Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

should Heroin users be locked up?

2456789

Comments

  • #32
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    I disagree with locking them up. I also disagree with enabling. I am conflicted. Definitely decriminalise but pandering is not the answer. Unless we give free drugs of all kinds to addicts. It will cause people who can't afford their drug of choice to say feck it I'll do heroin. I know people who started taking heroin because there was nothing else available. Big big mistake. I would like these heroin centers to be changed to addiction centers. Unless the agenda is to kill off undesirables by escalation of their drug abuse this is very badly thought out. If this is the agenda it is evil but probably will be effective.


  • #33
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,788 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    melissak wrote: »
    I disagree with locking them up. I also disagree with enabling. I am conflicted. Definitely decriminalise but pandering is not the answer. Unless we give free drugs of all kinds to addicts. It will cause people who can't afford their drug of choice to say feck it I'll do heroin.
    Yeah, I don't think that's going to happen all that often. If you can't spend a few days without your drug of choice you've got problems, they're probably addicts and with a regulated market for tackling heroin abuse those addicts would rise up though the drugs into treatment if they're eventually going to end up on heroin.

    The problem with decriminalisation is that it does nothing to solve the social issue. It takes pressure of the addicts and end users, it's great for individual rights but the industry remains unaffected.

    Full on legalisation and regulation like I described is a direct attack on criminal finances and on the supply train. It's a financial blow that will completely undermine the market.


  • #34
    looking_around
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭looking_around


    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    because if it just affects the person that takes it and no-one else then thats OK, but when people are so high out of their minds that they dont have a clue what they are doing and more at risk of being danger to the general public maybe they should be supervised and locked up for their own safety as well as that the safety of general public/family or whoever could come into contact with them when they are zonked like that out of their skull on drugs - yep maybe your right as well, lock up alcoholics as well if they are a danger to others and yes again some alcoholics are such a danger when they are out in public , only to do something dangerous or kill someone only to be up in court and their defence solicitor explain to the judge and jury that they were heavily drunk at the time and cannot remember anything of the night or what they were doing - which should never be taken account in defence I think.

    Also if someone does drugs to 'their own body' in the streets it has other knock on consequences as littering the streets with harmful syringes, blocking pavements, begging for money, there could be a bit of robbery and pick-pocketing for money for their habit, they may become alienated and vent their anger to public if they cannot get their fix, the list goes on, so no they are not just doing it or keeping it to themselves most of the time.

    And what ever happened to the "Intoxicated in a public area" law - Im pretty sure there is one for Ireland isnt there?, only I never seem to see it put into place hardly any of the time.

    You realise this happens with legal drugs? We don't arrest people for binge drinking UNLESS they put others at risk.
    So why can't this same view be taken with other drugs?

    People legally drive on valium because they're prescribed it...


    Also the suggestion is to allow for safe injection sites. Thereby taking users off the streets.

    My post didn't say legalise so they can use on the streets are get off scott free from committing crimes while high.

    My post was just about allowing people personal responsibility with their bodies and treating all drug use the same. A user should not be punished simply for using. That's immoral imo.

    I believe that there should be certain restrictions with the sale of some drugs but that they should all be legal.


  • #35
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,169 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    Andy From Sligo wrote:
    Ok - i personally dont think education is working, I dont think giving them special buildings of accommodation to shoot up will work - I dont believe they need help and rehabilitation on the outside. I do believe they need to be locked up (not punishment wise) in a organised institution such as a prison or somewhere where persons in authority can keep an eye on them 24 hours and if it means they still get there drugs in prison then fine if they are not prepared to come off the drugs once and for all on the outside.

    I appreciate that it's counter intuitive, but the evidence is against you. We don't educate very well and we definately don't treat it as a medical condition.

    Locking them up would be similar to treating the problem, but it would be focused completely differently (warehousing rather than fixing the problem).

    If you want to treat the problem, why not do it the way it has been proven to work in other countries?


