|
|
| 'Reality' Ad Campaign Will Urge Fighting Drugs |
|
Posted by FoM on April 04, 2002 at 21:52:36 PT By Del Quentin Wilber, Sun Staff Source: Baltimore Sun 
Baltimore officials are launching an ambitious $2 million media campaign that will urge residents to fight drugs and crime, and try to alter the psychological fabric of city life. The 13-week campaign, which officials will unveil at a news conference Friday at Israel Baptist Church in East Baltimore, will begin Monday with a four-minute television spot that is intended to shock residents into seeing the reality of the city’s problems. The campaign continues with a two-page advertisement -- a "Declaration of Independence from Drugs" -- in The Sun on April 14. In the following weeks, four television advertisements will address issues ranging from drug trafficking to drug abuse and police recruiting -- each spot offering a phone number that connects callers to operators who can offer information. The campaign is being financed by the Baltimore Police Foundation, a private fund that closely supports the city police department. It is unclear how successful the campaign will be at dislodging a drug culture that permeates the city, where nearly 60,000 residents are addicts. Police Commissioner Edward T. Norris, a strong backer of the campaign, said the campaign will encourage people to take action, which will help police reduce violence and drug trafficking. "We are very optimistic that it will work," Norris said. "The problems here are so acute. ... The police can’t fix this. ... We want to mobilize the community to take responsibility." The campaign’s architect, John Linder, said the advertising will succeed because the first spot confronts viewers with the gritty and honest side of Baltimore, establishing credibility with viewers. "People won’t listen until you do that," said Linder, president of Linder & Associates, a consulting firm. Subsequent ads will be more upbeat and show that the city is improving, and that all residents have a role to play in its growth, Linder said. Outside experts said the campaign could be successful because it starts by shocking people with reality, a proven technique to reach television viewers who often ignore advertisements. "These advertisements get people to stop and think," said Joe O’Donnell, a marketing professor at Towson University. "When you throw reality at people, they recognize it, associate with it right away. They start thinking about it." The four-minute movie begins by showing images of the city at night: a man standing over the fire in an oil drum, a homeless man under a bridge, an open door to an abandoned rowhouse. A boy begins to speak: "I know that there is a fire in me that nobody can put out." A camera follows the boy walking down a dimly lighted street, past young thugs. The boy then says that a guy on a street corner asked him to hold something for $100. Two men portraying suburban ites driving to the city to buy drugs then pull up in a car, and one of them reaches out to the boy. "A guy from the county thinks I’m a drug dealer," he says, "all they think I’ll ever be." Near the end of the spot, a man’s voice says: "The people of Baltimore are in a fight, a fight that in some places we’re losing." "The fight is not over," the man says. Then, the words -- "Believe, Believe in Us, Believe in yourself, Baltimore, Believe" -- flash in succession on the screen. The police foundation will air that advertisement several times on local television stations during the next two weeks, as well as a one-minute condensed version. The foundation then will air four other advertisements, including one that will urge drug addicts to seek treatment and another that encourages people to volunteer as mentors to children. All will offer a telephone number to a call center, where operators will direct people to help or information. Anticipating a flood of calls for drug treatment, city health officials added 85 additional drug treatment slots, boosting the total to about 7,700. Dr. Peter L. Beilenson, the city health commissioner, said he was not worried about a crush of people demanding treatment. Counselors at the call center will have access to up-to-date information on the amount of open drug slots and backlogs, he said. They also will have a list of more than 400 Narcotics Anonymous groups, some of which hold meetings all day long. "It’s time we had a campaign that highlights that this is everybody’s problem," Beilenson said. Note: Privately funded drive to be launched today. Source: Baltimore Sun (MD) Related Articles: Medical Marijuana: Delegates Act With Compassion Marijuana is a Medicine That People Need Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #27 posted by FoM on April 07, 2002 at 11:04:03 PT |
