ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 20th March 2019, 03:26 AM   #201
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,466
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Yea stats with out any context to just look at big numbers. How does this amount of garbage compared to the population size of the homeless vs the garbage generated by the average person in seattle?

It is easy to throw out big numbers and think they mean anything.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 03:54 AM   #202
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,466
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
The people in these encampments are not the working poor.
So where are the working homeless living?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 04:03 AM   #203
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,466
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I haven't said anything about the wonderful cops and horrible homeless drug addicts. Nor have I said anything that the current management of the encampments has been stellar.
Except the idea that putting those same cops who are doing those thing in the camps constantly with the added fun of being able to set dogs on people would be helpful. You are very clear that what these camps need is more cops and we know exactly what the cops do already. So it is kind of hard to not be at least a partial endorsement of the police behavior to date. The destruction of property and such would continue of course in your plan, just not be so focused on drug arrests.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 07:06 AM   #204
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,474
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Pretty sure that the way that works is that you agree to be searched when you choose to ride the ferry. That’s different from just searching people in the streets.
No question. Fine print on the back of the ticket, etc.

Quote:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 07:26 AM   #205
Steve
Illuminator
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,645
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
So where are the working homeless living?
They have their own special camps that are clean and tidy and there are no drugs. I think they are located in Bellevue, far away from the riff-raff in downtown Seattle.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 07:38 AM   #206
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,737
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Hey, don't let a new, not yet tried option get in your way when you can just moan about a problem without offering anything new.
Ah, but see, I have offered something new (actually, newer) in this very thread that you ignored, in favor of pretending no one is giving your 'new' idea a fair hearing.

You don't address the issues with your 'new' idea. In fact, you actively ignore them. So address the issues:

1. After you take their drugs, addicts are not going to just sit there and contemplate where their lives went wrong and turn over a new leaf. What they will do is whatever is necessary to get more money to get more drugs. This will cause a spike in crime, stretching the police resources still thinner;

2. Once the addicts get their drugs, they won't save any for 'a bump later', they will take it all, now, lest it be taken from them in the next sweep. Que up more ODs, stretching the emergency medical resources still thinner;

3. Do you think low level dealers carry all they have with them? No. And after the first sweep, definitely no. When the police take the drugs, the dealers go back to the stash and get more, and are back dealing before the police exit the other side of the camp;

4. Even *IF*, impossibly, the police are extraordinarily effective at getting the drugs out of the camps, then the addicts will leave the camps to get high in peace. They will find doorways, sheds, empty buildings, some in nice family neighborhoods. Now police and medical need to respond all over town, again stretching resources;

5. Just because the police don't arrest anyone doesn't mean there is no paperwork. After each sweep, the police hop back into the bus back to the station to fill out paperwork. The police get to skip the arrest reports, but they still have to sit on their buts in the station doing all the other reports. So, it's only a minor time savings over arrests.

Now, don't hand wave it away, but address why each of those things won't happen.

The 'new' plan that has the best results are: get the homeless safe, clean places to live. Get the medical and psych support. Get them job training. Get everyone in a safe supportive environment, then deal with substance abuse issues.

Any 'new' plan that starts with taking their drugs is doomed, as your 'new' plan is, because it's not new and history shows it doesn't work.
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']

Last edited by The Greater Fool; 20th March 2019 at 07:41 AM. Reason: made 5 clearer
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 11:35 AM   #207
deadrose
Illuminator
 
deadrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the wet side of the mountains
Posts: 3,047
Just as an aside, the explosive-sniffing dogs at the ferries aren't super common, except in late June and early July. It's funny how they become more concerned about terrorism at the same time that people might be buying illegal fireworks on the reservations.

Safety Theatre? A chance to rake in lots of fines once a year?

Anyway, back to the "Why Prohibition will work this time" discussion.
deadrose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 03:41 PM   #208
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,233
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
This is not a cure for drug addiction. Not a solution to all homelessness.

The problem is that it's not a solution to anything at all, except the problem of lack of justification for police harassing and abusing homeless people.

