[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

andyt andyt:

Oh, well, I guess you got me. I"ll be sympathetic to stupid boaters, you'll be sympathetic to stupid junkies. I'll push for supplying life jackets to all boaters, and ensuring they use them right, and you'll push to supplying clean junk to the junkies and ensuring they use it right. OK?

That's not the question I asked is it? I was genuinely interested in your reasoning for not showing sympathy to people who kill themselves with bad decisions if they're not drug addicts but, as usual you turned your answer into a pro drug rant while avoiding the question.

As for me advocating for the issue of free clean drugs like you want. Well you scan guess my position on that one.

But here's a novel thought in response to your suggestion. If we could make lifejackets mandatory why couldn't we do the same for rehab since both would go along way in stopping stupid people from making life altering bad decisions.

Read what jabber wrote below you. Life jackets are mandatory, but people still don't use them - remind you of anything?

You're going to order people who died from an overdose of heroin into rehab? Or make people who don't use life jackets into life jacket rehab? I'm not clear of your meaning here.

Using drugs to the point of killing you is a dumbass thing to do. I was going to say using drugs is a dumbass thing to do period, but then you'd just get upset because you're a drug user yourself. (I was thinking more of the booze than the opioids, but both could apply, I guess).

You seem to not understand anything about addiction, or is there some not using life jacket addiction I'm not aware of?

My point is you're just another left wing hypocrite who willingly sympathises with people who make a bad decision to use illegal drugs that eventually kills themselves but, then have the gall to vilify people who make "one" stupid mistake that kills them. I'm guess you'd have no problem sympathising with the victim if he'd been a high drug addict who forgot to put his life jacket on.

And for the record. Yes I am a legal drug user like a shitload of productive people and I'll willingly admit it. But, the difference between me and the people you champion is that I use my drugs as little as possible, don't buy them from some drug dealing scum bucket, actually use it to manage pain, and had a career that caused the injuries I now take the pain meds for. So, your lame attempt to lump me in with your drug "addicted" self destructive drains on society is just another red herring because the truth is something completely different.


As for understanding addictions I may not understand it as well as a clinical psychologist but I do have some experience in the field thanks to the military but this discussion has less to do with addiction and everything to do with making bad choices that kill a person but, I guess it'd be to optimistic to think you'd see that and actually feel sorry for people who died because of a mistake..

[andyt]

So no more Darwin awards? Those were all mistakes. Pretty stupid ones, as is not putting on a life jacket when the water gets choppy, and then standing up in the canoe. My reaction was so strong because the focus was all on what a hero he was, not on how he could have prevented having to be a hero. Accolades aren't worth much when you're dead.

You see drug addiction as just making a mistake, is why I say you don't seem to know much about addiction. You say you're managing pain, what do you think most junkies are doing? You seem to see the process that leads someone to overdose on heroin as identical to somebody making the decision to not put on a life jacket in choppy water. I think there's a world of difference there.

Anyway, good to hear you feel sorry for drug addicts that overdose. Not sorry enough to actually want to make the changes that would lead to far fewer overdoses, but it's a start.

When somebody dies because they didn't wear a seat belt, do you only feel sorry for them, or think to yourself what a dumbass they were too?

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

So no more Darwin awards? Those were all mistakes. Pretty stupid ones, as is not putting on a life jacket when the water gets choppy, and then standing up in the canoe. My reaction was so strong because the focus was all on what a hero he was, not on how he could have prevented having to be a hero. Accolades aren't worth much when you're dead.

You see drug addiction as just making a mistake, is why I say you don't seem to know much about addiction. You say you're managing pain, what do you think most junkies are doing? You seem to see the process that leads someone to overdose on heroin as identical to somebody making the decision to not put on a life jacket in choppy water. I think there's a world of difference there.

Anyway, good to hear you feel sorry for drug addicts that overdose. Not sorry enough to actually want to make the changes that would lead to far fewer overdoses, but it's a start.

When somebody dies because they didn't wear a seat belt, do you only feel sorry for them, or think to yourself what a dumbass they were too?

I feel sympathy for anyone who dies but it doesn't mean I still don't think they're a dumbass for offing themselves through stupidity. As far as addictions go all a person has to do is look around, read the research and see the results of that one bad decision and it 's not just drugs were talking about here.

It's not like the evidence of addiction's are not staring people right in the face every day. Nobody ever woke up one morning addicted. They had to try it first which constitutes a bad decision that can lead to death. Even taking a prescription which is monitored isn't a guarantee against making a bad decision. I'll just take one more because they don't work as well is another bad decision.

So, anyone who is willing to go boating without a lifejacket because they're invulnerable is just as delusional as someone who thinks they can take illegal or legal drugs with no adverse outcome.

I do find it fascinating though, that the College of Surgeons and Physicians has decided that there are to many people using narcotic pain relievers because they're the assholes who prescribed them in the first place. The first pain med prescription my doctor handed me said Oxycontin and he was actually shocked when I told him that I'd rather have my scrotum ripped off by a rabid dog than take those meds. Yet, a year later the same asshat is telling me that there are far to many people using pain meds who might just become addicted. No shit Sherlock.

$1:

Prescription medication use

According to results of the 2007 to 2011 CHMS, 41% of community-dwelling 6- to 79-year-olds had taken at least one prescription medication within two days of their household interview (Table 1). This was lower than the 48% who reported to the 2007-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) in the United StatesNote13 that they had used prescription medication in the past month. Also, unlike the American data, the CHMS estimate excludes people aged 80 or older, a group known to be heavier users of medication.

Table 1
Percentage using prescription medication, by sex and selected characteristics, household population aged 6 to 79, Canada, 2007 to 2011

Reflecting a well-established association,Note8,Note10,Note14 prescription drug use rose with age from 12% among 6- to 14-year-olds to 83% among 65- to 79-year-olds.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-003-x/2 ... 32-eng.htm

It is good to know that only 12% of the 6 to 14 year olds are on pain meds. I wonder if anyone told these people that as you age things wear out, past injuries come back to haunt you and old age makes everything hurt. Which would likely account for the extremely large number of 65 to 79 year olds on pain medications.

But back to the topic at hand. Every action has a reaction and in both cases thinking that bad things only happen to someone else is possibly the pinnacle of stupidity because that just isn't the way it works..