| Hi Lookinside, What I'm really confused about is why hospice is saying he might need a nursing home. I thought hospice took care of a person until they pass away in their home? I'm very confused because with my son that's the way hospice worked. My mother in law is in a nursing home and they will lose the farm back there too. That's not an issue with us because my husband isn't going to receive anything from that estate. Neither will anyone it looks like. I will take over full time care before a nursing home because to loss everything that we have worked for isn't acceptable to my father in law or us. Sad that money matters even in the end. Why should anyone try to own a home or property? If you don't own anything it isn't a problem but if you have just a little to show for your hard work they will take it. It's hard enough losing the person you love and then their home too? That's really hard. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #26 posted by lookinside on April 07, 2002 at 10:48:26 PT:
|
| Excellent thread. Very informative and entertaining. dddd: I'm tickled to see you posting in earnest again. You must be feeling considerably better! I didn't win the lotto again, but when I do, you will definitely be called upon to write those commercials. FoM: My FIL is in a nursing home. His only income is Social Security. That only comes to a little over $800 a month, but they accept that as payment in full. He has no major assets though. You might(if you haven't already) consider going to see an attorney familiar with nursing homes. There may be a way for your FIL to divest himself of assets so that Medicare picks up the bulk of the costs. My Grandmother lost everything(home, savings ,etc.) during her final illness. Just a thought. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #25 posted by Hope on April 07, 2002 at 10:03:53 PT |
| You were missed very much, dddd, and I'm so glad you are feeling better. Yes, I'm a woman. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #24 posted by dddd on April 06, 2002 at 17:37:04 PT |
| ....as most people probably know,,I am not a;"writer"...I am an old loudmouth longhair Hippie who stumbled across CNews years ago..I started out by making people mad with fake postings,,,and I decided that this site would be the only site that I would post comments on,,because the people here are nice,,and I didnt want to spread myself too thin with my blabbing ramblings...I know that I write alot of crap,,but what kept me going was nuggets of positive input,and recognition,,,brisk and robust debates,,verbal battles involving abstract ventures into diplomatic minefields,,etc...anyway,,then I got really sick a few months back,,too sick to even get up and turn on my computer,,,I will reluctantly admit the corny fact that I cried when I realized that people missed me here....I had no idea people were being entertained or enlightened by my sardonic rhetoric,and roadhouse proclamations!..........anyway,,,I really liked that oyster compliment,,I am now sorta convinced that oyster DNA is somehow involved in the reality of what I write,because I felt a feeling in my mind,,this mild ,yet sharp twinge,,,as if my mind had a scrotum,and thats where the feeling originated,,after all,,if you want pure DNA.........?...I dont know if I want the nickname "Oyster Juice" though,,,people might start callin' me OJ?.... .....by the way,Hope,would I be intruding too far into the shellfish of your privacy,if I assumed your gender was something other than male?....dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #23 posted by Hope on April 06, 2002 at 11:46:13 PT |
| Lol! Oyster juice? Your mind amazes me, as does the thinking of other posters to CannabisNews. I feel as though I have the honor of being at a forum not unlike the Round Table of the old Algonquin Hotel when it was the meeting place for similar minds and ideas in the 1920's. Thanks for being here, all of you! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #22 posted by dddd on April 06, 2002 at 10:33:05 PT |
| ...ya know,,I might not be that suprized if one of my ancestors tried messin' around with some neanderthal chick who happened to be in heat,, on a prehistoric beach,and somehow,,some oyster juice splashed onto the sperm pollywog,that ended up influencing my DNA????,,I guess I'm lucky it wasnt a clam or a crab.. ..seriously though,,thank you Hope.That was a nice compliment,.I often wonder if people think I'm making pearls that are produced by the irratation of a grain of sand,,,or strange smelling excrements from gopher,or possum influenced DNAs...................dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #21 posted by FoM on April 06, 2002 at 10:13:42 PT |
| All right, this month is the 30th anniversary of the Nixon commission. He appointed a commission to study marijuana use. This was an issue in 1972 because, you know, the pot smoking hippies in the '60s and so forth. So as every administration, by the way, has done since, they wanted to do a study. Let me read to you what the commission reported 30 years ago. It recommended all penalties for possession and use and even casual distribution be eliminated. It said, "Neither the marijuana user nor the drug itself constituted danger to public safety." I don't think we can say the same about alcohol. And it said, "Penalties against drug use should not be more damaging to the individual than the drug itself." Now, what went wrong in the last 30 years that this commission from this conservative president, why didn't they listen? Why hasn't the federal government caught up with the states and the people on this issue? Victoria: On drugs?
