Do we sentence insulin users to death because of their addiction?

This will be the most absurd comment I will hear the rest of this week!

Not if you believe the medical professionals when they say that addiction is an illness, not a moral failure. On this point, we obviously disagree. Again, I hope that someday you will attend an NA meeting or volunteer in some other capacity for those afflicted by the medical illness of addiction.

All of these people will push their limits until overdose/death.

It is so refreshing to finally see you refer to them as people.

I watched my close friend get addicted to pain medication. Built up a tolerance over months and then overdosed for a 12-hour stretch that required hospitalization. His medication had quality control. Luckily his episode did not result in death.

Would you consider your close friend's addiction a result of moral failure? We will be dealing with addiction forever. It is part of the human condition. To believe that you can eradicate the problem by simply killing all those afflicted by it is not only wrong, it is sick.

Do we sentence insulin users to death because of their addiction?

This will be the most absurd comment I will hear the rest of this week!

One of the biggest problems with fentanyl and May other recreational drugs is lack of quality control. Most overdoses are unintentional with people unknowingly taking a large dose which is fatal because there is no standard concentration. Were the illegal drugs subject to the same quality control as Rx meds, the dose would be standardized and there would be fewer overdoses. I am not sure that legalization would be a good thing, but the current approach is not working.

Nope>

Addiction is all about a "better" high. Control will do nothing. All of these people will push their limits until overdose/death.

I watched my close friend get addicted to pain medication. Built up a tolerance over months and then overdosed for a 12-hour stretch that required hospitalization. His medication had quality control. Luckily his episode did not result in death.

I do not see failures. I see lack of enforcement and death penalty.

Fentanyl is killing our nation>>>Legalize it and somehow the problem disappears.

YA>>>>NARROW-MINDED!

No one ever said that the problem would disappear. Ending the first Prohibition didn't get rid of the problem with alcohol. However, as the Good Doctor pointed out, if it were legal and regulated, there would be much fewer accidental deaths. In consultation with your medical professionals, you would be proscribed a non-lethal, non-adulterated dosage and at the same time, you would be referred to groups such as Narcotics Anonymous that would help you manage what the medical profession calls an illness.

Do we sentence insulin users to death because of their addiction?

In addition, there is no reason to react with anger and name calling. For my part, I am truly interested in finding a better path after seeing first hand how lives have been destroyed and are being destroyed. Depending upon your situation, I recommend attending an NA meeting or better yet, volunteer in a prison and discuss with some of the inmates how the illegal trade ruined their lives.

It is always so amazing how individuals can carelessly throw an epithet at others that smack dab on the money describes their own behavior or characteristic.

The next illegal drug that the cartels will poison the world with has not yet been invented.

Yet some think anything and everything should be legal. How narrow minded is that thinking?????

The reason the next illegal drug invented will be 100 times more powerful and deadly than the previous drug is precisely because the drugs are illegal. Please read the post carefully.

If you believe that this line of reasoning is narrow-minded, what do you believe should be done in light of the tremendous failures of over 50 years of the War on Drugs? More of the same? What is one definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting to get a different outcome.

I do not see failures. I see lack of enforcement and death penalty.

Fentanyl is killing our nation>>>Legalize it and somehow the problem disappears.

YA>>>>NARROW-MINDED!

The next illegal drug that the cartels will poison the world with has not yet been invented.

Yet some think anything and everything should be legal. How narrow minded is that thinking?????

The reason the next illegal drug invented will be 100 times more powerful and deadly than the previous drug is precisely because the drugs are illegal. Please read the post carefully.

If you believe that this line of reasoning is narrow-minded, what do you believe should be done in light of the tremendous failures of over 50 years of the War on Drugs? More of the same? What is one definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting to get a different outcome.

They seem to have become more powerful, no doubt. Their rise to power clearly relates to the drug trade and our USA policies. That said, if all drugs were legalized here today, I’m not sure how that would help solve the problems there, since many of the current activities, especially in terms of extortion, don’t seem to me to be directly related to the drug trade.

Organized criminals are brutal and heartless, but they are not stupid. They are diversifying their income streams. But as Rob pointed out, removing their primary source of income will put a big dent in their power and influence. Sadly, it will not rid the world of them. However, the longer Prohibition II is in place, the harder it will be to bring about a safer and more peaceful Mexico.

