Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: psy on November 02, 2008, 10:48:13 PM
-
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 (http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/09/california_prop_6.html)
-
Only problem with the democrats... they favor "treatment" (incarceration + thought reform) over incarceration.
-
Are they seriously trying this stupid shit again? God damn... how many straights are their gonna be?
-
It's being discussed on huffington post (not the kids issue, though):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerry-bro ... 40110.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerry-brown/the-failures-of-californi_b_140110.html)
Maybe you should leave some comments.
-
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.
-
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."
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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".
-
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/ (http://www.prop36.org/) Only difference now is that they're scooping up a few more of the juveniles.
-
And the song goes on! Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... effing insane.
-
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. (http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWAENEjC4HQ) 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:
-
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....
-
@ 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.
-
@ 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.
but wdo you know they are trying to create another cult-gulag ? Maybe they are trying ot recreate a legitimate "treatment" program. (legitimate in that they don't psychologically, physically, or mentally abuse their inmates besides imprisoning them)
-
Would you rather people go to jail
Having been through forced "treatment" for a nonexistant problem like many others here, I might have actually preferred that jail to "treatment", actually. At least there they wouldn't have been invasively trying to modify my existing view of reality and causality. Give people an option to get "treatment"? Why not... but force it? Never.
-
Psyche meds are WAY more dangerous than street drugs but prescribed like candy, while the dangers are covered up.
Be careful where you get your information on that. There is a lot of false information being put out on that subject by CCHR (a Scientology front group) among many others. Scientology views Psychiatry as "evil" (yes, really) and has been pushing that view on the public for a long time. That being said, I would tend to agree that there are some street drugs (such as marijuana) which, when taken in a manner other than smoking, are by and large safer than the vast majority of prescription medicaiton.
-
survivor wrote:
but wdo you know they are trying to create another cult-gulag ? Maybe they are trying ot recreate a legitimate "treatment" program. (legitimate in that they don't psychologically, physically, or mentally abuse their inmates besides imprisoning them)
and I say: Highly doubtful. the whole "how do you know" shit is starting to piss me off. No one knew I was being tortured in KHK but it sure as hell happened. If there is a "possibility" for abuse, there needs to be a change. There definitely is a possibility here.
And by the way, jail is soooooo much better than a program. By leaps and bounds, it's better.
-
Psyche meds are WAY more dangerous than street drugs but prescribed like candy, while the dangers are covered up.
Be careful where you get your information on that. There is a lot of false information being put out on that subject by CCHR (a Scientology front group) among many others. Scientology views Psychiatry as "evil" (yes, really) and has been pushing that view on the public for a long time. That being said, I would tend to agree that there are some street drugs (such as marijuana) which, when taken in a manner other than smoking, are by and large safer than the vast majority of prescription medicaiton.
I hear ya, but I was nearly killed by a psyche-med and I have done a tremendous amount of research on neurotransmitters and the brain as it pertains to psychiatric medications. I have also talked to many who have lived through the adverse reactions from these meds and it is truly horrific. The DSM-4 might as well be Dianetics at this point.
And I know Scientology is against psychiatry-(APA). For me it is a win-win. Kinda like a Sue Scheff vs. WWASPS kinda thing. Although I think some psychiatrists are good compared to the failed ideology of Scientology.
-
but wdo you know they are trying to create another cult-gulag ? Maybe they are trying ot recreate a legitimate "treatment" program. (legitimate in that they don't psychologically, physically, or mentally abuse their inmates besides imprisoning them)
I'll let Charles Bufe elaborate on AA in an institutional setting:
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chaptr10.htm (http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chaptr10.htm)
Changing how people think without their knowledge or consent is wrong. State mandated religious conversion is wrong and unconstitutional. Courts have upheld this again and again (http://http://orange-papers.org/orange-spirrel.html#judges).
Even if it worked, it still wouldn't be ethical for the above reasons, but it doesn't work (http://http://orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html), tragically, and often causes more harm than good (though those who are in it swear by it, in the same way Scientologists swear by their cultic voodoo hoodoo). If anectodal evidence of "OMG it saved my life" was backed up by hard facts, maybe there would be some merit to it, but the facts show, AA has a horrendous sucess rate (http://http://orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html), often worse than no treatment at all, lending credence to the stance that people should be left alone to use or abuse substances if they choose to.
