9 people overdosed on Fentanyl in Vancouver yesterday

[cracher]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

What a solution. Now people can die from fentanyl overdoses legally.

I think we should make a differentiation here.

Proper fentanyl has been around for a long time and is very useful/effective in the right setting. Street drugs laced with fentanyl are the problem, not the former. Dosing and purity are likely the biggest issues.

A buddy in Baltimore is studying the off-label use of fentanyl patches for addictions. Fentanyl may someday be a part of the solution to fentanyl. Let's not consider it a terrible drug altogether.

Edit: That should read addiction treatment, not addictions. Man could that change the meaning of what I said.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I believe that there is a strong hereditary factor, in conjunction with an over challenging environment, that leads to a person becoming an addict..

True. And there is also a strong hereditary factor (social and in some cases also genetic) in mental problems in general, which adds to the problem of addictions being hereditary.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Poster

Sure. Keep it a jusice issue. Seems to be working?

Why don't you elaborate on your opposition?

Just because what we are doing isn't perfect doesn't mean there is any better option, I'm not sure I know the answer but it is intirely possible our current approach, flawed as it is, is the best approach.

[Poster]

Originally Posted by blankall

In order to get rid of the black market, you have to make something readily available. Making a drug like Fentanyl readily available would be a disaster. Decriminalization of possession, sure. Full on legalization, no.

Its easier to get when there is no oversight on the distribution. Im not suggesting it be sold like candy just that the solution starts with taking the profits out of the hands of organized crime.

period.

if you want to discuss how we restrict access, that's a reasonable path that needs to be addressed, but not before choking out organized crime.

Originally Posted by Northendzone

But what about the children? Seriously though

yes, this is about the children. the only way to stem the tide of addiction related crimes and health care issues is to lower the user count.

do you not see any relationship to the legalization and controlled distribution of Tabaco on significant reduction in use on a generation by generation basis.

Originally Posted by 4X4

Dude, you can't just legalize hard drugs. What kind of a crazy message does that send to kids? Like as if I want to take my kid into the bathroom at the Saddledome and see some rec user blasting a rail off the sink or smoking a bowl of meth outside the doors. Come on, man. Hey, is that guy shooting up in the park across the street? Yeah, don't bother calling the cops, it's perfectly legal!

So there are reasons to perhaps decriminalize, but for you to say that unless you're in favour of full legalization, you're in favour of organized crime. I think a lot of people are in favour of finding a new solution to the drug problem, since the War on Drugs didn't work, but full legalization is sure as hell not the solution.

whats to stop a dude from doing meth 5 minutes from walking into the dome already? being illegal has no impact.

event security is an issue that needs to be addressed for all sorts of challenges. it doesn't change the fact that fixing the drug problem is to start by taking the profits out of the hands of organized crime.

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Ok. The only drawback isn't crime, that pales in comparison to the effect opiate addiction has on families and our healthcare system. The much, much, much larger issues would be increased in order to decrease crime? No

yes and opiate addiction cannot be properly addressed while there is no control on the supply. take the profits out of the hands of organized crime, control the supply and distribution and then apply resources to helping families who are being effected.

putting the moms, dads and children of our communities into jails and graves is a never ending cycle that only benefits organized crime and allows future generations of customers to be created.

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

What a solution. Now people can die from fentanyl overdoses legally.

That would be sad but I would like to think our resources will be applied better along the way and we can reduce the # of legal overdoses.

Originally Posted by 4X4

That's ok! Government can't prosecute itself, so we saved money on not prosecuting the dealer that supplied it! Resource allocation!!11!

yes, you get it. no one can compete with the government so lets use our community resources properly and save our society.

there is lots more to fixing the problem then simply legalizing everything, clearly. however how can we the people fight against both sides? (organized crime infiltrating our communities and government jailing our citizens).

take control and it starts with choking out the profits of organized crime.

id rather see an addict in a hospital then in a jail.

[Poster]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Just because what we are doing isn't perfect doesn't mean there is any better option, I'm not sure I know the answer but it is intirely possible our current approach, flawed as it is, is the best approach.

and all I am saying is taking the profits out of organized crime is where it starts.

I don't see any argument that says we should let a black market exist for this dangerous commodity.

[4X4]

Yeah, but you're saying that legalization is the solution, and for anyone to disagree with that, is to agree with organized crime. I don't think anyone is in favour of organized crime, but to just go and legalize hard drugs doesn't solve anything. Unless the government is going to monopolize the sale of hard street drugs, then legalization only legalizes the people that are already selling them. Success?

What you're really getting at is that it shouldn't be a life long criminal record for getting hooked and getting busted doing drugs. Right? So I think what you really mean is de-criminalization. Of course, you do sound pretty adamant, so I could be wrong. Maybe you actually think that legalizing hard drugs is a reasonable thing to do. And that it will somehow put the HA out of business, and money will magically arrive in the government's bank account, and that it will be allocated toward education, rehabilitation, and prevention.

Got some bad news, dude. Not gonna happen.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Poster

and all I am saying is taking the profits out of organized crime is where it starts.

