If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Prisoners set to win cash settlements from government after being unable to use heroin in jail, arguing cold turkey withdrawal was tantamount to assault   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 149
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

4344 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Nov 2006 at 1:51 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



149 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-11-13 01:54:01 AM
Ah geez, somebody call the Waaah-mbulance!
 
2006-11-13 01:54:35 AM
I submitted this with a better headline, but I had the shakes something terrible and it probably looked like "ABBAaaafawff afiwwf0fnbaa aiikfFAfaouifafn"
 
2006-11-13 01:55:54 AM
Well, withdrawls are extremely painful, are they not? Was that part of the sentencing?
 
2006-11-13 01:56:12 AM
I say give them the farking needles, and then OD the bastards, cheaper then paying for them over the years.
 
2006-11-13 01:56:26 AM
img1.picturewizard.com
 
2006-11-13 01:56:30 AM
What? The warden is supposed to get heroin for the inmates?
 
2006-11-13 01:57:36 AM
I second the OD motion.
 
2006-11-13 01:57:46 AM
Methadone, not heroin.
 
2006-11-13 02:02:15 AM
seriously, heroin?? Are you guys ignorant of methadone??? Anyways, I don't get why heroin addicts are thrown in jail, they should put em in rehab. JESUS, they ain't hurting nobody but themselves.
 
2006-11-13 02:02:15 AM
As much as I generally hate prison lawsuits, I feel there is some merit in this.

Withdrawl can kill, and it can fark a body up just as much as the drug can. Any long time or high dose user should have a medically supervised clean up period.

/Or just do the smart thing and put them in a medically induced coma for a month.
 
2006-11-13 02:04:35 AM
TheJoe03


seriously, heroin?? Are you guys ignorant of methadone??? Anyways, I don't get why heroin addicts are thrown in jail, they should put em in rehab. JESUS, they ain't hurting nobody but themselves.
===================================

Especially since rehab costs about the same as jailing, and in some cases actually rehabilitates.
 
2006-11-13 02:05:12 AM
I am guessing people saying addicts don't hurt anyone probably live in an upscale suburb where they can actually afford the habit...
 
2006-11-13 02:05:30 AM
Another vote for this being reasonable. Withdrawal was certainly not part of the punishment.
 
2006-11-13 02:05:35 AM
TheJoe03: I don't get why heroin addicts are thrown in jail, they should put em in rehab.

I think we should save a few horses and just put them in here:
www.photosagogo.com
 
2006-11-13 02:14:08 AM
Well Waffen, the act of being addicted doesn't hurt anyone (people are addicted to caffeine in record numbers), only stuff addicts do, but I'm guessing a lot of these people are in prison for having heroin on them, or being caught using. How does that hurt you??? Oh, and my point was to send them to rehab, so they can kick the habit, not prison, where they turn into hardened criminals (getting raped and beaten up can do that to a man).
 
2006-11-13 02:15:24 AM
WaffenSS: I am guessing people saying addicts don't hurt anyone probably live in an upscale suburb where they can actually afford the habit...

Contrary to popular belief, the ghetto actually has a LOWER rate of drug use and addiction than the 'burbs. IOW: most addicts live in an upscale suburb where they can actually afford the habit..
 
2006-11-13 02:16:52 AM
Heroin withdrawal can kill you. This is a medical issue, not a criminal justice issue. You are not allowed cruel and unusual punishment, and you have to provide prisoners with access to food and water as well as medical care. If a prisoner comes in and is pregnant, you have to give them health services for the child. If the prisoner comes in and is sick with pneumonia, you have to give them medicine. If they come in with a self inflicted stab wound, you have to treat it. You are not obliged to provide them heroin, but you would have to provide them with the means to withdraw safely or methadone treatment.

We don't live in Saudi Arabia. There are laws here.
 
2006-11-13 02:18:03 AM
ElRonHubbardsballs wins the thread.
 
2006-11-13 02:18:07 AM
Wiih: Methadone, not heroin.

Methodone has become just as addicting as heroine..And alot cheaper when the governement pays for your high.
 
2006-11-13 02:18:22 AM
That... is... awesome.

i lold
 
2006-11-13 02:19:39 AM
theeagle: Methodone has become just as addicting as heroine..And alot cheaper when the governement pays for your high.

So what is the downside?
 
2006-11-13 02:20:10 AM
www.celebrityvalues.com

That lame shaking act- you call that heroin withdrawls?
He's faking it!
Or he went off his meds- oh wait that's his actual story.
 
2006-11-13 02:20:18 AM
I am guessing people saying addicts don't hurt anyone probably live in an upscale suburb where they can actually afford the habit...

A kilo of heroin sold for $2720 in Pakistan in 2000. At that time, a kilo of heroin was worth $129,380 in the US. (from The Pursuit Of Oblivion, R. D. Hines, 2002)

The tighter a prohibition, the greater the incentive to facilitate the violation of that prohibition.

