At our drug and alcoholism treatment center, we believe in our patients’ ability to succeed. With the help of our outstanding staff, we support our patients’ growth and recovery. We can help. (866) 930-4673
At this point it is probably safe to say that the majority of Americans are familiar with the Taconic Parkway tragedy from back in July. Where Diane Schuler drove the wrong way down the Taconic Pkwy with five children in a minivan, drunk and stoned; crashing head-on with a SUV carrying three people. A total of eight people died in the wreck, the sole survivor was Diane Schuler's five-year-old Brian Schuler; it's is a blessing that more were not injured in that horrific accident. Schuler's husband Daniel has repeatedly claimed that Diane was not an alcoholic and that she hardly ever drank, furthermore, Daniel states that he had never seen her drunk. As for the marijuana, well, apparently that was only for medicinal purposes to help her sleep. Daniel Schuler went so far as to hire a private detective to dispute the toxicology findings, but, basically the investigator Tom Rushkin has been hired to poke holes in the case against Diane. The latest defense put forth is interesting to say the least! Tom Ruskin stated, "That Taconic mom Diane Schuler couldn't have been drunk and high when she crashed her car driving the wrong way down the Taconic because she ordered Chicken Selects from McDonalds four hours earlier", reports The Village Voice. One has to wonder how it is possible, after seven innocent people lost their lives, that Rushkin and Schuler's husband could think that would prove her innocence.
Apparently, Schuler could not have been drunk or stoned, she argued with a McDonalds' employee and demanded to speak to a manager about ordering something not on the breakfast menu - Chicken Selects. A McDonalds' employee who served Schuler filled out an affidavit and failed to mention that Schuler seemed intoxicated, and that is the argument in a nutshell. Maybe Schuler wasn't inebriated at the McDonalds, but, there was another four hours until the fatal crash which would be plenty of time to drink and smoke. Diane "was seen by three witnesses vomiting at the side of the road on the morning of the crash. At the time of that report, Ruskin said that if it was Schuler vomiting, it proved that she was incapacitated by illness and not by pot and alcohol", according to The Village Voice. It is unbelievable how hard evidence against Diane Schuler keeps popping up and Rushkin keeps dreaming up magical alternatives to why Schuler couldn't be intoxicated. Incapacitated by illness, like alcohol has never made people vomit when they mix alcohol with pot?
Diane Schuler was an alcoholic who took the lives of many people with her addiction. The evidence all points in the same direction and the longer people try to cover for Diane the worse it makes her and the entire family look. Is it possible that Diane hid her disease from everyone, sure it's possible; but, there are people out there who know what happened on that tragic day and they are not speaking up. If anything, the truth is owed to the loved ones of the deceased; why belabor this tragedy any longer. Everyday, people get behind the wheel intoxicated even with children, as we saw in Schuler's case; New York just passed a bill that makes driving intoxicated with a child in the car a felony. Unfortunately, laws have very little sway against an addicted mind.
The video below seems slow and pointless until the end when everything suddenly speeds up. Or at least that is how it appears. We wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving.
In the late 60's and early 70's many soldiers returning from the Vietnam War came back home with mental health problems. Making the matter worse, many of those same soldiers had serious addiction problems as a result of trying to deal with what they experienced in war. Vietnam veterans did not receive the care that they needed forcing them into ineffective mental health clinics and jails; there were not many options for drug treatment in those days. Countless veterans suffered from our lack of understanding of mental disorders, including and especially addiction. Forty years later and America finds itself in a similar predicament, staggering numbers of soldiers are coming back from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with serious prescription drug problems, either to deal with pain or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). This wave of addictions has veterans winding up in jails all over the country. Veterans with mental health and addiction problems belong in treatment, jails only exasperate the issue; if the United States does not provide its war veterans with adequate treatment, then we will see a repeat of history.
The Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) released a report showing that current practices and policies in the United States has needlessly sent large numbers of handicapped and addicted veterans to jail. The report points out the advantages of drug courts and that treatment is always the better option. Drug and alcohol treatment has a much greater track record of keeping recidivism to a minimum. Guy Gambill, a long-time veterans' advocate, suggests, "In the aftermath of Vietnam, self-medication and its collateral behaviors landed tens of thousands of veterans in prison. This time, let’s be smarter than the problem". Unfortunately, many young veterans coming back from the war who get into trouble do not take advantage of drug court if it is offered; most states do not even have veteran drug court available.
Clearly, action needs to be taken to help or at least offer help to veterans coming back from the war addicted to prescription drugs and other substances. There is no reason why any non-violent addict should spend time in jail; the science is there to back up treatment as being more effective. The military will not provide any form of maintenance programs for their soldiers addicted to opiates despite the evidence world wide to support drugs like Suboxone and Methadone. What is certain is that the military still has a long way to go before soldiers and other veterans are adequately cared for and treated properly, hopefully this report will open peoples' eyes.
