The Fentanyl Crisis thread

[Marcus]

In this case, let's call the fallacy Markk's 15% solution. Not nearly the strength of Holmes' 7% solution, but then that's the point Gad is making. Markk keeps calling it a strawman, but he's just begging.

[Gunnar]

To Gad, Marcus and Physics Guy, thank you so much for your impeccable and well needed arguments in your most recent posts. They added much needed sanity, compassion and justice to this thread!

Another point that is so often not recognized or understood is that the concentrating on criminal prohibition and "war on drugs" approach towards drug abuse and addicts really is not the best way of dealing with the problem. Because of the very nature of drug addiction, the main beneficiaries of that approach are organized crime, and the army of law enforcement officials and bureaucrats needed to police and administer that policy, and whose livelihoods actually depend on the continuation of the very problem for which they are hired to deal with. The harder we crack down on that approach, the higher the risk of drug trafficking, which tends to push up the price of the drugs and the potential profits to be made from pushing them, which is likely to both attract more pushers and the potential number of addicts.

It's similar to how prohibition of alcohol created a golden opportunity for organized crime and resulted in a huge increase in crime rates, including murder.

[canpakes]

Markk, if you completely shut down the border tomorrow, as in - no commerce, no crossings, no tourism - no anything ... will America’s fentanyl problem be resolved?

If not, what are your suggested next steps?

Of course not, I never said it would.

I'm no sure all the steps that will need to be taken, but one of the first steps is to get as much of the poison off the streets asap. Do you disagree? If one of your children or your wife, was addicted to fentanyl would you allow that person they get the drug to your home? Wouldn't you do everything in your power to keep that supplier and product away from them as they try to supply your loved one for profit? If they were in the country illegally would you report them and want them deported and/or arrested?

Remember, the scenario is that the border is completely shut down. That can’t realistically happen but we can have a causerie about it regardless.

To your point above, is there any advantage to prioritizing arresting suspected fentanyl dealers based on race or assumption of legal status?

Would you want the folks in charge to go after the suppliers, source of the product? I certainly would.

How would you like to see us go after the suppliers and their own ‘folks in charge’? What does that look like?

I would also get my child or wife help, the help they will need to hopefully recover, fully or in part. As a person of faith that would be one of my goals, it works for many in regard to addiction. Religious based groups have always been at the front lines. There are also great secular programs, and very effective to many. There are also some very expensive private programs that are successful, but again very expensive, and I would do that also if I could swing it.

Recovery programs make sense. Should the US commit funds to organizations that have recovery programs? If so, do you see a reason to prioritize faith-based programs over others? If so, why? And what should we, as a nation, be willing to spend on this addiction problem?

Has the new Administration made any statements or commitments to this part of the addiction problem?

In regard to our country it is basically the same "steps." We need to get as much of this crap away from these sick folks as we can, for me it is just common sense. We will need to find ways to get these folks help. Sadly they first want to get help, if they don't it just won't happen, it is impossible unless you lock them up. I know this from personal experience, with a once very close family member....maybe someday I can share the ongoing very tragic story. If the person does not want help, there are limited options and they are all very painful and they hurt, very deeply. It drains the family emotionally and financially.

Yes, this is also a problem that occurs when trying to help homeless individuals, inasmuch as some will refuse assistance. With a significant enough overlap between many homeless and addiction, how would you address this problem? I don’t think that you’re suggesting that we lock people up if they continue to use fentanyl but if that’s the case for a given user, what is your preferred next step?.

And another first step that I believe needs to happen, people need to understand this is a epidemic and we are basically at war.

in my opinion most realistic folks understand that fentanyl use is a problem, or ‘epidemic’.

And often that is a slow step with personal family addiction, it takes time to learn that tough love is far too often is a reality for those dealing with a addicted family member.

And ‘tough love’ means what, exactly, in a situation with a fentanyl-addicted family member?

[canpakes]

First, previous presidents didn't conduct their operations as showmanship for a bunch of wicked and deranged google-eyed Christians crying for blood. The kind of anger behind Trump from stupid people will eventually justify unprecedenteed human rights violations. Second, the largest part of those violations will be from sending those arrested to Guantanamo Bay or other holding facilities where they can be indefinitely put out of view.

This is what is so unnecessary.

I could ‘get’ that some folks are angry at the presence of border crossers, but to take that situation, and turn it into entertainment for a particular audience that feeds on revenge, unearned grievance and demeaning others for the sake of public spectacle is not in any way productive. Such a thing only reinforces the worst characteristics of human behavior.

To point back to a pic from another thread:



I seriously doubt that any person in this pic is so negatively affected by illegal immigration that they need to show such unmitigated public glee at the prospect of booting out immigrants, many of whom are just normal folks looking to take care of their own families and working low-paying jobs in an effort to do so.

If I personally knew anyone in this image, this would dramatically reshape my interpretation of their character.

And I can’t see the logic of shipping any immigrant to Guantanamo. This is just more showmanship done for the worst possible reasons.

[Gunnar]

Drug addiction has such a powerful hold on addicts that it is almost impossible for most of them to kick the habit without help. Even if they want to quit, they are unlikely to seek the indispensable help they need to quit if they know that they are likely to be prosecuted and have to serve prison time or be deported merely for being addicts.

[Doctor Steuss]

I'm just glad that fentanyl isn't being treated like guns.

