There is currently 1 user online.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 12:47
Avo, I can only read so far and then I just stop. Why do you believe that someone is trying to instill anything in you? It is just an example that just about everyone has done something wrong or illegal in the course of our addicitons. Ironic's "I think Clara should have gone to jail..." when the fact is how many of us SHOULDN'T? Penny pointed out that the difference between criminals and others is that the criminal got caught. There is no difference for me between my DUIs and someone else's drug scores. The point is that there is harm all around even if it isn't directly in your view.
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 16:37
Miss Clara, you were definitely trying to do that. You pulled me into a conversation that was between yourself, Ironic, and Ben; "Avo broke the law when she was using" which has nothing to do with dui. The topic was different: Should a person that was busted for dui several times go to jail? You proceeded to use me as an example of a person committing "drug crimes" and then brought up the deaths of 40 bad ass violent drug traffickers and suggested that I had something to do with their deaths.
You are like a kid that wants to take down her sister because she is being punished for coming home after curfew, "But Martha ditched school", "Why don't you ground her too?".
Truth about AA: http://orange-papers.org/menu1.html
Expose AA: http://www.expaa.org/
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 16:40
Not really. And I notice that when Penny pointed out to you that the difference between you and the ciminal was just getting caught, there was a dance about that. If you want to make it about you, fine. What it is about is that just about everyone does stuff in their addictions that they could be prosecuted for...
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 16:50
"just about everyone does stuff in their addictions that they could be prosecuted for..."
Clara won't be answering this herself as her husband has forbidden her to read my posts, but is this true? I don't think my partner did anything he could be prosecuted for, even when alcohol addiction became a serious problem for him. Getting addicted to alcohol is not a criminal offence, and although some people (like Clara) thinks this gives them the excuse to drive drunk, etc. not everyone with an adddiction problem feels the need to break the law and/or endanger the lives of other people.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 18:51
'just about everyone does stuff in their addictions that they could be prosecuted for...'
Clara won't be answering this herself as her husband has forbidden her to read my posts, but is this true? I don't think my partner did anything he could be prosecuted for, even when alcohol addiction became a serious problem for him. Getting addicted to alcohol is not a criminal offence, and although some people (like Clara) thinks this gives them the excuse to drive drunk, etc. not everyone with an adddiction problem feels the need to break the law and/or endanger the lives of other people." ~HumanSpirit
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 18:28
Clara says: "If you want to make it about you, fine".
No Clara, you made it about me. I was in the grandstands minding my own business.
If I had got caught one time I might have wised up a lot sooner. Some people do and some don't.
It's pathetic that one of the persons that got caught several times not only continued to re-offend, she blames the police for having it out for her.
Oh, and let's not forget that your biggest regret was crashing the Lexus. This after you got sober, clean and serene, made those amends, and started practicing no principles in all of your affairs.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 19:52
I didn't say that was my biggest regret. I have a lot of regrets about past behavior. I DID think the cops were out for me. That's part of the thinking and denial. Even on this board, you aren't an alcoholic with the wee bit I would drink. Weren't you one of them, Avo, part of the pack that would chant 6 pack Clara? Posters were coming out of the woodwork to tell me I had a problem with DUIs, not alcohol. Being in AA doesn't change how I thought at the time.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 20:39
Never chanted 6-pack Clara. I have been trying to be cordial.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 20:41
I think "mature" might be the word. I was frankly astonished that anyone say those things to someone that clearly had a problem with booze, but what the heck. My apologies because I thought I had read a post from you that dissed the amount. I remember being surprised about it.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 20:59
Generally good people make a ton of mistakes in their life. That includes getting emotional and having a reaction. Honestly I have to bite my lip to keep from saying things. Like my buying drugs, I could give good detail about it and kind of want to but I also don't want to expose myself online. For the 1000/1 shot the "wrong" person stumbles across it. Besides, it would look like I'm offering excuses and want to appear like I was better than other users and neither is true. I really don't think it matters, we're all similar and victims of ourselves. It's just circumstantial....Lol and I didn't comment on your sherry and crab except for ask a question that was actually serious. I do think that the entire exchange was rather humorous.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 22:35
My friend who had 24 years of sobriety in AA had this advice - if you are going to drink, get enough.
I honestly see no reason for multiple DUIs. BUT, this does fit within the framework of "blaming that nasty disease" that is doing "pushups in the parking lot."
