One Year On ... Some Things Never Change

My life has changed somewhat since I officially ended The Australian Heroin Diaries over 12 months ago. And by far, the biggest change has been the amount of free time I now have. I never realised how much time actually went into my website. Just having time to surf the web without sniffing out drug related issues is so refreshing. Now I have some resemblance of a normal life with more time for work and other interests. But the itch to restart The Australian Heroin Diaries has at times been overwhelming especially when I keep getting emails from readers and comments are still being posted on my website.

For those who may be interested, I no longer use drugs and I'm living a happy, productive life on the NSW coast. My reliance on SROM has dropped to half the dose I was on just over a year ago. I still pinch myself sometimes to see if it's all not just a dream. I feel the last 16 years have been a blur to the point where it's almost surreal. Did all this really happen to me? A confident professional with fantastic friends, a great family, a new house, a successful business and a plan to marry the love of my life? What possibly could have gone wrong? Anyway, that is in the past now and I have much to look forward to. My depression has almost gone and I have someone special in my life. Work is great and I have got back much of what made me who I am.

Unfortunately, my return for this article is not just a simple update but the scary realisation that we still have a long way to go. On a recent visit to Victoria, I caught a glimpse of the Channel 7 news and up pops that bearded burbler called Hinch. Now I have no real qualms with Hinch but also don't have that much interest either in his self assigned role as our moral saviour. Sure, he has some worthy pet issues (as we all do) but calling himself the human headline probably sums up the style and depth of the journalism he dishes out. But what I heard that night sent shivers down my spine and brought back the bitter distaste I had for drug hysteria, moral crusaders and those who abuse the drug issue for personal gain. I suppose you could drop me into the last category but at least I try to base my ramblings on research and facts. Maybe it's something Hinch might want to try.



The first surprise with the Hinch story was that he had resurfaced that stale myth called the ice epidemic. I thought that went out of flavour years ago. Maybe it's part genius to once again capitalise on scaring the bajesus out of suburban housewives and the largely ignorant public especially since the issue had faded into drug propaganda history years ago. His claim that ice was going to rewrite history as the greatest drug threat society will ever see waddled off into the pond of obscurity a long time ago. Of course, the ice carnage promised by various drug warriors never materialised and they simply moved on to other critical issues like Korean rap singers and Matthew Newton. So why now Mr. Hinch?

What did Hunch say that provoked me to write a whole article after being away for so long? Well, if there was a list of every myth and lie that has been said about the so called ice epidemic then Hinch must have it. Super addictive, epidemic proportions, giving users super human strength, our worst drug problem ever etc. etc. According to Hinch, our worst drug problem ever has Ambulance call outs rising by 107% from 136 to 282. Yup, that's 282 ambulance call outs. Hardly a national crisis. If anything, it shows that the recent policy of not charging drug effected people when calling an ambulance is working.

It makes people psychotic. Puts police, emergency services and members of the public at risk. And can give users almost super human strength.
--Derryn Hinch. Channel 7 News

Like so many anti-drug stories, the lack of research, popular myths and fuzzy facts blur the reality for the sake of ratings. Some bearded buffoon banging on about addicts robbing your house and hulk like, drugged out maniacs attacking members of the public makes for good viewing. I'm sure the fact that most people affected by ice are more likely to cuddle you to death than belting you won't win over any viewers especially when we are constantly bombarded by such ridiculous claims like those by Hinch. The perception that everyone on ice is a raving lunatic wanting to rob or bash you is so far from the truth that it makes me dizzy. Contrary to most media reporting, amphetamines are well known to cause over friendliness, make people talk too much and want to have sex. Sure, there will be some who become violent but not anymore than the national average of drunken youth out on the town. Adding the "psychotic" tag is bound to help garnish up images of frenzied junkies wanting to bash and rob our grandmas. Luckily, it's just junk journalism at it's worst.

“Most methamphetamine users do not become psychotic. There are some people who do, a minority who do, and that's usually related to extended periods of binge using, with people not sleeping, not eating - that sort of thing,"
"The vast majority of people use methamphetamine very occasionally recreationally, perhaps on the weekend or something, and they're not going to get to that point."
--Annie Madden. AIVL

If there are so many ice "addicts" and it's such an epidemic then why aren't the night clubs actually fight clubs? Where's the reports of frenzied bloodbaths in a club full of drugged out ice users? The fact is that any amphetamine such as ice usually makes you friendly towards others much like low doses of alcohol does. But like Alcohol, too much can have the opposite affect. We tend to forget that alcohol is the single most violent drug on earth and the violence associated with ice is usually because of the copious amounts of booze they consumed while out on the town. Add to that the ability of ice to keep you up for days and you get the nasty combination of sleep deprivation and several days of drinking condensed into a short period. This is where most of trouble occurs.

Because there has been such extensive media coverage of this purported relationship between violence and ice use, what we get now when we talk to service providers, is a reproduction of the messages that the media are portraying. So, when someone walks into the service and they might be agitated or violent, very quickly the service provider says, !!!OOh, they must be on ice.!!!  And so, you get this reproduction of the message that is actually communicated in the media, rather than one that is based on evidence and based on good clinical practice. We weren’t receiving news amongst the service providers of high levels of violence related to methamphetamine use five years ago, when the peak of methamphetamine use was occurring in Australia. We are seeing that now.
--Associate Professor John Fitzgerald, Principal Research Fellow at the School of Population Health, University of Melbourne

Methamphetamine is a dangerous drug when abused. But so is alcohol. It seems a wee bit hypocritical that someone renown for their boozy lunches and capacity to drink several bottles of wine in a single sitting is taking a swipe at ice users. But hypocrisy and stupidity form the basis for most anti-drug stories. Hinch and the police rattle on about ice being responsible for 80% of crime and how violent these druggies are. They even make it point to tell us that desperation drives them to commit serious crimes. Surprise, surprise ... none of these crimes would happen if we had different laws. Boozers don't commit crimes to buy their drug of choice because it's legal and when they have a problem, we give them medical treatment not jail.

