The 9th circus says felon has right to guns

[supercorndogs]

I won't agree with any part of what you said about addicts. People choose to be addicts. Nobody started blowing dudes in an alley because their doctor gave them perccocet. Nobody took those pills and didn't know what they were and that they were addictive. That's all a lie. That entire line of thought is designed by attorneys to do two things:

1. Sue the drug companies.
2. Minimize accountability in criminal court.

People are responsible for their own actions, and the "I sprained my ankle and the next thing I know I'm a homeless heroin addict prostitute" garbage is a symptom of the loss of individual accountability in America. You can't save people from their own bad decisions, nor should we allow that kind of weak pandering to walk amongst us.

Its funny because actually that is almost exactly how many people got addicted. Phrama lied about their heroim pain killers and told people they were safe and nonaddictive. Doctors got kick backs for handing them out like tic taks and millions got addicted. I feel like most peopel in the country have watched it happen to at least 1 person they know. For me being in high school when they were doing this playing sports and wrestling. I can think of more like 10 or 15 people who got injured and were given a pain killer they got addicted to. Turned to heroin when the pills dried up and at least half are in prison or dead now. We as a country have now decimated one generation with drugs and aborted another. We are primed to be replaced.

I can't say I fully agree about choice. It has to be a personal choice to get off the stuff. But some bad advice got many on the stuff.

That of course leaves out a lot of addicts that were made over the last 10 years or so who made a choice to follow some crowd or another like a sheep.

 

[M4orturnate]

If I could avoid getting the cold or flu by not giving the guy on the corner $20, I'd never have the sniffles again.

What is that supposed to mean?

 

[quietmike]

What is that supposed to mean?

That the idea of addiction being a sickness is just more nonsense of lefty losers who refuse to accept responsibility.

 

[M4orturnate]

People do choose to be addicts. Slavery is a choice too, every day. Let's stop pretending that it isn't. If it isn't a choice, then nobody could ever beat it.

If you've ever got drunk or high in your life you made the same choice as a addict. You're just lucky you don't have the gene to make you obsessive over it. Doctors have found the the physical difference in the way alcoholics metabolize liquor. I'm not saying they're blameless or victims but they sure the hell don't choose it.

 

[M4orturnate]

That the idea of addiction being a sickness is just more nonsense of lefty losers who refuse to accept responsibility.

And what your expertise on this? You just talking out your ass or do you have anything to back it up?

 

[M4orturnate]

That the idea of addiction being a sickness is just more nonsense of lefty losers who refuse to accept responsibility.

Recovery requires extreme ownership of every wrong you've ever done. You couldn't be farther off if you tried

 

[quietmike]

And what your expertise on this? You just talking out your ass or do you have anything to back it up?

The fact that almost everyone knows someone who knows soneone who could get nearly everything, yet they aren't addicts.

 

[quietmike]

Recovery requires extreme ownership of every wrong you've ever done. You couldn't be farther off if you tried

A double reply. You triggered because you completely failed a family member and they were a cock smoking addict?

 

[M4orturnate]

The fact that almost everyone knows someone who knows soneonewho could get nearly everything, yet they aren't addicts.

Once again you didn't make a point. Sometimes its best not to let your feelings override facts. Just because you want something to be true doesn't mean it is

 

[M4orturnate]

A double reply. You triggered because you completely failed a family member and they were a cock smoking addict?

Nope once again you're not even close lol

 

[quietmike]

Once again you didn't make a point. Sometimes its best not to let your feelings override facts. Just because you want something to be true doesn't mean it is

Says the one arguing against personal responsibility?

 

[quietmike]

Nope once again you're not even close lol

Aww. It's not your fault you completely failed, it's someone else's fault.

 

[M4orturnate]

I'm done this is like arguing with a leftist. Let me know when you got something more then your feelings boomer

 

[quietmike]

I'm done this is like arguing with a leftist. Let me know when you got something more then your feelings boomer

Let me know when you tell your mom how badly growing up w/o a father affected you.

 

[Rio Precision Gunworks]

Definitely on board with this. I think there can be some arguments for violent offenders, but that argument would likely also include not being fit for release.

