What's the process of commitment though? Is it just a mass intervention or does he have to put his hand up for it. I don't know if you can generally force anyone against their will to do something unless it's prison or similar incaceration. But who'd know. It's just sad to watch and will be sadder when I just stop giving a ■■■■. If that makes any sense.
To commit someone means to lock them up in a mental institution.
What's the process of commitment though? Is it just a mass intervention or does he have to put his hand up for it. I don't know if you can generally force anyone against their will to do something unless it's prison or similar incarceration. But who'd know. It's just sad to watch and will be sadder when I just stop giving a ■■■■. If that makes any sense.Yep it makes sense. He doesn't have to put his hand up. Sometimes, depending on the person's behaviour it can be at the Judge/Magistrate's discretion. If the person is a danger to themselves and to others, continually breaking the law, there can be intervention. The family can speak up and be a part of the process and compulsory lock up treatment. Often families don't want to be the one, who said go ahead and do it. This happens in absolute desperation where there's no other options left.
There is a Buddhist Rehab Centre in Thailand, (you do not have to be a Buddhist) it has been very successful in terms of people completing the program and staying clean from all sorts of addictions. It is no walk in the park and quite brutal particularly, the first three or four weeks. There’s nowhere to run to, its in the middle of the jungle. Its the difference between going to jail and being some one’s ■■■■■ and doing more drugs or going into rehabilitation. People stay for several months. Its not cheap but thanks very much to the AFL, its possible. It is a unique program where people get clean, learn how to live without their drug of choice and re-learn life skills.
Its a chance because sure as hell, if no one does anything, Ben will euthanize himself which is against the law in this country.
Yeah I get that bit but wanted to understand process.
Ironically, Cousins is something of an argument against the belief that drug addiction can be addressed by decriminalisation.Guy faced absolutely no legal consequences for his drug use for years. For him, it WASN’T illegal, in any meaningful way. Still it turned him into … Whatever he is now.
That strand is thinner than WADAs argument.
Don’t think you can make that connection.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not one if the LOCK UP ALL TEH ADDICTZ crowd & I think drug laws for stuff like usage should be loosened. But as cousins demonstrates, simply being free of legal consequences for your drug use doesn’t mean it won’t ■■■■ you up.
Decriminalisation aint a magic bullet.
yep, tis like the good old, ■■■ cannabis has so many beneficial uses in such and such, it should be legal.
Failing to acknowledge that the elemants that get you high, are generally taken out of legit medical used cannabis, so their argument is invalid to begin with.i also don’t see them arguing to legalise cocaine and herion cos they help in “pain” management too, and were specficially designed for that purpose.
Also on the swiss model, if it works for them great, but what is there culture like in general ?
I’m not sure it’d necessarily translate into our culture or alot of cultures who are based on over indulging in substances, even legal ones.
We can’t even remotely curb binge drinking and trying to knock each other out every weekend, good luck adding proper drugs to the equation.
You have so little idea it’s almost laughable.
Agreed.
If I can just address one claim, I would much rather the night clubbing scene be filled with people on (safe, legal) MDMA wanting to dance and love one another than having had 16 beers with every 5th bloke being a turbo looking to knock someone’s block off.
If the AFL cared they should have acted when it was brought to their attention back in the early days. They didn’t.
In an ideal world, the powers that be would have the brains to realise the war on drugs was lost a long time ago. Better to legalise and I realise a lot of people will be against this but at least that way, the whole scene would be regulated and safer. Until the next craze comes along.Ironically, Cousins is something of an argument against the belief that drug addiction can be addressed by decriminalisation.Guy faced absolutely no legal consequences for his drug use for years. For him, it WASN’T illegal, in any meaningful way. Still it turned him into … Whatever he is now.
That strand is thinner than WADAs argument.
Don’t think you can make that connection.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not one if the LOCK UP ALL TEH ADDICTZ crowd & I think drug laws for stuff like usage should be loosened. But as cousins demonstrates, simply being free of legal consequences for your drug use doesn’t mean it won’t ■■■■ you up.