"Poor Mexico. So far from God, so close to the United States." -- Attributed to Porfirio Diaz

As did the rum runners during Prohibition I, the businessmen and women attempting to maximize profits switched to products that pack a greater punch in a smaller amount of product. Before Prohibition I, most alcohol consumed was beer and wine. Of course, if you are transporting contraband, you want to be able to transport as much product as possible in the smallest container possible. Hence, spirits became the product of choice for those supplying alcohol during Prohibition I.

Today, the suppliers of recreational pharmaceuticals are doing the same thing. At first, the move was to create the strongest strains of marijuana possible. This is why you often hear officious politicians decrying the fact that, "the marijuana of today is far stronger than 50 years ago." Well, duh! Of course, it is! It is stronger because you doofuses made it illegal! But could the suppliers find a smaller product with even more pharmacological punch that would be even more profitable?

Welcome to fentanyl! China is now the major supplier of this dangerously powerful drug, much of it making its way through Mexico. One can't help but see the echo of history here. It is certain the Chinese have not forgotten the Opium Wars of the 19th Century.

Fentanyl flow to the United States

But wait, there's more! A new drug is entering the market. It is much stronger than fentanyl and even accidental exposure from handling this drug can be deadly.

Carfentanil is 100 times stronger than fentanyl

We will never win the War on Drugs through Prohibition II. Never. All we will do is continue to throw away vast amounts of resources, fill prisons with hapless foot soldiers, and encourage stronger and more dangerous forms of intoxicants. We must acknowledge this as fact and find a better way to deal with the scourge and its devastating effects.

Of course, if you want to secure a job with guaranteed employment, become a DEA Agent. That's the real middle-class welfare system!

The next illegal drug that the cartels will poison the world with has not yet been invented.

Yet some think anything and everything should be legal. How narrow minded is that thinking?????

Although there are many recreational drugs that should be legalized, I don’t think that the odds on that happening are very high.

There is an old saying, "In nature, there is no right or wrong, only consequences."

If we don't change course, we can expect the same -- actually worse -- outcomes to continue. In the meantime, buy stock in private prisons, while Prohibition II continues to tear at the fabrics of our societies. Xi Jinping is having a hearty laugh at our expense.

What's the matter with the beach? The Casa Cultura is an oven and the acoustics are terrible, especially when everyone around you is having conversations instead of listening!

I thought we had identified that the most recent beach grounds were not suitable meaning big enough to hold large concerts?

The beach out front of the museum was fine until the Paseo del Pescador was re-modeled and up-sized. Past concerts on Playa La Madera were OK until the rising tide flooded the last 5 or 10 rows of seats.

One memorable year, the final closing concert was held off to one side of the plaza at La Cancha, while the ayuntamiento (had to get that lovely-sounding word in) had scheduled other music on the main stage at the same time.

What's the matter with the beach? The Casa Cultura is an oven and the acoustics are terrible, especially when everyone around you is having conversations instead of listening!

I thought we had identified that the most recent beach grounds were not suitable meaning big enough to hold large concerts?

I heard back from the organizers of the fest and they made it clear, in no uncertain terms that the city made the decision to have it at the pier. They even offered to create a walkway for pier users but were told not to. It is up to the city who provides the permit to decide where to have it.

That's what I said I thought since the first time this happened.

I’m not sure what the BIG deal is?
Only the opening and closing concerts were at the muelle.
Otherwise night concerts were at Case de Cultura.
Sailfest also had a couple of concerts at the muelle.
Where else would you suggest holding a large event?
The Parthenon?
Your worst fears may be realized next year

I'm not surprised you wouldn't appreciate how the locals feel or the terrible image our visitors leave here with. No, to you it's no big deal at all. Not your community or your livelihood.

Can't wait until they hold events at the Partenón and no one wants to walk up that hill. Maybe they'll open up the secret escape tunnel to try to coax more visitors up there.

Yes, I pointed the same thing out regarding the SailFest concerts as did many of my fellow zihuatanejenses.

I heard back from the organizers of the fest and they made it clear, in no uncertain terms that the city made the decision to have it at the pier. They even offered to create a walkway for pier users but were told not to. It is up to the city who provides the permit to decide where to have it.