I also think that for the most part, definitely on a first offense.....your record shouldn't be used against you when seeking a job. If the whole point is rehabilitation......don't make it harder for people to get jobs and such. Over my career I've seen more than a few who gave honest tries but weren't able to find gainful enough employment and ended up being a recidivist.

 

[Rio Precision Gunworks]

Pretty odd from the 9th Circuit though. But, I guess they can't get everything wrong.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

Its funny because actually that is almost exactly how many people got addicted. Phrama lied about their heroim pain killers and told people they were safe and nonaddictive. Doctors got kick backs for handing them out like tic taks and millions got addicted. I feel like most peopel in the country have watched it happen to at least 1 person they know. For me being in high school when they were doing this playing sports and wrestling. I can think of more like 10 or 15 people who got injured and were given a pain killer they got addicted to. Turned to heroin when the pills dried up and at least half are in prison or dead now. We as a country have now decimated one generation with drugs and aborted another. We are primed to be replaced.

I can't say I fully agree about choice. It has to be a personal choice to get off the stuff. But some bad advice got many on the stuff.

That of course leaves out a lot of addicts that were made over the last 10 years or so who made a choice to follow some crowd or another like a sheep.

You realize that "documentary" doesn't mean truth right? Nobody told anyone that opiates weren't addictive, no doctor, nobody with the ability to Google search, nobody with two brain cells. That entire post you just made is regurgitated garbage created by lawyers to simultaneously minimize the criminal activity of their clients, while their colleagues were suing the pants off of "big pharma". Everyone has known opium was addictive since about 1450ad. People become heroin addicts because they want to. There is no other reason. They willingly do that. Nobody goes from a prescription pill or two a day to dozens without the conscience effort to do so, and buying them illegally, or Dr shopping, and then on to heroin. No way to prove it, but I'd bet way above 90% of heroin addicts never had a prescription drug issue. What boggles my mind is that opium use is no worse per capita than it was in the mid 70's, or the early 90's, and it's easy to find that information, but people believe every line of shit that runs across your idiot box marked "news" or "documentary". Look into the actual numbers over the decades. You've been snowballed by lawyers bent on massive payout lawsuits, not reality. Fentanyl overdoses skew the numbers recently, which isn't an indication of higher participation, but lethality. The overdose rate is significantly higher than it has ever been. Who you ask is driving that? Why, the addicts. Fentanyl is the answer to the problem of diminishing highs as people develop a tolerance. Heroin addicts demand fentanyl in their heroin. They caused the fentanyl epidemic. If fentanyl had been available in the 70's, it would have probably killed millions every year..

 

[hero's machine]

Our lovely government is the godfather of fentanyl importation. We need drug wars and drug zombies to keep America on its current path to being more dependent on the government.

Anyone who doesn't know drugs are bad either grew up where they can't get drugs or is completely ignorant. One just needs to drive to any metropolitan area and look around. That's what you get if you do drugs.

If your personality causes you to choose that over waking up and making a clean buck....enjoy your cardboard on the corner so you can suck dicks for half smoked cigarettes.

Life's about choices YOU make. You are responsible for YOUR actions.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

If you've ever got drunk or high in your life you made the same choice as a addict. You're just lucky you don't have the gene to make you obsessive over it. Doctors have found the the physical difference in the way alcoholics metabolize liquor. I'm not saying they're blameless or victims but they sure the hell don't choose it.

There is a genetic predisposition to addiction, no doubt about it.

However, the vast majority of people with it, aren't drug, gambling, sex, or any other kind of addict. They are functioning normally. It's still a choice. Some people are like me, and know they have it, so they make damn sure they never open those doors, or at least have the foresight to understand the situation and refuse to allow those issues to develop. Massaging this idea of genetic predisposition does almost nothing but forgive destructive behavior after the fact. Children should be educated about that type of family history beginning in their early teens and continuing throughout their lives (not unlike you should handle all of your children). Nobody is addicted to heroin or any other hard drugs without significant effort..

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

Recovery requires extreme ownership of every wrong you've ever done. You couldn't be farther off if you tried

I "loved" your post because you just contradicted yourself so hard.

