November 21, 2017
Editorials Latest News | Poll Questions | Charles Manson | North Korea | Susan Collins

Comments for: Matter of substance: Drug addiction as disease, not subject of shame

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • maineiac123

    Personally, I’m convinced that if we legalize drugs we’ll have a lesser problem with addiction than we do now, for one thing it will help keep drugs off the street. On the other hand I also believe that the use of drugs is a choice and I wonder just how much society should put up with regarding addicts. Is there some point where we simply say, “It’s your choice, suffer the consequences”.?

    • Anonymous

      Agreed. True freedom, though, is a double edged sword in that, if someone wants to use drugs, that’s their right. However, if that individual has ruined their body and mind with drugs and are unable to get or maintain a job, they must not become a burden on the taxpayers.

    • 3rd rail

      “Is there some point where we simply say, “It’s your choice, suffer the consequences”.?
      ______

      What if that choice affects others in society, through crime, death and mayhem ? Can we build a place to keep them off the streets, a place where they can get high without the public risk ?

      Hey, if we can let’s do it and round the junkies up. And the sooner the better. You can be it’s first honorary care taker.

      //////////////////////////

      “Personally, I’m convinced that if we legalize drugs we’ll have a lesser problem with addiction than we do now, for one thing it will help keep drugs off the street.”
      _____

      What is that ! Naivety or dope user perspective ?

      • maineiac123

        Naivety or dope upser perspective? really? Simply because one disagrees with you. Oh yes, I’m right up there with all those naive and dope using Chiefs of Police and District Attorneys who are calling for legalization because keeping them illegal simply does not work. We should have learned that during prohibition but we didn’t instead we’ve spend over $1 trillion on the war on drugs that only seems to benefit drug lords and pushers rather than society.

        • Anonymous

          It didn’t work (actually made things much worse) in the days of Al Capone, and it doesn’t work any better now.

          • 3rd rail

            Here’s the problem, a drunk is easier to spot. And booze is far easier to control in society. The flip side is it also sends a message, what do you suppose marijuana will send ?

            Always be careful of what you wish for..

          • Anonymous

            I’m just suggesting that these other drugs be treated the same as booze and cigarettes.

    • Anonymous

      Legalize, yes. With certain caviats.
      Choice? How about the child that the school has diagnosed with one of their favorite excuses for having them on ritilin or some other mood altering drug?
      We don’t allow people to legaly drink in Maine until they are 21. Why? Because their brain is not fully developed and doesn’t fully think through decisions.
      Most of the adults that I have come in contact with that are addicted were turned on by the time they were in their early teens, many earlier. Every drug pusher and pharmaceutical company knows that the earlier you can get them hooked the higher the chance that you will have a life long client.
      Caviat, if someone is caught and convicted of supplying drugs, including alcohol, to anyone under the age of 21, they will get an automatic prison sentence of 30 years. No chance of parole, No early release for good behavior, the full 30 years.
      Caviat, if someone over 21 wishes to experiment with any drug, they are given a release form which explains all the possible side effects of their drug of choice and absolves everyone from responsibility for anything that might happen to the experimenter. They will take full responsibility for their own ‘choice’ to experiment.

      • Anonymous

        I agree with you 100% on your post and have expressed similar thoughts over the years every time this subject comes up. (And every few months thare is another bleeding heart piece about drugs and druggies.)

        One difference I have expressed however. No 30 year sentence. I want the death penalty for selling to underage. With NO exceptions for ANY reasons. Why should we pay for 30 years of free everything for them? And you wait. The bleeding hearts will at some point come up with an excuse to let them out early. It costs too much, and they didn’t really hurt anyone.

    • Anonymous

      “It’s your choice, suffer the consequences”

      Agreed. Look at history. There has ALWAYS been a percentage of the population that became addicted to one thing or another. But today that percentage is exploding because of progressive changes in society, morals, and a culture of enabling the behavior.

      • Anonymous

        If you build it, they will come.

    • Anonymous

      Sorry. I have to agree with the Chinese on this one. Execute the drug dealers! They are not only contributing to the misery of the used, they mess up the lives of everyone connected to the user. The gift that keeps on giving! Public execution will solve the problem one way or the other.