That's what I said I thought since the first time this happened.

I’m not sure what the BIG deal is?
Only the opening and closing concerts were at the muelle.
Otherwise night concerts were at Case de Cultura.
Sailfest also had a couple of concerts at the muelle.
Where else would you suggest holding a large event?
The Parthenon?
Your worst fears may be realized next year

They seem to have become more powerful, no doubt. Their rise to power clearly relates to the drug trade and our USA policies. That said, if all drugs were legalized here today, I’m not sure how that would help solve the problems there, since many of the current activities, especially in terms of extortion, don’t seem to me to be directly related to the drug trade.

Organized criminals are brutal and heartless, but they are not stupid. They are diversifying their income streams. But as Rob pointed out, removing their primary source of income will put a big dent in their power and influence. Sadly, it will not rid the world of them. However, the longer Prohibition II is in place, the harder it will be to bring about a safer and more peaceful Mexico.

"Poor Mexico. So far from God, so close to the United States." -- Attributed to Porfirio Diaz

As did the rum runners during Prohibition I, the businessmen and women attempting to maximize profits switched to products that pack a greater punch in a smaller amount of product. Before Prohibition I, most alcohol consumed was beer and wine. Of course, if you are transporting contraband, you want to be able to transport as much product as possible in the smallest container possible. Hence, spirits became the product of choice for those supplying alcohol during Prohibition I.

Today, the suppliers of recreational pharmaceuticals are doing the same thing. At first, the move was to create the strongest strains of marijuana possible. This is why you often hear officious politicians decrying the fact that, "the marijuana of today is far stronger than 50 years ago." Well, duh! Of course, it is! It is stronger because you doofuses made it illegal! But could the suppliers find a smaller product with even more pharmacological punch that would be even more profitable?

Welcome to fentanyl! China is now the major supplier of this dangerously powerful drug, much of it making its way through Mexico. One can't help but see the echo of history here. It is certain the Chinese have not forgotten the Opium Wars of the 19th Century.

Fentanyl flow to the United States

But wait, there's more! A new drug is entering the market. It is much stronger than fentanyl and even accidental exposure from handling this drug can be deadly.

Carfentanil is 100 times stronger than fentanyl

We will never win the War on Drugs through Prohibition II. Never. All we will do is continue to throw away vast amounts of resources, fill prisons with hapless foot soldiers, and encourage stronger and more dangerous forms of intoxicants. We must acknowledge this as fact and find a better way to deal with the scourge and its devastating effects.

Of course, if you want to secure a job with guaranteed employment, become a DEA Agent. That's the real middle-class welfare system!

They seem to have become more powerful, no doubt. Their rise to power clearly relates to the drug trade and our USA policies. That said, if all drugs were legalized here today, I’m not sure how that would help solve the problems there, since many of the current activities, especially in terms of extortion, don’t seem to me to be directly related to the drug trade.

No, but it removes their primary source of income and with it, much of their power and raison d'être. And it allows the police better options than they currently have so that can go after extortionists instead of worrying about who's protecting them.

I heard back from the organizers of the fest and they made it clear, in no uncertain terms that the city made the decision to have it at the pier. They even offered to create a walkway for pier users but were told not to. It is up to the city who provides the permit to decide where to have it.

That's what I said I thought since the first time this happened.

While I will not argue that the USA drug policy contributes to the prevalence of the cartels in Mexico and the current wars between them for territory, I’m confused about how the current and recurring extortion schemes of various and sundry businesses relates directly to the drug trade. It seems to me that the extortion schemes relate more to criminal gangs taking advantage of the absence of an effective, competent police force. I hope that the local citizens will soon receive the protection they deserve.

Because if the cartels weren't overpowering the police forces the police would at least be able to deal with petty crime, which they can't do if they're hiding behind fortress walls and the only patrolling they do is zooming through town in pickup trucks during "safe" hours for photo-op purposes but doing nothing to prevent crime or punish criminals. Here we can't even do breathalyzers because the cops are afraid of what would happen if they tried to stop the wrong person. While things aren't yet as bad as they were under the former mayor Gustavo García Bello, we've seen this movie before, and each time it gets worse but nothing really gets done except to chase cucarachas around in circles. All the pretty painted concrete is worthless if tourists stop coming due to a perception of danger.