In one post you're passionately explaining how it isn't the individual's fault, they are a prisoner of their genetics, and then there is this above where you rightfully explain that the only solution is extreme individual accountability. The accountability is both the prevention and the cure. It is the only thing that will ever work. Prohibition will never keep it away, education programs like DARE are and always have been a joke, so it falls on parenting. No parent of an addict wants to hear that, but you're the only one who can mitigate it, (and sometimes they can't stop it). But, once you have a full blown addict, they will never quit until they truly want to. That's the truth that nobody wants to believe, but it's all there is..

 

[supercorndogs]

I just went and checked. Peopel who commit crimes and pay for those crimes. Are still people with inalienable able rights. So are drug addicts, hosers, leftists, mother in laws, beat nicks and your dumb ass neighbor. People claiming the support constitution then wanting to treat rights like privileges.

You realize that "documentary" doesn't mean truth right? Nobody told anyone that opiates weren't addictive, no doctor, nobody with the ability to Google search, nobody with two brain cells. That entire post you just made is regurgitated garbage created by lawyers to simultaneously minimize the criminal activity of their clients, while their colleagues were suing the pants off of "big pharma". Everyone has known opium was addictive since about 1450ad. People become heroin addicts because they want to. There is no other reason. They willingly do that. Nobody goes from a prescription pill or two a day to dozens without the conscience effort to do so, and buying them illegally, or Dr shopping, and then on to heroin. No way to prove it, but I'd bet way above 90% of heroin addicts never had a prescription drug issue. What boggles my mind is that opium use is no worse per capita than it was in the mid 70's, or the early 90's, and it's easy to find that information, but people believe every line of shit that runs across your idiot box marked "news" or "documentary". Look into the actual numbers over the decades. You've been snowballed by lawyers bent on massive payout lawsuits, not reality. Fentanyl overdoses skew the numbers recently, which isn't an indication of higher participation, but lethality. The overdose rate is significantly higher than it has ever been. Who you ask is driving that? Why, the addicts. Fentanyl is the answer to the problem of diminishing highs as people develop a tolerance. Heroin addicts demand fentanyl in their heroin. They caused the fentanyl epidemic. If fentanyl had been available in the 70's, it would have probably killed millions every year..

Yes they did.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

I just went and checked. Peopel who commit crimes and pay for those crimes. Are still people with inalienable able rights. So are drug addicts, hosers, leftists, mother in laws, beat nicks and your dumb ass neighbor. People claiming the support constitution then wanting to treat rights like privileges.
Yes they did.

What ?

I think you're confused. I've made at least 3 posts here where I was very clear about the idea that people should get all of their rights reinstated after finishing their sentenced prison term. I made what had to be the most elaborate declaration of this in the thread. So, again..... whiff..

 

[supercorndogs]

I "loved" your post because you just contradicted yourself so hard.

In one post you're passionately explaining how it isn't the individual's fault, they are a prisoner of their genetics, and then there is this above where you rightfully explain that the only solution is extreme individual accountability. The accountability is both the prevention and the cure. It is the only thing that will ever work. Prohibition will never keep it away, education programs like DARE are and always have been a joke, so it falls on parenting. No parent of an addict wants to hear that, but you're the only one who can mitigate it, (and sometimes they can't stop it). But, once you have a full blown addict, they will never quit until they truly want to. That's the truth that nobody wants to believe, but it's all there is..

I am not even sure if you are being ironically obtuse or of you are really this oblivious.

 

[supercorndogs]

What ?

I think you're confused. I've made at least 3 posts here where I was very clear about the idea that people should get all of their rights reinstated after finishing their sentenced prison term. I made what had to be the most elaborate declaration of this in the thread. So, again..... whiff..

Thats why it was above your post and not below. I was responding to the thread. The only part addressed to you is under the quote. Yes, they did sell them as non addictive miracle pain go away pills.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

I am not even sure if you are being ironically obtuse or of you are really this oblivious.

No, you can't see the connection either huh? It's okay, ruminate on it a while. Mayne it will cone to you..