The drug war hurts everyone.
 
2006-11-13 02:20:39 AM
ElRonHubbardsBalls: We don't live in Saudi Arabia. There are laws here. We don't live in Saudi Arabia. There are laws (rights) here.

Fixed for the benefit of the flamewar to ensue.
 
2006-11-13 02:21:56 AM
theoretical pants: The drug war hurts everyone.

Drug traffickers don't seem to be complaining.
 
2006-11-13 02:23:08 AM
theorerical pants: The drug war hurts everyone.

Not true. It helps the drug dealers.
 
2006-11-13 02:23:14 AM
MWeather, no kidding why do you think I said that.

My point was that a lot of people in suburbs who are addicted are not pushed to commit other crimes, so thus their problem is not affecting anyone else.

Most cops usually don't want to bust people in their own homes for "Recreational drug use." I mean, lighting a crack pipe or bong on your front porch in front of the cops is a sing of disrespect though, just hide your shiat.

Drug charges are usually used when other charges are too flimsy to stick and the DA doesn't want to try any charges that will probably flop in court, but the person can be charged with drug charges just to get them off the street.

A lot of those people going in on drug charges committed other crimes, or suspected of committing other crimes. It's very rare to see a soccer mom be thrown in jail, usually they are sentenced to rehab and community service. It is the criminals with a record who get slammed.
 
2006-11-13 02:25:41 AM
MWeather:Drug traffickers don't seem to be complaining.

I disagree. Sometimes I bet they get really pissed when they can't find somewhere to store all that cash.
 
2006-11-13 02:28:09 AM
WaffenSS: Drug charges are usually used when other charges are too flimsy to stick and the DA doesn't want to try any charges that will probably flop in court, but the person can be charged with drug charges just to get them off the street.

A lot of those people going in on drug charges committed other crimes, or suspected of committing other crimes. It's very rare to see a soccer mom be thrown in jail, usually they are sentenced to rehab and community service. It is the criminals with a record who get slammed.


All the more reason to legalize it. What you describe is the definition of unjuet enfocement of the law. If you want to send a suspected burglar to jail, find some farking evidence. His personal vices are his own damn business.
 
2006-11-13 02:29:41 AM
theoretical pants: I disagree. Sometimes I bet they get really pissed when they can't find somewhere to store all that cash.

They can always funnel it into leftist guerrillas and terrorist organizations.
 
2006-11-13 02:30:26 AM
MWeather, I'd argue against legalizing certain drugs, or at least caring more then a certain amount. Why? Because violent criminals on the street would drasticly increase. Sure "overall crime" would go down on paper at first, but you would see a rise in more violent crimes.
 
2006-11-13 02:33:07 AM
WaffenSS

but the person can be charged with drug charges just to get them off the street.

Since when has "getting criminals off the street" become the role of the US justice system?
 
2006-11-13 02:33:23 AM
Oh, and another thing... kind of off topic... fark the damn CSI like shows, all that does it fark up our judicial system as well. Cops can find real hard evidence, but without some specialist there the stupid ass jury won't convict.

Getting them to convict on drug charges is a lot easier because field kit tests can be done, and other tests to verify the field test later. And then some person can testify that yes, the susbstance was a certain drug, blah blah blah.
 
2006-11-13 02:33:28 AM
I believe you gotta decriminalize ALL drugs (a user aint a criminal, only the dealer), and LEGALIZE soft drugs (bud, shrooms, etc). It won't happen any time soon (looks like people are trying to make cigs illegal), but hell that's what SHOULD happen.
 
2006-11-13 02:34:40 AM
Sohta, well, the justice system is pretty farked, but cops try. Some try a little too much though. And some are just corrupt bastards who for some god damn reason wont be touched by internal affairs.

We need god damn independent internal affiars for all police departments.
 
cot
2006-11-13 02:34:49 AM
WaffenSS: Because violent criminals on the street would drasticly increase. Sure "overall crime" would go down on paper at first, but you would see a rise in more violent crimes.

I have no idea what you're basing this on. Any logic behind the statement escapes me.
 
2006-11-13 02:35:04 AM
WaffenSS

Because violent criminals on the street would drasticly increase.

Not that I necessarily completely disagree with you here, but you better substantiate that claim with something.
 
2006-11-13 02:35:19 AM
MWeather: They can always funnel it into leftist guerrillas and terrorist organizations.

But that's $129,380 double cheeseburgers!
 
2006-11-13 02:37:23 AM
WaffenSS:
Because violent criminals on the street would drasticly increase.

What makes you think violent crime would increase?
 
2006-11-13 02:38:52 AM
WaffenSS: I'd argue against legalizing certain drugs, or at least caring more then a certain amount. Why? Because violent criminals on the street would drasticly increase. Sure "overall crime" would go down on paper at first, but you would see a rise in more violent crimes.