Decriminalisation aint a magic bullet.
yep, tis like the good old, ■■■ cannabis has so many beneficial uses in such and such, it should be legal.
Failing to acknowledge that the elemants that get you high, are generally taken out of legit medical used cannabis, so their argument is invalid to begin with.i also don’t see them arguing to legalise cocaine and herion cos they help in “pain” management too, and were specficially designed for that purpose.
Also on the swiss model, if it works for them great, but what is there culture like in general ?
I’m not sure it’d necessarily translate into our culture or alot of cultures who are based on over indulging in substances, even legal ones.
We can’t even remotely curb binge drinking and trying to knock each other out every weekend, good luck adding proper drugs to the equation.
You have so little idea it’s almost laughable.
Agreed.
If I can just address one claim, I would much rather the night clubbing scene be filled with people on (safe, legal) MDMA wanting to dance and love one another than having had 16 beers with every 5th bloke being a turbo looking to knock someone’s block off.
If the AFL cared they should have acted when it was brought to their attention back in the early days. They didn't.Yes and No. Maybe they were waiting for someone to contact them first before offering. We don't know what approaches have been made. What we do know is that the AFL are into the good look for the brand.
I watched a young kid, in and out of rehab, walked out of rehab one night, got some stuff, took too much and collapsed in a phone box and rang us. By the time we found him it was too late. I have never forgotten him or how I felt watching his family at his funeral and how they blamed themselves for not doing enough sooner.
What is enough? When is enough? Good questions and different answers for different people.
What's the process of commitment though? Is it just a mass intervention or does he have to put his hand up for it. I don't know if you can generally force anyone against their will to do something unless it's prison or similar incaceration. But who'd know. It's just sad to watch and will be sadder when I just stop giving a ■■■■. If that makes any sense.
It is really, really, really hard to get someone committed against their will. Obviously judges and psychs are reluctant to make such a huge call, but also, spots in secure wards are as rare as hens teeth, and every mental health professional (and I suspect many, many family members and loved ones of people with certain varieties of schizophrenia, psychoses, etc etc) have been begging for more since forever. It’s not like the frigging 1800s or something where there’s an asylum around every corner. To get committed long-term, then you basically have to kill someone and then plead insanity, and convince everyone that you’ll probably do it again if you’re released.
Normally the best you can do is get someone in a secure ward for a few days after a suicide attempt or something, after which they are quite likely to get released again once the immediate crisis is over. And that’s even if you DO have the best medical insurance available. If you don’t, well, the hospital might send out a Crisis Assessment Team to your house who’ll talk to you for a bit, arrange you an appointment with a psych and then wish you luck.
Most people with severe mental or addiction issues that lead them to be violent or dangerous will end up on the street, in prison, or in a grave. There’s really not a lot of help or options out there, no matter how much money you are able to throw at the problem.
Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
When they legalise it, what happens to the small-time dealers and drug kingpins. Do they just give up their flashy lifestyles and go back to turning an honest dollar?
The small time guys I know just do it on the side cos they can and/or leftovers from what they use personally (N=4 or 5)
Our mental health system is rubbish. Its a damn disgrace. Lots of good people trying to do best they can with very little resources and funding. Jail is not the place for the mentally ill but; you’re right, that’s where they mostly end up because there is nowhere else left to go.What's the process of commitment though? Is it just a mass intervention or does he have to put his hand up for it. I don't know if you can generally force anyone against their will to do something unless it's prison or similar incaceration. But who'd know. It's just sad to watch and will be sadder when I just stop giving a ■■■■. If that makes any sense.It is really, really, really hard to get someone committed against their will. Obviously judges and psychs are reluctant to make such a huge call, but also, spots in secure wards are as rare as hens teeth, and every mental health professional (and I suspect many, many family members and loved ones of people with certain varieties of schizophrenia, psychoses, etc etc) have been begging for more since forever. It’s not like the frigging 1800s or something where there’s an asylum around every corner. To get committed long-term, then you basically have to kill someone and then plead insanity, and convince everyone that you’ll probably do it again if you’re released.