The biggest give away though to expose Hinch's rant as a poorly researched puff piece is that he complains there is no specific treatment for ice abuse and no legal substitute drug like methadone is for heroin addicts. It takes a mere 10 minutes of research to discover that substitution treatment is solely for addictive drugs that cause no physical harm e.g heroin. Amphetamines like alcohol have a devastating effect on you physically and using these drugs daily will not only fry your brain but inflict massive harm to your body. And since amphetamines are not physically addictive but physiologically dependant, substitution treatment would be pointless. It's just sloppy research by Hinch. But who cares? Some media personality with a degree in gravel collecting must know more than the hundreds of experts who spend their lives researching this stuff.

Although this is a serious issue, there is an amusing side to it. Hinch says that ice can give users almost super human strength. Really?! Super human strength … like Captain America? Pffft. For the record, no drug can instantly give you extra strength. Muscles do not magically grow because you smoke ice. It may boost your adrenaline levels but you still have the same strength with or without ice. Ironically, it's the legal drug, alcohol that causes the aggression and wild thrashing that many blame on ice. You know, the drug that Hinch was once infamous for abusing (or as he so delicately puts it, it was ‘all part of life’s rich tapestry’). The silly argument about street drugs giving users super human strength is as bizarre as believing in the science behind the Hulk. It's pure fiction and was debunked decades ago when PCP was making it's rounds in the 1980s. Do you remember decades ago when reports of drugged out super humans lifting up cars and taking on a dozen police officers were part of the war on drugs? Even a few years ago, there were hospitals being coerced into building "safe rooms" and deploying security guards to protect workers from crazy, iced up supermen? Well, this bizarre claim was dismissed as a media beat up by irresponsible, second rate journalists and simply another attempt by anti-drug nutters to bluff the public. It seems like some things will never change.

Related Articles

The Propaganda Files - The Faces of Meth
Ice - More Drug Myths
AMA Pushing Zero Tolerance (Ice - More Drug Myths Pt II)
The Ben Cousins Story - Experts vs. Bozos

Safe Injecting Room Hysteria Hits Victoria

Picture this scenario. A cancer expert proposes a medical clinic that would not only save dozens of lives each year but save $millions in future costs through preventative care. The proposed clinic from the expert is backed up by thousands of highly qualified peers and he even produces evidence from 91 other similar clinics around the world that show how successful they have been. The local council approves the clinic by a massive 6-1 vote while a local radio station quotes dozens of residents supporting the idea.      

What would you think if our state premier, in front of the media, told the cancer expert, his peers, the council leaders and supporters that the government won't be allowing the clinic to proceed and that instead, they will rely on extending current programs. No big deal, we have heard it all before at least a dozen times. 

What if though, the government' s current programs - the ones they want to expand - have never actually worked? And I'm not just talking about not working in some suburb in Melbourne like Richmond but in every region, in every state and territory in Australia. Not even once has the premier's proposed strategies ever resulted in success in Australia But, what if the premier's suggestion has never even succeeded overseas although it has been the default policy for 40 years in thousands of states, counties and provinces in over 200 countries around the world? Now, that's just ridiculous...

OK, so it's not a cancer clinic but the principle is still the same. If it was actually a cancer clinic, the public, the medical profession, the media and the opposition would be demanding the resignation of the premier and his cronies. What leader would ignore thousands of medical experts and hundreds of scientific studies and instead continue on with a policy that has failed for 40 years and annually costs tens of $billions, kills dozens of people, sends thousands of non violent Australians to prison and causes more societal carnage than any other policy in modern history? The answer is simply stunning. No leader would be that irresponsible, reckless and idiotic to ignore the massive amount of scientific and empirical evidence ... unless it has to do with illicit drugs.  

Why do governments ignore the scientific research behind illicit drugs? For example, why would Ted Baillieu oppose a safe injecting clinic in Richmond so vehemently when Sydney's MSIC has proven itself, again and again through independent, scientific research? If there was ample evidence for a cancer clinic, Uncle Ted wouldn't even hesitate but since it's about drugs, all advice from experts and professionals is simply rejected like a Buck's Fizz CD at a Faith No More concert.

Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu refuses to approve the state's first heroin injecting centre because he doesn't want to be seen as soft on drugs, a key drugs policy adviser says.

Yarra councillors voted 6-1 on Tuesday night for an injecting room to tackle drug-related problems in the inner Melbourne suburb of Richmond.

Mr Baillieu insists his government won't sanction the establishment of an injection room along the lines of the Sydney facility that has operated in Kings Cross for 10 years.

"I recognise there's a problem and it's one of the reasons why we want to have more police on the streets," he told Fairfax Radio.

"We haven't supported injecting rooms, we won't support injecting rooms, and I don't support the normalisation of any of this sort of behaviour."

-Sydney Morning Herald

One of Baillieu's answers was to put more police on the streets. This type of response might have been appropriate in the 1970s/1980s but we have had 40 years of successive failures, hundreds of studies slamming the tactic and no proof whatsoever that the suggestion would help the drug problem. In fact, every single scientific study or research project has shown us that an increased police presence simply moves the problem to neighbouring suburbs or a new location. Relying on brute force tactics like law enforcement is not just lazy politics but ineffective at best and dangerous at worst. Is this really the best solution an elected leader can come up with? Decisions like this would not be tolerated in the private sector so why are they allowed when you're the elected premier? This isn't about profit/loss statements or whether company XYZ should increase their marketing budget for SE Asia. The cold, hard reality from decisions about issues like the proposed safe injecting clinic in Richmond can have an enormous impact on families and those who need help the most.

