Lurker > Keebs05

GreenKnight127 posted...

A. produced the heroin themselves. (Illegal)
B. bought it from a dealer. (Illegal)
C. stumbled upon it in the god damn woods and chose to use it. (stupid and illegal)

Or they're using someone else's stash. Or they were drugged without their knowledge. Or they took a medication that was laced with it (all 3 of which I have personally responded to) but hey, only 2 possible circumstances right, Kyuubi?

GreenKnight127 posted...

and by choosing NOT to tell the cops....they are committing a crime by either covering their own ass who made the heroin,

Do me a favor and look up the 5th Amendment.

Listen, clearly nobody's mind is going to get changed (yet I'm the dense one) so believe whatever the hell you want. After 6 hours of arguing and beating my head against the wall, I've grown tired. I deal with overdoses on a frighteningly regular basis. Jail and prison won't help but believe what you want. I guess all I can do is be thankful that TC isn't a cop.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Keebs05 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).

With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.

By denying one they implicitly confess to the other as no other circumstance exists. We know that heroin was aquired as they had/used it so they would be aware which one they did. They're a key witness in their own crimes.

Well worded false dichotomy but it's hardly conclusive.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Notice how no scenario exists where a heroin user neither produced or had been supplied heroin. A crime was definitely committed so it's inappropriate to not give him at least the lower charge (aiding and abetting).

With zero proof of production or a sale, an aiding and abetting charge will not stick.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

You haven't provided any proof that would hold up to support any counts of aid and abetting, producing or distributing.

You and TC are assuming that the heroin was bought by the user, the heroin was used in his house all alone and that he knew the dealer. From my experience, heroin users don't always use in their own places (easily 50/50), they rarely use alone and they typically get their supply from whoever will sell it for the cheapest, stranger or acquaintance.

I'm not even 100% sure why TC is so hung up on aiding and abetting anyway. Most of the time, aiding and abetting is a misdemeanor. That's a maximum of 1 year in jail. You're not going to get a junkie to flip by threatening them with a year.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Keebs05 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Keebs05 posted...

Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all?

This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them).

With zero proof to bring prosecutors.

The proof being their testimony. Weed doesn't spontaneously appear.

When did we start discussing weed?
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Keebs05 posted...

Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all?

This is pretty simple, if they did not get it elsewhere then they're a producer and so can be arrested for a loooong time. If they don't reveal their supplier then they helped the dealer commit a crime (supplying them).

With zero proof to bring prosecutors.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

GreenKnight127 posted...

If the buyers don't want to give up their dealers, then they are aiding and abetting.

Who did they "aid and abet?" How do you know that the drugs were purchased by a user? How do you know that the drugs were purchased at all?

The first element for a charge of aiding and abetting is the commission of a crime. You don't even know that a drug deal went down.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

RoboXgp89 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

RoboXgp89 posted...

CacciatoPart3 posted...

RoboXgp89 posted...

butthurt that people are using painkillers when doctors make them so hard to access or make them addicted in the first place
nothing you say has anything to do with reality it's just a personal vendetta because you can't own up to your own stupid mistakes

I literally have no fucking clue what youre trying to say with that ridiculous, incoherent post.

try reading the topic title more
we're talking about how when people abuse painkillers they're more likely to get treatment if they fall into a certain economic class/race rather than go to jail

"Celebrity" is not a race.

the point still stands it's a health issue and if I was a cop I'd throw away their drugs and send them to rehab or something
jail is for people who commit non-consensual crimes

Police can't force somebody into rehab. They can be forced to go to the hospital but not an actual rehab program.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Banks is hotter than all of them combined
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

GreenKnight127 posted...

Cops should have every right to ask these addicts where they got their drugs from. Their name, physical description, contact numbers, etc.

If the addict doesn't want to "rat out" their dealer.....then they are aiding and abetting. It's really as simple as that.

It's no where near as simple as that.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Zeus posted...

Keebs05 posted...

Zeus posted...

But I'm not talking about the guys who can get better just through rehab, I'm talking about repeat offenders who, in the absence of any punitive enforcement mechanism, go through the motions, get clean, and then just re-offend (possibly even killing themselves because their immunity has been reset). Obviously rehab needs to be on the table -- after all, the whole point of the prison system should be to rehab criminals for general society -- but it seems like you need at least *some* punitive measure to discourage usage as well. It's not really an either/or thing.

If possible death doesn't discourage usage, I doubt three hots and a cot will.

Given that people generally don't believe that an OD will happen to them but worry about prison, I'd say that the latter is probably the more effective threat.

I can tell you from personal experience that the opposite is true. Almost every OD that I respond to has their own narcan kit now.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Zeus posted...

But I'm not talking about the guys who can get better just through rehab, I'm talking about repeat offenders who, in the absence of any punitive enforcement mechanism, go through the motions, get clean, and then just re-offend (possibly even killing themselves because their immunity has been reset). Obviously rehab needs to be on the table -- after all, the whole point of the prison system should be to rehab criminals for general society -- but it seems like you need at least *some* punitive measure to discourage usage as well. It's not really an either/or thing.

If possible death doesn't discourage usage, I doubt three hots and a cot will.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

I've worked in EMS for over a decade and have never seen someone OD and get arrested.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

To this day, I think this is a pretty badass final boss theme in all it's 16-bit glory.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Absolutely. I either completely agree with him or completely disagree. Add some alcohol and it'd be interesting.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

Revelation34 posted...

ASlaveObeys posted...

How are we supposed to know what they OD'd on?
You don't wait around to ask questions with narcan. Time is more important.
You just give it.

Giving drugs to people without asking questions is a wonderful idea.

It only takes 10 minutes without oxygen for the brain to incur damage. If there are no opioids in the system, narcan literally does nothing. No harm is done by giving narcan to someone who doesn't actually need it. Narcan is an automatic treatment on suspected overdoses by EMS, fire, police, etc.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel

THEGODDAMNBATMA posted...

Also I hate how MGS4 felt like a sendoff to Solid Snake's story, but Metal Gear Solid V didn't feel like a sendoff to Big Boss.

That's because Big Boss was barely in the game! The entire point of V felt like an explanation for how BB could've "survived" the Outer Heaven Uprising. Very little was added to the story.
---

"Old soldiers never die, they just fade away" R.I.P PFC Dusty Seidel