Cali Prop. 5: Forced State-run "Treatment for kids"

[psy]

Finally, Prop 5 creates drug treatment and other support programs for at-risk youth. No such services exist now for people under 18. Prop 5 will set up network of drug treatment programs for young people, who could be referred to treatment by family members, school counselors or physicians. Services would also be available for youth on probation or involved with the juvenile justice system. Obviously a lot of drug users begin before they turn 18. Prop 5 recognizes this, and may help nip many addictions in the bud.

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com ... rop_6.html

[Anonymous]

Only problem with the democrats...  they favor "treatment" (incarceration + thought reform) over incarceration.

[Che Gookin]

Are they seriously trying this stupid shit again? God damn... how many straights are their gonna be?

[Anonymous]

It's being discussed on huffington post (not the kids issue, though):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerry-bro ... 40110.html

Maybe you should leave some comments.

[psy]

Are they seriously trying this stupid shit again? God damn... how many straights are their gonna be?

Well.  It's state funded and mandated this time.  Right in Synanon country too (California).

This is sad.  If people commit crimes, throw them fucking in jail.  It' isn't the drugs fault (otherwise you'd have to hold them innocent, on account of a medical problem they can't control).  As for nonviolent, consensual crimes such as drug usage...  what is the point of the government interfering at all, other than to dictate morality.  Geez.

[psy]

Somebody in the article quoted in the OP wrote this in the comments section.  I couldn't agree more:

Prop 5 is just another expensive tentacle of the state's failed War on Drugs. Our real drug problem is the sense of entitelment of a meddlesome majority who believe they have a right to force other people to be sober. People only quit drugs when they want to quit. "Rehab" will not and can not work because 1) there is no effective treatment; 2) coerced treatment doesn't work; 3) there is no confidentiality in these programs; and 4)"rehab" misdiagnoses the problem--which is one of government persecution, not addiction. This will not prevent one person from going to prison. Prisons are like like closets; the more you have, they more you try to cram into them. Any people so stupid to spend $50 billion a year just to break and destroy other people has a worse problem than the worst crack addict. So, screw you and your drug laws. Nobody wants what you are smoking, least of all your coercive do-gooder "help."

[Ursus]

Ugh. Yet another of yet another rehash of the same old same old...

What are its chances? And potential (practical) consequences if it goes through?

[psy]

Ugh. Yet another of yet another rehash of the same old same old...

What are its chances? And potential (practical) consequences if it goes through?

It's getting very little airplay.  Chances are most people will be bewildered by the proposition.  Whether it passes or not is probably a crapshoot.

Potential consequences?  The state's very own program.

[psy]

Ironically, this is probably one of those few situations where the private pay re-education industry and I would agree: no on prop 5.  They don't like the competition.  I don't like forced treatment, period.

[Che Gookin]

That implies they'll be "treating" people in the first place. Let's stop beating around the bush and call it for what it really is, "mindfucking".

[Antigen]

Ironically, this is probably one of those few situations where the private pay re-education industry and I would agree: no on prop 5.  They don't like the competition.  I don't like forced treatment, period.

Competition? No, they'll just be soaking up those fat government contracts. They're doing this already w/ Teen Challenge, Phoenix House and the like taking court ordered inmates. Here's the model for it in Cali http://www.prop36.org/ Only difference now is that they're scooping up a few more of the juveniles.

[Che Gookin]

And the song goes on! Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... effing insane.

[Anonymous]

Did I just walk into the twilight zone? *cue twilight zone music theme*  :eek:

Prop 5 is all about providing treatment instead of jail time for drug offenders, or at least lowering the amount of time an individual must spend in jail for using drugs. What's so objectionable about that? Oh wait- you think that suddenly the powers that be are going to rescind the drug war in one swoop? That's not the way things work in this country. Bad policy is easy to enter into, but takes a long time to correct. Prop 5 is a step in the right direction, why oppose it? Would you rather people go to jail for using drugs? Because that's what is happening now, and will continue to happen unless reform like Prop 5 are supported by the public.

Let's take a look at who opposes Prop 5:

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)
Crime Victims United
California League of United Latin American Citizens
California State Association of Counties (CSAC)
California Chamber of Commerce
National Drug-Free Workplace Alliance
National Association of Drug Court Professionals
LULAC National Health Commission
California District Attorneys Association
La Raza Roundtable de California
California Narcotics Officers Association
Drug Prevention Network of America
Californians for Drug Free Schools
California Association of Drug Court Professionals
Chief Probation Officers of California
Drug Prevention Network of the Americas
International Scientific and Medical Forum on Drug Abuse
Institute on Global Drug Policy
California Police Chiefs Association
International Task Force on Strategic Drug Policy
Students Taking Action Not Drugs (STAND)
California State Sheriffs Association
Drug Free America Foundation
Save Our Society From Drugs (SOS)
California Correctional Supervisors Organization
D.A.R.E. America
Associated Plumbing and Mechanical Contractors
California State Association of Counties (CSAC)
California Chamber of Commerce
California Farm Bureau Federation
Communities Against Substance Abuse
California Crime Victims Assistance Association
California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association
Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC)
California Judges Association
California Peace Officers' Association (CPOA)
Drug Free Schools Coalition

