Law Opioid Billionaires Get SLAP ON THE WRIST For Murdering Hundreds Of Thousands

Ex fucking actly. A first year nursing student would know this.
so it was fake studies that made licensed physicians, with at least a decade of school and internship, believe that an opium pill was actually just a "strong Tylenol"?
 
79%-84% of opioid deaths each year are white non Hispanic, over indexing in males. You really don’t think the penalty wouldn’t have been far more severe if the evils of the drugs affected a protected community?

MADD changed alcohol laws around the nation when little Tiffany got killed at a crosswalk.

I know it’s passé to point out the obvious two sets of rules of law. Where Daniel Shaver can get murdered in cold blood with undisputed evidence and the cop gets off. But a baby stabbing felon resisting is treated like a god and given 50,000 hours of media time

That sounds like a cultural problem that causes white males to be overrepresented in OD deaths than anything else.
 
I've sort of followed this story since its been developing over the last few years. Really frustrating but the issue isn't with the specific case but rather how these are handled generally which your guardian link goes into a bit. At the very least this family should've been brutally fined if not jailed for what they did. And it wasn't just Purdue, I remember hearing that a lot of the pharmaceutical companies agreed to market opioids without references to specific brands so the opioid push came from the industry as a whole.

<BidenShutIt>

which members like how do you prove?

it sucks for sure for the memebrs of family who didnt partake and have their name stained
 
That sounds like a cultural problem that causes white males to be overrepresented in OD deaths than anything else.
Who said it wasn't? And thank you for proving my point
 
Who said it wasn't? And thank you for proving my point
The question shouldn't be who said it wasn't, but who said it was. You're deflecting blame away from the culture in the white community that has led to the overrepresentation of white males in OD incidences and shifted blame to pharmaceutical companies and in the coverage/societal outrage over these deaths.

Your lack of promoting personal responsibility for these people making decisions to take dangerous drugs didn't go unnoticed by me.
 
The question shouldn't be who said it wasn't, but who said it was. You're deflecting blame away from the culture in the white community that has led to the overrepresentation of white males in OD incidences and shifted blame to pharmaceutical companies and in the coverage/societal outrage over these deaths.

Your lack of promoting personal responsibility for these people making decisions to take dangerous drugs didn't go unnoticed by me.
Huh? When did I talk about blame? I said if the victims were a different race the settlement would have been different.
 
I know it’s passé to point out the obvious two sets of rules of law. Where Daniel Shaver can get murdered in cold blood with undisputed evidence and the cop gets off. But a baby stabbing felon resisting is treated like a god and given 50,000 hours of media time
that deranged white thug shouldn’t have been waving that gun around and he should have pulled his pants up quicker.
 
Man I know so many more people who have Od'd then died of covid the last 2 years. My wife works front line this crisis is just continuing to spiral out of control with no end in site. The other day there was 10 overdoses alone in 1 afternoon. You wanna talk about overloading the Healthcare system, that's emergency responders showing up every single time . Ambulances and first responders that could be used elsewhere.
I am sure the opioid epidemic has been far worse than most people suspect.
 
They paid for fake science in order to specifically deceive the public about the dangers of a drug they pushed on Americans as being harmless.

That's illegal obviously and anyone with a brain can see it.
Yes,a nd this isn't 1950s science talking about tobacco T zones on your face. There are were laws supposed to stop this exact behavior, and they did it, and ironically enough got away with it more than big tobacco did. As big tobacco, whic is Altria, British Tobacco and kinda Imperial Brands have to pay the states annually under the MSA- Master settlement agreement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agreement
In the MSA, the original participating manufacturers (OPM) agreed to pay a minimum of $206 billion over the first 25 years of the agreement.

While the Salckers pay much less, and actually don't have to pay at all for years.
 
I think these people are real pieces of shit, but murdered people? No. They enabled people to die.

Giving drugs to an addict is enabling.

It can be argued that knowingly getting people dangerously addicted while lying about the risks is similar to manslaughter.
 
Giving drugs to an addict is enabling.

It can be argued that knowingly getting people dangerously addicted while lying about the risks is similar to manslaughter.

Semantics. They are scum for what they did, but the victims still have to account for their part in this.
 
Semantics. They are scum for what they did, but the victims still have to account for their part in this.
That's tricky. If you give someone a drug and they think it's safe to use responsibly but it's really hyper addictive, are they really to blame?

It's not like the victims went and bought heroin on the black market fully aware of what they were doing. They took prescribed drugs that were presented as minimally habit forming. If the presentation had been "This is as addictive as buying H from a street dealer," some of those people would have acted differently and some of the doctors would have too. The misleading nature of the presentation robbed the victims of the ability to make informed choices.
 
Huh? When did I talk about blame? I said if the victims were a different race the settlement would have been different.
You mean they would have criminalized all of the users, wrote draconian possession laws, and locked the users up for 5+ years instead of calling the users "victims" and labelling the years of drug use a "mental health crisis" pouring millions, if not billions, of dollars into drug treatment facilities and similar interventions?
 
You mean they would have criminalized all of the users, wrote draconian possession laws, and locked the users up for 5+ years instead of calling the users "victims" and labelling the years of drug use a "mental health crisis" pouring millions, if not billions, of dollars into drug treatment facilities and similar interventions?
If you have followed the opioid epidemic in any way shape or form you would realize their is a key distinction between heroin/meth and opioids. wait for it.... because opioids are written with a prescription, its a futile effort to actually catch users and abusers and convict them of something when wait for it again... they have a prescription. The documentary the Pharmacist details this issue and why police are handcuffed in the opiate war vs. illegal narcotics. Apples to Bananas

With that said, the drug wars especially in the inner cities dating back 50 years were wrong in many ways. There are also treatment centers for Heroin and meth users not just opiates.