I'm quite curious why you think this will work to stop... i'm still not sure what you think it will stop, when we have a full century of history in this country and others demonstrating that Prohibition doesn't work at all. The only reason Prohibition policies still exist is due to reactionary right disinformation, the massive amounts of money it brings in for government agencies and the civilian corporations who support them, and the convenient excuse it provides for violently suppressing minorities and dissidents.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 04:48 PM   #209
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,030
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
That's odd, there are ferry lines here in WA State the police run dogs up and down the wait lines looking for explosives all the time.

From your link:

Clearly not the same thing.
you really want to live in a police state so badly you are willing to intentionally conflate security checkpoints with open parks?

It's exactly the same thing since the question being asked is "was the use of the dog a search, per the 4th amendment" and the answer was "yes, it's a search." They, hell, we all have the right against searches and seizures. A dog sniff is a search, so you can't use that to establish probable cause.

Again, what do you do when the junkie actively fights back against your clearly illegal search?
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 04:52 PM   #210
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,233
Naturally, KOMO's biased "expose'" has engendered more than a little criticism from other journalists. Here's a pretty good takedown of the program, with supporting documentation linked in the article:

6 reasons why KOMO's take on homelessness is the wrong one

Excerpt:
Quote:
When people complain about tents and garbage in Seattle, I wonder whether they’re more bothered by having to look at these visual signs of our community’s failure, or whether they actually care about the adults and children who live in those tents.

The KOMO special, by reporter Eric Johnson, definitely appeals to the “I don’t want to have to look at homelessness” viewer. It’s a call to punish, rather than help, people in need, and it seeks to divide them into “the real homeless” (or the “deserving poor”) and all the others. It’s all the more disappointing given Johnson’s reputation as a journalist.

Yes, we also need to focus on public safety and public health; we should be able to walk around our thriving city without harm. Small business owners should be able to operate in a climate that allows them to flourish. Police should be able to do their job of protecting the public. Kids should be able to play in parks free of needles.

But at a time when our region needs to come together on solutions, KOMO’s program is a drastic, distorted and divisive step backwards.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 04:56 PM   #211
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Yea stats with out any context to just look at big numbers. How does this amount of garbage compared to the population size of the homeless vs the garbage generated by the average person in seattle?

It is easy to throw out big numbers and think they mean anything.
Dude, I drive by these encampments on a regular basis. The amount of garbage that accumulates is bizarre.

I'm not sure what evidence you have that the stats on the amount of garbage is exaggerated.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 04:57 PM   #212
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
So where are the working homeless living?
With friends, in cars, shelters, and some of the formal safe campsites and tiny houses. They're not living under bridges and going to work everyday.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 05:43 PM   #213
deadrose
Illuminator
 
deadrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the wet side of the mountains
Posts: 3,047
I'm sorry, that statement is wrong.

Luchog & I spent over a decade living in the heart of Seattle, seeing all this happening in our own neighborhood, seeing our own friends become homeless, seeing how the system "works". Your observations from your nice suburb and your nice car appear very different from ours - and the opinion piece that started the whole thing is from a Sinclair network station, where they are regularly forced to repeat the beliefs of their extreme right-wing owner as fact.

The working homeless, the disabled homeless and the "deserving of help" homeless are living in the exact same conditions as the addicts and alcoholics. Services are completely overstressed and underfunded and help is just not there. Your plan would require vast amounts of funding that this government will never provide, and would succeed no better than every other attempt at prohibition has. It will cause incalculable harm and likely cause a huge increase in overdoses and lifelong physical damage.
deadrose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 05:46 PM   #214
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
Ah, but see, I have offered something new (actually, newer) in this very thread that you ignored, in favor of pretending no one is giving your 'new' idea a fair hearing.