That list, the opponents of prop 5, is a who's who listing of the most relentless and well funded drug warriors. It is a coalition of moralistic drug warriors, big business, prison industrial complex types and law enforcement. These prohibitionists are running ads calling prop 5 "the drug dealers bill of rights" featuring (supposedly liberal... yea right) democratic senator Feinstein. Now we can add fornits to the list of these drug warriors? OMGSAYITAINTSO!  :timeout: Who is funding opposition to prop 5 and the commercials? The prison guard union, the largest union in cali.



Who supports prop 5?

League of Women Voters of California
California Nurses Association
California Society of Addiction Medicine
California Academy of Family Physicians
Consumer Federation of California
California State Conference of the NAACP
National Council of La Raza
California Council of Community Mental Health Agencies
Mental Health Association in California
California Labor Federation
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees California
SEIU California State Council
George Shultz, chairman of Governor Schwarzenegger's Council of Economic Advisers & former US Secretary of State
Jeanne Woodford, former warden, San Quentin; retired director, California Department of Corrections
George M. Galaza, retired warden, California Department of Corrections
Superior Court Judge James Gray, Orange County
Norm Stamper, retired Seattle police chief & former executive of San Diego Police Department

At least one of these names should look familiar to you, since he has worked to fight programs relentlessly for decades.  :notworthy:
To see fornits posters opposing prop 5, and taking a stance with prohibtionists, LEO and prison guard unions is just plain wrong.


VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 5!  :cheers:

[Antigen]

I'll say the same thing I said when Sue Scheff prevailed against WWASP; even a broken clock is right twice a day.

But check the BODs and BOAs of CSAM/ASAM.  You'll find a familiar name or two there as well (Bobby DuPont and Donald Ian MacDonald, that I know of). Which is one reason why DPF, MAP, MAPINC and all the rest flat out refused to include Straight and it's affiliates as targets or subtopics in the overall movement against the drug war even though so many of their primary target characters were prrminent on my list. ASAM/CSAM gave a big chunk of change and their endorsement to Prop 36, therefore they and their affiliates were untouchable. In point of fact, that is precisely why I set up the very first Fornits forum and all the rest. I tried hard to convince drug policy reformers to go after DFAF and affiliates with a vengence. They flat out refused. If they had their way there never would have been any expose on the private sector of this here gulag archipelago.

I don't have a whole lot of faith in a lot of the organizations you list in support of this expansion measure either. And if you check the actual results over the past 8 years of prop 36 you'll find that they're still building prisons in California despite the propaganda. The only difference is that, prior to incarceration, the inmate gets to jump through hoops while trying to win a rigged game against 'treatment' providers. So they scoop up a whole lot more people and spend less per inmate on housing and upkeep, but only till they get violated. The end result is the same with the addition of a Stepcraft/Synanon based mindfuck added in for good measure.

Don't fall for the good cop/bad cop routine. It's old as the hills and just as dusty. But then again, that's what will give us Obama as our next president tomorrow evening some time. As de dawg chases his tail....

[wdtony]

@ yes on 5,

I saw the commercials on TV and immediately got a sick felling in my gut. I think I see a pattern of deception once again.

I would rather be placed in any prison before going through what I did in the program.

We need a proposition ending prison time for drug use or possession first. Then we should scientifically evaluate how best to handle the prison problem. The real criminals are the white collar ass-hats who dictate policies to ruin people because they self-medicate.

I'm sorry, but if you're not hurting anybody but yourself, I don't care. No jail needed, no treatment, just leave people alone so they can destroy themselves or crawl out of the abyss that some of us have when they are ready. The problem is, the abyss I crawled out of was caused by this so-called "treatment". We eventually change our behavior because we see a reason to do so and it takes that learning to really make the change.

 I don't use any drugs but I know many people that have been using drugs since college and live very productive lives. That's 15 years of an illegal activity that we are supposed to believe is a scourge to our society? I gotta tell ya, these people have high paying jobs and do very well in life, I don't see the criminal connection. Also, alcohol is a drug and it's legal. I know very few people who don't drink alcohol but very very few that do don't have anything that I would consider a drinking problem. But more importantly, drug laws do not stop people from using drugs. Just like prohibition didn't stop drinking, so why do we have these laws that transform normal people into criminals?

I think the sociopaths at the top know that drug use is a normal human event and have successfully influenced public opinion that it is seen as a criminal behavior. They benefit by making money off of the criminals and poor souls who are just doing what is probably natural in our environment.

Then think about legal drugs and big pharma and you can nail down what is really going on. Money and control over the masses. Psyche meds are WAY more dangerous than street drugs but prescribed like candy, while the dangers are covered up.