Prof. David Penington said Mr Baillieu's proposal to solve the problem through law enforcement would not work.

"Mr Baillieu is very firmly of the view that everything can be handled by law enforcement," Prof Penington told AAP.

"It's an instinctive reaction.

"It's a problem that is not going to go away with law enforcement. It's something that law enforcement has failed to eliminate over the last 50 years.

"They just fear that anything seen as soft on drugs will increase their use, but in fact, if we look at the evidence from other places and the successful program in Sydney, there isn't any evidence of increased use."

-Professor David Penington, a senior fellow at Melbourne's Grattan Institute 

THE CURRENT REALITY

Our antiquated drug laws are devastating the human race, stockpiling addicts in overcrowded prisons and creating havoc for those with mental disorders. The irony is that although only a very small percentage of society end up with major drug problems, the bulk of drug users never have a health problem and only ever run into trouble when they cross paths with law enforcement. The tiny group of troubled drug users are the focus for most of our public policy, the media's attention and the bulk of police resources. Like alcohol abusers, the problematic drug user require most of the available help but after decades of anti-drug propaganda and politicians taking advantage of the publics misguided views usually force politicians into retaining useless and often dangerous drug policies that mostly just appease nervous parents, conservatives and semi-religious community groups.

Those who do end up with an addiction or a drug problem have become fodder for headline writers and self promoting politicians. Gone are the days when addicts were diagnosed with respect by doctors and treated like any other person with a medical issue. Now they are forced into rancid, run down shooting galleries or laneways, away from emergency services. It's bad enough that most users do not know what's in their stash but denying them a safe place to inject it just adds that extra self loathing and self hatred for having to do things to themselves that many of them still can't fully comprehend. 

Being a junkie is as distressful and overwhelming as it gets. And when the despair from your daily ritual to find money also includes being hunted down by military style cops, your dose becomes all that more important. Just try and imagine how knowing there are strangers looking for you, pumped full of hatred because their commander-in-chiefs and our elected leaders publicly insist that you are the scourge of society. Would that affect your state of mind? Why would anyone think that addicts living this life are somehow happy with their situation?

SHOCKED IN MY JOCKS

I'm certainly no fan of MTR's Steve Price but what do you say when he writes an article for the Herald-Sun supporting a Safe Injecting Clinic in Richmond? Maybe this is what happens when an intelligent man starts to read between the lines of the usual anti-drug rubbish put out in the trash media? Maybe this is what happens when you are confronted more often with articles based on evidence and facts? Who knows? Whatever the reason, I have to say to Steve Price, well done for an excellent article.

PUBLIC LAMBASTING

I am really getting fed up with trash media like the Murdoch sewerage pit that spends hundreds of hours looking for new ways to degrade drug users, especially those who are addicts or have HIV/AIDS.  It's always the same; some nasty, cutting headline based on the warped opinion of some religious nutter, bigoted politician, hate group etc. Or it's meant to shock us about how much some program costs. 

Family groups yesterday said they objected to the program.

"We are against both the needle exchange and the condom programs," said Terri Kelleher of the Australian Family Association.

"People aren't making the best decision when they are on drugs, and therefore shouldn't be supplied with condoms. There's no guarantee they are going to use them anyway."

-The Herald Sun - You Pay $100,000 Bill For Addicts' Sex And Disease Control 

Everyday, there's some derogative article that describes drug users/addict-dealers/addicts etc. as a major threat to society. Especially to our precious children. How many times have you read about an innocent 1-2 year old being in the same room as their scum-of-the-earth parents are taking their deadly methadone or even worse, selling drugs? Does a 2 year old really notice these events while they desperately try to turn Ken or Barbie into contortionists? Do kids this age really stop midway through the TellyTubbies to enquire if the drugs for sale are as good as the previous batch from last week?

Will someone please think about the children!

-Helen Lovejoy (Wife of The Reverend Timothy Lovejoy) 

One of the main targets for criticism are Needle Exchange Programs (NEPs). Never mind the fact that they pay for themselves many times over, some people just cannot cope with the idea of providing clean injecting equipment for drug users. Some groups even object to providing condoms, so there's doom and gloom everywhere.   

Crime Victims Support Association's Noel McNamara said it was "disgusting" taxpayers were funding drug use.

"We're making it easier for people to go on drugs," he said.

"It's appalling that this money is being spent on drug users rather than on people fighting cancer or diabetes."

-Sunday Herald Sun - Needle Exchange Sparks Hot Spot Fears For Footscray And Frankston 

The US under G.W. Bush banned federal funding to any group that provided syringes or condoms (including HIV/AIDS support groups). Healthcare groups had to spend their funding on abstinence only programs following the "Just Say No" style or groups that promoted no sex before marriage. By the end of his term as president, the US had 1000% more people with HIV/AIDS and blood borne diseases than Australia. Obama changed all that and luckily the rate of drug users and sex workers with blood borne diseases is dropping rapidly. Although the federal laws have changed, it is still illegal in some US states to buy syringes without a prescription. Interestingly, John Howard was a big supporter of US style drug policy.