      • maineiac123

        I am very much opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the apparent number of innocent people who have been executed in this and other countries. We’ve spend over $1 trillion on the War on Drugs and we’re losing the battle. Legalize drugs and you get them off the street for the most part, legalize them and you have additonal revenues to work towards addiction problems. I also think there is a time when we simply tell people that you over-dose again and you’ll probably die because we will not as taxpayers continue to suffer the burden of your choice. I recall a case in Australia a couple of years ago where a person had been saved around 6 times from overdoses. Each time she would have died if rescue had not responded and yet she said they would probably have to do it again because she is just a “recreational” drug user and she’s not going to give it up on her weekends. Somehow that simply irritates me and I have no doubt we have plenty like that in the U.S. as well.

      • Anonymous

        In that case, there are hundreds of thousands of doctors, pharmacists, lobbyists, and other assorted suits that should be off to the gallows. Big pharma is the biggest pusher of them all.

    • Tom Brown III

      props.

      legalize it all, let insurance providers refuse to cover costs of rehab and damage done by recreational drug users. Portugal has it right.

  • William Brittain

    I wonder if he ever did nicotine?

  • Anonymous

    Addiction nearly always certainly does reveal a lack of willpower and a moral failing.

    Since the 1960’s, when the ugliness of addiction skyrocketed, the American public has been urged time and again to avoid illicit drug use. Those who fail to heed these clear warnings have demonstrated a lack of willpower, and a moral failing. Those who fail to participate in available programs such as AA, NA, and the countless substance abuse programs available throughout Maine, have demonstrated a lack of willpower, and a moral failing.

    Once again, the BDN has it exactly wrong.

    • Anonymous

      Now apply this to cigarette smoking… I wonder how many people posting here have been smoking tobacco for years and don’t consider themselves to be moral failures. Yet they got hooked on tobacco despite all warnings and have likely had very limited success stopping, though they are surely aware that they have a heightened risk of cancer.

    • Anonymous

      Yeah, shame on those 10, 11, 12 & 13 year olds for not having the will power to resist peer pressure. Shame on them for not telling the schools that they don’t want to take ritilin or other mood altering drugs in lieu of disciplin. Bunch of immoral children! They should be locked up until they turn 21.

    • Anonymous

      Exactly, and taxpayers and others who fall victim to some of these drug addicts end up paying for their moral failings.

      Instead of falling all over themselves apologizing for these worthless SOBs because a large part of the law abiding public doesn’t treat them like victims and “disease” sufferers, the BDN editors should call these weak-willed and pleasure seeking criminals what they are: criminals, drug addicts, burdens on society.

      And instead of treatment programs, the emphasis should be on punishment and stigmatization for sellers and users.

  • Anonymous

    The editorial skips blithely over the very real question of whether there is an effective way to treat drug addiction – without which, ‘treatment’ programs become just another way to throw taxpayer money down the ‘professional’ rat hole.

  • We will always have to deal with addiction as long as we keep medicating the top layers and numbing out the rest. We also need to understand how addiction works and why all the laws put into place by those who have no clue what it is or are in denial themselves in which doesn’t help the cause. There seems to be this proverbial cloud we love to have hanging over us as a culture in which gives us some pleasure at watching others suffer all while we keep pushing pills down their throats. Rid us of addictive medications (and they can do it), the high costs of those meds and get the FDA back to what it was when we didn’t have 30 tort cases a year in the courts because of those same medications. Those in the bible belt should have been the ones to change that since their God has placed everything on the planet to combat all things. There is such a thing as being recovered and returning to a life where you can have normalcy without meetings every day of your life and being worried about a drink or a drug taking you over the cliff. Humans, The ignorant race ugh.

  • Anonymous

    It’s still about education and responsibility. Do we teach people to drink responsibly or tell people to never drink? It’s ok to get intoxicated but you have to know when to say when. There are lots of kids that care about their lives and go to college to improve their lives. There will always be those among us that don’t care about themselves and that is the crux of the problem. Should everybody live without booze because some people drink too much? We already decided that and it’s the same with drugs. Now, everybody has to go without cold medicine because some people use too much. The minority inconveniences the majority so we should spend more time educating the minority in self control.

  • Anonymous

    addiction is everywhere i hate to say it but everyone is addicted to something whether it being food or drugs or work everyone is an addict to something

  • “Addiction” means someone needs drugs to function normally.

    Not quite right. Once an addict, always an addict and more prone to relapse, though many addicts live free of drugs and function normally.

You may also like