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 18:59
Lol, I suppose so. That's if you define "dancing" as admitting that a person has broken the law in the past and is willing to discuss what the punishments are and should be. I posted that at least twice. You must have gotten tired of reading.
A couple of things I've learned before, and especially AFTER AA: To take responsibility for your actions as well as credit for accomplishments. Don't take on more than your share of guilt because that could cripple a person. Humans have enough responsibility dealing with their own demons let alone feeling the need to take on extra baggage that doesn't belong to them.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 15:24
Spoken like a true junkie, in denial. Jesus, I haven't heard this amount of bull since I was using years back.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 16:23
Though not as horrible as having six drinks and getting behind the wheel.
Since when does medical marijuana exist in Texas? No one gives a shit if you've got a medical card in a non medical state, it just isn't valid.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 16:27
Maybe, maybe not. You might pay attention to the drug wars in Juarez before making such an ignorant statement. Everyone in the drug use business contributes to that.
MMJ doesn't exist in Texas. I have addressed this on the board, Ironic. I live 9 miles over the border from New Mexico, and I got it there through a source connected with my nephew. I don't have a medical card. It would be illegal for me to have it.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 15:50
Juarez has very little to do with what goes on in South Florida..maybe you are the one who is ignorant about whose turf this is. I also believe 100% that it is not my fault or any junkie's fault that your drug is legal and ours is not. So alcohol had better legal representation a century ago, yay!! That is all that means. Alcoholics do NOT have some moral high ground over drug users, I should put THAT in my signature. Alcoholics who use that argument tend to pull it out as a last resort and I always get a hearty chuckle from hearing someone sound so passionately deluded. Now I am not saying that is what you just said here but I get that vibe from you, that you feel that way.
The marijuana smoked here is mostly grown locally. Some is shipped from medical states for a higher price. The cocaine comes from South America. The heroin is from there too, I believe. We don't get black tar like is out West and in Cali, we get brown powder.
Besides, I don't think Avo used heroin at all, and pills were MUCH more readily available (and half the price they are now) during the extreme part of my using. Can you tell me what the hell Juarez has to do with oxycodone please?
Point is, your purchasing marijuana has about as much to do with Ciudad Juarez and Mexican violence as does any drugs I would buy here.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 16:12
It's coming here for a reason, Ironic, and it comes through a number of Texas border towns, especialy El Paso. They have interesting stories they tell. The homegrown drug is meth.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 15:34
Can I have a six pack and a speedball to go, please!!!!!
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 13:11
She evidently did not, however. I should also have gone to jail - every day I was behind the wheel, for 20 years - because I did not draw a sober breath in all that time. But I never got busted. I was criminal, with arrogant intent, but never got arrested.
“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 21:26
how was work today?
Alcoholics Anonymous: MyNotGodHasItCovered®http://www.expaa.org/http://bereanresearch.com/http://badrecovery.blogspot.com/NOT AA:
Rational Recovery, SOS, HAMShttp://alcoholabusesolutions.com/
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 21:53
Great, baby, great! Got one international and two national sponsors!
Anything else you're gonna have to superGoogle.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 22:02
So you follow in Bill W's revered footsteps of stealing, is that it?
Persephone In Exile
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 08:14
Good heavens. The last thing the United States is more jails.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 13:13
O rly? So it's all right with you if people commit serious crimes, go to court, and get their sentences knocked down to something akin to community service? What are they going to learn from that experience? That they can do it again without fear of sanction. Yeah, good plan.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 13:40
Losing your driving privileges is the best deterent of the punishments. Each day you have to deal with that consequence of your action/crime.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 14:04
Not true. When I got my DUIs, the State couldn't revoke my general driving privileges because I had an out of state license. Tennessee didn't participate in an interstate compact at that time, and I kept that license for 10 years despite living in MD. All MD could have done is revoke my privileges to drive in that state. People rive on suspended, revoked or limited licenses all the time. Because we were so convinced that the police were watching me, my neighbor and I swapped cars. She drove my new Lexus while I drove her 10 year old Honda.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 23:38
Good to know you practice a program of "rigorous honesty."
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 14:07
So naive. Do you honestly believe people whose licenses have been suspended or revoked don't drive?