Bill: It isn't drugs.
Victoria: Even just marijuana. [ Laughter ] [ Applause ] Fred: Oh, I'm definitely gonna spank her. Bill: Yeah, I'd like to get a shot in myself, Fred. [ Laughter ]
Fred: You say marijuana is a very benign drug. Bill: No, it doesn't. [ Laughter ]
In fact, the last presidential commission to study this, just a couple of years ago, their finding addressed that issue, whether it was a gateway drug.
The answer came back, no. [ Laughter and applause ] And that's all they can find. Fred: I'd like to see the report on the gateway drug thing. Bill: No, actually, the gateway drug is beer. Fred: Well, that, too. Bill: That's the first thing that -- Victoria: But didn't we just get over this with smoking? I mean, haven't we for the last 20 years learned that smoking is bad, and that we're not to do it? C.C.H.: Marijuana has actually positive properties. [ Applause ] Victoria: You'd never get applause for that in Washington, D.C.
C.C.H.: I think even that's changing because, I mean, coming from an experience of my 80-year-old neighbor, white, southern Texan, husband, a banker, has been smoking marijuana for the last 25 years because it alleviates symptoms with her eyes. Bill: Yes, that's undeniable that it has medicinal properties.
C.C.H.: Right. [ Light laughter ] Eaten out of house and home, but as far as I'm concerned in terms of a casual smoker, toker, drinker, it's absolutely fine. [ Cheers and applause ]
Bill: Which begs the question -- David: Because politicians are afraid of being seen as soft on drugs, soft on crime. Victoria: Well, if they thought the people were for it, they'd be for it. David: But the people aren't for it.
C.C.H.: No, the people are for it. [ Talking over each other ] [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #20 posted by FoM on April 06, 2002 at 10:12:19 PT |
| Victoria: You all need to march on Washington.
Bill: Well, here's what Nixon said, and maybe this is why it never got through as commission. I mean, you can't write dialogue like this. Fred: Well, you must remember that Nixon had that famous meeting with Elvis Presley. Bill: Right. Fred: And he probably said, "This man is out of control. Bill: Elvis was very stoned during that meeting. It shows.
Fred: And ironically, he showed up --
Bill: That is such an epitome of the irony in this country, right? Elvis Presley, who died from drugs, who took 11 different kinds of incredible downers that would kill anyone the first time they took it, took them every night, and he built up such a tolerance, and it froze his insides. [ Applause ]
Bill: Okay, we're talking about the Nixon commission report on marijuana, why it hasn't been implemented.
Victoria: Yeah, isn't that -- [ Light laughter ]
Bill: See, that simplistic thinking is one of the reasons why so many people are in jail for this stupidity.
Victoria: Smoking is bad because we found out it did things inside of your lungs, and I don't agree with that commission report.
Bill: They did one, I'm telling you, two years ago. [ Applause ] Victoria: There are contradictions, Bill.
Bill: Well, show me the study.
Victoria: Well, I don't know evil, but hurting people's health I think it does.
Bill: So Americans don't have the right --
Bill: But Americans kill themselves with food, alcohol and cigarettes.
C.C.H.: I just want to see the legalized marijuana, when you see the ad on the television, as you're seeing for all these new drugs when they say, "And it may cause side effects such as dizziness, vomiting," and so on. [ Light laughter ]
And to see it with marijuana. Bill: Even the drugs they advertise -- C.C.H.: All the new drugs that they're advertising. Bill: I know.