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

Thats why it was above your post and not below. I was responding to the thread. The only part addressed to you is under the quote. Yes, they did sell them as non addictive miracle pain go away pills.

You believe that? You're a fool then. Opium has been addictive forever. Nobody was confused about that. What you're repeating is a lie.

 

[AngryKoala]

There is a genetic predisposition to addiction, no doubt about it.

However, the vast majority of people with it, aren't drug, gambling, sex, or any other kind of addict. They are functioning normally. It's still a choice. Some people are like me, and know they have it, so they make damn sure they never open those doors, or at least have the foresight to understand the situation and refuse to allow those issues to develop. Massaging this idea of genetic predisposition does almost nothing but forgive destructive behavior after the fact. Children should be educated about that type of family history beginning in their early teens and continuing throughout their lives (not unlike you should handle all of your children). Nobody is addicted to heroin or any other hard drugs without significant effort..

I'm going to call BS. Any other kind of addict? Have you looked at studies regarding the increase in social media usage and phone usage. The amount of teens addicted to phones/social media are off the chart.

They may not be addicted to drugs, sex or gambling but they have found other outlets that provide the same dopamine hit as drugs.

 

[AngryKoala]

You believe that? You're a fool then. Opium has been addictive forever. Nobody was confused about that. What you're repeating is a lie.

The strength of addiction matters. The molecular structure matters as it affects the pharmcokinetics of the drugs as well as the addiction potential.

There are a plethora of things outside of drugs that are addictive such as candy but the capacity of the item to cause a release (amount and time) of dopamine determines the addiction potential.

They lied about how addictive the drug was, they used trusted doctors to prescribe and those ignorant of the potential harm became addicted.

There is a reason they lost and it has nothing to do with absolving personal blame.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

I'm going to call BS. Any other kind of addict? Have you looked at studies regarding the increase in social media usage and phone usage. The amount of teens addicted to phones/social media are off the chart.

They may not be addicted to drugs, sex or gambling but they have found other outlets that provide the same dopamine hit as drugs.

That's a different conversation, but we can have it if you want. The studies seem to show that these phones and social media aren't creating addiction so much as they are changing the way that the human brain works, specially the reward system. Now, I realize that there is only a sheet of notebook paper between those two things, but they are different. Kids that are raised with phones and even worse, social media throughout their developmental years, have lasting effects to a few different areas of the brain. It's awful, maybe the worst thing we ever did to kids, but it is different than genetic predisposition to addiction, which I believe is what you were comparing it to.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

The strength of addiction matters. The molecular structure matters as it affects the pharmcokinetics of the drugs as well as the addiction potential.

There are a plethora of things outside of drugs that are addictive such as candy but the capacity of the item to cause a release (amount and time) of dopamine determines the addiction potential.

They lied about how addictive the drug was, they used trusted doctors to prescribe and those ignorant of the potential harm became addicted.

There is a reason they lost and it has nothing to do with absolving personal blame.

Can you prove in any way, that any doctor told any patient that opiates weren't addictive?

I'll take one real example, not the story of a heroin addict, but one video, one commercial, one advertisement, one anything..

It doesn't exist.

 

[AngryKoala]

That's a different conversation, but we can have it if you want. The studies seem to show that these phones and social media aren't creating addiction so much as they are changing the way that the human brain works, specially the reward system. Now, I realize that there is only a sheet of notebook paper between those two things, but they are different. Kids that are raised with phones and even worse, social media throughout their developmental years, have lasting effects to a few different areas of the brain. It's awful, maybe the worst thing we ever did to kids, but it is different than genetic predisposition to addiction, which I believe is what you were comparing it to.

The same areas of the brain that drugs excite are what phones do as well. VTA, PFC and amygdala are all interconnected in the risk-reward path. Social media does that very same thing.

No it is not different, it is addiction. Read the studies, there have been a few already.

 

[AngryKoala]

Can you prove in any way, that any doctor told any patient that opiates weren't addictive?

I'll take one real example, not the story of a heroin addict, but one video, one commercial, one advertisement, one anything..

It doesn't exist.

Candy is addictive and yet no one states it is not. However, we can have candy without ending up on the street sucking dicks for skittles. Why?