During the Festival of Dangerous Ideas in 2009, Lawyer, Greg Barns blamed the media for much of the drug hysteria in Australia. And he is dead right. The muck raking might help them sell newspapers and keep silly opinion writers in a job but the end results are deadly. As Barns pointed out, many people get all their information from these media groups and after years of telling the same lies, most people start to believe them as facts. Where's the social responsibility?

Melbourne's 9000 overdoses a year

-The Herald Sun - Peter Mickelburough 

How are our elected politicians supposed to introduce sensible, evidence based policies with the media stirring up so much controversy about an issue that has been twisted for at least 40 years? Even before the term "War on Drugs" was coined by US President, Richard Nixon, we had "Reefer Madness" and other silly fairy tales circulating like they were facts. 

Shame of our Needle Town

Sunday Herald Sun - Hamish Heard

But times have changed. Most drug experts now agree that we cannot continue with a "War on Drugs" mentality but it has to start with some brave politicians to risk putting science before popularity. Luckily, tt has actually started albeit slowly. I just hope Ted Baillieu can be mature enough to support evidence based policy and stand his ground against the biggest fear of all ... being called "Soft on Drugs" by opposing politicians. 

Related Articles

Herald-Sun and It’s Readers Hit a New Low

Even the Truth About Drugs are Illegal

Drug Hysteria & The Great Doctor Witch Hunt

Bucket Head of the Year Awards - 2010

ALREADY!!! - Another Lib Makes a Dickhead of Himself

Has Paul Sheehan Written the Worst Article Ever?

Yarra City Council Votes In Favour Of Supervised Injecting Rooms 

Business Shoots Down Melbourne Injecting Room

Herald-Sun and It’s Readers Hit a New Low

News Ltd. Newspapers like The Daily Telegraph, The Courier Mail and the Adelaide Advertiser are notorious for producing some of the worst journalism in Australia but this week, the Herald-Sun hit a new low. 

What does a Herald-Sun journalist do when he stumbles across a young overdose victim being cared for by his friends? Chip in and help? Enquire about an ambulance? Pester the friends for a story? 

The victim’s friends were in obvious distress but that didn’t stop Herald-Sun journalist, Aaron Langmaid from getting his story. Like some deranged parrot, he repeatedly quizzed the frantic carers if the victim had taken GHB. Five times in five seconds in fact. Eventually, one person snapped back, “I don’t know!”

What’s he actually had? Was it G? What else? What else has he had? Has he had G? How much G did he have?

How long ago did he have it?

When did you last speak to him … Like in the club? How long ago? Like 20 minutes? 

How old is he?

And on it went. 

Langmaid is a disgrace and sadly, typical of the News Ltd ‘ambulance chaser’ mentality. Langmaid, himself described the situation as ‘frantic’ and that ‘a young life hangs in the balance’ but that didn’t stop him from his selfish pursuit of a story. Were his demanding questions appropriate while a man lie dying in front of his friends? Did he really have to push those attending the victim so hard for an immediate answer? And why didn’t he wait until the ambulance arrived before interfering with a potentially fatal overdose? This was appalling behaviour for a journalist with a major newspaper.

Trash media like the Herald-Sun are experts at this style of dog whistle journalism. Stories about street crime, celebrity meltdowns and welfare cheats attracts a certain type of audience and the Murdoch press really know their market. And like a Mecca for rednecks; racists, bogans and right-wing nutters coming running when there’s a chance to spill some vile on those often deemed as “low-lifes” or “oxygen thieves”.

“Dole bludgers” and “boat people” might be a popular target for most of the Herald-Sun hate squad but the real prize for attracting loonies are drug users and dealers. And nothing highlights this more than the article in question. The reader’s comments section was full of derogative, vile put-downs aimed at the overdose victim and anyone related to drugs. Druggies, as most readers liked to call them were also referred to as ‘idiots’ 27 times. ‘stupid’ 13 times and fools 11 times. Other endearing names include junkies, scum of the earth, the scourge of society, overdosed dogs, drug-addled useless parasites, lowest of the low, indulgent idiots, drop-kicks, excreta, self-inflicted drones, cashed-up tools, brain dead morons, slime balls, ferals[sic] and even buggers.

Drug addicts are the lowest of the low. They don't deserve any more help than they are already getting. If they can't handle their own situation properly then don't expect assistance from anyone else. I can understand that its ruined people's families but this is getting ridiculous. I'm sick of hearing about these kinds of incidents...its their own faults no one elses.

-ausie29

It’s not just the name calling that makes these readers so disgusting but something more sinister. There were literally dozens of comments that proudly called for people overdosing to be left on the street to die. 

Just let them OD and die I reckon, less buyers means less demand means less drugs. Simple but effective.

-The Warden of Williamstown

What sort of person thinks like this? What drives someone to make such malicious comments in a public forum about strangers? Have we, as a society really sunken this low? 

Here's a thought. Leave the overdosed dogs in the gutters where they fall and concentrate on helping good, honest humans.

-Serge of Melb

The Herald-Sun holds a family day picnic for it’s readers

A big part of it seems to be modern conservative ideology. There were plenty of readers blaming a lack of personal responsibility and a diminishing standard of morals. Fine, they are welcome to their views but spewing out hateful demands for people overdosing to be left to die is bordering on derangement. 

One quick way to fix this problem is for Ambo's to fail to respond to overdoses. At what point will the wider community accept that these drug users MAKE A CONSCIOUS DECISION to use drugs. Why should it be up to US (again) to be responsible for the actions of others. Police will NEVER stop the drug problem - it's been around for centuries. On top of that USERS don't get charged by Police anymore - Christine Nixon pitted the little darlings, stating a drug OD was a 'medical' problem & Police were instructed not to charge them with 'using' drugs... Let all that OD die from the OD. Then these idiots might thing twice about using - bonus will be the Ambo's can then have time to attend REAL medical emergencies.