You don't address the issues with your 'new' idea. In fact, you actively ignore them. So address the issues:

1. After you take their drugs, addicts are not going to just sit there and contemplate where their lives went wrong and turn over a new leaf. What they will do is whatever is necessary to get more money to get more drugs. This will cause a spike in crime, stretching the police resources still thinner;

2. Once the addicts get their drugs, they won't save any for 'a bump later', they will take it all, now, lest it be taken from them in the next sweep. Que up more ODs, stretching the emergency medical resources still thinner;

3. Do you think low level dealers carry all they have with them? No. And after the first sweep, definitely no. When the police take the drugs, the dealers go back to the stash and get more, and are back dealing before the police exit the other side of the camp;

4. Even *IF*, impossibly, the police are extraordinarily effective at getting the drugs out of the camps, then the addicts will leave the camps to get high in peace. They will find doorways, sheds, empty buildings, some in nice family neighborhoods. Now police and medical need to respond all over town, again stretching resources;

5. Just because the police don't arrest anyone doesn't mean there is no paperwork. After each sweep, the police hop back into the bus back to the station to fill out paperwork. The police get to skip the arrest reports, but they still have to sit on their buts in the station doing all the other reports. So, it's only a minor time savings over arrests.

Now, don't hand wave it away, but address why each of those things won't happen.

The 'new' plan that has the best results are: get the homeless safe, clean places to live. Get the medical and psych support. Get them job training. Get everyone in a safe supportive environment, then deal with substance abuse issues.

Any 'new' plan that starts with taking their drugs is doomed, as your 'new' plan is, because it's not new and history shows it doesn't work.
There is nothing in this post except: won't work, won't work, won't work.

How is any of that a new idea?
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 05:48 PM   #215
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
Originally Posted by deadrose View Post
Just as an aside, the explosive-sniffing dogs at the ferries aren't super common, except in late June and early July. It's funny how they become more concerned about terrorism at the same time that people might be buying illegal fireworks on the reservations.

Safety Theatre? A chance to rake in lots of fines once a year?

Anyway, back to the "Why Prohibition will work this time" discussion.
It's not akin to Prohibition which involved widespread use by half of society.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 05:49 PM   #216
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
you really want to live in a police state so badly you are willing to intentionally conflate security checkpoints with open parks?

It's exactly the same thing since the question being asked is "was the use of the dog a search, per the 4th amendment" and the answer was "yes, it's a search." They, hell, we all have the right against searches and seizures. A dog sniff is a search, so you can't use that to establish probable cause.

Again, what do you do when the junkie actively fights back against your clearly illegal search?
A police state?

Puhleese.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 06:01 PM   #217
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
Originally Posted by deadrose View Post
I'm sorry, that statement is wrong.

Luchog & I spent over a decade living in the heart of Seattle, seeing all this happening in our own neighborhood, seeing our own friends become homeless, seeing how the system "works". Your observations from your nice suburb and your nice car appear very different from ours - and the opinion piece that started the whole thing is from a Sinclair network station, where they are regularly forced to repeat the beliefs of their extreme right-wing owner as fact.

The working homeless, the disabled homeless and the "deserving of help" homeless are living in the exact same conditions as the addicts and alcoholics. Services are completely overstressed and underfunded and help is just not there. Your plan would require vast amounts of funding that this government will never provide, and would succeed no better than every other attempt at prohibition has. It will cause incalculable harm and likely cause a huge increase in overdoses and lifelong physical damage.
And once again all the stereotypes come out about who I am.

You have no idea.

I said nothing of "not deserving of help", nothing judgmental except to say this particular group were addicts who so far were refusing help.

As for the 'vast amount of funding', the article mentioned a huge amount of financial resources being funneled into the problem but split up by the warring factions for their pet projects.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 07:18 PM   #218
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,474
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
There is nothing in this post except: won't work, won't work, won't work.



How is any of that a new idea?


I’d appreciate you addressing these points rather than a dismissal.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 09:23 PM   #219
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I’d appreciate you addressing these points rather than a dismissal.
You said you had offered another option. You didn't. you just criticized mine.

OK, I don't agree.
I don't agree.
I don't agree.
I don't agree.
I don't agree.

I think that sums it up.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2019, 09:53 PM   #220
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,178
I am not intimidated by you guys. I know hard core drug addiction and alcoholism intimately and professionally.

I'm only talking about the drug addicts in the garbage strewn encampments and responding to the KOMO special.

I agree the documentary was over dramatized and over-sensationalized.

What I noticed right away was no one was trying to break the drug supply chain. It was all about arresting people and complaining the courts let them go. There was an additional op-ed about the four factions that each had their ideas and the split between them was inhibiting effective action. I agree.