The addiction potential matters and it varies from person to person and drug to drug.

If I pop a vicodin one time, more than likely I'm not going to be an addict. I can take fentanyl one time and be an addict. The reason why is in the structure of the drugs (Usually a greater degree of methylation or longer carbon chains).

Fentanyl will absorb quicker and create a massive flood of dopamine in a short amount of time. Fentanyl has a very high addiction potential. Candy, while it can become addictive, it does not have the same addiction potential.

I'm sure they knew it was addictive but they didn't know how addictive and it was the doctors whom prescribed the drugs to relay that information and monitor the patient. It was a systemic failure predicated on lies from Purdue and doctors that were paid off.

 

[supercorndogs]

You believe that? You're a fool then. Opium has been addictive forever. Nobody was confused about that. What you're repeating is a lie.

What I am repeating is exactly what manufactures of those drugs said despite knowing other wise and stupidly leaving paper trails that they knew otherwise. I literally listened to a doctor say it. But you keep on making shit up and trying your shot at revisionist history.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

Candy is addictive and yet no one states it is not. However, we can have candy without ending up on the street sucking dicks for skittles. Why?

The addiction potential matters and it varies from person to person and drug to drug.

If I pop a vicodin one time, more than likely I'm not going to be an addict. I can take fentanyl one time and be an addict. The reason why is in the structure of the drugs (Usually a greater degree of methylation or longer carbon chains).

Fentanyl will absorb quicker and create a massive flood of dopamine in a short amount of time. Fentanyl has a very high addiction potential. Candy, while it can become addictive, it does not have the same addiction potential.

I'm sure they knew it was addictive but they didn't know how addictive and it was the doctors whom prescribed the drugs to relay that information and monitor the patient. It was a systemic failure predicated on lies from Purdue and doctors that were paid off.

Can you give me the timeline for this period of time where people where prescribed opiates without warnings that they were addictive. We agree about almost everything else, but I'm telling you that that part didn't actually happen..

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

What I am repeating is exactly what manufactures of those drugs said despite knowing other wise and stupidly leaving paper trails that they knew otherwise. I literally listened to a doctor say it. But you keep on making shit up and trying your shot at revisionist history.

No, pretending people were taking opiates while believing they weren't addictive is revisionist history, but.... here's your chance:

Show me a single video of a doctor telling a patient that opiates aren't addictive, a billboard, a commercial, anything. Literally anything to prove what you claim as historical fact. I can tell you that it never existed because it didn't happen.

 

[supercorndogs]

What I am repeating is exactly what manufactures of those drugs said despite knowing other wise and stupidly leaving paper trails that they knew otherwise. I literally listened to a doctor say it. But you keep on making shit up and trying your shot at revisionist history.

Then about 10 years later when they couldn't sell safe an nonaddictive any anymore I was sent to a pain doctor and he tried everything he could to get me on some shit to. "This could really improve the quality of your life." He said. "OK here is my cell number if you change your mind." He said. Like a cartoon drug dealer. The only thing he wasn't doing was flipping a coin.

 

[supercorndogs]

So you want us to go dig up corporate memos and private emails from the early 2000s that we're used in the lawsuits against big pharma to prove to you what we already know. Or even better videos of docotors saying it. Fuck off you twat.

 

[hlee]

Convicted VIOLENT Felons (ChiMos, Rapists, Murderers) should be banned for life from voting and guns. The absolutists/anarchists who oppose that have it easy because they never propose any solutions. I'm also against refugees getting full gun rights in 90 days of being in the U.S.- which is the current law.

No, the solution is easy to understand. If the convict cannot be trusted to not be a danger to society (with full rights) upon release, the convict shall not be released.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

So you want us to go dig up corporate memos and private emails from the early 2000s that we're used in the lawsuits against big pharma to prove to you what we already know. Or even better videos of docotors saying it. Fuck off you twat.

So....... not one example right?

You're evidence is "trust me bro".

Every time I see you in a debate, it always ends the same way. You're a clown.

