. In practice – I’m concerned that an imperfect system run by imperfect people will wind up killing innocent persons in my name – so much so that I wind up opposing the use of the death penalty.
[There's also the practical matter that - in an attempt to prevent killing an innocent - it costs so much to prosecute a death penalty case, it's cheaper to lock up the person for life.]
November 21st, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Killing a person for the crime of killing a person makes as much sense as a parent who has stayed up all night worried over a child who is hours late, every possible bad scenario playing through their head; upon finally seeing the child alive, well, and safe-proceed with great anger to beat the kids ass for doing it.
November 21st, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Square Verbose Doc:
“To get Americans to accept these approaches is a real challenge; it is hard to get people past the (tiresome) debates about whether addiction is a disease–mainly because of the false belief that calling something a disease removes all personal responsibility for one’s behavior.”
Doc, as a professed researcher, I’m betting you are or at least have been, on numerous short lists for Expert Witness. You said you were in a position to hear from leading specialists as well.
You have my respect for attempting to navigate this forum while stating your profession, and dong it out of a sense of intellectual integrity rather than morbid curiosity.
Let me say that addiction is neither a crime nor a disease: it is a physiological response.
Addiction is a pathological relationship with a mind or mood altering substance or experience where the loss of control over the rate and frequency of use has manifested to the point of the addict suffering life altering circumstances. That many, despite this, persist in their actions is precisely the divide.
The legal question of insanity is that if at the time of the event, was the person capable of discerning the consequences of their actions, cognizant, and capable of distinguishing right from wrong.
Traditionally the insanity defense, when appropriately applicable, has been posited in the event of psychosis, but not neuroses. Our legal system recognizes organic psychosis and not drug induced psychosis. The diminished capacity of either is barely distinguishable, yet an incorrect view of “addiction” presupposes the same liability as a person who was neither under the influence of a mind altering substance nor suffering a psychotic episode.
If addiction can be characterized as a “loss of control over rate and frequency of use”, and this is the established clinical model, how can this person be held to the same standard? Diminished capacity is diminished capacity whether caused by schizophrenia, developmental delay, or “roid rage”
The legal model errs by not making the distinction between responsibility and accountability. Though it is hard to define a person under the influence of a powerful mind altering drug “accountable”, it is also hypocritical to adjudicate that person “responsible” if he suffers from an uncontrollable reaction in his own body’s response to the drug coupled with an overpowering compulsion to ingest the drug.
An interesting precedent is numerous multi million dollar class action suits against pharmaceutical companies whose product has been alleged to have contributed to suicide. though these cases are rarely tried in criminal courts, the legal premise is that a person who ingested the defendant’s product was compelled beyond any mental defense, to commit suicide.
Clearly case law sets the legal precedent that ingesting a powerful psychoactive drug can cause a person to commit suicide while under its influence, when such a person would not have done so otherwise.
In civil court, legal liability in such cases falls on the manufacturer of the drug and not the end user of the drug.
The reverse is true in criminal court where a person who ingests a psychoactive mind altering drug, is judged criminally liable for his actions while under its influence.
The distinction that a prescribed medication can be assumed to be safe while a known illegal substance with documented side affects may or may not be, does not in and of itself prove intent on the part of the addict to perpetrate an illegal act.
A person under the influence of an illegal drug should be adjudicated by the same standard as a person who would not be suicidal but for the effect of a legally prescribed drug’s effects on his own ideation; by reason of diminished capacity.
This is where people like yourself and your colleagues can exert the most influence
Again, neither crime nor disease, but the unpremeditated actions
November 21st, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Not Surprised:
Thank you for your kind words and thoughtful response.
Your definitions of addiction are right on target. I had not given much consideration to the diminishment of capacity by addiction in relation to specific illegal acts beyond taking the drug itself.
I actually don’t do any expert witness work. My research is on molecules and neurons, and court cases don’t get decided at that level. Also I’ve not pushed to do that kind of work–to reference your earlier post, my feet are pretty firmly planted in the scientific hierarchy rather than the legal one.