-Fed Up of Berwick

What is it with modern conservatives and their lack of compassion? A recent study from the London Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience found that those with strong conservative views have less grey matter in a part of the brain related to understanding complexity than liberal minded people. The study also concluded that a conservative’s brain is bigger in the section linked to fear.

People living in fear will understandably see more threats everywhere because they are looking for them, and will lash out violently at any provocation while those analyzing the big picture are busy sorting complex details. While slower to retaliate, Liberals are compelled to explore options that might be difficult but necessary.

-Cathy Taibbi: Allvoices

So, conservatives have a unique brain that can’t process complex matters as well as the general population? And they are fearful of what most people deem fixable. I must say that I’m not really surprised at this information considering the reader’s comments from the Herald-Sun article. Conservative ideology is a destructive force and it unnecessarily divides many communities on important social issues. Throw in some self absorbed religious types and you have a dangerous combination.

I cannot have a lot of sympathy, as a person who has had to deal with the squalor and desperation of drug abuse in people I know. Self respect, my faith and my upbringing helped me to never go down that path (or even contemplate it) but the sorts of morals (yes, social engineers, I know it is a dirty word) approved of today are selfish, Left-wing and all about seeming and self-gratification. mental illness is not treated seriously enough, drug pushers are not dealt with harshly enough, and police are wasted on traffic duties and gay-pride marches. The bulk of the citizenry are being conned by a few do-gooders who want to further aid this deadly trade and the people who choose to use the drugs.

-shebs

Apart from the standard anti-drug rhetoric, there is a glaring contradiction in the mentioned article. The underlying message from the Herald-Sun is the need for tougher drug laws and and more public messages like, “mmm … drugs are bad … OK”. There is even a loaded poll under the scary heading, Drug Crisis. It asks readers the leading question, Should there be greater policing and tougher penalties to eliminate drugs on our streets? Of course, over 75% of readers voted yes. But the article included several opinions that contradict the newspaper’s position.

You can't win this war. Part of the reason drugs are so popular is because they are illegal. If illicit substances are regulated you create a space where users know what they are getting. Let’s have a discussion about a national drugs policy.'

-Australian Lawyers Alliance director Greg Barnes

Even champions of Zero Tolerance like the Catholic Church chipped in.

Catholic Care chief executive Fr Joe Caddy said drug use had to be treated as a health issue rather than through the criminal justice system. "In some cases we would still need the authority of the courts but part of the solution is teaching users - and their friends and family - how to manage the situation,'' he said.

-From the Article

And of course, Les Twentyman.

He told heraldsun.com.au that law and order was not going to stop the city's soaring drug problems.

[…]

"At the end of the day we can't stop it. Even when the police announce that they are going to be at rock concerts they still take the drug. The law and order part is certainly not a deterrent," he said.

[…]

Mr Twentyman said European schemes where drugs are tested for revellers before they take them should be considered.

"What they do in Europe is when people come in to buy drugs they test the drugs for them so they know exactly what they're getting."

"Maybe that needs to be looked at here, it's been a success."

-From the Article

If you had accidentally stumbled onto the Herald-Sun article from another country, you may be forgiven for thinking that Australians are nasty, hysterical twats. Just the initial video showing a ruthless, disrespectful reporter should be enough to trigger some serious questions. And then there’s the loaded poll with such a leading question. But it’s the reader’s comments that would leave you with no doubt. For example:

Let these fools die. Death penalty for sellers no matter how big or small. Jail for users.

-JB

And this.

People who take so called "recreational drugs" should not be given any treatment. Let them die. Maybe then the message will get through. Why should they be clogging up our health resources and a bonus would be a drop in crime.

-cazy of everywhere

But there’s always a lighter side to everything.

Apparently, drugs is what it's all about these days. This is what I was told by an inside source. You go to clubs, you do drugs. Just close the clubs down. The fewer places for these dogs to pack in, the better.

-Anthony B of Melbourne

Anthony, thanks to you and your ‘inside source’, for sharing that very important piece of information. Have you informed the Australian Federal Police?

Maybe some readers just have too much time on their hands. Especially in this instance:

Punish all three involved! User first offence, minimum $1k fine, and public humiliation. Publicly name them, and put them in public stocks for 12 hrs a day very wknd for 3 mths, and ban them from drugs & alcohol for 1 yr. Subsequent offences lock them up for min of 3 yrs. in special community service goals, that required manual labour, no concurrent sentencing. Drug dealers, no matter age, should face a minimum 15 years, before eligible for parole, with a maximum of never to be released for third, or subsequent offence. Finally, clubs, organised dance parties, other commercial activities, what ever, a $10k fine for each, and every addict who is, or was found to be on their premises. I say 'was', because the bouncers, rather than move this sick individual to a safe location, put him in a car. The fine should be $250k for each dealer caught, other than those they hand over with suitable proof to Police, and $500k fine if the Police raid, and only find drugs on the floor. Companies running these venues should have to put up a $mill Bond to cover potential fines, and replenish it if used, before being able to do business.

-Yasmine

Some suggest that more education about the consequences of drug use is a possible solution. I agree, we need more education … like basic writing skills.

and while he lies in the gutter with self inflicted wounds,honest people who need an ambulance are waiting,dieing because of his choices,illegal choices.Let a few die,it is their choice to ignor the law and education on drugs.they are just a scourge on decent society

-Eric of Melbourne

Herald-Sun reader Robynne says ...
"Why woulod a government condone drug taking?"

Yes, education might just be the key.  