 

[918v]

Opiates have been around for over a hundred years, just like cigarettes, just like everything else. To say people didn’t know or were fooled is dishonest. Just like blaming predatory lenders for the housing market crash. It’s always somebody else’s fault.

Why is is that 99% of the population isn’t addicted to drugs? Maybe because of their choices. And yeah, I’ve seen people go from superstar to asshole as a result of opiate abuse. I have also seen people catch themselves on the way down and turn it around.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

@supercorndogs

Here is one of dozens of stories that I found easily discussing how addictive opiates were, over 100 years ago in this country. They even had oxycontin in the 1800's, but you believe it was invented to trick gullible people into becoming addicts in 2016.

I also want to reiterate that, (and I have no way to prove it), but if there was a way, I'm certain I would be correct, way less than 10% of heroin addicts actually got addicted to pills they were prescribed. That's the same level of deception that has every homeless chump in an old field jacket practicing his thousand yard stare. Meanwhile there aren't actually enough homeless vets out there to fill up a school bus. It's all about mitigating responsibility and garnering sympathy. It's part of the scam.

Inside the Story of America’s 19th-Century Opiate Addiction

Doctors then, as now, overprescribed the painkiller to patients in need, and then, as now, government policy had a distinct bias

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[AngryKoala]

Can you give me the timeline for this period of time where people where prescribed opiates without warnings that they were addictive. We agree about almost everything else, but I'm telling you that that part didn't actually happen..

I would have to dive back into all of it but it was being marketed as a less addictive option which was a lie. The doctors pushed the drug on their patients for kickbacks.

Yes, people probably knew they were addictive but they put trust in their physicians. Taking drugs under the care of a physician is different than a party. That facet dissolves a majority of individual responsibility when the subject matter experts lie.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

I would have to dive back into all of it but it was being marketed as a less addictive option which was a lie. The doctors pushed the drug on their patients for kickbacks.

Yes, people probably knew they were addictive but they put trust in their physicians. Taking drugs under the care of a physician is different than a party. That facet dissolves a majority of individual responsibility when the subject matter experts lie.

Less addictive isn't the same thing as not addictive.

They are less addictive, that's obvious. If you don't think a heroin addict is more dependant than someone taking oxy, then you have lived a very sheltered life. Here's the problem: nobody lied except the addicts, and that's what addicts do, they lie, they steal, they cheat, they deceive. They will say or do anything to get what they want..

 

[AngryKoala]

Less addictive isn't the same thing as not addictive.

They are less addictive, that's obvious. If you don't think a heroin addict is more dependant than someone taking oxy, then you have lived a very sheltered life. Here's the problem: nobody lied except the addicts, and that's what addicts do, they lie, they steal, they cheat, they deceive. They will say or do anything to get what they want..

The problem is they did lie. They said it wasn't as addictive and it most certainly was more addictive. You can have the opinion that the individual is responsible for their decisions and that's fine but to state the physicians and Purdue didn't lie is ludicrous.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

The problem is they did lie. They said it wasn't as addictive and it most certainly was more addictive. You can have the opinion that the individual is responsible for their decisions and that's fine but to state the physicians and Purdue didn't lie is ludicrous.

Didn't lie?

Did they say that it wasn't addictive?

They said it was less addictive than pure opiates. Tell me where the lie is?

Show me if I'm wrong. Not an opinion piece, show me something that proves your point. This entire line of thought can be traced to a "documentary" funded by the attorneys involved in a multi-billion dollar lawsuit. If I'm wrong, prove it.

 

[AngryKoala]

Didn't lie?

Did they say that it wasn't addictive?

They said it was less addictive than pure opiates. Tell me where the lie is?

Show me if I'm wrong. Not an opinion piece, show me something that proves your point. This entire line of thought can be traced to a "documentary" funded by the attorneys involved in a multi-billion dollar lawsuit. If I'm wrong, prove it.

"The U.S. Justice Dept. launched a criminal investigation, and in 2007 the company and three top executives pleaded guilty to fraud for downplaying OxyContin’s risk of addiction. Purdue and the executives were ordered to pay $635 million. The case centered on elements of Purdue’s marketing campaign that suggested to doctors that OxyContin was less addictive than other painkillers."