Normally the best you can do is get someone in a secure ward for a few days after a suicide attempt or something, after which they are quite likely to get released again once the immediate crisis is over. And that’s even if you DO have the best medical insurance available. If you don’t, well, the hospital might send out a Crisis Assessment Team to your house who’ll talk to you for a bit, arrange you an appointment with a psych and then wish you luck.
Most people with severe mental or addiction issues that lead them to be violent or dangerous will end up on the street, in prison, or in a grave. There’s really not a lot of help or options out there, no matter how much money you are able to throw at the problem.
Crims are far more creative and industrious than our law makers. They will find something else to invest in.Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
When they legalise it, what happens to the small-time dealers and drug kingpins. Do they just give up their flashy lifestyles and go back to turning an honest dollar?
What's the process of commitment though? Is it just a mass intervention or does he have to put his hand up for it. I don't know if you can generally force anyone against their will to do something unless it's prison or similar incarceration. But who'd know. It's just sad to watch and will be sadder when I just stop giving a ■■■■. If that makes any sense.Yep it makes sense. He doesn't have to put his hand up. Sometimes, depending on the person's behaviour it can be at the Judge/Magistrate's discretion. If the person is a danger to themselves and to others, continually breaking the law, there can be intervention. The family can speak up and be a part of the process and compulsory lock up treatment. Often families don't want to be the one, who said go ahead and do it. This happens in absolute desperation where there's no other options left.There is a Buddhist Rehab Centre in Thailand, (you do not have to be a Buddhist) it has been very successful in terms of people completing the program and staying clean from all sorts of addictions. It is no walk in the park and quite brutal particularly, the first three or four weeks. There’s nowhere to run to, its in the middle of the jungle. Its the difference between going to jail and being some one’s ■■■■■ and doing more drugs or going into rehabilitation. People stay for several months. Its not cheap but thanks very much to the AFL, its possible. It is a unique program where people get clean, learn how to live without their drug of choice and re-learn life skills. In Australia, there is a men only drug rehab centre just out of Coffs Harbour called Adele. I have read all their material and blurbs and I like the sound of it but I haven’t found anyone who has been there to talk to. Its also very affordable. Does re-skilling programs and has rigid rules about expected behaviours.
Definitely worth a phone call.Its a chance because sure as hell, if no one does anything now, Ben will slowly euthanize himself which is a crime in this country.
Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
Not sure how reducing the cost and improving the quality and availability of drugs is going to reduce the number of those dependent on drugs.
Tax going into programs that treat addiction just off the top of my head, or going into better schooling so that people have a better chance at life so that these issues are tackled on a societal level rather than an individual one.
Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
Not sure how reducing the cost and improving the quality and availability of drugs is going to reduce the number of those dependent on drugs.
Reducing the number of people using a substance would only be one aim. Recognising that there are a lot of people who prefer other things to alcohol, and allowing them access to a regulated, safe, and reasonably priced supply, just like alcohol and tobacco users have, and thereby allowing them to become productive members of society would probably be top of the tree for me.
Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
Not sure how reducing the cost and improving the quality and availability of drugs is going to reduce the number of those dependent on drugs.
Reducing the number of people using a substance would only be one aim. Recognising that there are a lot of people who prefer other things to alcohol, and allowing them access to a regulated, safe, and reasonably priced supply, just like alcohol and tobacco users have, and thereby allowing them to become productive members of society would probably be top of the tree for me.
It all comes down to an economic argument for me.
At the moment we spend an ungodly amount of money trying to stop, prosecute and control illegal drugs. Which we are so bad at we openly acknowledge that a large proportion of the pitpulation experiments or uses illegal drug regularly. America has shown that if double down on the money and prosecution all you get is more people in jail and the same problems.
Use the money,time and effort of government department for education, treatment and rehabilitation and I think you will find a far better system.