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 17:16
Lots of them do not you know this. Dw and du I offenders are not hardened criminals you know this
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 18:52
I don't distinguish between degrees of crime for the purposes of this discussion. If it is a crime there is a court appearance and either restitution or consequence must be paid. I wasn't a "hardened criminal" for the 20 years I was out there driving drunk, but I was a criminal. I skated through a field sobriety check even though I was clearly intoxicated. They did not give me a breathalyzer. This was long ago, before so much attention was paid to drunk driving. The level of criminal savvy has nothing to do with the fact that DUI drivers are criminals.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 19:07
I wonder why did they not pay as much attention to it back then? There was a day when even having an open container wasn't that big of a deal. Do you think it really just took them that long to realize just how dangerous it is to drink and drive?
Troll free AA critical forumhttp://www.expaa.org/
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 20:24
Mothers Against Drunk Driving is a huge lobby and strides have been made over the past 20 years. I remember when a dui would call for .15. Then it went to .10 and now .08, although it can be less and you can still be prosecuted. I remember when the cops would just give you a ride home. In LA, you could pull up the Daquire Huts and get a drink to go. I don't know if that is still true.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 20:31
You seem to know a lot about drink driving.
Funny, when I visited the States a few years back, I spent most of the 2 weeks in bars. Most of the people in the bars would get pissed and drive home at closing time. A site to behold.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 20:35
I did it for a long time, Hinge. It's an embarrassment.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 19:11
63 years old? Sober for 32? That means you quit at age 31. 20 years driving drunk. You were driving drunk at age 11? Is this a little slip up Marietta?...lol
God damn it, get me a whiskey
Bill W, Deathbed
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 19:57
"Say it ain't so Joe".
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 20:11
But I think I've got it right. Either I've misunderstood or Marietta's lying through her teeth.
I just remembered - Marietta was 27 years sober - that almost works. Oh, but it was only a couple of years since her last meeting.? Confusing...lol
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 20:20
becket/marrrietts just slipped in HIS story.
However long the claim to soberness is, keep in mind that he has been taking medication for 27 years as revealed here on the OPF.
So as is the case with Bill W, the sober days claimed is false and a lie.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 09:04
it doesn't matter if you don't distinguish between degrees of crime for this discussion or amid any other circumstances. The fact of the matter is there are differences, a hardened criminal continues to break the law, while incarcerated, after incarceration, a hardened criminal will not have an honor system & will not have the control or inclination to abide a judges sentence out on the street & will still drive. Law abiding citizens who do not live the life of a hardened criminal & did break the law by dui or dwi, the majority will comply with the sentences, will obey the judge, will not drive, etc. etc. They are not hardened criminals & will not behave as a hardened criminal will behave.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 14:57
Becket, yes, it IS quite all right with me if the corporate owned prison system that has emerged in the last 2 decades in this country is dampened down a bit. People are incarcerated for next to nothing these days, frequently because they are underprivileged and minorities. I don't think people should be put in jail for crimes such as minor possession while violent offenders are let go, which is frequently the case, nor do I think we should have the high rate of felony convictions for minor drug offenses that cripple people for life. I also don't think Clara should have been incarcerated for her DUI nor anyone else when there are other options, even if I don't like the options. Once people enter the criminal justice system they are frequently so burdened that they never ever escape it. The US has one of the highest rates of incarceration for women, for children and for ethnic minorities in the civilized world, and I find it rather shameful. Then again, I'm an unabashed progressive and not the least bit ashamed of it, though I rarely bring my politics to this forum.
BTW, no, I didn't say "serious crimes", that was your rewording. I don't consider Patricia Spottedcrow's sale of $31 dollars worth of weed to have been a "serious crime", and it certainly wasn't a violent one. And that's just one small example. I wonder how many of the prisoners in Alabama and Georgia being considered for cheap labor at the moment are in jail for "serious crimes", as well.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 15:10
I don't consider her sale of $31 worth of weed a serious crime either. But getting behind the wheel under the influence is a pretty big deal. More people get hurt behind that than do by walking to the beach and getting stoned. Do you consider aiming and firing a loaded car onto a freeway, with someone who is measurably intoxicated at the wheel, a minor crime? I consider that a serious crime whether someone gets hurt or not.
The entire system should be reevaluated from the bottom to the top and restructured. And that is not going to happen in my lifetime, I'm pretty sure. Too many politicians on the take have too much to lose by less demonizing of pot and more demonizing of booze. Just ain't gonna happen.