I sometimes think of addiction as an unintentionally self-inflicted chronic brain injury in someone who belatedly discovers their vulnerability to said injury. You need genetic vulnerability plus environmental exposures plus drug exposure to get addiction. That said, once established there is not much difference between chronic injury and disease.
That brain injury then leads to a long term condition the intensity of which fluctuates over cycles of use, abstinence, and relapse.
The capacity to take measures against addiction will vary at different points in these cycles. As a physician, I consider people responsible to do whatever they can to help themselves at any given time, but at the same time I realize that at some times they won’t be able to. I treat people who have schizophrenia or bipolar disorder in the same way. To me, regarding people as more helpless than they are robs them of their agency. But at the same time to hold someone responsible for excercising capacity they don’t have is cruel. One has to strike a balance which will be different for each person at each time.
We live in a moralistic and judgmental culture–based on what you’ve posted while I’ve been here, I can tell that you’ve experienced the results of that far more than I. People are very resistant to reason when it challenges their subjective moral beliefs. I can tell you that it is still difficult to get many people who suffer from severe depression past the idea that their illness is a moral failing. Lord knows I try. It is even harder to get enough of the general public to accept a disease model of addiction to make change politically feasible.
So instead I think we have to get people to look at results.
Harm reduction approaches work, and they can be adopted one pilot program at a time until people see that regardless of what they believed, we were doing things the wrong way. We physicians and scientists can best exert our influence by providing and advocating approaches based on harm reduction, even as we try to fight moralistic, antirational approaches to the problem.
In academia, all of us tend to get busy in our own little sandboxes.
I’m now curious as to how many of my colleagues have detailed knowledge about the Danish experience and whether it influences their thinking or is just “filed away”. I’m also interested in how much detail it is taught to our research and clinical fellows. My sense is that we are all at some level aware of this information, but since we live and work within the American system, most of us just don’t think about it much, and that’s a shame.
Thanks again for your replies.
Square Verbose Doc
November 21st, 2009 at 11:31 pm
I was on a course for army corporals deemed ready to become sergeants. day one you always get the drug lecture from the MPs. This one is a Warrant Officer and I can’t help thinking of Officer Stedenko of the Narcotics Bureau on Big Bambu.
“The Army has a no drugs policy” Here we go, I’m bored out of my mind already.
“If you are caught using or possessing drugs you will be liable to penalties both civil and military” Twenty years ago man, and I still remember this shit word for word.
“Can anyone tell me one of the reasons why people use drugs? Yes, Corporal Damon”
“Well, personally sir I’ve always believed it stems from man’s inherent need to alter his consciousness…”
I believed it then, I believe it now. People take drugs because it makes them feel good. At least, it makes them feel better than they feel when they don’t use it.
That’s it. It’s as much a part of the human condition as opposable thumbs and anthropomorphised deities.
People will use whatever is available locally. Often, drugs make people feel so good they figure something magical is happening. Hence the inextricable link between drugs and gods. This latest craze for powders has thrown things on it’s ear a bit, because suddenly we have drugs for which we have no rituals, no rites. We’re at the cutting edge, making up drug etiquette as we go along.
History has shown that, all over the world, people will use whatever is available to them to get high. If all the meth in the world disappeared tomorrow, well, at least we always have booze. I’ve worked in indigenous communities in the desert, 5 or 6 hours drive down a dirt road from the nearest bar. So, they sniff petrol. In Glasgow, they sniff glue. In Tonga they drink after-shave. I’ve seen it.
I also believe that if we truly value the personal freedom to choose our own poison, it behooves us to do some research and take responsibility and not whine at the consequences. The news has been out for a while that heroin is addictive. I never met anyone in fifty years who missed that memo. It’s why I never used the shit. That, and the fact that vomiting then falling asleep wasn’t what I was looking for in a recreational drug experience.
Same with crack. Granted, crack never really made it to Australia. The quality of the local meth has been more than enough to keep coke and it’s derivatives an expensive niche drug. But, if crack were freely available and cheap as chips, would I smoke it? You’re fucking kidding me. It’s addictive. People I trust to know such things tell me that it is so. Keep it away from me. Every addict I ever knew went into it with their eyes open.
