TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.kcbd.com/story/23301187/1-de ... ance-store

Been to this store a few times,and the older gentleman was always pleasant. Very sad deal when you have to defend yourself against someone close to you.

Sounds like very bad business indeed.

"They believe this would have never happened if Daniel had gotten the help he needed."

So, it's somebody else's fault?

Oldgringo wrote:"They believe this would have never happened if Daniel had gotten the help he needed."

So, it's somebody else's fault?

I don't read it that way. A lot of addicts refuse to get help. I believe that is what they are saying he needed help but he wouldn't get the help he needed.

Keith B wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:"They believe this would have never happened if Daniel had gotten the help he needed."

So, it's somebody else's fault?

I don't read it that way. A lot of addicts refuse to get help. I believe that is what they are saying he needed help but he wouldn't get/accept the help he needed.

Fixed it for you. I've been involved in a recovery ministry for a little over 5 years now. Help is almost everywhere you look, and it is simply a matter of learning what resources are available in your area. Some of them don't even cost any money. I'm willing to bet that the family had already gone through this process, and had already tried to get their addicted relative into rehab. But absent him getting arrested in the commission of a crime and going to prison, he can't be forced to get help. He has to hit his own personal bottom in order for him to be convinced that he needs it; and he has to be convinced that he needs it before he will accept it.

It's an old and sad story, but in the end, it is entirely the addict's responsibility to get the help. When you're a family member of an addict and you assume a burden of responsibility for the other person's recovery, which is not yours to take on because you're not the addict, that is codependent behavior, and maybe you need to seek recovery from that. It would not at all be unusual for an addict to be surrounded by codependents. It's almost axiomatic. And it is often but not always the case that the codependents enable the addict's addiction. In recognition of this, the codependent will often say, "well it is partially my fault. I enabled his behavior." Even if the codependent enabled the behavior, the addict is still a free-standing human being and is the ultimate arbiter of his own addiction. To become addicted is a choice. To remain addicted is a choice. To get sober is a choice. To accept the available help in your area in order to conquer the addiction is a choice. And all those choices belong entirely in the addict's lap. The benefit of that is that if he gets sober, he owns his sobriety, and nobody can take that away from him unless he surrenders it........and that is a choice too.

Per the article:

They say Daniel had been threatening his stepfather for months, but it came to a head today because he was on synthetic marijuana.

I concede defeat in the war on drugs, but as we legalize more and more the recreational use of drugs, we're going to see more and more of this stuff.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:"They believe this would have never happened if Daniel had gotten the help he needed."

So, it's somebody else's fault?

I don't read it that way. A lot of addicts refuse to get help. I believe that is what they are saying he needed help but he wouldn't get/accept the help he needed.

Fixed it for you. I've been involved in a recovery ministry for a little over 5 years now. Help is almost everywhere you look, and it is simply a matter of learning what resources are available in your area. Some of them don't even cost any money. I'm willing to bet that the family had already gone through this process, and had already tried to get their addicted relative into rehab. But absent him getting arrested in the commission of a crime and going to prison, he can't be forced to get help. He has to hit his own personal bottom in order for him to be convinced that he needs it; and he has to be convinced that he needs it before he will accept it.

It's an old and sad story, but in the end, it is entirely the addict's responsibility to get the help. When you're a family member of an addict and you assume a burden of responsibility for the other person's recovery, which is not yours to take on because you're not the addict, that is codependent behavior, and maybe you need to seek recovery from that. It would not at all be unusual for an addict to be surrounded by codependents. It's almost axiomatic. And it is often but not always the case that the codependents enable the addict's addiction. In recognition of this, the codependent will often say, "well it is partially my fault. I enabled his behavior." Even if the codependent enabled the behavior, the addict is still a free-standing human being and is the ultimate arbiter of his own addiction. To become addicted is a choice. To remain addicted is a choice. To get sober is a choice. To accept the available help in your area in order to conquer the addiction is a choice. And all those choices belong entirely in the addict's lap. The benefit of that is that if he gets sober, he owns his sobriety, and nobody can take that away from him unless he surrenders it........and that is a choice too.

Per the article:

They say Daniel had been threatening his stepfather for months, but it came to a head today because he was on synthetic marijuana.

I concede defeat in the war on drugs, but as we legalize more and more the recreational use of drugs, we're going to see more and more of this stuff.

Choices, we all have choices. Did I mention responsibilities.....?

The Annoyed Man wrote:I concede defeat in the war on drugs, but as we legalize more and more the recreational use of drugs, we're going to see more and more of this stuff.

It's a war that can't be won because unscrupulous people will always find a way to get what they want.

Dave2 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I concede defeat in the war on drugs, but as we legalize more and more the recreational use of drugs, we're going to see more and more of this stuff.

It's a war that can't be won because unscrupulous people will always find a way to get what they want.

Daniel was on K2 the synthetic weed. Problem is lawmakers cannot create a blanket ban for K2 they can only ban ingredients. The people who cook the stuff have thousands of ingredients they can use so it just slows them down for a couple of weeks then its back on the shelf.



Its sold as spice or potpourri and labeled not for human consumption.

nightmare69 wrote:

Dave2 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I concede defeat in the war on drugs, but as we legalize more and more the recreational use of drugs, we're going to see more and more of this stuff.

It's a war that can't be won because unscrupulous people will always find a way to get what they want.

Daniel was on K2 the synthetic weed. Problem is lawmakers cannot create a blanket ban for K2 they can only ban ingredients. The people who cook the stuff have thousands of ingredients they can use so it just slows them down for a couple of weeks then its back on the shelf.