It won’t solve the core problems but, based on current evidence from places like Portugal, it will improve them and save a ridiculous amount of money in the process.
Ironically, Cousins is something of an argument against the belief that drug addiction can be addressed by decriminalisation.Guy faced absolutely no legal consequences for his drug use for years. For him, it WASN’T illegal, in any meaningful way. Still it turned him into … Whatever he is now.
That strand is thinner than WADAs argument.
Don’t think you can make that connection.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not one if the LOCK UP ALL TEH ADDICTZ crowd & I think drug laws for stuff like usage should be loosened. But as cousins demonstrates, simply being free of legal consequences for your drug use doesn’t mean it won’t ■■■■ you up.
Decriminalisation aint a magic bullet.
yep, tis like the good old, ■■■ cannabis has so many beneficial uses in such and such, it should be legal.
Failing to acknowledge that the elemants that get you high, are generally taken out of legit medical used cannabis, so their argument is invalid to begin with.i also don’t see them arguing to legalise cocaine and herion cos they help in “pain” management too, and were specficially designed for that purpose.
Also on the swiss model, if it works for them great, but what is there culture like in general ?
I’m not sure it’d necessarily translate into our culture or alot of cultures who are based on over indulging in substances, even legal ones.
We can’t even remotely curb binge drinking and trying to knock each other out every weekend, good luck adding proper drugs to the equation.
You have so little idea it’s almost laughable.
Agreed.
If I can just address one claim, I would much rather the night clubbing scene be filled with people on (safe, legal) MDMA wanting to dance and love one another than having had 16 beers with every 5th bloke being a turbo looking to knock someone’s block off.
Read about the programs in the Netherlands and how successful they are and how the crime rate has decreased. As a country we are not there yet and I don’t know when we will be. We can’t build prisons fast enough to house criminals and juvies, most are inside for drug offences of all kinds, fraud as a result of gambling and offences related to alcohol abuse and violence and unpaid fines. The system’s working really well, isn’t it? For whom?Good points made. We're seemingly getting a bit better and not jailing people purely for possession. I think society is learning that not all addicts are necessarily scum. If they physically don't harm anyone else but themselves, then they should have free will to inject whatever they ■■■■■■ like. However, it's not as though decriminilisation will lead to "free" drugs, they will still have to financially support their habit. Chances are they will still do this via burglaries, armed robberies etc. I don't see how we'll ever stop this. It's not something where a perfect solution will ever be found.The govt. could have clinics where the users are registered and are helped with their addiction. The govt. would need to supply all drugs (will never happen) with a view to weaning the addicts of their addiction. This should (1) minimize the need for crime to support the addicts’ habit and stop the dealers, manufacturers etc profiting from illegal drugs. Would be (2) costly to the government but if run well and if successful there would be less need for these clinics and therefore reduce costs as hopefully the number of addicts are reduced. So much more can be said but essentially the government need to invest on a different and radical approach to eradicate the use of illegal drugs.
(1) Almost eliminate it completely I think.
(2) Not overly costly, the drugs will be good quality and very cheap. The current illegality of them pushes up their cost enormously.
Awesome post.
Not sure how reducing the cost and improving the quality and availability of drugs is going to reduce the number of those dependent on drugs.
Reducing the number of people using a substance would only be one aim. Recognising that there are a lot of people who prefer other things to alcohol, and allowing them access to a regulated, safe, and reasonably priced supply, just like alcohol and tobacco users have, and thereby allowing them to become productive members of society would probably be top of the tree for me.
It all comes down to an economic argument for me.
At the moment we spend an ungodly amount of money trying to stop, prosecute and control illegal drugs. Which we are so bad at we openly acknowledge that a large proportion of the pitpulation experiments or uses illegal drug regularly. America has shown that if double down on the money and prosecution all you get is more people in jail and the same problems.
Use the money,time and effort of government department for education, treatment and rehabilitation and I think you will find a far better system.
It won’t solve the core problems but, based on current evidence from places like Portugal, it will improve them and save a ridiculous amount of money in the process.