I’ve always figured that people must think that it won’t happen to them. I feel sorry for people that are given drugs by someone who spent 7 years training, and get sick. That shouldn’t happen. I don’t feel sorry for people who inject themselves with heroin and then want a marker because they have an addiction. Give me a break.
Prison isn’t the answer. Legalisation is no panacea either. In South Australia, they legalised possession of two plants for personal use. Home-invasion burglaries have gone through the roof, over 80% being pot ripoffs. This is where it’s legal to grow your own. People want what’s easy. I was in Amsterdam a few years ago. First cafe I walked into had a big sticker behind the counter – “This Business Supports The Big Red Machine”. When drugs are legalised, overall, very little seems to change.
I hope the Denmark experiment works out (http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/525/denmark_heroin_maintenance_pilot_program), although similar programs have had mixed results, Also keep in mind that Denmark’s size and population are roughly equivalent to Maryland. In this country, a lot of people are opposed to the government bankrolling affordable health care. I can’t wait to see the day that the US Congress can create a bipartisan harm-minimisation based national drug policy. I can’t wait to see that.
November 22nd, 2009 at 4:31 am
Damon:
Good thoughts, all. A lot of your commentary however perfectly illustrates what Doc said:
“We live in a moralistic and judgmental culture–based on what you’ve posted while I’ve been here, I can tell that you’ve experienced the results of that far more than I. People are very resistant to reason when it challenges their subjective moral beliefs. I can tell you that it is still difficult to get many people who suffer from severe depression past the idea that their illness is a moral failing.”
You said:
“I also believe that if we truly value the personal freedom to choose our own poison, it behooves us to do some research and take responsibility and not whine at the consequences. The news has been out for a while that heroin is addictive. I never met anyone in fifty years who missed that memo. It’s why I never used the shit. That, and the fact that vomiting then falling asleep wasn’t what I was looking for in a recreational drug experience.
Same with crack. Granted, crack never really made it to Australia. The quality of the local meth has been more than enough to keep coke and it’s derivatives an expensive niche drug. But, if crack were freely available and cheap as chips, would I smoke it? You’re fucking kidding me. It’s addictive. People I trust to know such things tell me that it is so. Keep it away from me. Every addict I ever knew went into it with their eyes open.
I’ve always figured that people must think that it won’t happen to them. I feel sorry for people that are given drugs by someone who spent 7 years training, and get sick. That shouldn’t happen. I don’t feel sorry for people who inject themselves with heroin and then want a marker because they have an addiction. Give me a break.”
Assignment of blame.
You feel sorry for an addict who developed the addiction because a Doctor overperscribed an addictive substance, but disdain a heroin user.
That is a moralistic judgement.
“Every addict I ever knew went into it with their eyes open.”
Man, this statement reeks of ignorance.
When I was pursuing my own recovery through attendance at 12 step meetings, I experienced a well-known prejudice:
Recovering alcoholics looked down on those recovering from drug addiction.
I have to admit though that such “mental disconnects’ helped to keep me in addiction. I always sought out those I thought were worse off than me so I could say “well, I must not be an addict because I don’t do what these people do”.
When I worked at a residential treatment facility, I noticed that people grouped themselves socially based on their drug of choice more than they did because of gender, ethnicity or any other factor.
In your own stated “economy of scales”, you seem to draw the distinction between intentional and unitentional addiction.
Feeling sorry or assigning fault are both “after action” responses both of which are essentially worthless except as personal opinion.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:43 am
Dear Damon
Quote:
“Well, personally sir I’ve always believed it stems from man’s inherent need to alter his consciousness…”
You’re right 100%. And for most people it’s recreational. Some folks get sick from it. As Not Suprised once stated about turning it on and not being able to turn it off. It’s a “feeling” illness.
When I first started using it made me feel really good. Later it only made me feel better, and at the end it made me not feel at all. Chemical dependancy is a progressive illness. It always gets worse over time. It cost me everything at one point. It cost me what I loved the most, Bikes and Brothers. (no family to loose)Finally, about 26 years ago a Biker I didn’t even know sucked me out of the legal system and helped me put a life together. I came to believe that I’m one of those people that can have a life or I can have a drink. But I can’t have both at the same time.