I don't see any argument that says we should let a black market exist for this dangerous commodity.

You're framing the problem really wrong here. It's not keep status quo and have crime vs legalize and decrease crime. If that's all that was involved, I'd be with you. What you're ignoring is the whole rest of the equation.

Legalization vs not is far more complicated. There's some rational arguments for legalization with proper context, though I still strongly disagree. Framing it as pro criminal vs decriminalized is really facile and shows less than basic understanding of the scope of the problem.

On the legalization to disrupt criminal enterprise, no one will disagree. First we need to define what you mean. Do you mean unrestricted access? Access under medical supervision? Access only with restrictions (age, location, etc)? They all have different benefits and pitfalls and need arguments in their own right. Legalization with unfettered access is probably a very awful idea. Age restriction is probably a step in the right direction but one would assume there'd still be a an increase in use which would very likely outweigh any benefits in decreasing the decrease in criminality. Access under medical supervision is actually fairly successful in small centers in Vancouver and Amsterdam. I'll listen to an opposing argument for full legalization , but I haven't heard one that's convincing. People inaccurately point to countries with relaxed possession laws as though they're legalized and they're certainly not (Portugal, Netherlands, etc). There's no country to my knowledge where that's worked.

Also, remember, a lot of crime is committed by addicts get money to buy the drugs and changing the distribution model doesn't stop this. With more addicts, how is this problem ameliorated?

[Ducay]

I'm no expert, but my take is that some form of gov't provided access to opiods would help cut out the rampant deaths from Fentanyl and these other killer opiods & laced drugs. I can't see legalization working, but some form of gov't provided or controlled access.

There are knock-on effects, good and bad (dont get me wrong), but the sheer volume of opiods deaths from these new potent drugs could see a real push to get a safer, more controlled ones into the hands of addicts.

It's effectively the next progression of the "safe injection sites". While there is no stoping you from using, lets make it as safe as possible while we try to get you some help. Rather than having 5 (guessing) people die a day in Vancouver from these new drugs, you'd provide herion or whatever to them that is clean, of known quantity and quality.

[Flash Walken]

If addicts are choosing their supply in part based on quality, the government is in a unique position to undercut the black market with significantly higher purity drugs at a fraction of the cost.

If addicts are choosing their supply in part based on availability, the government is in a unique position to undercut the black market by distribution through pre existing medical system.

If addicts are choosing their supply in part based on safety, the government is in a unique position to undercut the black market by providing free medical assistance to users as well as security from our local police departments.

Removing addicts entirely from the criminal justice system is the first step in addressing what is now a public health crisis.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I'm no expert, but my take is that some form of gov't provided access to opiods would help cut out the rampant deaths from Fentanyl and these other killer opiods & laced drugs. I can't see legalization working, but some form of gov't provided or controlled access.

There are knock-on effects, good and bad (dont get me wrong), but the sheer volume of opiods deaths from these new potent drugs could see a real push to get a safer, more controlled ones into the hands of addicts.

It's effectively the next progression of the "safe injection sites". While there is no stoping you from using, lets make it as safe as possible while we try to get you some help. Rather than having 5 (guessing) people die a day in Vancouver from these new drugs, you'd provide herion or whatever to them that is clean, of known quantity and quality.

The government already provides access to methadone. It doesn't work. People want the strong stuff. This is why fentanyl is so out of control. Heavy addicts are seeking out the strongest high possible. They don't care about safety.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Not from Van, but related. And ummm, holy #### this is crazy.

Follow the pills and you'll find the overdose deaths.

The trail of painkillers leads to West Virginia's southern coalfields, to places like Kermit, population 392. There, out-of-state drug companies shipped nearly 9 million highly addictive — and potentially lethal — hydrocodone pills over two years to a single pharmacy in the Mingo County town.

Rural and poor, Mingo County has the fourth-highest prescription opioid death rate of any county in the United States.

The trail also weaves through Wyoming County, where shipments of OxyContin have doubled, and the county's overdose death rate leads the nation. One mom-and-pop pharmacy in Oceana received 600 times as many oxycodone pills as the Rite Aid drugstore just eight blocks away.

In six years, drug wholesalers showered the state with 780 million hydrocodone and oxycodone pills, while 1,728 West Virginians fatally overdosed on those two painkillers, a Sunday Gazette-Mail investigation found.

The unfettered shipments amount to 433 pain pills for every man, woman and child in West Virginia.

“These numbers will shake even the most cynical observer,” said former Delegate Don Perdue, D-Wayne, a retired pharmacist who finished his term earlier this month. “Distributors have fed their greed on human frailties and to criminal effect. There is no excuse and should be no forgiveness.”

The Gazette-Mail obtained previously confidential drug shipping sales records sent by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey's office. The records disclose the number of pills sold to every pharmacy in the state and the drug companies' shipments to all 55 counties in West Virginia between 2007 and 2012.

http://www.wvgazettemail.com/news-he....9NHGBCwv.dpuf

[Street Pharmacist]

Seems like they want to blame wholesalers which is strange

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by blankall

The government already provides access to methadone. It doesn't work. People want the strong stuff. This is why fentanyl is so out of control. Heavy addicts are seeking out the strongest high possible. They don't care about safety.