Crimes related to drug use are often proportional to the restrictions on said drugs. Alcohol created a violent organized crime circuit when prohibition made it illegal. Onlhy by re-legalizing it did it become less of a burden on the legal system. Reason, understanding, regulation and control are the only rational ways to truly deal with the problem of drugs. As it is, we are only turning a blind eye toward those who have become slaves to it while creating a highly profitable market for those who make it available through illegal trafficking.
 
2006-11-13 02:39:51 AM
WaffenSS: Cops can find real hard evidence, but without some specialist there the stupid ass jury won't convict.

Well they can always plant evidence or get him for drugs. After all, they're pretty sure he's guilty, and that's good enough for me. Besides juries are unreliable.
 
2006-11-13 02:40:44 AM
people have some big balls to be asking for this. F them.
 
cot
2006-11-13 02:41:01 AM
MWeather: What makes you think violent crime would increase?

Maybe he's planning on running out and getting hooked on PCP and beating up old ladies, just as soon as PCP is legalized.

Me, I've been eyeing crack for a while, but I just don't want to break the law to take it. Plus it's so hard to find, that high school is at least 5 or 6 blocks from here. As soon as I can buy that shiat at Walgreens, I'm going to quit my job, sell all my shiat, live in my car, and smoke crack all day.
 
2006-11-13 02:41:28 AM
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/debate/myths/myths3.htm

You can also go ask most LEOs. Using drugs to bust people is an easier way of controlling gangs on the street, as well as other violent criminals.

Also, a drug arrest can lead to warrant (and if a car, a warrant isn't needed) were evidence for another crime can be found legally. Were if we could not search for drugs, we could also not find other evidence for other crimes.


Drugs are a "gateway" for information. You want some drugs to be illegal because it allows cops to be able to access things legally were otherwise it might be impossible, so i nreality keeping certain drugs illegal can be very helpful for law enforcement.
 
2006-11-13 02:43:12 AM
Ohh wow the ugly US Republican side of FARK rears it's ugly head.

These people are addicts.
And while not A+ Grade Upstanding Model Citizens, are people with a treatable chemical dependeancy not unlike alchoholism. And many of which were already on a VOLUNTARY treatment program prior to incarceration. It is the manner of the State dictating their treatment without patient or patients doctor consultation in a clearly heavy handed across the board fashion that is the problem here.

It's almost like saying that all cancer patients who get thrown in jail shall get only "this" treatment regardless of the type of cancer or the treatment and the results of said treatment they had recieved prior to "this" 12 month incarceration, they are here now, and we don't give a damn what the outcome is, we only care to say yhat "we" provided "a" form of treatment.

In extreme cases, herion and alchohol detox can result in death. And more certainly and commonly, Herion and alchohol DT can be a painful and excruciating experience that with proper medical assistence/supervision can be clearly avoided.

And additionaly, this is an issue occuring in Great Britain, where they have socialized health care that is available to all. So quite clearly, this is not a cost issue of the prison board other than for patient access to the already State paid physician, but overal apathy and disregard by the State for the welfare of their wards.

Hell yeah they deserve compensation, and damn straight changes should be made to insure such abuses do not occur again.
 
cot
2006-11-13 02:43:41 AM
Raspil: people have some big balls to be asking for this. F them.

Withdrawal can kill you. I don't know if they really weren't providing adequate medical care to allow for safe withdrawal, but if they weren't it's totally understandable that they're upset.

Hell, alcohol withdrawal can kill you too if you're enough of a wreck. Refusing to provide adequate health care to prisoners is essentially torture.
 
2006-11-13 02:44:01 AM
MWeather, planting evidence is bs, wrong, and illegal, and putting him away for drugs is legal and probably a good thing for the community.

Reality bites.
 
2006-11-13 02:45:12 AM
WaffenSS

So... lemme get this straight. Criminalized drug used is "Usefull", hence it is "Right".

...

...

Seriously?
 
2006-11-13 02:46:44 AM
WaffenSS: Using drugs to bust people is an easier way of controlling gangs on the street, as well as other violent criminals.

It's be even easier if they didn't need to worry about trials. Easy /= Just.

You want some drugs to be illegal because it allows cops to be able to access things legally were otherwise it might be impossible, so i nreality keeping certain drugs illegal can be very helpful for law enforcement.

Wait, you actually think using selective enforcement of a victimless crime as a pretext for a search that would otherwise be prevented by the 4th ammendment is a GOOD thing? Are you serious?
 
2006-11-13 02:46:51 AM
WaffenSS

Because violent criminals on the street would drasticly(sic) increase.

Is that what happened after the prohibition of alcohol ended in the US?

It's not. Homicides fell. (source[pops])
 
Displayed 50 of 149 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report