The Gillard goes all out to spend millions on anti smoking advertising,tells us what to drink ,what to eat ,BUT GIVES THE GREEN LIGHT TO ILLICIT DRUGS,SUPPLIES SHOOTING GALLERIES SO ADDICTS DON'T OVER DOSE,gives them free methodone,LIQUID HEROIN,WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE ??WHY WOULOD A GOVERNMENT CONDONE DRUG TAKING ??

-ROBYNNE morton of merrimac

See what happens when you leave school before your 12th birthday. BTW, what is a ‘Gillard’? And I might be wrong but did the reader misspell their own name?

But amongst the riff-raff there was a beacon of hope. This from Molly of Melbourne:

For those who don't know, GHB was originally designed as an anaesthetic, thus, falling unconcious from it isn't an "overdose", it's doing what the drug was designed for. Secondly, it's a naturally occurring substance in the body, it's much healthier to have GHB than most other drugs. There is a big problem in Melbourne with people taking too much and clubs calling ambulances, but there is a much bigger Australia wide drinking problem. Where are the stats about how many people die from GHB? The number is minuscule, and it's usually because the user has combined a bunch of drugs, not because of GHB toxicity. The chance of death from it is about the same as it is for someone who's passed out from alcohol, the main reason for death? Choking on vomit, but they don't like to add that factor in. I'm not saying we should ignore the problem, but don't dramatist it, look after your mates, make sure they're in the recovery position if they do "blow out" and try to educate them when they're awake on safe use. You can't stop people taking drugs, but you can help make it safer.

-Molly of Melbourne

The display of ignorance, aggression and malevolence from some readers was almost bordering on schadenfreude. There were so many comments that were just downright nasty and totally unnecessary as well as many opinions based on nothing but limited, misguided views. I can’t help but ask myself if this is the consensus in Australia or is it just the result of dog whistle journalism. Maybe it’s just pack mentality from a small group of uneducated, arrogant rednecks? I like to think of Australia as a fairly accepting society especially considering we like to portray ourselves as a “fair go” nation. Sadly, I think the self imposed image of barracking for the underdog or being the “fair go” nation is championed mostly by the very readers who made many of the horrible comments. I picture many of them being draped in the Australian flag reminiscent of the Cronulla riots in NSW. Hopefully, this is not the real Australia but a country made up of multiple cultures, strong beliefs in equality and a willingness to listen to reason.

And on a final note, you can’t go past this apt comment with it’s compelling advice.

Just for once, people of Melbourne & Australia, can I implore you, just for once in your lives, to refrain from making comment on issues that you know next-to-nothing about. Plus, just because your cousin, ten of your Facebook friends or your co-worker's former nanny had problems with drugs, it doesn't make you an 'expert' - FACT. So now that we have that established, pls click on the link below and begin the process of developing insight: http://enews.vaada.org.au/news/2011/04/11/media-release-vaada-saving-lives

-Joe

Overdose Footage Sparks New Drugs Debate

Herald-Sun

Aaron Langmaid & Anne Wright

April 2011

HARROWING footage of an overdose victim sprawled on a city footpath in the middle of the day has sparked nationwide debate.

Closing Melbourne's seedy daytime dance clubs and legalising illicit drugs were among suggestions.

Despite campaigning on a plan to clean up Melbourne's streets, Lord Mayor Robert Doyle would not comment on the issue yesterday.

The owner of the nightclub involved said the victim's friends had demanded to be let out of the venue as he lapsed into unconsciousness.

Tramp owner Matt Giles said staff urged the group to wait for an ambulance but they were told to carry him on to the street.

"We didn't want to let him go,'' he said.

"We told them 'you're not taking him home'.

"But they demanded to be let out.''

The 20-year-old had been conscious while inside. It was the first GHB-related case he had seen at the venue in five years.

"We judge it case by case but it's tough for us,'' he said.

Australian Lawyers Alliance director Greg Barnes said it was time to discuss a federal policy of decriminalisation.

"You can't win this war,'' Mr Barnes said. 

"Part of the reason drugs are so popular is because they are illegal. If illicit substances are regulated you create a space where users know what they are getting,'' he said.

"Let's have a discussion about a national drugs policy.''

Catholic Care chief executive Fr Joe Caddy said drug use had to be treated as a health issue rather than through the criminal justice system.

"In some cases we would still need the authority of the courts but part of the solution is teaching users - and their friends and family - how to manage the situation,'' he said.

The footage captured by the Herald Sun also attracted a huge response from readers.

"The fact the (victim) was at a 'night' club at 11 in the morning says it all,'' said Lance, of Melbourne.

"Having these places open until this time promotes the use of drugs. How else can someone last the distance without drugs. Open them earlier and close them at 3am.''

In graphic scenes, a 20-year-old man is hauled from a nightclub at 11am on Sunday as families stroll past seemingly unaware a young life hangs in the balance.

The video showing paramedics battling to revive him highlights the drugs epidemic, with 9000 overdoses a year putting enormous strain on emergency services.

Premier Ted Baillieu, who viewed the Herald Sun video, said the anti-drugs message was not getting through to young people.

"This is a parent's worst nightmare," Mr Baillieu said. "It is shocking footage, it's real, it's evil."

Friends of the victim are clearly frantic after bouncers carry him unconscious from Tramp bar on King St.

The Herald Sun witnessed staff waiting with the man inside the venue door for more than 10 minutes before he was carried across the footpath and into a waiting car.

He remained unconscious until paramedics arrived but his friends confirmed he had taken the liquid drug gammahydroxybutrate, or GHB.

"I don't know how much he's taken or when he took it," one cried.