-
I hear ya, but I was nearly killed by a psyche-med and I have done a tremendous amount of research on neurotransmitters and the brain as it pertains to psychiatric medications.
Yeah, but you have to admit, there is a difference between psychiatry itself and the pharma industry. Individual psychiatrists generally try to do the right thing but are affected by marketing like anybody else. A shrink put me on Ambien once. Very bad experience. It stayed in my system too long and affected my depth perception during the day (among other side effects). Clearly with many drugs there should be a lot more testing, but there are drugs that work as advertised and have changed many lives for the better.
-
I hear ya, but I was nearly killed by a psyche-med and I have done a tremendous amount of research on neurotransmitters and the brain as it pertains to psychiatric medications.
Yeah, but you have to admit, there is a difference between psychiatry itself and the pharma industry. Individual psychiatrists generally try to do the right thing but are affected by marketing like anybody else. A shrink put me on Ambien once. Very bad experience. It stayed in my system too long and affected my depth perception during the day (among other side effects). Clearly with many drugs there should be a lot more testing, but there are drugs that work as advertised and have changed many lives for the better.
I can't argue with that. Peter Breggin is an affluent Psychiatrist and is hell-bent against Big Pharma. Unfortunately he has explained how Big Pharma has paid for the APA's trips, meals, conferences, et-cetra. I think psychatry could be great if it wasn't influenced by the Pharmaceutical industry.
As far as some good meds helping some, I do believe that. I have seen it and experienced it myself. It is difficult to weigh the pros and cons when information is so constricted by whomever has a vested interest. When shit like ODD starts becoming mainstream accepted, I get nervous because I just don't believe it is a real condition. I mean, I have been diagnosed (at different times) with drug and alcohol addiction, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, depression and panic disorder. I have also been diagnosed as a normal person with no indication of any mental illness. How does this jive? Who is right? All different specialists and doctors but always a different diagnosis and different brain drug. Diagnoses are screwy.
-
I hear ya, but I was nearly killed by a psyche-med and I have done a tremendous amount of research on neurotransmitters and the brain as it pertains to psychiatric medications.
Yeah, but you have to admit, there is a difference between psychiatry itself and the pharma industry. Individual psychiatrists generally try to do the right thing but are affected by marketing like anybody else. A shrink put me on Ambien once. Very bad experience. It stayed in my system too long and affected my depth perception during the day (among other side effects). Clearly with many drugs there should be a lot more testing, but there are drugs that work as advertised and have changed many lives for the better.
I can't argue with that. Peter Breggin is an affluent Psychiatrist and is hell-bent against Big Pharma. Unfortunately he has explained how Big Pharma has paid for the APA's trips, meals, conferences, et-cetra. I think psychatry could be great if it wasn't influenced by the Pharmaceutical industry.
Well. A good blow to decreasing that grip would be to deregulate drugs so that psychiartists could prescribe alternatives (such as marijuana) where they felt it was appropriate. As Marijuana has so many uses, it could dramatically affect pharma's exclusive grip on treatment. It's one of the reasons I feel it's still illegal. Pharma wants a monopoly.
-
Diagnoses are screwy.
That's for sure. Often they're made in haste, and without sufficient knowledge of a particular person.
-
Ok, let's go back in our minds to a saner time before anyone ever seriously considered the idea that government should tell us what foods we eat and what drugs we put into our bodies. This would have to be prior to the time of Jefferson, who said "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." And I think he was right.
Back in the good old daze, the Rx symbol was shorthand for "Recipe" If you thought someone was wise and learned enough to give you good advice on what to do for your health, you'd trade currency or whatever else for their advice and they might write down the instructions as a prescription for an apothecary to follow to put it together for you. That was the benchmark. Does anybody seriously think that this or any government is wise, honest or even learned enough to tell you what to put into your body?
I'm trying to find a once popular drug policy reform quote. Can't remember who said this, but he was a professor and he asked his class a couple of questions:
- How many of you have smoked pot (many)
- How many went through treatment to quit (few)
- How many of you believe that smoking pot will destroy your life? (many)
These were graduate students, if I'm not mistaken. No slouches. The evidence of their having achieved well for themselves despite having smoked pot was undeniable. And yet they didn't see it. The professor described it as not logical conclusion but deep seated religious indoctrination.