Medical marijuana in California has created a wave of people who have started growing the drug with the hopes of making a fortune. People are traveling from all over the country to get their foot in the door before it is closed. People think that because there are medical marijuana laws that it will protect them from the authorities. That is not the case, if you break the law and profit from growing pot under the guise that the plants are grown for medical purposes you will be incarcerated. There are more marijuana growers in the United States today than ever before, especially in California where laws are more relaxed. Unfortunately, the majority of marijuana grown in California is not for medical use and is being sold illegally. Marijuana is quickly becoming the next gold rush; the idea of growing marijuana for profit without the threat of punishment is inviting more people into the drug war. Federal officials plan to announce today 4.4 million plants have been seized since last summer, which is up 52%.
Since medical marijuana cuts into the Mexican cartels profits, they have become more aggressive with their guerrilla operations. The idea that legalizing pot would stop the cartels is not proving true. The United States legalizing medical marijuana will mean more pot will be grown to be sold illegally. Marijuana is an addictive drug that affects the lives of many people, more pot equals more addicts. Sadly, the Mexican cartels are using our national forests to grow marijuana, destroying our pristine habitats. According to the LA Times, "in 2008, 2.9 million plants were found, worth an estimated $11.6 billion. About 70% was grown on public lands. The campaign also seized 2.9 million plants in 2007".
The numbers are staggering and unfortunately they are our future. More people will be exposed to the drug than ever before, inevitably we will see addiction rates spike in America. It will be interesting to see how California goes about this transition and responds to the changes.
There are so many bills flying around California that it is hard to keep track of everything going on with the Marijuana debate. What the future will hold is any one's guess, but, with the way things look it seems like it won't be long before Marijuana is a legal drug in California and perhaps the United States. There are a number of states who are tired of spending millions of dollars on prohibiting the production, distribution, and use of the drug. With the country in an economic recession more and more people are trying to find a way to generate revenue. The fact that more people will become addicted to the drug has become over-shadowed by the recession and the violent Mexican cartels. The argument is that legalizing marijuana will slow down the cartels and bring more tax money which could help pull us out of our economic woes. Whatever the case may be there will be a lot of heated discussion in the months to come regarding the pros and cons of marijuana legalization. Listed below are some of the bills and measures that are in the works for a green California and perhaps a green America:
Assembly Bill 390: Introduced in February by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, it would legalize marijuana cultivation, sales, possession and use by people 21 and older, regulating it somewhat like alcohol. A license to grow for sale would cost $5,000 to start and then $2,500 to renew each year, and a $50-per-ounce tax would be placed on retail sales. Ammiano said he hopes this would bring upward of $1.4 billion per year for drug abuse prevention efforts. No taxation would occur unless the federal marijuana ban is lifted; otherwise, the bill's only effect would be legalization of personal cultivation and use. Ammiano held the bill in committee this year, and is now rewriting it to put it forth again in January.
The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010: Proposed by Oakland marijuana activists Richard Lee and Jeff Jones, it would legalize personal possession of up to an ounce of cannabis and up to 25 square feet of cultivation per home. It also would give local governments the option of whether to permit, regulate and tax commercial sales, a system akin to how alcohol is or isn't sold in "wet" and "dry" counties in some states. This seems to be the measure to watch; the proponents say their petition drive is surging, and its endorsements include that of Oakland mayoral candidate and former state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata. For details, go to Tax Cannabis 2010.
The Tax, Regulate and Control Cannabis Act of 2010: Advanced by proponents Joe Rogoway, Omar Figueroa and James Clark, all of San Francisco, it would legalize personal cultivation and use without limits, but would require -- not just allow -- state and local governments to regulate and tax commercial marijuana cultivation and sales. Tax revenues would have to be spent on education, health care, environmental programs, public works and state parks. For details, got to the California Cannabis Initiative.
The Common Sense Act of 2010: Advanced by proponent John Donohue, of Long Beach, it would require the Legislature to adopt laws regulating and taxing marijuana within one year, but would let local governments choose whether to also tax marijuana's cultivation, sale, and use. For details, go to Grasstax.
-Info Provided by the Contra Costa Times-
I am curious to see what everyone thinks about the direction California is heading regarding this subject. Is California moving too quickly and not evaluating the big picture thoroughly? Once California passes the breaking point it is very unlikely that what has been done can be reversed. Both sides have well thought out arguments to support their views; but, what isn't clear is whether they have thought out plans to implement such a drastic shift into everyday life? Please send us your comments.