  • #36
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    ScumLord wrote: »
    melissak wrote: »
    I disagree with locking them up. I also disagree with enabling. I am conflicted. Definitely decriminalise but pandering is not the answer. Unless we give free drugs of all kinds to addicts. It will cause people who can't afford their drug of choice to say feck it I'll do heroin.
    Yeah, I don't think that's going to happen all that often. If you can't spend a few days without your drug of choice you've got problems, they're probably addicts and with a regulated market for tackling heroin abuse those addicts would rise up though the drugs into treatment if they're eventually going to end up on heroin.

    The problem with decriminalisation is that it does nothing to solve the social issue. It takes pressure of the addicts and end users, it's great for individual rights but the industry remains unaffected.

    Full on legalisation and regulation like I described is a direct attack on criminal finances and on the supply train. It's a financial blow that will completely undermine the market.
    Many addicts are addicts that need for some reason to block out reality. If you can't go without your drug of choice for a few days you are an addict. Of you could take it or leave it you would not be an addict. I agree in part with legalisation and regulation, but not starting at the most harmful end of the spectrum. That is lunacy.

    When you say they will rise up through the drugs to heroin and then get help would you consider this good?, maybe I am misunderstanding you but I would prefer them to get help long before they started injecting heroin. Not a lot come back once they have gone there in my experience.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    looking_around wrote: »
    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    because if it just affects the person that takes it and no-one else then thats OK, but when people are so high out of their minds that they dont have a clue what they are doing and more at risk of being danger to the general public maybe they should be supervised and locked up for their own safety as well as that the safety of general public/family or whoever could come into contact with them when they are zonked like that out of their skull on drugs - yep maybe your right as well, lock up alcoholics as well if they are a danger to others and yes again some alcoholics are such a danger when they are out in public , only to do something dangerous or kill someone only to be up in court and their defence solicitor explain to the judge and jury that they were heavily drunk at the time and cannot remember anything of the night or what they were doing - which should never be taken account in defence I think.

    Also if someone does drugs to 'their own body' in the streets it has other knock on consequences as littering the streets with harmful syringes, blocking pavements, begging for money, there could be a bit of robbery and pick-pocketing for money for their habit, they may become alienated and vent their anger to public if they cannot get their fix, the list goes on, so no they are not just doing it or keeping it to themselves most of the time.

    And what ever happened to the "Intoxicated in a public area" law - Im pretty sure there is one for Ireland isnt there?, only I never seem to see it put into place hardly any of the time.

    You realise this happens with legal drugs? We don't arrest people for binge drinking UNLESS they put others at risk.
    So why can't this same view be taken with other drugs?

    People legally drive on valium because they're prescribed it...


    Also the suggestion is to allow for safe injection sites. Thereby taking users off the streets.

    My post didn't say legalise so they can use on the streets are get off scott free from committing crimes while high.

    My post was just about allowing people personal responsibility with their bodies and treating all drug use the same. A user should not be punished simply for using. That's immoral imo.

    I believe that there should be certain restrictions with the sale of some drugs but that they should all be legal.
    Can people really legally drive on vaLiam? I doubt it. It really zonks people let. Way more than say weed.


  • #38
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,949 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    always wary of the comments of 'its been tried in other countries and it didnt work' - its not a firm answer solution is it really, if it was tried out and be thought to be effective or making a change (even if it wasnt a complete solution) then even if it failed at least we can say 'its been trialled *in this country* , but alas it failed' is much better solution in my opinion


  • #39
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,949 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    might have been watching too many films (like trainspotting lol) and soaps but if you have a loved one and you want to try and get them off drugs you *lock them up in a room* , get them away from suppliers and try and break the cycle , you let them ride it out and hope that after they get over the cold turkey bit their head is clearer and vow that they will never go back to doing drugs again (in an ideal world) - if we just carry on supplying them drugs (whether it will be medically specialised shoot up places/premises in towns and cities) your not really helping them to get off the gear your just shifting maybe the problems out of one area into another area


  • #40
    My name is URL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,420 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    but if the problem was dealt with in a different way and the drug users were locked up in prison for using then the suppliers would have less people to supply to.

    That's a pretty innocent and naive view.

    Anyway, prisons are already at or over capacity. It's why people who commit violent assaults regularly get suspended sentences.

    Unless you want to pay a **** load more taxes in order to fund the building of more prisons, and the costs involved in taking care of addicts in custody, then it's just a stupid pie in the sky idea.