The only valid point that has come up (IMO) in the thread was the issue of the restrictions on the canine searches, public property or not. That would need to be addressed.

The rest, no offense, was mostly false assumptions about what I know, false assumptions I was addressing things I was not addressing, and false assumptions (this one is the worst) that I'm a Bellevue snob (some call the stereotype a Bellevue housewife, I'm not married).

**** that. I'm going to look past that bull **** because I have nothing against people in Seattle who think they've had some kind of life experience people in Bellevue have not had. I occasionally have to remind people in my job that the people they are dealing with had whole lives the people I'm working with don't know about.

There's a doctor here in town I knew as a teenager back in LA when his roommate was shot by drug thieves looking for the heroin my friends were all dealing out of their apartment. She survived. I was shocked to run into him here as a practicing MD.

I have more than a few stories but so what? This is not a contest about who knows the deepest depths of drug addiction. I am pretty sure I could hold my own in that contest. Again, so what?

Stop dismissing ideas based on false assumptions. Stop all your knee-jerk reactions to ideas that don't fit with your own. Fine, you don't think that will work. I understand that. You could be right. What I'm proposing has not been tried and chances are very good it never will be.

It's still an idea I think is worth trying.

And the knee-jerk responses really should be reconsidered. Take a deep breath. Remember you don't know everything and you don't know who SG was before she joined the JREF.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 20th March 2019 at 09:57 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:34 AM   #221
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Which arm chair were you sitting in before you came upon that pearl of wisdom?

I won't detail my mother's treatment history other than to note that it involved consultation with several experts in the field. If you think that you know more than they all do combined then you are not only ignorant but dangerous as well.

If what you are saying is true, your memories of your mother are clouding your ability to remember what was actually discussed. She would have had the exact same relief with other opioids at larger dosages. The "experts in the field" that you are remembering would not have even suggested them because fentanyl was available to provide that relief at a much smaller dosage.

That is just one of many reasons I know that your assessment of the events that occurred surrounding the treatment of your mothers pain is confused to say the least.

To be frank, the only one arm chairing here is you. Having access to what those "several experts" told you is not having access to everything those "several experts" know. Not even close. And I think deep down inside you know that. Thankfully the science behind your story is not decided upon by psionl0 or This is The End.
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:41 AM   #222
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
The 4th amendment doesn't seem to make that. Clearly cars are of course on public roads hence public property and no 4th amendment rights protect them just like anyone who is out in public.

The police can sweep a dog by your vehicle at any time if it is on a public road. If the dog hits they then get a Judge to approve a search over the phone and your vehicle is then searched or impounded.

How often to you drive your house onto the street?

So, thanks for the example??
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:47 AM   #223
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,678
It boggles my mind that supposed logical skeptics think that just because a war on all drugs was a completely amazing failure that we can deduce that a war any specific drug would also be a failure.
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:53 AM   #224
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
The police need probable cause before using the dogs. It's considered a search.

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-file...da-v-jardines/

You are confusing private land and public land again. That case was at a house.

Police can use dogs all they want to on public land, like at road blocks.
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 01:01 AM   #225
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,678
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Myth? Seriously? Wow, you are showing an astonishing, and frankly surprising, level of cluelessness here. You really need to get your information from sources other than right-wing partisans, because you are showing an uncharacteristic level of ignorance here.

https://www.businessinsider.com/60-d...in-jail-2018-3
https://www.economist.com/britain/20...ply-and-remand
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-prison-walls/
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...ic-drug-crisis

I could post many more, but I think that should prove the point adequately.

You in fact are the one that is "completely clueless". You are drastically over-representing what these articles are telling you. The ability to access any particular drug inside versus outside is relatively nil.

If you are addicted to drugs and are sent to prison you better get used to the fact that it's going to be a drip feed at beast.

Guns have also been found in prisons. Many times in fact. That does not mean guns are available in prisons at any particular time.

This does not say that the prison black market does not exist. It does exist and is often helped along by corrupted guards. That does not mean that the black market does not relatively... suck.

In reality the actual black market inside prisons more often than not is more likely to be booming in snacks than drugs.