I'll give you another example which you can replicate easily. Go into any bar on football night. Tell somebody about Mark Stepnoski (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Stepnoski) having become president of Texas NORML the day after he retired and having gone public with the open secret that all-star level performing athletes prefer pot to Rx drugs for their many aches, pains and the pressures of celebrity. Every time, you'll have some fool with a beer in his hand blabbering about how bad an example people like that set for the chiiiiiiiildren. You can go ahead and point out the athletes' level of performance, dedication and accomplishment and that the drugs they choose to achieve that evidently fail to fuck them up. No matter. If you press the point, you may well find yourself running for the door under threat of physical violence from an angry mob of drunken drug war zombies.
Point is, "treatment or incarceration" is a false dichotomy (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma). Just exactly the same as we all faced while in the program; go along or get beat down. The reality was, is and ever shall be that our only choices were to get beat down physically or suck it up and get our minds fucked up; either way we're getting fucked up!
If I had it to do over again, I'd have taken a stand at the time and maybe gotten through it with my mind a little more intact. I won't fall for it again.
-
There are some of your posts, Ginger, that i'd just like to frame.
:notworthy:
-
survivor wrote:
but wdo you know they are trying to create another cult-gulag ? Maybe they are trying ot recreate a legitimate "treatment" program. (legitimate in that they don't psychologically, physically, or mentally abuse their inmates besides imprisoning them)
and I say: Highly doubtful. the whole "how do you know" shit is starting to piss me off. No one knew I was being tortured in KHK but it sure as hell happened. If there is a "possibility" for abuse, there needs to be a change. There definitely is a possibility here.
.
I don't know enough about it, maybe the legislation is written in a way that the places they set up don't have oversight and have a high danger of abuse, but there is a difference between a "drug treatment program" and a "program." I am against forced treatment and imprisonment for drug use. That said, not all treatment places, or treatment, especially court mandated treatment, are programs. Maybe treatment could be going to meetings once a week or meeting with a shrink. But yes, "treatment or prison" is a false dichotomy, made more absurd because many of the people forced into "treatment" won't be drug addicts, just drug users or sellers.
-
The CYA, or California Youth Authority, isn't called Cover Your Ass without a damn good reason. Now don't get me wrong as I'm not advocating for these treatment duckfarms, but if I had a choice I'd take the treatment duckfarm over some kiddie lockdown in the state of California anyday.
My thoughts on this make me wonder why they are once again treating the symptom rather than the disease. What is causing high crime rates amongst kids in California anyway?
Are they even as high as people are being lead to believe?
Beats the hell out of me, but I do know that I'd rather see the money funneled into after school programs like marching band, chess club, football, and god help me and I shudder as I say this but even basketball. (Nothing personal I just hate basketball the sport is retarded)
Now to take it another level what blows my mind is the ideology that kids are soooooo very dangerous that they have to be ripped out of their neighborhood and hurled into a drug treatment program to get them off the crack.
*coughs.. wrap around program please...
Seems to me there are plenty of other ways to address the problem, if the problem even exists in such horrifying numbers, that bouncing kids into drug programs shouldn't even be a choice.
-
The CYA, or California Youth Authority, isn't called Cover Your Ass without a damn good reason. Now don't get me wrong as I'm not advocating for these treatment duckfarms, but if I had a choice I'd take the treatment duckfarm over some kiddie lockdown in the state of California anyday.
My thoughts on this make me wonder why they are once again treating the symptom rather than the disease. What is causing high crime rates amongst kids in California anyway?
Are they even as high as people are being lead to believe?
Beats the hell out of me, but I do know that I'd rather see the money funneled into after school programs like marching band, chess club, football, and god help me and I shudder as I say this but even basketball. (Nothing personal I just hate basketball the sport is retarded)
Now to take it another level what blows my mind is the ideology that kids are soooooo very dangerous that they have to be ripped out of their neighborhood and hurled into a drug treatment program to get them off the crack.
*coughs.. wrap around program please...
Seems to me there are plenty of other ways to address the problem, if the problem even exists in such horrifying numbers, that bouncing kids into drug programs shouldn't even be a choice.
the only reason kids have problems if not because they are impoverished is because their parents are abusive. If you want to help "problem kids" empower them to the point they are not dependant on their wretched parents. IMproved foster care, force absuive parents to bankroll their kids--away from home. Something like that. But middle class and working class peoples don't like the idea of legislation being passed to protect kids from them.