Yeah, a lot of rational people here are looking at rational solutions that rely on others making rational decisions. The fact is a lot of these people want to get as wasted as they possibly can, and have a horizon of time no longer than about 36 hours in the future. People who once killed themselves slowly are now killing themselves quickly.

[Calgary4LIfe]

People who feel legalization of all drugs - including the 'hard drugs' - may be thinking of it in a rather simplistic way (no offence).

Let's draw a parallel to another illegal societal issue - prostitution. I am 'mostly' on board with the legalization of prostitution, as it gets the women off the streets and in some safe places, would remove children from this practice, and would have government officials regulating the industry and assuring that sexually transmitted diseases are at a minimum. It would also eliminate completely human trafficking. Great, right?

Well, studies show that in places with legalized prostitution - like Amsterdam and Thailand - human trafficking is at an all-time high, children are being forced into prostitution, and even disease transmission has not slowed down at all. Pimps (mostly multinational criminal organizations) are very much getting rich off of prostitution.

Now, I still see some 'good' in legalizing prostitution, but it hasn't really eased the bad.

Legalizing the hard drugs I would think would do little to stem the flow produced and distributed globally by organized crime, and would not have a negligible impact on addicts.

I think Portugal got it mostly right with their decriminalizing of all drugs, but it wasn't just the decriminalizing that had an impact. They put a tonne of people onto the streets helping those with addictions. They spent a lot of money and resources on helping at-risk people, and got addicts who were on the street turned around.

There will always be a black market. If there is a black market for designer clothing, DVDs, etc., you bet that there would be a black market for narcotics. Want to kill that market? Go after the demand.

It almost doesn't matter what you are trying to fight in the social-justice realm. It is almost always (I haven't heard of an exception) that it does a lot more good in helping people than in hurting people. Concentrate on helping people get out of their addictions - including their lifestyles. That is the only way you can make a long-lasting permanent change in society.

Rio is another good example. What did they do? They threw a LOT of money at the enforcement side. They greatly increased BOPE's budget. They go in and will clean out a favela at times. How? Better than Cap'n Crunch wanted (with mandatory life sentences) - they simply shoot and kill traffickers (100% of the time if they are holding a gun, and will carry out summary executions whenever they get a chance, which is often).

What changed in Rio? Did the rates of addiction go down? Did the criminal element disappear (or were seriously impaired at all)? Nope. For every kid (and in many cases, they were kids under the age of 18 - some as young as 10), a handful more jumped to replace them.

Duterte's 'war on drugs' is going to fail in the Philippines. America's 'war on drugs' failed. Going completely the other way to full legalization isn't the answer either. I think it is somewhere in the middle with decriminalizing all drugs, spending a lot of money on services to help those people who are at risk, while combining it with effective law enforcement.

Case in point - I had a 'buddy' who got caught with 10 kgs of cocaine running from BC to Calgary. Got caught red-handed - even had his fingerprints on the vacuum sealed packages. Went to jail for about 2 weeks, and his lawyer got him off on some technicality. Is this enforcement? The guys making a tonne of money and bringing in the bulk of the drugs into cities are RARELY caught, and even more rarely convicted.

There is something wrong with the enforcement side of the equation. There is something even much more wrong with the support side, however. Fix that.

[CroFlames]

No solution is simple, even full legalization (which is wrong IMO) or decriminalization (which is a good start).

A good parallel is alcohol. Sure, a vast majority of booze sold is legal and the government gets it's cut, but there are tons of alcohol related deaths. TONS. Not to mention, people still homebrew legally and illegally.

If the government had a monopoly on hard drugs, the old drug king pins would simply invent something new and the people will abuse it. The government is too inefficient to ever win the battle.

Hypothetically, even if the government has an absolute stranglehold on the entire drugs market, people will still get high and kill themselves in other ways. Huffing gasoline, or abusing prescription drugs that were stolen or ingesting experimental substances to chase a high.

I'm not saying I know the answer, but I know it's not an easy one or a black and white one. Not even sure there is an answer except for families and schools to try their best to educate kids.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Originally Posted by Poster

There is no argument to be made. If you don't support full legalization, you support organized crime.

Period.

Maybe if you want people to take your opinion more seriously, you should start with not using large sweeping statements such as this.

[activeStick]

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/mobile/b-c-reac...2016-1.3209531

The coroner's office released updated numbers today - November was a record in BC with 128 deaths from illicit drug use, beating the previous single month record of 82 in January 2016.

[CliffFletcher]

I was having a beer over Christmas with a couple friends - one in the media and another in the health care sector - and the talk turned to fentanyl. The guy in the media mentioned that the Calgary parents who OD'd recently were fairly normal people who were doing some coke privately. The health care guy pointed out that any time you're doing a street drug today, you're rolling the dice that it includes a lethal dose of fentanyl. This led to a discussion of cocaine use among pro athletes, including members of the Flames. The conclusion was that it's only a matter of time before a pro athlete gets a lethal dose and snuffs it. Sobering stuff.