C.C.H.: It'll clear up your nostrils, but constipation, dizziness and vomiting -- Bill: Right. The entire commercial is taken up with disclaimers. C.C.H.: And they say it as fast as they can.
Bill: Right, right. [ Light laughter ]
Victoria: Back in the hallway in my hotel, just as I was getting on the elevator, says, "Watch out.
Bill: What a dumb country. [ Applause ]
Bill: All right, this just in. [ Applause ] http://abc.abcnews.go.com/primetime/politicallyincorrect/episodes/2001-02/403.html [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #19 posted by dddd on April 06, 2002 at 09:54:18 PT |
| ...there are no amounts of money that would be sufficient to buy national,network airtime if the message was not politically acceptable!....consider the fact that airtime can be purchased for all manner of infomercials???does anyone want to suggest that there would not be enough money availiable for an anti drug war infomercial?..you couldnt even do a 'Waynes World' thing if it had critism of the wod!.....Let's say that 4Q won 89 million in the lottery,,and he wanted to buy time for a Rastifarian 700 Club thing,,,,4Q was willing to pay 5 Million for a 30 second spot during the superbowl.???would they sell the commercial time to 4Q???...No Way,,,,4Q could not even buy time on Gilligans Island at 4:00 in the morning on UPN!!!.....so keep in mind,,,that when 4Q wins the lottery,,he may not have time to comment here anymore,,,,he has this evil plan,,he is going to start doing these fake infomercial a hair-growing anti-wrinkle formula,that cures acne and stops toenail fungus while it enlargens breasts and lengthens penises!........ .Then,,when the networks begin to trust '4Q Marketing Inc.',,and the 4Q gets into the prison industry,,and then expands into the health insurance game with "4Q Permanente",,and "Que Cross",,,and an investor frenzy occurs as 4Q wisely butters the right palms,,being very careful to keep the money soft enough to get around those tough new campaign contribution laws they just passed!..Wow Man!,, they weren't fuckin' around with the level of reform!..They had to debate it for a long time and I'm not sure if there were any filibusters involved with this harsh new campaign finance law,,I do know,that most everybody agrees when they vote on whether or not they should get a pay raise!..the walls of partisan disagreement and petty bickering seem to disappear...............................OK,,back to 4Q,,and his "Trojan Horse" plan for getting his government drug laws info-mercial on national TV,,,,,,,after gaining the confidence of all the major networks, the 4Q plan will fall into place..like Dale Gribbel would do,,I will refrain from saying anything else.4Q might think I revealed too much...... ..anyway,,the crux of my comment,is that even though the ondcp,can buy 30 seconds of airtime during the superbowl,with your tax dollars,,,4Q could NEVER buy the same time,for the same price if his message was deemed inappropriate by the powers that be....There are certain things that money can no longer buy...... ..I saw Politically Incorrect last night,,and Bill Maher was impressive as he spoke out about the Supreme Court /public housing eviction ruling,,,but you wont get much closer than that to nation TV questioning the government.Bill Maher found the limit when he carelessly dared to say something that was not acceptable to certain entities that obviously gave him some sort of shock treatment,because he apologized,and was never quite the same after that... ....dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #18 posted by Hope on April 06, 2002 at 08:45:21 PT |
| dddd, I think you have a touch of oyster somewhere in your DNA. You have an astounding ability to face a gritty irritant that there is no relief from...the horrible decisions of our government...and "spit" on it and whirl it around and somehow create a pearl...a smile...where formerly there was only gnashing of teeth. FOM, I'm sorry to hear about your father-in-law. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #17 posted by bruce42 on April 06, 2002 at 07:38:19 PT |
| no way. it sounds like a great idea. too bad the so called public airways require godly amounts of money to utilize. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #16 posted by qqqq on April 06, 2002 at 03:31:38 PT |
| ..after trying to read through that last 4d 'thing',,,,I feel like I have just sat thru a full hour long Ronco info-mercial for some new kind of Popeil Ab-Vaporizer George Foreman hair restorer grill that will enhance breasts and lengthen penisuz or your money back from that Tony Robbins guy and those two dwarfs..next thing ya know,,4d will be trying to get us to go to the local Hilton to buy a "gallery oil painting",for ten bucks! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #15 posted by dddd on April 06, 2002 at 03:12:04 PT |