You might want to get your facts from real world studies and not from news articles before you start chastising people about cluelessness.
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:00 AM   #226
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 13,974
Originally Posted by This is The End View Post
If what you are saying is true, your memories of your mother are clouding your ability to remember what was actually discussed.
If you think that you can avoid my argument by claiming that I am emotionally affected then you are seriously mistaken.

When it comes to discussing whether to administer morphine or fentanyl, I will be guided by the people who are experienced in palliative care and not by somebody who thinks that (this time) calling something illegal will solve all our problems.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:25 AM   #227
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,466
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Dude, I drive by these encampments on a regular basis. The amount of garbage that accumulates is bizarre.

I'm not sure what evidence you have that the stats on the amount of garbage is exaggerated.
I am not saying it is exaggerated, I am saying it is totally without context. I would expect the homeless to generate more trash as a result of needing to eat more prepackaged food and the like. Then you have no orderly collection and it will build up quickly.

But if the garbage is the problem why not try to deal with sources of it, such as the need to rely on prepackaged food, and the lack of orderly collection instead of saying it is clearly because drugs?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:28 AM   #228
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,466
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
And once again all the stereotypes come out about who I am.
And once again you fail to actually provide evidence to support your assertion that there are no working homeless in these camps and they are all drug addicts aside from a piece by a hard right wing media outlet.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:07 AM   #229
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,474
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
You said you had offered another option. You didn't. you just criticized mine.



OK, I don't agree.

I don't agree.

I don't agree.

I don't agree.

I don't agree.



I think that sums it up.


I certainly did no such thing. Step back, take a breath and address the points. Or don’t.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:27 AM   #230
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,737
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
There is nothing in this post except: won't work, won't work, won't work.

How is any of that a new idea?
You really should read my post so you can understand how foolish you sound.
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:48 AM   #231
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,030
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
A police state?

Puhleese.
You are advocating for the police to have the ability to search citizens without probable cause because you don't like the way they live. No thank you to that suggestion.

Please apply that suggestion to another public health crisis - Obesity. If fatty is out in public, we can search them for foodstuffs. What are they going to do, outrun the police?

Also, quit dodging the question about what you are going to do about the junkie who fights back against your illegal state searches. they aren't all docile when it comes their stash.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:22 AM   #232
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,233
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
It's not akin to Prohibition which involved widespread use by half of society.

Special Pleading Fallacy. It's the same problem, with the same dynamic; only the scale is different, and not by enough.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
You said you had offered another option. You didn't. you just criticized mine.

OK, I don't agree.
I don't agree.
I don't agree.
I don't agree.
I don't agree.

I think that sums it up.

Yes, it certainly sums up your inability to actually address the points made. I noticed you don't appear to have read the article I linked to, or its supporting documentation.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I am not intimidated by you guys. I know hard core drug addiction and alcoholism intimately and professionally.

That doesn't mean that you understand the fundamental causes and confounding factors of the homeless problem. This is an Appeal to Authority Fallacy.

Quote:
I'm only talking about the drug addicts in the garbage strewn encampments and responding to the KOMO special.

And that's a large part of the problem with your position; you're depending entirely on what is clearly a hard-right propaganda piece, which you are viewing uncritically because it appears to reinforce some of your own personal preferences and prejudices.

You've been here long enough to understand how important it is to consider the source of any information in order to determine its validity. Where is the corroborating information? The data used to produce the conclusion?

Quote:
I agree the documentary was over dramatized and over-sensationalized.

And yet you appear to be taking it at face value. It was nothing but a hatchet job intended to turn sentiment away from the homeless and toward the police, and demonize people who have been consistently and persistently marginalized by the city government for longer than I've been living here. The article I linked earlier has a very good debunking of it.

Quote:
What I noticed right away was no one was trying to break the drug supply chain. It was all about arresting people and complaining the courts let them go.

This is so patently ridiculous it's hard to even accept it as an Appeal to Ignorance fallacy. It's also a very popular right-wing talking point.

There is, and has been for a very long time, ongoing efforts on the municipal, count, state, and federal level to break the supply of illicit drugs. It's call the War on Drugs; and it has never been effective at doing so. There were articles just this last week on big supply chain busts netting hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of drugs from high-level dealers; yet the supply has still not dried up. Why is that?