“What doesn’t kill you can make you stronger”
It’s a small percentage of people that have the illness of chemical dependancy. It’s a life threatening illness and needs profesional
treatment, not punishment.
Sincerly
DocB
P.S.
I’ll start using DocB to avoid confusion. the name Doc has always been a high risk name.
November 22nd, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Not Surprised
Yep, I think we can take it as read that you and I don’t see eye to eye on this one. Although I did study addiction back in the early 90s, most of my opinions – and they are just my opinions – have been based on my own experiences with addiction and addicts. If I’m ignorant, it has been far from blissful gaining the experience.
I guess I could post a list of bad shit, the stepdaughter’s fatal overdose, the friend who used to make cash magically disappear whenever he came to visit, babysitting people who were hanging out, hoping that whoever they’d sent to score hadn’t run off with the gear, we’ve all got lists of those stories. My point is this – of all the many junkies I’ve met, not one of them could ever look someone in the eye and truthfully say “I never knew you could get hooked on this stuff”.
They may not have fully appreciated the details of the consequences. But come on, man. Heroin is addictive. Crack is addictive. Injecting yourself is really crossing a line, and it’s probably a really, really bad idea. Cigarettes give you lung cancer. Beanies probably won’t prevent head injury as well as a full face. We all make our own choices. The information is out there and it’s all fucking bad when it comes to heroin and crack.
I fully expect to pay a physical price for all the shit I’ve put into my body over the last thirty odd years. C’est la vie. If I don’t have the lung capacity to chase my grandkids around the garden, or my liver finally gives out, I got no-one to blame but myself. Some things really are people’s own stupid fault. I try not to apply judgements on others that I don’t apply to myself.
So, yes, you got me dead to rights there. That’s a moral judgement. You reap what you sow. It’s what my personal experiences have taught me to expect from life – if you deliberately put yourself in harm’s way for no damn good reason other than “It seemed like a good idea at the time” or “I didn’t think it would happen to me”, you’ll generally tend to get less sympathy than if you’re the victim of an accident. This is most certainly where you and I differ. I have more sympathy for some stupid RUB who gets a punch in the teeth for wearing a SAMCRO cut to Laughlin than I do someone who chooses heroin as a lifestyle.
There’s another moral judgement for you. I believe that addiction is a lifestyle choice. I’ve known far more users than I’ve known addicts. I’ve seen some people dry themselves out, go the methadone, get interventioned on, get dried out in jail, have parents (yeah, and step-parents, I’m flagging some of my own bias here) pay for expensive rehab rpograms….and sometimes they just keep going back…they miss the life, they miss the excitement, they miss living on their wits, they miss life being very very simple – every day, all you have to do is one thing. Score. That’s it. They don’t want to give up the lifestyle. Maybe that doesn’t apply to everyone. It does apply to all the junkies I’ve know.
I see moral judgements on this page every day. I can’t help but think that “I always looked at crack as a nigger drug, never touched it.” is probably a moral judgement and then some. I don’t care who’s popularised it, my criteria has always been 1. does it make me feel good? and 2. how much is it going to cost me?
Question 2 is often one of them multi-faceted questions.
This is a touchy subject. We’ve all lost people. Nothing personal, man. I’m just trying to make sense of it all.
November 22nd, 2009 at 3:01 pm
DocB
I agree that there needs to be a lot better treatment programs. I haven’t yet seen one single country that’s really getting it right. there are some promising pilot programs, but that’s about it. And from what I see, most of those programs are in countries where big government bankrolls social justice programs. I don’t see too much public money being spent on treatment of addiction in the USA. I am amazed at the crazy levels of imprisonment here. And from what I can tell, there’s barely enough money to even put a roof over their heads, let alone discuss rehab options.
The road back, from what I’ve seen, always comes from the individual. If the individual makes a commitment to come back from addiction, there’s often an awful lot of help out there, in my experience. Where the will is strong enough, I’ve seen people kick their habits alone. Where the will really isn’t there, it doesn’t matter what you do, it’s not going to help. Change has to start from within.