| ..my IQ is shot...but it aint from weed...I really like the questions that have been raised in this "thread".(,I hope I have correctly used the term "thread",...I will assume that it could be defined as ;"an element of the fabric of an internet discussion,,which can be traced through the eyes of many needles of postings"..,,and I've often thought that "off topic",,could be,"on thread",,thus aleviating the misgivings and mild pangs of guilt experienced by 4Q,and of course,myself ...it's probably become obvious that I say "topic schmopic!",,if you're not having a fun or interesting time reading what you're reading,,then let me know and I will link you up with the Drudge report,or some kind of Ted Koppel chat room at Sam Donaldson.com,where you can find out what George Will thinks about big league baseballs link to the Dominican/Haitian al-quieda?)...... ...yup,,,REALITY is my favorite term as a topic for discussion....It is the mother of all terms that are abused by lack of definition,yet at the same time,the assumed meaning of the term is known to most people who are aware of what the real meaning of reality is....(sorry,,,just messin' around....abusive entertainment,,respectfully challenging those who are hardy enough to continue to wade through,and sort out the unortodox syntax, silly punctuation,and questionable eloquence of my slathered ramblings.....?)..... ...OK,,back to reality..I really like the things that Hope said about 'rights'.(..I am going to assume Hope is a female ..if she is a male,,then I hope he wont be mad..it would be kindof typical if he got mad or offended that I mistook him for a her,,and to be fair,,the same would probably be true vice versa.).....but back to "rights",and the questions Hope raises.........She says;"I don't know what any of it means. I'm just exercising my right to try to understand it. Thanks for the privilege. :-) ".....and I like that...the word 'privilege',has an akward connection to the term,"rights".......but,,I now realize that the reality of all this is that although I consider it a privelege to have the right to write all of this rambling,,plus I am honoured and thankful to anyone who has read this far,,I need to try and stop writing such spaced out,,,off thread ramblings that have nebulous,unrealistic conclusions....... ..I guess that I have a right to wander about reality,,,,and I consider it a priveledge to embarass myself by writing so many words,with no real conclusions ...back to the reality of this article...At the end of the article,it proclaims that it is privately funded.?.. OK,, then if it is,in fact,,privatetly funded,does that mean that the privacy of the 'funders',is protected from public scrutiny?......;.." The campaign is being financed by the Baltimore Police Foundation, a private fund that closely supports the city police department. "......."A private fund....now isnt that special!",,,says the Church Lady......When 4Q wins 54 million in the lottery,then the Reality Foundation will be formed,and it will be privately funded by private donations from 4Q...We will launch an ad campaign that shows a greenhorn politician on a streetcorner,,and a big black limo pulls up...the politician hops in,,and a voice says;"..do you have any idea the amount of your tax dollars that will be spent towards defense this year?",,then the picture flashes to a roofing company employee,,and then a fast food worker,,,and then a carpenter,who looks up after hammering a nail,,and then a 7-11 clerk,,,,then the camera zeros in on the face of a grocery store checker,,and she says;"no..how much?"..then we flash back to inside the limo,and the politician is taking cash from some guy with sunglasses,,,and the narrators' deep voice says;"over 300 billion dollars"........then,,the scene flashes to a classroom,and zeros in on a teacher who asks;"who can tell me how much a billion is?"....the camera pans around the class,and the shabby classroom,,,old worn out books,,duct tape on a cracked window,,,a close-up of the teachers selecting a stubby piece of chalk,,the camera pans around the classroom of bewildered children,,,,no one raises their hand.....the teacher says,,"OK,,let's look at a billion in terms of time.One thousand seconds is about 17 minutes. One million seconds is about eleven and a half days. One billion seconds is about 32 years!" ...If an ad like this was shown on the superbowl,,,America would shit its' pants...multitudes of enraged sheeple would venture forth onto the streets,,people who were wise enough to have stocks in tear-gas and pepper-spray/beanbag-rubber bullet companies would gleefully witness the brutal police state mayhem...the 4q foundation is labeled as terrorist,and 4q ends up in camp x-ray....4q is lucky enough to get a cell with a view of the Carribean,and a pair of binoculars,and he sees a huge yacht pass by,,he tries to make out the name on the vessels bow,,,yes,,it was "The Kenny Boy"!,,flyin' the Texas flag..........dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #14 posted by FoM on April 05, 2002 at 23:04:27 PT |