"Fentanyl doesn't kill people. People with fentanyl kill people. If you take it away, they'll just use something else. Criminals will still break the law..."

[Gadianton]

And ‘tough love’ means what, exactly, in a situation with a fentanyl-addicted family member?

According to Megyn Kelley on her Christmas special I listened to on that long drive over the holidays, "tough love" doesn't work for severe opioid addiction. She admitted her impulse was "tough love" (go figure) but then became convinced it was impossible and negotiation with addicted family members is much more complicated, but still possible.

I say that with grave reservation because my interest isn't to let Markk derail our problem here into all the fine details of combating fentanyl. It's to denounce and lay bare the absolute stupidity of wedding mass deportations with consignment to Guantanamo Bay or worse, to the problem of combating fentanyl addiction. Markk has quadrupled down on this. He says things like, "There are tough decisions being made," that includes mass deportations in order to take the fentanyl seriously. That's total BS. Markk wants to mix in mass deportations somehow into a vague "take the border seriously" campaign for the sake of fighting fentanyl. total BS.

Working illegals have zero to do with the fentanyl problem. If you want to talk about other border issues that actually have a part in the supply chain, then those are at least on the table for discussion. But citing mass deportation as part of a comprehensive measure to deal with fentanyl is a lie, and obvious lie. And terribly immoral to lie like that and send people to their doom. In principle, not Christian, in practice typically Christian.

[Gadianton]

I seriously doubt that any person in this pic is so negatively affected by illegal immigration that they need to show such unmitigated public glee at the prospect of booting out immigrants, many of whom are just normal folks looking to take care of their own families and working low-paying jobs in an effort to do so.

If I personally knew anyone in this image, this would dramatically reshape my interpretation of their character.

And I can’t see the logic of shipping any immigrant to Guantanamo. This is just more showmanship done for the worst possible reasons.

That's quite the pic. Which one is Markk? It sounds like you're onto them, Canpakes. You are correct, neither Markk nor my right-wing friend are seriously worried about working illegals. My right-wing friend was in the trades like Markk, he was the boss, and he hired them all the time. He even donated money to family sometimes to help when they got nabbed and needed to get back in. He's also very kind to the workers in our HOA, and even has them work on his yard sometimes. But then there's this disconnect that is unfathomable. Within 5 seconds, he can literally be talking to one of them and asking about their life and loved ones, and then turn and go into a tirade of, "get them out of here! we're getting overrun!" He's not speaking of the ones he knows personally, but some unnamed mass of others out there.

msnobody in another thread asked IHAQ what he was doing to help people. Right-wingers are often the best people you'll ever meet when it comes to personal interaction. My right-wing friend will be the first person in line to help anyone in the community irrespective of color or anything else. My left-wing friends in this community, though far better informed, would be the last in line to help anybody. However, right-wingers are quite possibly some of the worst people who have ever lived in terms of collective action. Do people think that Nazi's were just these terrible evil people? No, they were family people who in general were good who made massive mistakes in terms of collective action; therefore, they were evil.

As you point out, Canpakes, this is about something else. It's identity politics. Guys like Markk have been driving around in their trucks yelling at liberals for decades. You know those sayings about not letting your enemy find out what you love? If liberals care about immigrants or people of color or LGBQ or whatever it is, then right-wingers will get even by destroying that thing they care about. Those folks in the picture aren't trying to get in the faces of immigrants, who would be rather confused; they are trying to get in the face of liberals who they perceive as caring about the immigrants. So yeah, liberals ought to be more careful for a variety of reasons about participating in the culture war.

If you're going to be against DEI and immigrants, you ought to go all the way and get rid of Christians also. These guys have the right idea:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRpOKJw66Hg
I'm sure Bill at least agrees with me this is a cool song.

[Markk]

Lol....what I am more than doubling down is that there is a Fentanyl crisis, and we need to do everything we can to stop it.

Mass deportations won't do anything to stop it. And you again prove exactly what I'm saying. Spending billions to do "everything" when the crux of your "everything" will do nothing only proves that your motivations don't align with your stated goals. You're lying, in other words. Anyone who watched Trump rallies on YouTube knows that your anger and hatred towards "immigrants" (even among immigrants themselves) has nothing to do with the Fentanyl crisis. You know your lying, because you know Trump is a liar here; he repeatedly claimed that illegal immigrants generally speaking were criminals and insane people that we need to get out of here for public safety. You don't quite repeat that part of the message you and ceebs voted for.

I never said it would in any context you are suggesting....CFR please. You are arguing with yourself, against your straw-man.

Mark: 'Under Clinton there were over 12 million deportations,"

Gad: " You didn't check hard enough because this obviously isn't true. As I've said before, you don't know anything about things like inflation and immigration law. On the other hand, you do know more than I do about doing drugs."

According to this it is true.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article ... ief-or-not

Gad you stated that by Trump deporting illegal immigrants, he was violating the civil rights of those the he deported. So I'll ask my question again, "where these other Presidents violating the civil rights of those they deported?

[Gadianton]

According to this it is true.

You're missing some important nuance. Look at those tables carefully. Right-wing politicians gloss over these numbers to make it appear like Trump isn't that bad. When talking about possibilities like Guantanamo Bay, understanding that chart will matter a lot.

So I'll ask my question again,

Go back and read my post, I answered you the first time.