Just think, if they funneled every criminal through Huntsville in Texas there would be no live criminals left.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 15:44
I suppose it's the frequency. Are you really going to put a good portion of college students in this country in jail for making a youthful mistake? I'm not saying that to minimize the seriousness of driving while drunk, not at all, but I think it's better to drive that point home to them in a way that doesn't destroy their lives at the same time. I don't feel that way about repeat offenders, but most people who aren't even close to being problem drinkers or alcoholics have driven drunk (or at least legally drunk) at least once in their lives. That doesn't make it right, but it does make the fact that it is usually a "slap on the wrist" or a fine instead of more severe punishments make a bit more sense.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 16:10
You said: "That doesn't make it right, but it does make the fact that it is usually a "slap on the wrist" or a fine instead of more severe punishments make a bit more sense."
I disagree. I'm not saying jail either, but (IMO) it should definitely be form of punishment that resembles the significant danger of the crime. That one time, even for the non alcoholic or occasional drinker is enough to destroy lives. I don't think that it should be about substances. This is about carrying a gun and waving it around recklessly. Or at least that is how it should be portrayed, even if the intent was just to make a loud noise on Independence Day. The Lightfoot sentence was preposterous and insane and sets no example because it's realized that the sentence is not in the norm and doesn't fit the crime. I think it needs to be shown people that dui won't be tolerated. If it isn't harsh enough the first time, it's gonna happen again. And it shouldn't be taken as lightly as it is. **Back in the day, I did my share of dui. I regret it and now really wonder how I could be so thoughtless. I guess because a lot of people do/did it often and over and over. My very distanced brother (I have a lot) that was a drinker killed a woman walking her dog when he was drunk. Never been arrested before, wonderful man, hard working. He ended up in prison for years along with the rapists and murderers. That struck me, knocked some sense into me like a bat would. It can happen that first and only time (he had dui before though, just never caught) and those first times need to be avoided too. What to do? I’m not sure. And I don’t want a life destroyed by it either. I really think that house arrest is a good idea in some cases. Something along those lines, with mandated ongoing classes. Maybe a DUI jail. Something that isn’t crippling but could make a difference. What happens now just doesn’t deter enough.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 17:58
The thing of it for me really is that many people consider me complete scum to have gotten addicted to pills. They consider me no better, really, than the people currently behind bars who were caught buying illegally. I probably could've been prosecuted, also, for what I did. I've asked the world for mercy, in a sense, though, and some who are in prisons are in for far less severe problems than I had. What good is having understanding extended to me if I cannot feel it for others who got caught? Who did mess up and drive home from the bars they were getting (probably less) messed up (than me) in?
I just don't see how I could live through all that and have nothing but compassion for people who are stuck in the criminal justice system, which is a horrible thing in my eyes. I'm asking for compassion for the abuses that are being done in rehabs when there are plenty of people who would just as soon say it is our fault for getting addicted, that we should be screamed sense into at that point in our lives. I cannot not have compassion for someone struggling legally just because they got caught in the grips of using and drinking. They made horrible mistakes. So have we all. That's just where I stand on it all. I deserve no compassion whatsoever if I'm not able to honestly feel it for others.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 18:37
because I really don't <strong>know</strong> what the best way to handle drinking (or drugging for that matter) is. But I know a couple of things that <strong>aren't</the right thing to do. One of them is to send people to a completely ineffectual program based on superstitious faith healing. The other is using shame and guilt in a different context.
Oops, don't know what happened to the rest of my post. Will try again.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 18:41
MADD victim impact panel
Seeking to reduce the frequency of recidivism, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) developed an intervention termed the Victim Impact Panel (VIP) in which drunk drivers are confronted with the real-life consequences caused by other offenders. People whose lives have been devastated by a drunk driver, often through the loss of a loved one, volunteer to speak to an auditorium of offenders, who typically are court-ordered to attend. The presentations are usually heart-rending, with high emotional impact from these first-person stories.
Does attending a MADD-VIP prevent future offenses? One study followed 6,702 drunk driving offenders who reported whether or not they had been mandated to attend a VIP (C’de Baca, Lapham, Liang & Skipper, 2001). Among first offenders, VIP attendance had no effect on the likelihood of a subsequent offense. Among female repeat offenders, however, those who attended a VIP were twice as likely to be re-arrested for drunk driving, even after controlling for other risk factors. The study was uncontrolled, however, and a more definitive trial was recently conducted by Woodall and colleagues. In this study, judges were persuaded to randomly assign drunk driving offenders to attend or not attend a VIP in addition to the usual legal consequences. The findings were similar. Among first offenders there was no effect on the likelihood of recidivism, but for those with more than one prior offense, attending the VIP was associated in both men and women with significantly higher rates of repeat offense.
