Cocaine Destroying Rural Ireland

I have a friend who is an addiction counsellor and she reckons that if drugs disappeared, many of societies problems would be solved. I think that's a silly point of view.

There's no doubt that drugs and alcohol are a big factor in physical and sexual assaults, presentations to A&E departments, muggings/burglaries to feed a habit but many of them actually have uses as medicines like morphine for severe pain and stimulants for adhd. It's also arguable that civilization would never have developed without alcohol.

Just looking at countries with a high rate of abstinence from the biggest legal drug (alcohol), they all seem to be in the Middle East and Africa, not exactly the most developed places.

I'd take your friend's qualified and presumably, experienced, point of view over anyone else, as would most people. As usual with humans, it is only when kids arrive that logic sets in. I see one other poster here tried to claim that addiction and " responsibility of use " are two separate things, which is, of course, laughable.

A few sleepless months worrying about your son or daughter soon focuses the mind on that claim. Almost every addict I've met began their life of addiction claiming " but I use drugs responsibly".

You see it in every Rural Pharmacy in the country.

" 24 Nurophen plus please"

" what's it for"

" My mums period pains, she sent me down"

" She's 62, isn't she?"

Down to the next chemist in the next village.

" 24 Nurophen plus please"

" what's it for?"

"Back pain"

" There you go"

And on and on it goes. Multiple pharmacy's per week, every week. Just so you can responsibly get out of bed and get the kids out to school.

It's not just Cocaine. In fact we are on the cusp of a National Coedine epidemic which is much, much, much worse. Addicts are the only responsible users of drugs. That fact that a regular user of any drug is at the stage where they consider their usage to be "responsible" is practically the definition of the first stages of addiction.

If that happens to be a good description of anyone here, it's not too late to stop, especially if you have a family.

I accept this as a contributing factor, but it's still not getting at the underlying causes. People are not doing drugs because there's less police around or because the dealers are finding it easier to operate. The dealers are taking advantage of a situation that already exists: work out what that is and no one will require their services.

The question wasn't why is cocaine more prominent, it's why are people getting addicted to it? (And by addicted, I mean where it becomes a problem: not the casual useage).

That gives an idea of the level of death annually attributable to alcohol: 4 deaths per day; or circa 1500/ year.

I remember trying to do an exercise to get my head around fentanyl epidemic in the USA; from my rough numbers if Ireland had an identical problem it would be circa 1200/annum.

Fentanyl issue in USA is horrendous and is worth reading up on, particularly in certain areas; but as bad as it is its still less than alcohol deaths per annum here.

Two hours well spent for anyhow convinced that even social alcohol drinking is harmless.

A habitual drug user describing themselves as responsible makes me think you have a rather narrow understanding of responsibility. You mean, I assume, personal health-wise only? Like, you don't OD or go around on a rape rampage while high? You're managing or accepting the damage to your brain, lungs, nose yada yada.

But in terms of societal responsibility there's a rather large difference which is difficult to ignore. There are of course personal dangers from any medicine and alcohol, but those are certainly not illegal. Your class A habit is fueling drug cartels, crime etc. How are you rationalizing that as being socially responsible?

Whether alcohol contributed to civilization or not doesn't mean that it is needed to sustain that civilization afterwards.

Yes obviously there are uses for drugs in a medical setting and even if more strictly controlled some medication would be abused but a few people abusing drugs is a hell of a lot better than a huge amount of the population doing drugs and all the problems that causes and the trauma that gets passed down generation to generation.

I read this "great article" in the printed edition (library). He compares dealers to the Black and Tans? says cannabis is a dangerous and gateway drug. His final 3 short sentences are comedy gold. "The war can be won", more than one U.S. president said something similar. "Ireland is small and it's hard to hide a crime" Prisons are about a million times smaller with 24/7 security and we can't keep drugs out of those institutions. "We just need more resources" How much and from where? The Health budget, close a few hospitals? Education, shut down some schools? Increase taxes? with an election soon, I doubt it. As you said rural Garda stations have closed, Justice Dept also has a limited budget. Quality journalism, ha, but thanks for the post, it reminds me why I stopped buying newspapers. ,

I am not the one you addressed your question but I can offer you my answer.

Q.

How are you rationalizing that as being socially responsible?

A.

The very same way everyone is rationalizing drinking alcohol which is known carcinogen so alcohol consumption can't be and isn't socially responsible. Mainly considering how many people drink alcohol VS minuscule percentage of society who consume other currently illegal drugs.

The years 1870 - 1914 are called 'The Great Binge', when everyone was off their chunk on legal, over-the-counter medications. It culminated in World War 1.

The Great Binge - Wikipedia

No. It did not culminated in WWI. It was not a cause of it in any way shape or form. It ended because of laws coming in effect which outlawed most of the substances.

And while they were legal even though there were some problems with certain percentage of people abusing them society was still functioning and life was normal. Pretty much the same situation as it is today except that East India Company was substituted by Mexican cartels and government lost control and taxable income.

And why did they make that network of treaties and alliances?

Largely because the three cousins of the ruling royal families of the time were off-chunk paranoid and hated each other. Their cabinets were greedy, off-chunk, paranoid, hated each other and their subjects were mostly just off-chunk.

King George V - Morphine and cocaine addict

Kaiser Willhelm II - Huge Morhpine and laudanum user from an early age

Tsar Nicholas II - Cocaine addict. Cocaine was called 'The Tsar of Drugs' in Russia.

I replied to a post above that stated

'There are examples throughout the world and history that supervised and legal use of any addictive substance does not end up with chaos or civilizational collapse'

Arguably, the free availablity of drugs and alcohol contributed to the first World War. In fact, if you were to view history through a lens of substance misusers and their influence on power and politics it would be a real revelation.

perhaps a small nuance on this is that there is at least some amount of fair trade alcohol, and perhaps even fair trade hash(eg small home grown etc) Not trying to apologise for the massive behemoths like Diageo who want us all addicted to their wares but there is a credible amount of commercially and socially reasonable alcohol use.

However, there is absolutely no fair trade or craft cocaine ,

Apropos of nothing, Diageo are the mains sponsors of the 'Drink Aware' campaign. It's sole message is that alcohol is not addictive, is not destructive in and of itself and it is not the problem - the problem is you, the consumer. A very 'guns don't kill people' message. It's an extremely cynical way to protect their profits. The gambling industry is arguable far worse, but that's probably for another thread.

This id agree with, but are they.really saying alcohol is not addictive? (Honest question - not in Ireland, so don't lnow)