An Ambulance Victoria spokesman later confirmed an advance life support team - and even a fire brigade unit - had been called to treat the suspected overdose victim.

Youth worker Les Twentyman said Melbourne's drug problem has been on the rise for some time, and needed to be addressed.

He told heraldsun.com.au that law and order was not going to stop the city's soaring drug problems.

"The ambos told me recently that they had noticed they were attending more of these types of incidents," he said.

"The scene is just awash with drugs."

Mr Twentyman said the party drug scene appeared to affect middle class youngsters the most because they could afford to be in the clubs and buying drugs.

"At the end of the day we can't stop it. Even when the police announce that they are going to be at rock concerts they still take the drug. The law and order part is certainly not a deterrent," he said.

"They'll just shop around and one day it's heroin, another day it's amphetamines or whatever pills they can get their hands on.

"The issue is that they have a whole cocktail of different drugs."

Mr Twentyman said European schemes where drugs are tested for revellers before they take them should be considered.

"What they do in Europe is when people come in to buy drugs they test the drugs for them so they know exactly what they're getting."

"Maybe that needs to be looked at here, it's been a success."

Intensive care paramedic Alan Eade said it was a scene with which officers were all too familiar.

"We have the highest rate of use of GHB of any city in Australia," Mr Eade said.

"In other states and territories usage has dropped, but not here. Melburnians are overwhelmingly stupid.

"The greatest education point is this: it's a dangerous drug and people die using it.

"If it goes wrong, it goes wrong to the tune of not breathing," Mr Eade said.

But he said the youths involved in Sunday's incident had done the right thing: "They got help. Some others probably wouldn't have."

Mr Baillieu said the message wasn't getting through.

"It's turning young people's lives upside down. It's wasting lives, turning kids into vegetables in hospitals - it's madness."

Nightclub Owners' Association spokesman David Button said the use of GHB in clubs was prevalent.

The victim was taken to the Royal Melbourne hospital and later discharged.

A Victoria Police spokeswoman said the Force was committed to reducing the supply of illicit drugs in the community.

"(This includes) the use of so called 'party drugs' in nightclubs," she said in a statement. 

"If information is received regarding trafficking at licensed premises or within the community, Victoria Police responds accordingly.

"The Drug Task Force and Regional police members continue to conduct a number of successful operations aimed at reducing the manufacture and supply of illicit drugs."

Related Articles

GBH, Ecstasy, Overdoses and Raves - Australian Style

Journalist Should Be Ashamed

Piers Akerman, His Readers, Oxycodone and The Truth

Did They Really Say That? Part 1 - The Media

Will The Daily Telegraph Writer Who Wrote This Crap Please Own Up

Drug Reporting in the MSM - They Just Get Sillier and Sillier

Has Paul Sheehan Written the Worst Article Ever?

Drug Dealers Have to Live Somewhere

News Ltd Hypocrisy & The Culture of Nasty, Aggressive, Unethical Media

Only in the Trash Media

Bogan Schapelle Haters Love The Hillbilly Press

CourierMail - Cocaine Hysteria Thrives in Trash Media

WARNING! - Drug Users Being Responsible ... Again!

DIARY: Sick Comments, Dalrymple and Faith

Journalist's Shame

Soft on Drugs? ... Soft in the Head!

Darren “Maaaate” Marton

Today, in the The Daily Telegraph, Darren Marton wrote. 

I AM not an expert in the drug and alcohol field. I am a layman who has learned his lessons through life experience.

And he is dead right. He is not an expert on drugs and forms his views from empirical data (his own experience). Certainly not worthy of consideration for a national or state drug policy.

But it’s more than that. Like most anti-harm minimisation zealots, Marton’s use of the truth, is dubious at best. It’s this willingness to lie along with a mix of fanaticism - in opposition to harm minimisation - that makes people like Darren Marton so dangerous.

Marton’s recent piece in The Daily Telegraph(below) is a prime example of how anti-drug rhetoric from politicians can be misconstrued as some wise, righteous advice that can only benefit the community. But lying about the facts is not helping anyone, especially the families of drug users who have suffered the consequences from decades of propaganda. Marton’s message is just an extension of that propaganda, hurting the very people he is supposed to care so much about.

Claiming we have never had a "War on Drugs" is an insult to the millions of people incarcerated around the globe who have done nothing wrong but suffer an addiction. Imagine how do African-Americans and Latinos in the US feel when someone denies that they are victims of a largely racist policy? Although African-Americans make up 12.2 percent of the population and 13% of regular drug users in the US, they account for 74% of all Americans sent to prison for drug possession crimes. In other words, African-Americans were sent to state prisons for drug offences 13 times more often than other races. It’s a similar story for Latinos. How can Darren Marton possibly defend a Zero Tolerance policy when it causes results like this? Look at the crack-cocaine disparity laws in the US. During his reign as US President, Ronald Reagan - whose strategies form the basis for Marton’s suggestions e.g. “Just Say No” campaign, tough drug laws etc. - increased penalties for crack possession, 100 times that of powder cocaine. Of course, crack is widely used in poorer suburbs largely populated with minorities like African-Americans and Latinos whilst cocaine powder was then exclusively for the richer, white middle-upper classes. This is the reality of Marton’s suggestions. The fact is, simple slogan campaigns like “Just Say No” or his own “No Way” don’t work and never have. They might appease nervous parents or posturing politicians but history and research have ruled them out as ineffective.