| I just checked in before I called it a day and saw your comment. We are going through a hard time these days and hope you and others understand if I slip up a little. My father-in-law has taken a turn for the worse and hospice is starting to say a nursing home might be necessary. There is a law that if a person in hospice gets really bad they must be put in a nursing home because of a law. We are working very hard to find a way around it and for now it is ok but the nurse told me that a nursing home requires money up front. About $3,500 a month. I asked if they would take the person's property if the bill gets to high. She said yes. I believe in the right to live and to die with dignity. Something is very wrong with our system. Why work all your life to give it to the government in the end. No legacy. No nothing. It's very wrong. Thanks for reading my rant. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #13 posted by Hope on April 05, 2002 at 22:54:13 PT |
| You say, "Who has rights? I don't really know. The right to what? What does it all mean?" At this moment, I can't think that it means anything. "Everything is meaningless. Everything is vain." It's political. It's something we fight over and grieve over and kill over. Right now we have the freedom...the privilege...the right...to use computers...the internet. There are those who would take that freedom from us or curtail it greatly at the least. Rights obviously aren't evenly spread around. There are rights that I'm not even mildly interested in taking advantage of. But, even if I don't want to have or do something, even if I don't want to take advantage of the right , I like knowing I have it and that I'm not being forced to not have that right.....whatever it might be. I think right and privilege technically mean about the same thing...but most of the time when I speak of "rights", I'm talking about the "rights" supposedly guaranteed by the Constitution and of course, God given or natural "rights". Freedoms and liberties that I am allowed that are not to be infringed upon by another. Most people seem to use the word "privilege"...which really is just a special right...to mean, "This...whatever it might be....is a "privilege" that you are allowed and it can be taken away from you, legally, at the whim of whoever controls it". When you think about it...it's political, yet it's one of those invisible treasures, like love, air, water, health, and security that you hardly notice that you have unless you don't have it. I don't know what any of it means. I'm just exercising my right to try to understand it. Thanks for the privilege. :-) [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #12 posted by Nuevo Mexican on April 05, 2002 at 14:18:25 PT |
| was a GREAT band! I saw them in Tucson in 73', and had had they're double album for two years before that, so I was psyched to see them perform. Down on the Rillito River (dry sand bed. great for horseback riding). It makes my day to see them mentioned here, as their lyrics were always insightful and uplifting, as was their music. Thanks for the stab from the past! Many great memories, here is their website: http://www.sonsofchamplin.com/ Made this ole hippies day!!!! Time to light up! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by FoM on April 05, 2002 at 13:03:57 PT |
| That's very true. I have a lot on my mind these days and I get scattered very easily and miss very important observations. Who has rights? I don't really know. The right to what? What does it all mean? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by Hope on April 05, 2002 at 12:51:53 PT |
| Something I've noticed happening in recent years is that privileges are replacing rights. What we once thought of as "Rights", we are now told are "Privileges"....which of course can easily be lost. Slaves don't have "rights"....they are allowed "privileges". [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by tmjc118 on April 05, 2002 at 11:49:22 PT |
| I'm sure you all know what an authoritarian government is. A totalitarian government, where you are restricted rights and controlled. If you have read 1984, or any distopian novels similar to it, you must realize how horrific these governments can be. I had an epiphany a few months ago, as I asked myself a question which I'm sure many of us think about every day. Why are certain substances illegal in free states like the U.S.? We all know the propaganda, it's harmful to our bodies, it sends the wrong message to the children, hell, apparently it funds terrorists nowadays (ya i know, its bull). But do any of these reasons, according to our constitution, make it just that certain substances are outlawed? In an ideal democracy, it's my choice as an individual, so long as it does affects others' "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness." I don't know what other think, but in my sincere opinion, this is a violation of my rights, and it's called suppression.