  • #41
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,788 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    melissak wrote: »
    Many addicts are addicts that need for some reason to block out reality. If you can't go without your drug of choice for a few days you are an addict. Of you could take it or leave it you would not be an addict. I agree in part with legalisation and regulation, but not starting at the most harmful end of the spectrum. That is lunacy.
    It's not as necessary for other drugs. Heroin is highly addictive. It's borderline impossible to take it recreationally, it's simply an addiction afflicting vulnerable members of our society. It needs that regulation and the state's focus more than any other drug. It's pointless with drugs like cannabis, MDMA, LSD, because they're just not that addictive. I'd say the majority of cocaine use is recreational, most users don't go on to become addicts.
    When you say they will rise up through the drugs to heroin and then get help would you consider this good?, maybe I am misunderstanding you but I would prefer them to get help long before they started injecting heroin. Not a lot come back once they have gone there in my experience.
    Why would I consider it good? You're the one who implies addicts will end up on heroin eventually. Ya, offer help to all addicts but with a regulated system where heroin addicts get free state heroin, they must get treatment. That's the price they pay for their drug.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    kidneyfan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭kidneyfan


    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/may/24/evvol-julie-chance-as-a-closeted-lesbian-in-dublin-life-wasnt-easy-then-i-found-heroin

    People can change!


  • #43
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,949 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    not wishing to go off topic but as someone mentioned with valium ect , then yes if the medical leaflet or their doctors have said ' dont drive or operate machinery or drink alcohol with these drugs' then yes maybe they too should be classed as breaking the law and should face the penalties?


  • #44
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    not wishing to go off topic but as someone mentioned with valium ect , then yes if the medical leaflet or their doctors have said ' dont drive or operate machinery or drink alcohol with these drugs' then yes maybe they too should be classed as breaking the law and should face the penalties?
    I'm sure they would under the drug driving legislation. I would much rather be in a car with a stoner than someone zonked on valium. Obviously dosage would-be factor


  • #45
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,949 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    My name is URL wrote: »
    That's a pretty innocent and naive view.

    Anyway, prisons are already at or over capacity. It's why people who commit violent assaults regularly get suspended sentences.

    Unless you want to pay a **** load more taxes in order to fund the building of more prisons, and the costs involved in taking care of addicts in custody, then it's just a stupid pie in the sky idea.

    i am always at the view that there is no more room in prisons because of other factors , and i also believe you have to look at the current people in prisons and what they are in there for before talk of building more prisons. Are they prisoners in prison at the moment that are a danger to the general public if they were let out tomorrow or indeed transferred to an open prison or let out and tagged? - are there people in prison that are there only for a reason for their court case to come up? - are their prisoners who need their cases/sentence reviewed from when they did the crime and maybe shortened or scrapped?


  • #46
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    ScumLord wrote: »
    melissak wrote: »
    Many addicts are addicts that need for some reason to block out reality. If you can't go without your drug of choice for a few days you are an addict. Of you could take it or leave it you would not be an addict. I agree in part with legalisation and regulation, but not starting at the most harmful end of the spectrum. That is lunacy.
    It's not as necessary for other drugs. Heroin is highly addictive. It's borderline impossible to take it recreationally, it's simply an addiction afflicting vulnerable members of our society. It needs that regulation and the state's focus more than any other drug. It's pointless with drugs like cannabis, MDMA, LSD, because they're just not that addictive. I'd say the majority of cocaine use is recreational, most users don't go on to become addicts.
    When you say they will rise up through the drugs to heroin and then get help would you consider this good?, maybe I am misunderstanding you but I would prefer them to get help long before they started injecting heroin. Not a lot come back once they have gone there in my experience.
    Why would I consider it good? You're the one who implies addicts will end up on heroin eventually. Ya, offer help to all addicts but with a regulated system where heroin addicts get free state heroin, they must get treatment. That's the price they pay for their drug.
    I didn't. I said for someone chronically addicted free heroin when other drugs are so expensive would be tempting. I have known people chronically addicted to alcohol, speed, prescription meds even weed to the point they cannot not have it and I have known people who can take or leave heroin. Not many mind but addiction is addiction. Have you ever seen a chronic alcoholic with withdrawals? Not that far off a heroin user sometimes