Welcome back.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:08 pm
I see moral judgements on this page every day. I can’t help but think that “I always looked at crack as a nigger drug, never touched it.” is probably a moral judgement and then some.
Damon, the above isn’t a moral judgement, its called racism.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:36 pm
My mistake. Thanks for the tip.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Dear Damon
The base of your arguments seems to be that chemical dependancy is somehow connected to “choices”. A truly chemically dependant person suffers because he no longer has the ability to chose. He can’t “just say no”. Chemical dependancy is an illness. Willpower doesn’t work on the illness of addiction any better than it works on diareha. In either case if willpower is your only treatment you wake up with a real mess on your hands. I can’t MAKE anyone buy that it is an illness. You either buy it or you don’t. If you believe that it is an illness your whole theory of addiction goes down the tube. Please be open and just think about the possibilities of illness instead of morality.
respect
DocB
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Damon, look. This isn’t something I’m so invested in that I get personal with people over it. But there is a tremendous difference between studying addiction or knowing addicts than in battling your own addiction.
That doesn’t qualify me as some sort of expert. But you keep using the word “sympathy”. You say addiction is a “lifestyle choice.”
You don’t have a clue, Damon. It’s OK with me that you don’t, but you still don’t.
Ok I’m done. I respect your opinion.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Doc, it is about choices. Back in the day, when we really didn’t have a clue about the long term effects, I would’ve agreed with you. But today? Today we’ve got more information about the evils of all drugs than we did back then—a whole lot more.
Today, there’s no excuse for being addicted to drugs, except it is your choice to do it.
Hey, Mr. Aging Rebel—-cooool site. I’ve been meaning to write it all down, but who would believe it? I was a perspective prospect for the 81 back in ’74 in Bridgeport. I got involved in acid and that was the end of my club career. I sincerely regret not making the cut.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Dear not-a-hippy
OK, real qouck, just for grins, then I’m outa here. I’ve spent more time on this than I wanted to.
Mom caught her little boy jerking off. She advised him of how sinfull it was. Before she left she said “If you keep doing that you’ll go blind.” When she was gone the little boy said “Well, I’ll just do it till I need glasses.”
If you’re an adict, by the time you “NEED GLASSES” you can’t see to find them.
I’m done with this
respectfully
DOCB
November 27th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
I’d say in my first husband’s case, in the beginning it was his choice to use crank to stay awake for a night job. Didn’t take much for it to become an addiction that he could not break free of. I went into debt trying to keep the family afloat while he spent everything he made on crank. Started with snorting, graduated to smoking “chasing the dragon”, trying to catch the good high, but never quite getting there. Our life was a shambles. We were “ships that passed in the night”. Our kids suffered, I suffered. And in the end, 16 years after his first taste of meth, he suffered, while his liver was dying. Meth is poison and I describe it as the work of the devil. It kills you, plain and simple. In his last 2 weeks of life he went to drug abuse meetings and pleaded with the guys to never use meth again. Many promised him they wouldn’t, and quite a few went right back to it after mandatory drug tests ended. He’d be sad to know that. That was nearly 6 yrs ago. Ironically, my second husband is a one percenter who doesn’t touch drugs. Life is good again.
November 29th, 2009 at 7:05 am
Probably no one starts with the intention of becoming addicted; they either don’t think about it at the time, or discount the possibility. Since different people become addicted with different times and amounts of exposure, everyone has had the experience of seeing people use without becoming addicted (yet). Based on this, they figure to themselves “yeah, I can handle it” and feel that they will not be among those who become addicted. Add to this that for many first exposures to addictive drugs come when they are young enough that they still feel fairly invulnerable.
November 29th, 2009 at 7:47 am
Add this; research shows that those at most risk to become addicted are those who carry genes that predispose to more impulsive, risk taking behaviors. Its not that genes are destiny, but they tend to push things in a certain direction. In the right genetic/environmental contexts, those genes help give us entrepreneurs, leaders, and warriors. They’re preserved in our gene pool for a reason. But many must carry them in genetic and environmental contexts where pro-risk taking genes predispose to problems like addiction instead of conspicuous success. One could say that the success of our species has required these genes to be present, and that those who carry them in contexts where they are exposed to the risks more than the benefits are in some sense taking a “genetic hit for the team”.