-TC [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #6 posted by Jose Melendez on April 05, 2002 at 08:34:27 PT:
|
| The reality is that even Bob Barr is starting to get the hint that laws based on kneejerk reactions, such as his own opposition to the counting of legally cast votes, actually cause harm and exacerbate the very problems they are designed to address.
From: Panel faults restrictions imposed since Sept. 11 [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #5 posted by Sandino on April 05, 2002 at 08:14:50 PT:
|
| "Reality is just a concept that truth will always replace." A line from The Sons Of Champlin tune: "Boomp Boomp Chop." [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #4 posted by Dan B on April 05, 2002 at 07:48:53 PT:
|
| Simplistic, not simplic\stic. Oops. Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #3 posted by Dan B on April 05, 2002 at 07:47:20 PT:
|
| Baltimore has a reputation as a very liberal city when it comes to drug policy. In the past, the people of Baltimore have elected a mayor who was openly against the War on Some Drugs. The people of Baltimore seem to know instinctively (as people around the country and around the world are beginning to understand) that declaring war on drugs only serves to fill prisons. What I like about these ads is that they do not say that Baltimore needs to crack down on drug users, or that addicts need to be forced into making a decision between prison and drug treatment. Nope, what these ads are saying is that the community can respond in a positive way--without police intervention. It is as though the police are finally admitting that they are not the answer to Baltimore's drug problems (and with 60,000 addicts--yes, Baltimore does have a serious drug addiction problem). The ads and the added beds are a beginning, but one wonders how significant an increase of 85 beds to a total of 7700 will be for the total of 60,000 addicts who need those beds. Of course the issue is less simplic\stic than these ads make it out to be. Thousands of Baltimore residents live in poverty--the chief cause of the despair that leads some toward hard drug addiction. The city would do well to address the poverty of its citizens (those with homes and those without) in addition to calling on the community to help those who are already addicted. When I see real programs aimed at ending poverty (the real cause of crime in the "inner city"), that is when I will believe that the city is truly interested in curbing its drug problems. Still, it is refreshing to see ads from the police aimed not at imprisonment, but at helping those who need help. I would bet that if the feds would finally relent and allow compassion rather than force be the rule for handling drug addiction, Baltimore would be one of the cities to lead the country in abolishing draconian laws that seek to punish rather than serve its citizens. Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #2 posted by freddybigbee on April 05, 2002 at 06:38:56 PT:
|
| Yes, shock ads grab one's attention; for about five seconds. Once people tune those out, what next? Even more shocking ads? Perhaps images of people being exploded by land-mines or torn apart by canine-cop dogs would make them listen. Maybe someone will invent TVs that actually shock their viewers with 110 volts. Then the government could up the amperage if viewers didn't pay enough attention. For the Super Bowl, they could set the amperage at the maximum that household circuits will sustain. If that doesn't work, they could revise the building codes to increase the capacity, say up to 50 amps. Or maybe require 220 volts. Until drugs are legalized, removing law-enforcement and "justice" from the equation, rational stategies for minimizing harm will never prevail. Common sense, self-interest, and peer-pressure would moderate drug use in the absence of repressive forces. People used drugs before prohibition and after; it's human nature. It doesn't have to be a tens-of-billions of dollars per year problem. It's the prohibition, stupid! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by goneposthole on April 05, 2002 at 06:30:16 PT |
| I don't think anybody really cares. That is the reality. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |