A growing number of parents across the U.S. are being criminally charged with murder or manslaughter after their children die from exposure to fentanyl.
We are choosing to address drunk driving, as we have for years, through stricter prison sentencing, which has never improved or otherwise addressed the root causes of drunk driving. Punishing drunk drivers makes everyone feel better, because…children dying is fucking devastating and we need someone held accountable, and drunk drivers do bear at least some responsibility. But just because it makes us feel better doesn’t mean it is effective.
There are many other things that need doing–many, many things–to make a dent in drunk driving, and we keep pulling out the same useless tool.
They aren’t completely different, they have in common a direct link to harming bystanders. And usually we punish people who cause harm to bystanders.
So if you have a specific difference in mind that justifies lenience towards opiate addicts who harm bystanders but does not also apply to alcoholics who do the same, then you should spell it out.
Both of you are trying to argue that opiate addicts deserve more leniency than other types of addicts, but I don’t think you’ve made your point well at all.
In fact, some of the arguments seem exactly backwards. For example, opiates are more highly regulated than alcohol, which implies we should be less tolerant of accidental deaths causes by opiates.
It’s not “leniency.” You’re still acting like there’s one available response and you either slide it up or slide it down, but that’s transparently untrue. This concept is at the core of this entire discussion and the fact you keep ignoring it indicates you’re here to troll, not engage.
I could’ve sworn you were arguing against the “heavy hammer of justice”. But if you aren’t actually calling for leniency then we agree: these particular parents deserve to be charged, and addicts of all types deserve more systemic support.
We are choosing to address drunk driving, as we have for years, through stricter prison sentencing, which has never improved or otherwise addressed the root causes of drunk driving. Punishing drunk drivers makes everyone feel better, because…children dying is fucking devastating and we need someone held accountable, and drunk drivers do bear at least some responsibility. But just because it makes us feel better doesn’t mean it is effective.
There are many other things that need doing–many, many things–to make a dent in drunk driving, and we keep pulling out the same useless tool.
Do you disagree with any of that?
They aren’t completely different, they have in common a direct link to harming bystanders. And usually we punish people who cause harm to bystanders.
So if you have a specific difference in mind that justifies lenience towards opiate addicts who harm bystanders but does not also apply to alcoholics who do the same, then you should spell it out.
Honestly reverendsteveii already addressed this with you.
Forgive me, but you’re not very good at whatever you’re trying to do.
I already replied to them.
Both of you are trying to argue that opiate addicts deserve more leniency than other types of addicts, but I don’t think you’ve made your point well at all.
In fact, some of the arguments seem exactly backwards. For example, opiates are more highly regulated than alcohol, which implies we should be less tolerant of accidental deaths causes by opiates.
It’s not “leniency.” You’re still acting like there’s one available response and you either slide it up or slide it down, but that’s transparently untrue. This concept is at the core of this entire discussion and the fact you keep ignoring it indicates you’re here to troll, not engage.
I’m out 🫡
I could’ve sworn you were arguing against the “heavy hammer of justice”. But if you aren’t actually calling for leniency then we agree: these particular parents deserve to be charged, and addicts of all types deserve more systemic support.