Australia minorities are not exempt from the harsh reality of the "War on Drugs" either. Tough drug laws inflict much more damage to poorer families than the middle-upper class. For example, most drug dealers are addicts on low incomes who fund their addiction by selling to other addicts and friends. This “crime” is non violent and between consenting adults yet it is the focus of a Zero Tolerance policy championed by those who are far removed from this world. At the other end of the scale are the largely hidden, middle-upper class addicts who often have the means to fund their addiction albeit, only for a while. They often can afford clever solicitors, have family support and let’s face it, scrub up better in a court room.

Denying we have ever had a "War on Drugs" is disingenuous and to suggest that we are somehow too liberal with our drug policy is wrong. What Marton fails to tell us is that our official policy of Harm Minimisation has never been properly implemented. Anti-drug zealots love to rattle on about harm reduction programs like needle exchanges, methadone etc. but it is only one pillar of the Harm Minimisation policy. The other two pillars are Supply Reduction(law enforcement) and Demand Reduction(education). If you believe people like Marton, harm minimisation is all about an easy ride for users and taking away resources for prevention and law enforcement. But Harm Reduction only receives 3% of the drug budget whilst law enforcement(Supply Reduction) gets a whopping 56%. Education(Demand Reduction) gets 23% while treatment gets a measly 17%. 

In other words, your taxes mop up the mess. It is a social experiment policy, and a reactive one at that.

Those who oppose Harm Minimisation universally favour Zero Tolerance. What they fail to explain though, is that most drug policies in reality are based on Zero Tolerance with smatterings of Harm Minimisation programs. Not exactly the “social experiment policy” that Marton claims. 

I ask the question: What kind of future do we want to leave our children and our grandchildren? If it's one that protects our young, strengthens families, and provides safer communities, then let's do it.

Apart from being poorly written, Marton’s piece is pure hyperbole. Exaggerated sound bites, warnings of a doomed future and conspiracy theories tossed together in a disjointed, mess of ideas. But this is the level of competence expected from crusaders like Darren Marton. A far cry from carefully researched studies by qualified experts with decades of experience. I can’t help but think of that famous quote from The Simpsons - Won’t someone please think of the children! And maybe we should. In the US, African-American children were nearly nine times more likely to have a parent incarcerated than white children and Latino children were three times more likely to have a parent incarcerated than white children. Another success for Marton’s Zero Tolerance strategy.

The former NSW Director of Public Prosecutions, Nicholas Cowdery QC, called at The Daily Telegraph's People's Parliament debate for the decriminalisation of some drug offences. This is outrageous.

In his article, Marton also mentions “The Daily Telegraph's People's Parliament debate for the decriminalisation of some drug offences” and how “outrageous” it is that former NSW Director of Public Prosecutions, Nicholas Cowdery QC wants a change to our drug laws. Maybe if Marton looked a bit closer he would have noticed that yesterday, several Liberal Party members attended a presentation in Parliament House by former ACT Supreme Court Judge Ken Crispin who warned us about the problems with our current approach to tackling drug crime. Dr Crispin said that the majority of Australians in jail were there because of drugs or mental illness and most would reoffend because they had not received proper treatment. He added that despite the billions spent on combating drugs, the price of heroin and cocaine had dropped but supply had steadily increased. The Libs who attended, fully support the idea of drug law reform and praised the ex judge’s suggestions. Surely a blow for Marton who relies so heavily on the anti-drug rhetoric of political parties, especially the Libs.

In summary, Darren Marton’s baseless article should concern all of us. With no support from professionals and experts, Marton and co. are left with the only option available ... to play on public ignorance and emotions. If Darren Marton actually spent some time researching the topic of drug policy and the effect on society he might come to a different conclusion. Instead, like so many other anti-drug crusaders, he keeps reiterating the same old, debunked suggestions that are rejected by most professionals in the AOD industry, researchers, scientists, welfare workers, doctors, economists and drug experts. And as history has shown, these suggestions when put into practice are not only dangerous but cause far more damage than drugs ever will. 

Soft On Drugs? Simply Say No

The Daily Telegraph 

Darren Marton

March 2011

I AM not an expert in the drug and alcohol field. I am a layman who has learned his lessons through life experience.

It is of serious concern to me that proponents of harm minimisation favour the legalisation for personal use of some prohibited drugs.

The former NSW Director of Public Prosecutions, Nicholas Cowdery QC, called at The Daily Telegraph's People's Parliament debate for the decriminalisation of some drug offences. This is outrageous.

For a number of years now it has been claimed that we have lost the war on drugs.

But we have never had a war on drugs. For some, moving to a second phase of harm-minimisation - legalisation - was always the final objective.

But I don't believe Australians are the type of people to wave the white flag.

The NSW drug and alcohol budget in 2009/10 was $140 million. In addition to the services that funding provides, the NSW Government also provides funding for treatment services.

In other words, your taxes mop up the mess. It is a social experiment policy, and a reactive one at that.

Kids as young as 11 have been calling for better drug education with the nation's largest youth survey revealing they feel "ill equipped" to deal with drugs.

When are we going to start listening to the most vulnerable people in the community?

It is far easier to build a young boy or girl than to repair a man or woman.

So it is imperative that we protect our most vulnerable with a focus or prevention and early intervention.

I ask the question: What kind of future do we want to leave our children and our grandchildren?

If it's one that protects our young, strengthens families, and provides safer communities, then let's do it.

Darren Marton is Director of The No-Way Campaign

Related Articles

Liberals Urge Soft Line On Drugs

Race and the Drug War

The Drug War Is In Part Responsible For So Much Economic Disparity And Suffering Of The Black Population In The U.S.

New Report Details Racially Disparate Impact of Facially Neutral Criminal-Justice Policies

Darren Marton - No Way!

Bucket Head of the Year Awards - 2009

Bucket Head of the Year Awards - 2010