As a physician, my hope is that someday we will be able to counsel people about their risks more accurately, so that they can make better decisions. Since we only know of a few genes that predispose to certain problems, and we do not understand how they interact with environment and other genes one might carry, we are not at this point yet. At the same time, I am extremely frightened about what could be done with poorly protected genetic information about individuals by government and most importantly by private corporations which in our world excercise as much or more influence than the government.
I don’t have easy answers for this one yet.
November 29th, 2009 at 7:48 am
DOCB’s story about the “little wanker” perfectly illustrates the principle of thinking one is invulnerable!
December 1st, 2009 at 9:36 pm
did you say methadrine? yummmy yum yum, no flying involved
December 1st, 2009 at 9:38 pm
no morphine involved, but it is nice
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:35 am
Drugs are bad, Mmmm-Kay?
December 2nd, 2009 at 7:00 pm
Hey, fayettenam; what’s the best thing about crank? Only two more sleeps till Christmas!
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:50 pm
the best i remmember was, the old ladies cooking up that xmas sneer, who next? got veins?
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:51 pm
no sleep involved
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Philo:
Drugs don’t kill people, I do……….
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:55 am
Dear Not Surprised,
Drugs don’t kill people, I do.
That was the line of the day by the way.
your pal,
Rebel
December 7th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
that was a cold ride tonite, maybe i was trying to escape tommorrow, it did not happen, she hunts me down, through thick and the sludge, core, she can’t escape me , even caought i still spill it out, the pure love i detest, an American dream, a truth that no politician or dollar can bind me to, a hatred of lies, no brotherhood invovled, that man can love a hatred of common goals, and each other regardless of color, that is the true being inside, to hate all, not even trust myself, i am free, when i put my gun to my head, you mean nothing to me, on the street, i yeild, watching, laughing, slowly licking my rust
December 16th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
British researchers did an outstanding study of drug use and impact on society including impact on individuals, society, health care costs etc. On the long list alcohol was number four behind heroine, cocaine, barbiturates and street methadone. Alcohol is worse than Meth, LSD, Marijuana, Ecstacy and a host of others. When the guy presents his information he get’s fired. Tobacco was worse than weed!
Maybe its my Dutch heritage, was in Holland last summer, you can smoke dope in the cafes but not cigarettes, guess they are ahead of the curve. This country needs to get real about where to focus limited LE resources. Also, why is it that when the MC’s get caught with dope (which by the way seems to be about their only crime of any merit they are actually charged with) it becomes these huge criminal conspiracies and when Hollywood gets caught they get a couple of days in the pokey at worst?
From NPR:
“Britain’s top drug adviser was fired Friday after saying that marijuana, Ecstasy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol.
David Nutt’s comments have embarrassed the British government, which toughened the penalties for possessing marijuana earlier this year over the protests of many prominent British scientists.”
December 16th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
i must admit it was a bad thirty years ago, on that x-mas eve, when we all shared those needle things,, to admit that those needles got clogged up when others were standing in line for that taste of life expectancy, back then , our lives ment nothing to us, we even ate other peoples leftovers, a garbage can was a daily diet, a left over beer with a cigarrete butt was nourishment, that box of cheerios was allways empty, water was a mud puddle to ride thru towards the next bar, even today i see a mirror of things to come, no one should try to mimmic the past, most my so called friends died trying, if nothing else they died free, and now when i see someone riding their way to glory on a harley with all those attitude stickers stuck to a helmet or their arm, i know i will never be like them when they park that beast and get comfortly numb, even in my dreams the man hunts me down, Freedom is a curse, live it day and nite, with or with out the beast between your legs
January 23rd, 2010 at 7:19 pm
Its strange, the older i get the smarter the old man gets! and i’m 52. PANHEADS FOREVER
February 16th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
maybe i miss the self destruction
March 2nd, 2010 at 8:36 am
Bump