Why were such interventions ever expected to work? The underlying mental model for confrontation seems to be that “if you can just make people feel bad enough, they will change.” Confrontational strategies have been designed to make clients feel scared, ashamed, or humiliated, with the assumption that such experiences are curative. In the Woodall study, exit interviews with offenders leaving the MADD-VIP experience confirmed that in general they felt terrible about themselves: embarrassed, ashamed, humiliated, guilty. The result was not less, but more drunk driving.
It seems guilt, shame, humiliation doesn't work to prevent drinking and driving, and in fact, actually increases it.
Drinking and driving are a crime, no doubt. A deadly one, but most people have done it. We need better solutions, like CBT, for instance.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 20:36
Wow, those are interesting stats. Obviously it's lacking in areas because of the uncontrolled studies. There could have been a number of reasons that the drinking and driving continued. I generally would have thought it a good idea. It's a change, and although can be heart wrenching and make people want to alleviate uncomfortable feelings by drinking, I imagine it would be even more uncomfortable to think that you are doing the same thing again and again. What stumps me is that although drinking might have helped with the shame, why does it have to increase driving offenses? Good info, c&e, thanks.
Thu, 05/17/2012 - 23:47
causeandeffect says: "It seems guilt, shame, humiliation doesn't work to prevent drinking and driving, and in fact, actually increases it. Drinking and driving are a crime, no doubt. A deadly one, but most people have done it. We need better solutions, like CBT, for instance."
Ever attend a MADD VIP? Definitely an eye opener for some. Those who "tune out" are the ones you should be worried about.
If one reads the original study, the focus was not on "confrontational strategies", but on "recidivism". Miller and White tweaked the conclusions to suit their article.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 21:14
Hey Persephone, You make good points and I trust that what you are feeling is true and worthy. I think about what you said, and I too feel frustrated because being an addict of anything has such stigma. It's certainly no fun to feel like crap, and the process takes longer to accept when there is also a bitter lack of empathy from others. Not just that, but a self righteous "man up" and "your weak" is thrust upon us. Oh, the "how could you? why would you?" is equally hard.
The lack of compassion toward addiction treatment and the addicts in jail (especially minorities suffering a worse fate) that you talk about isn't overlooked by most here. Myself included. At least I don't think so. Those punished for addiction, which is a health issue, is a crime in itself. It certainly isn't helping the drug war and it's doing nothing positive for the change in how society views the addict. Working on this awareness is a notable cause and feeling compassion and fighting to be heard is commendable.
I maintain that the only difference that we (you and I) hold lays within the dui discussion. This isn’t because the addicted drinker isn’t as sick, or that young people can suffer severe consequences for a “normal” course in their life. I fully understand and hold the same opinion. The only difference is in what to do about the driving aspect, which is quite different than the sickness/stigma/punishment aspect. It’s an action that although lacks intent of harm, isn’t an illness in itself. When it’s a life and death situation for others, the stakes change. For what it's worth, I don't think that prison is the answer for dui either.
Because dui is direct in the causation of innocents dying, unlike the addict that uses, there needs to be something in place to protect those that are irrefutably harmed. There needs to be compassion for them as well. I also maintain that I don’t know what the answers are. Jail doesn’t help and as you pointed out it can cause life debilitating changes. I’m sorry I disagree. You do deserve compassion along with anyone that gets fucked by the judicial system. I don’t think anyone wants a drastic and crushing blow giving to those making horrible mistakes. What is evident is that when since this happens repeatedly and we can see that the measures taken now aren’t working, it is clear that something different needs to take place.
Wed, 05/16/2012 - 18:59
And give them a slap on the wrist, tacitly endorsing drunk driving and putting truly innocent lives in jeopardy? Hell yes, I would throw their asses in jail.
What IS the way to drive it home, that driving drunk is selfish, irresponsible, egotistical? You hate mandating as a method of subjecting them to a possible solution. You don't want them in meetings, you don't want them in jail - what do you want? "Just don't do it again, Jimmy . . . and I'm taking the keys to your cherry 68 Camaro for one solid week, mister!" Is that gonna do it? Any self-respecting punk has duplicate keys or friends with cars and booze. Come on.
A DUI charge doesn't destroy the driver's life, by the way, but a drunk driver can kill himself, his passengers, and others who happen to be unlucky enough to be in harm's way.