  • #47
    looking_around
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭looking_around


    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    might have been watching too many films (like trainspotting lol) and soaps but if you have a loved one and you want to try and get them off drugs you *lock them up in a room* , get them away from suppliers and try and break the cycle , you let them ride it out and hope that after they get over the cold turkey bit their head is clearer and vow that they will never go back to doing drugs again (in an ideal world) - if we just carry on supplying them drugs (whether it will be medically specialised shoot up places/premises in towns and cities) your not really helping them to get off the gear your just shifting maybe the problems out of one area into another area

    Only, you can't force someone to sober up. The drug isn't the only thing causing the addiction. Addiction is often tied with depression and escapism. Cold turkey approach doesn't deal with why a person wants to spend all their time strung out.
    melissak wrote: »
    Can people really legally drive on vaLiam? I doubt it. It really zonks people let. Way more than say weed.

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/completely-sober-drivers-who-smoked-cannabis-in-last-week-could-be-prosecuted-under-new-laws-711538.html

    I can't find limits for Ireland, but the UK are criticised for their drug driving laws. They do people for impaired driving even a week after they used an illegal drug. Conversely their legal prescription drug limits are potentially high enough for the person to still be impaired.

    It's not a fair system.


  • #48
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    This seems to be a point that people are choosing to ignore. Why is it that so many young people from certain demographics look at the miserable existence of "junkies " and say that is my best option in life


  • #49
    LDN_Irish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭LDN_Irish


    melissak wrote: »
    Can people really legally drive on vaLiam? I doubt it. It really zonks people let. Way more than say weed.

    You can, yeah. The leaflet just says the usual "may cause drowsiness. If affected don't drive or operate etc." The half-life of valium is insanely long, up to 100 hours they reckon, so of you weren't allowed to drive after taking it you'd have to wait 100 hours to drive again.


  • #50
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,788 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    melissak wrote: »
    This seems to be a point that people are choosing to ignore. Why is it that so many young people from certain demographics look at the miserable existence of "junkies " and say that is my best option in life
    They don't. They may end up advancing to heroin through other party drugs, or they end up in such despair that the numbness sounds appealing and the negative effects seem no worse than their normal life.

    The terrible "education" we give young people around drugs means they don't trust the schools and parents. We tell them they'll end up on the streets, sucking dicks for drug money and there's no evidence of any of the negative effects they've been told are rampant.


  • #51
    Lyaiera
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭Lyaiera


    melissak wrote: »
    This seems to be a point that people are choosing to ignore. Why is it that so many young people from certain demographics look at the miserable existence of "junkies " and say that is my best option in life

    I've never once had drugs pushed on me. Every single drug I've taken I've willingly asked for. For me it was trying to escape what was happening to me.

    The only thing I am or ever have been addicted to is nicotine. And I haven't done any big drugs.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    talking_walnut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 725 ✭✭✭talking_walnut


    Andy, why do you think people decide to start doing heroin? We all see what it can do to you. A lot of users probably grew up with parents who were addicted and know better than any of us what it can do to you. Yet they still decide to do it themselves. If your life is sh1te, why not look for some relief from the bleakness. What part of dragging someone off the street and forcing them to detox is going to change that underlying problem? They still have all the same issues that lead them down that road, but with an added criminal-record and the knowledge that one needle could make them forget all of these problems for a while and bring them peace.

    Do you not think they've tried tackling addiction with these approaches? Have you looked into this idea at all or is this just an idea you've reached from watching movies? It's not even limited to addiction. We tried throwing unwed mothers into the Laundries, yet people still had sex outside of marriage.

    People are sh1te at processing the long-term consequences of their actions. No amount of waving a big stick is going to change that.




    Disclaimer: There's some generalisation about heroin users going on above. They're not all the stereotypical junky. It's becoming a growing issue for middle-class Americans at the moment and there's plenty of people that are addicted to heroin but hold down jobs, etc.