-
There are some of your posts, Ginger, that i'd just like to frame.
:notworthy:
Aw, shucks!
-
My thoughts on this make me wonder why they are once again treating the symptom rather than the disease. What is causing high crime rates amongst kids in California anyway?
It's something like a state of induced hypnosis, very similar to the state which causes psychotic and sometimes violent reactions in people who have never done psychedelics.
Here's a little test. Which of the following are true?
Today's kids and teens are more violent than their parents' generation. Teenagers abuse alcohol and drugs more often than adults, and more often than ever before. Teen pregnancy is skyrocketing. Kids' test scores are lower than their parents' were, and getting lower.
If you said yes to any of these, you may have been affected by what scholar and writer Mike A. Males terms a "media blitz on teens" driven by sensational anecdotes and manipulated statistics.
Full text of book review of Mike Males Framing Youth http://www.rense.com/health3/agkids.htm (http://www.rense.com/health3/agkids.htm)
Not only will this sort of forced treatment throw documentary obstacles to a kid achieving in the real world, I think we all have some better than average understanding of how it will throw a monkey wrench into the works in the kids' own heads.
Survivor, the goose steppers among drug policy reformers made all the same arguments for Prop 36 8 years ago. Fact is, something like 90% of all drug treatment offered in this country today is Stepcraft based and the other 10% just lie about it and/or based it on coercing the use of different drugs.
-
PARTIAL QUOTe is FAIL QUOTE!
-
Only problem with the democrats... they favor "treatment" (incarceration + thought reform) over incarceration.
I was having a discussion about this very thing with my friend last night at her election party. She said "No, it's good, because it gives other options besides juvie."
I said "You know, I know people who actually decided to do the jail sentence instead of go to 12 step meetings. Jail is for a set, limited period of time, 12 step is for whenever you finally clue in and pull your head out of your ass."
-
Well. Prop 5 was defeated.. phew!
-
Well. Prop 5 was defeated.. phew!
Unfortunately, prop 8 was not.
Do you know what this means??? Trannies can't marry *anyone*. FUCK!
-
Well. Prop 5 was defeated.. phew!
Unfortunately, prop 8 was not.
Do you know what this means??? Trannies can't marry *anyone*. FUCK!
It means war on the LDS church, is what it means. They pumped money and lies into CA to get 8 passed. The Utah mormans interfered with a CA election. They interfered with public policy. Now they want gays to be "Civil" to them (http://http://www.queerty.com/yeah-right-20081105/). The comments in that link speak volumes.
-
While this is clearly not a Level 4facility, the vibe of prison permeates everything, from lingo and body language to food distribution.
*
There’s a reason for this. The bulk of Impact residents are here because of Proposition 36, a 2001 measure that dedicated $120 million annually for five years to providing rehab rather than imprisonment for drug-related offenses. Los Angeles County mandated four- to six-month stays for nonviolent first- and second-time drug offenders diverted to facilities such as Impact. Almost 40,000 Californians enter treatment each year through Prop. 36, which, according to advocates, has saved taxpayers $1.3 billion over five years. Private-pay or “blue cluster” clients, who pay about $7000* a month, are supposedly treated a little better and live in “Beverly Hills,” a newer housing unit up above the main yard. I claimed I was private pay for simplicity’s sake, but I will apparently live in the “ghetto cluster,” where everyone starts out.
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=26143 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=26143)
-
So... wonderful. Forced religion to a cult religion that harms people. They don't even bother to hide the Synanon anymore in facilities such as Impact.
-
They never really did deny the Synanon connection all the time. Internally, The Seed was pretty proud of it. I don't remember mention of it in Straight, but then again it was an accepted part of my reality so mention of it would not have been noteworthy to me. It's only really when critics start asking questions that they get all squirrelly about it.
-
They never really did deny the Synanon connection all the time. Internally, The Seed was pretty proud of it. I don't remember mention of it in Straight, but then again it was an accepted part of my reality so mention of it would not have been noteworthy to me. It's only really when critics start asking questions that they get all squirrelly about it.
From what I can gather, CEDU was the only synanon bastard child that didn't openly broadcast about their origins. Daytop, Phoenix House and Walden House all talk freely about it.