'You want a description of hell?' OxyContin's 12-hour problem #InvestigatingOxy

OxyContin's 12-hour problem

www.latimes.com

 

[mosin46]

@supercorndogs

Here is one of dozens of stories that I found easily discussing how addictive opiates were, over 100 years ago in this country. They even had oxycontin in the 1800's, but you believe it was invented to trick gullible people into becoming addicts in 2016.

I also want to reiterate that, (and I have no way to prove it), but if there was a way, I'm certain I would be correct, way less than 10% of heroin addicts actually got addicted to pills they were prescribed. That's the same level of deception that has every homeless chump in an old field jacket practicing his thousand yard stare. Meanwhile there aren't actually enough homeless vets out there to fill up a school bus. It's all about mitigating responsibility and garnering sympathy. It's part of the scam.

Inside the Story of America’s 19th-Century Opiate Addiction

Doctors then, as now, overprescribed the painkiller to patients in need, and then, as now, government policy had a distinct bias

www.smithsonianmag.com

glad someone said this. "homelessness" has the same origin 90+% of the time. ie personal actions,choices and consequences. the fentanyl addiction and homeless (esp vet) issues are BS that "our" side flogs constantly. until a few years ago,homelessness,or at least living on the street,was a choice made by an individual. with bidenomics maybe more real victims of the system. i bet one can count on hands,no toes,the # of bronze star+ winners that are homeless. how to know? vet probs get dumped out by the dems knowing that there will be no pushback from the rt on anything alleged to help vets. addiction,at least by the 50s was a well known risk,in the US,of opiate abuse. in china known a looong time by chinese,indians and brit pushers. same with coke,crank,meth,crack. doubt there is 1 inner city 10 year old that doesn't get that. unless i am way out of date,there has never been a script written for fentanyl oral (never used or produced in legit circles) or injectable outside of hospital use. yea patches do/did exist. have no info on their effectiveness or addiction risk. yes the chinese and the cartels seem to have introed fent into their supply chain. looks to be more addicting than heroin. so what? the social prob is the same. kids,esp teens,do and try stupid shit all the time. been that way 100K years plus. that brings up the family/education issues. alcohol is and has always been an socially approved addiction problem and the gateway drug. we all know how well the volstead act worked out. all of this just more grist for the propaganda mill.

 

[wade2big]

"The U.S. Justice Dept. launched a criminal investigation, and in 2007 the company and three top executives pleaded guilty to fraud for downplaying OxyContin’s risk of addiction. Purdue and the executives were ordered to pay $635 million. The case centered on elements of Purdue’s marketing campaign that suggested to doctors that OxyContin was less addictive than other painkillers."

'You want a description of hell?' OxyContin's 12-hour problem #InvestigatingOxy

OxyContin's 12-hour problem

www.latimes.com

Using a DOJ “criminal investigation” or any other tax slave forced funded institution as proof of anything other than gov’t corruption means you have lost the argument.

 

[AngryKoala]

Using a DOJ “criminal investigation” as proof of anything other than corruption means you have lost the argument.

No it really doesn't and I'm not turning this into a big gov lies back and forth with you either. Purdue lost the fraud case for a reason, they lied, they admitted to lying...case over.

Now go adjust your foil hat and wash the shit stains from your recliner.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

"The U.S. Justice Dept. launched a criminal investigation, and in 2007 the company and three top executives pleaded guilty to fraud for downplaying OxyContin’s risk of addiction. Purdue and the executives were ordered to pay $635 million. The case centered on elements of Purdue’s marketing campaign that suggested to doctors that OxyContin was less addictive than other painkillers."

'You want a description of hell?' OxyContin's 12-hour problem #InvestigatingOxy

OxyContin's 12-hour problem

www.latimes.com

Read the entire article. Not a single piece of evidence to support your claim that they lied about addiction. It doesn't even suppose that they lied about adiction, it accuses them of failing to explain how the adaptability of the human body would lead to less than 12 hours of relief from a dose. That's the crux of the legal arguement, nothing at all about anyone claiming that it isn't addictive.

Like I said, you're just repeating a lie..