[ Image ]

Its sold as spice or potpourri and labeled not for human consumption.

Yeah, I saw that the article described it as synthetic weed and assumed it was something like K2. But my point remains unchanged: we can look forward to a whole lot more of this stuff.

I had a conversation a couple of weeks ago in San Francisco with a guy from Malta. He was commenting on the homeless problem in such a rich country. He said they don't have that problem in Malta. When it was brought up that it was a drug issue a lot of the time. He said they still don't have as much of a problem in Malta. I finally asked him how they got around that whole pesky personal freedom issue. He seemed confused. When I explained that many people choose not to accept help. And many choose to live on the streets instead of in a shelter because they can do drugs on the street and not in the shelter, he started to understand my question. He said that in Malta a drug problem would be considered an embarrassment to the person and to the person's family. He then admitted it was a cultural difference and partly swept under the rug.

Don't get me wrong. I don't believe every homeless person is there because of drugs. But I thing a very substantial percentage of the homeless are there because of drugs. A large portion are also mentally ill. That's a whole other kettle of fish.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:"They believe this would have never happened if Daniel had gotten the help he needed."

So, it's somebody else's fault?

I don't read it that way. A lot of addicts refuse to get help. I believe that is what they are saying he needed help but he wouldn't get/accept the help he needed.

Fixed it for you. I've been involved in a recovery ministry for a little over 5 years now. Help is almost everywhere you look, and it is simply a matter of learning what resources are available in your area. Some of them don't even cost any money. I'm willing to bet that the family had already gone through this process, and had already tried to get their addicted relative into rehab. But absent him getting arrested in the commission of a crime and going to prison, he can't be forced to get help. He has to hit his own personal bottom in order for him to be convinced that he needs it; and he has to be convinced that he needs it before he will accept it.

It's an old and sad story, but in the end, it is entirely the addict's responsibility to get the help. When you're a family member of an addict and you assume a burden of responsibility for the other person's recovery, which is not yours to take on because you're not the addict, that is codependent behavior, and maybe you need to seek recovery from that. It would not at all be unusual for an addict to be surrounded by codependents. It's almost axiomatic. And it is often but not always the case that the codependents enable the addict's addiction. In recognition of this, the codependent will often say, "well it is partially my fault. I enabled his behavior." Even if the codependent enabled the behavior, the addict is still a free-standing human being and is the ultimate arbiter of his own addiction. To become addicted is a choice. To remain addicted is a choice. To get sober is a choice. To accept the available help in your area in order to conquer the addiction is a choice. And all those choices belong entirely in the addict's lap. The benefit of that is that if he gets sober, he owns his sobriety, and nobody can take that away from him unless he surrenders it........and that is a choice too.

Per the article:

They say Daniel had been threatening his stepfather for months, but it came to a head today because he was on synthetic marijuana.

I concede defeat in the war on drugs, but as we legalize more and more the recreational use of drugs, we're going to see more and more of this stuff.

nightmare69 wrote:Problem is lawmakers cannot create a blanket ban for K2 they can only ban ingredients. The people who cook the stuff have thousands of ingredients they can use so it just slows them down for a couple of weeks then its back on the shelf.

[ Image ]

Its sold as spice or potpourri and labeled not for human consumption.

Sure they can... just ban "someone who is not a doctor intentionally inducing an altered state of mind" or something... That side-steps the issue of ingredients altogether. Of course, we tried a form of that with prohibition, and all we got out of it was organized crime and government corruption. People still got drunk (in fact, IIRC, drinking actually went up during prohibition), it just cost them more (leaving less money for food, clothing, and shelter) and came with a lot of ancillary violence. So it seems to me that our two choices are something that we know from early 20th century history won't work and doesn't really solve any problems vs something that we know from recent history won't work and doesn't really solve any problems.

Not that it means anything, but synthetic weed was banned from being sold in Lubbock just recently. After the ban, but before this incident, it was reported that the stuff was still being sold because of the ingredient change....

clarionite wrote:I had a conversation a couple of weeks ago in San Francisco with a guy from Malta. He was commenting on the homeless problem in such a rich country. He said they don't have that problem in Malta. When it was brought up that it was a drug issue a lot of the time. He said they still don't have as much of a problem in Malta. I finally asked him how they got around that whole pesky personal freedom issue. He seemed confused. When I explained that many people choose not to accept help. And many choose to live on the streets instead of in a shelter because they can do drugs on the street and not in the shelter, he started to understand my question. He said that in Malta a drug problem would be considered an embarrassment to the person and to the person's family. He then admitted it was a cultural difference and partly swept under the rug.

Your Maltese acquaintance was less than truthful with you. Malta has one of, if not the highest, rate of heroin addiction in the EU. The last figure I know of was from 2010, 6 addicts per 1000 residents.

Keith B wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:"They believe this would have never happened if Daniel had gotten the help he needed."

So, it's somebody else's fault?

I don't read it that way. A lot of addicts refuse to get help. I believe that is what they are saying he needed help but he wouldn't get the help he needed.

This... My son had a problem with drugs did not want help, refused to take meds etc... When he turned 18 I gave him 6 months to get his act straight, after the 6 months, I gave him $500 and said hit the road. He went from back seat, park bench, bridge etc for about a year. Finally he cleaned himself up got a job and a place to sleep. So I bought him a car to help. Long story short he now is in college, working as IT support for an Insurance company, has his own apartment, and a better car. When people are ready to change they will, ask any smoker what most helped them quit, it was their own desire. We have all heard the saying "you can lead a horse to water........"

Tragic. That synthetic marijuana is BAD stuff. It can have various side effects to include making one paranoid, ect.