Quote:
The rest, no offense, was mostly false assumptions about what I know, false assumptions I was addressing things I was not addressing, and false assumptions (this one is the worst) that I'm a Bellevue snob (some call the stereotype a Bellevue housewife, I'm not married).

Evasion, ad hominem, well poisoning... You're really adding up the fallacies here.

Quote:
There's a doctor here in town I knew as a teenager back in LA when his roommate was shot by drug thieves looking for the heroin my friends were all dealing out of their apartment. She survived. I was shocked to run into him here as a practicing MD.

Appeal to Emotion Fallacy.

Quote:
I have more than a few stories but so what? This is not a contest about who knows the deepest depths of drug addiction. I am pretty sure I could hold my own in that contest. Again, so what?

Then why did you bother even bringing them up? This isn't about the horrors of drug addiction, this is about the causes of the homeless problem, and the city's failure to address the root causes, while demonizing and abusing the homeless.

Quote:
Stop dismissing ideas based on false assumptions. Stop all your knee-jerk reactions to ideas that don't fit with your own.



You have made a big deal about "driving past" the homeless all the time, and wonder why people are getting on your case for your elitist and condescending east-sider attitude. Some of us actually lived with the problem, with homeless encampments in our own personal neighborhoods, up close and personal. You can't claim to have a better understanding of the problem because you've "driven past it" and simultaneously dismiss so imperiously the experiences of those of us who have lived with it, without being called out for elitism and hypocrisy.

Quote:
Fine, you don't think that will work. I understand that. You could be right. What I'm proposing has not been tried and chances are very good it never will be.

It's been tried in various ways for a hundred years now. Even a casual student of history can see that. And it has never worked. Not once. Not even brutal police states and prisons have been able to stop it, no matter how many people they kill.

Housing and treatment have to come first, before drug enforcement, or the problem will never get any better. Better yet, decriminalization must be a part of that. The overwhelming majority of the "drug problem" you and the law-and-order right-wingers complain about are artifacts of prohibition, not of drug use.

The US spends around fifty billion dollars a year on drug enforcement. Imagine what could be done if that money was diverted into housing, treatment, and job training programs. Try doing that instead of parroting right-wing propaganda points.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:37 AM   #233
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,544
Right-winger here. I just want to say that SG isn't parroting any right-wing propaganda points I subscribe to or believe in.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:00 AM   #234
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,608
Originally Posted by deadrose View Post
Just as an aside, the explosive-sniffing dogs at the ferries aren't super common, except in late June and early July. It's funny how they become more concerned about terrorism at the same time that people might be buying illegal fireworks on the reservations.

Safety Theatre? A chance to rake in lots of fines once a year?
Up until about 3 years ago when I moved east of the mountains, I was a regular ferry commuter for many years. The cops+dogs were on duty year round, every crossing except late night.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:03 AM   #235
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,474
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Whatever you think, unless you have a citation, this has not been done. They arrest people and let them go.

Since it's unlikely anyone will listen to a new idea (as evidenced by this thread continually missing the details in my suggestions) we'll probably never know. But all of your naysaying isn't addressing what I've suggested.

Repeated dog patrols, take the drugs, come back hours later, do it again, and again and again.

Can you say this has happened anywhere?

No. Cops spend more time arresting people, and courts let them go. Resources wasted.

This was in reply to an earlier post from Norman Alexander.

What is the salient difference in outcomes between:
- Taking drugs away from people and leaving them where they are,
and
- Arresting them and then letting them go?

Seems to me that both are just as ineffectual; the dog-search idea just wastes different resources than the jail / court idea.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:46 PM   #236
deadrose
Illuminator
 
deadrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the wet side of the mountains
Posts: 3,047
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Up until about 3 years ago when I moved east of the mountains, I was a regular ferry commuter for many years. The cops+dogs were on duty year round, every crossing except late night.
OK, I guess it's just the Vashon/Southworth/Fauntleroy and Point Defiance/Tahlequah that they infrequently target except during fireworks season. I don't ride other runs that regularly.
deadrose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:59 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.