 
If you have followed the opioid epidemic in any way shape or form you would realize their is a key distinction between heroin/meth and opioids. wait for it.... because opioids are written with a prescription, its a futile effort to actually catch users and abusers and convict them of something when wait for it again... they have a prescription. The documentary the Pharmacist details this issue and why police are handcuffed in the opiate war vs. illegal narcotics. Apples to Bananas

With that said, the drug wars especially in the inner cities dating back 50 years were wrong in many ways. There are also treatment centers for Heroin and meth users not just opiates.


I'm aware. It doesn't change the point I made. They could have simply criminalized everything and made the criminal penalties more onerous. Which is what they they did previously.

Look up the fear of the "Negro cocaine fiend" in the early 1900s which led to the Harrison Act and the subsequent Narcotics Control Act. First, they heavily restricted who could produce the legal drug then they slapped criminal sentences on people in possession of the formerly legal drug. There's no difference here between the 2. We already had some restrictions and the pathway has been trod before. Increase restrictions and then criminalize possession.

With opioids, they took a different path. They refused to curtail production and they refused to criminalize possession, as they had in decades past. This means that the only pathway they left themselves were simply litigation against individual producers, like the Sacklers. So, yeah, if this was a different group of people you definitely would have gotten a different outcome. Because they would have criminalized even the legal production and possession of the drug first. Then they wouldn't bother with litigation and settlements, they would have just thrown everyone in jail.

You might re-focus on the difference between opioids from a pharmaceutical company and heroin on the street but we've done this before as well. They took crack and cocaine and treated them differently as well. The well known 100:1 ratio.

None of the drug stuff is new but the response is definitely far kinder than in the past.
 
If you have followed the opioid epidemic in any way shape or form you would realize their is a key distinction between heroin/meth and opioids. wait for it.... because opioids are written with a prescription, its a futile effort to actually catch users and abusers and convict them of something when wait for it again... they have a prescription. The documentary the Pharmacist details this issue and why police are handcuffed in the opiate war vs. illegal narcotics. Apples to Bananas

With that said, the drug wars especially in the inner cities dating back 50 years were wrong in many ways. There are also treatment centers for Heroin and meth users not just opiates.


B... B... But muh false narratives
~Pan
 
I'm aware. It doesn't change the point I made. They could have simply criminalized everything and made the criminal penalties more onerous. Which is what they they did previously.

Look up the fear of the "Negro cocaine fiend" in the early 1900s which led to the Harrison Act and the subsequent Narcotics Control Act. First, they heavily restricted who could produce the legal drug then they slapped criminal sentences on people in possession of the formerly legal drug. There's no difference here between the 2. We already had some restrictions and the pathway has been trod before. Increase restrictions and then criminalize possession.

With opioids, they took a different path. They refused to curtail production and they refused to criminalize possession, as they had in decades past. This means that the only pathway they left themselves were simply litigation against individual producers, like the Sacklers. So, yeah, if this was a different group of people you definitely would have gotten a different outcome. Because they would have criminalized even the legal production and possession of the drug first. Then they wouldn't bother with litigation and settlements, they would have just thrown everyone in jail.

You might re-focus on the difference between opioids from a pharmaceutical company and heroin on the street but we've done this before as well. They took crack and cocaine and treated them differently as well. The well known 100:1 ratio.

None of the drug stuff is new but the response is definitely far kinder than in the past.
I'm not sure what you are challenging of my statement. I agree coke and Crack treatment was BS years ago. My point is that in today's climate, the penalty would have been far worse if the victims were a protected class. I'm not debating previous transgressions.
 
I'm not sure what you are challenging of my statement. I agree coke and Crack treatment was BS years ago. My point is that in today's climate, the penalty would have been far worse if the victims were a protected class. I'm not debating previous transgressions.
Oh, I challenged your implication that because the majority of the opioid victims were white that the government took a lighter stance on penalization than if the victims had been black. I'm pointed out how the government handled this type of drug prevalence when they believed that the majority of the victims were black.

When you compare the 2 histories, it's pretty obvious that how they're handling things now is much lighter than in the past. They've been kinder to the victims, by not criminalizing possession (via regulatory schemes). So, now you're looking at primarily civil litigation instead of primarily criminal litigation and that yields different outcomes.

So, I agreed with you that the outcomes would have been different, I disagreed with why. And it's all about the kid gloves they applied to the drug users.
 
Oh, I challenged your implication that because the majority of the opioid victims were white that the government took a lighter stance on penalization than if the victims had been black. I'm pointed out how the government handled this type of drug prevalence when they believed that the majority of the victims were black.

When you compare the 2 histories, it's pretty obvious that how they're handling things now is much lighter than in the past. They've been kinder to the victims, by not criminalizing possession (via regulatory schemes). So, now you're looking at primarily civil litigation instead of primarily criminal litigation and that yields different outcomes.

So, I agreed with you that the outcomes would have been different, I disagreed with why. And it's all about the kid gloves they applied to the drug users.
Yes, history showed different handling. Recent history showed riots, chaos, destruction of cities when judgements came down on certain classes. In turn the judicial system gave in which is what I'm claiming would happen here. Case in point, the prosecution of: The McCloskey's, Kyle Rittenhouse, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor settlement, etc...
 
Back
Top