  • #53
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    melissak wrote: »
    This seems to be a point that people are choosing to ignore. Why is it that so many young people from certain demographics look at the miserable existence of "junkies " and say that is my best option in life

    In the post above yours.
    looking_around wrote: »
    Only, you can't force someone to sober up. The drug isn't the only thing causing the addiction. Addiction is often tied with depression and escapism. Cold turkey approach doesn't deal with why a person wants to spend all their time strung out.

    The demogtaphic is usually younger people, late teens early twenties from disadvantaged backgrounds. This has a definite effect on the likelihood of addiction kicking in.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #54
    Bicky bicky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 311 ✭✭Bicky bicky


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    In the post above yours.



    The demogtaphic is usually younger people, late teens early twenties from disadvantaged backgrounds. This has a definite effect on the likelihood of addiction kicking in.

    We need drug education and b taught bout moderation.

    I became addicted to smoking heroin in my late teens because I was a runner boy working for what I taught was a bag of cocaine but was really speed I realised I was nothing to the big guys running the show only way out was to use heroin people don't trust heroin users with there numerous wares!

    I did not hide I was a user which in turn got me out of the gang.

    I didnt want to be a junkie on doctors paper so I self medicated with Street up Johns(xanax) but the up johns really f#%k my head up were way harder than any other drug I've used to kick!

    Drugs are never going away health issue not criminal!


  • #55
    BalcombeSt4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,838 ✭✭✭BalcombeSt4


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    The problem with heroin is that it's very moreish.

    The problem with heroin is that it feels so ****ing great.


  • #56
    Summer wind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,285 ✭✭✭Summer wind


    Maybe we should have our own hunger games. Send all the drug abusers out to the Phoenix park on a bus. Tell them there's drugs hidden there and let them off to find them. Then give a few of the people on the dole some ak47's and whoever takes out the most druggies gets the biggest bestest council house ever.


  • #57
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    Summer wind wrote: »
    Maybe we should have our own hunger games. Send all the drug abusers out to the Phoenix park on a bus. Tell them there's drugs hidden there and let them off to find them. Then give a few of the people on the dole some ak47's and whoever takes out the most druggies gets the biggest bestest council house ever.
    How about we send you there? Jog on back under your bridge.


  • #58
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    melissak wrote: »
    This seems to be a point that people are choosing to ignore. Why is it that so many young people from certain demographics look at the miserable existence of "junkies " and say that is my best option in life

    In the post above yours.
    looking_around wrote: »
    Only, you can't force someone to sober up. The drug isn't the only thing causing the addiction. Addiction is often tied with depression and escapism. Cold turkey approach doesn't deal with why a person wants to spend all their time strung out.

    The demogtaphic is usually younger people, late teens early twenties from disadvantaged backgrounds. This has a definite effect on the likelihood of addiction kicking in.
    I know it was mentioned in the previous post. I was responding to this point


  • #59
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,949 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    i'm all for those that want to be really rehabilitated and kick the drugs once and for all, but what about the ones that will never make an attempt to get off it until it kills them or a medical problem associated with taking drugs finishes them off - do we forget about them particular citizens? do we let them carry on because we know that they are a lost cause? - do we supply them to help them with their addiction? - do we let them carry on robbing and mugging people for money so they can pay for their wares?, do we hope that they dont end up disrupting people trying to go along their lives by jumping out in front of a train whilst spaced out? - what about if they were arrested and put in jail , fed/sheltered/better chance of coming off drugs (maybe) , out of harms way (for them as well as any potential victims of them) sure they might even get off the stuff, get medical help and maybe help with depression or addiction whilst they are in prison - (it might be a shorter waiting list in prison than on the outside i dunno) - they might even end up getting a little job in there and they could also make friends in there or be around people with the same issues.


  • #60
    brianregan09
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,503 ✭✭✭brianregan09


    Start a Gladiator Games , throw all the druggies, criminals, paedo's the whole lot charge massive money for entry and let them fight for there freedom ...Worked for the Romans and it puts the fear of god into people thinking of entering that life style and makes money instead of taxing people and frees up the jails ...where are ya going wrong


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Summer wind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,285 ✭✭✭Summer wind


    melissak wrote: »
    How about we send you there? Jog on back under your bridge.

    Nice big high horse you are on there.


Advertisement