It is currently Tue Apr 24, 2018 6:35 am



All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Our Sponsors





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:58 am 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:28 pm
Posts: 129
Trump announced his plan today on how he will tackle the opioid epidemic. For those who bring high amounts of opioids into the country, are most likely to be charged with the death Penalty. He also said that they'll be working on prevention ads for children & Congress recently appropriated $6 billion dollars to combat the opioid epidemic. If the decision was yours, how would you spend the $6 billion to combat the opioid epidemic? & Do you think it is right for high volume drug traffickers to receive the death Penalty?

_________________
I may not have all what I want, but thank GOD I know how that I have all that I need.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 11:21 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:03 pm
Posts: 1557
This post has been sitting a bit so I'll comment....

Understand that no President has the authority to change sentencing guidelines. I suppose he could ask the Attorney General to request for the maximum in Federal cases, but the decision on sentencing belongs to the judges on each case. Most drug arrests (save for international and interstate dealers) are prosecuted in the states, where the US President has no say or impact. If anything, any dealer convicted in California will probably be set free with a free car, just to spite Trump!

Congress would have to establish the death penalty for drug dealing, i.e. Congress by majority vote and Senate by at least 60 votes, then signed by the President. No way that is happening in an election year, and not likely after, with a Democrat-controlled House and Republican Senate.

There is a long history, and long debate, over the value of mandatory minimum sentences. At this link you'll see the crimes with Federal minimum sentences, and studies done beginning in 1991 to see whether mandatory minimum sentences impact crime: https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/mandatory-minimum-penalties-drug-offenses-federal-system

From Wikipedia....the first mandatory sentences for drugs go back to the 1950's and involve marijuana. Then in the 1970's New York passed laws requiring life sentences for dealers caught with more than 4 ounces of a 'hard drug'.

In the 80's, when cocaine was pouring into Florida (honestly, cocaine was a very big drug back then), crack was hit with harder minimums than powered cocaine, leading to accusations of racial bias (although for large amounts, dealers of both drugs got long time). The cocaine issue was really seen as a national security issue, as tons of powder were coming in daily, and 'narco-countries' were living off the money (and misery?) of American yuppies. Check out movies like Studio 54, or TV from the 80's (Miami Vice)-- culture was saturated with cocaine with a spin that was almost positive. Much different, and less accurate, than the perceptions of heroin addiction portrayed in media now.

SHOULD drug dealers ever face the death penalty? Not in my opinion. From my perspective the death penalty is a waste of resources. People complain about paying for someone in prison, but putting someone to death is more expensive, even before getting to the moral issues where people will always disagree. I will say that the longer this goes on, where every person in the midwest knows someone who died from overdose, the less sympathetic I am to the people who profit from the drug trade.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 1:02 pm 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:28 pm
Posts: 129
I agree completely.

Just like you, I too live in the mid West (Michigan) but I do have another question for you... I don't know how to word it but hear it goes;

Will buprenorphine ever become more accessible to the opioid addicted community? Will it also ever be inexpensive? Could it ever be covered by insurance for more than just a year or two?


Also something else, why doesn't the govt. see that people who are receiving MATs end up being more successful in terms of staying clean and are productive members of society? Instead of making access to bupe harder & having more people die ( unless it's all a part of some Illuminati plan to control the human population through addiction & manipulation) they should make it easier for one to get help. While taking buprenorphine and being productive members of society, the economy would be better, along with having improved neighborhoods & communities and we would be putting alot of drug dealers out of business. I don't understand why we can't do this.

_________________
I may not have all what I want, but thank GOD I know how that I have all that I need.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Our Sponsors
Suboxone Forum latest topics RSS feed Subscribe to the entire forum
cron

 
Fond Du Lac Psychiatry
Dr. Jeffrey Junig, M.D., Ph.D.

  • Board Certified Psychiatrist
  • Asst Clinical Professor, Medical College of Wisconsin

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group