Don't worry about drugs. Helium possession is what will get you busted!

Forums › Off topic › Don't worry about drugs. Helium possession is what will get you busted!

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

2866 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 685

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1653101 18-Oct-2016 18:11

Rikkitic:

With any subject like this, opposing camps tend to fall back on extreme arguments. In practice, I think adequate safeguards could be put into place. It doesn't have to be an all or nothing proposition. I believe human dignity is better served by allowing people to die peacefully in a manner of their own choosing than by subjecting them to forced prolonged misery against their will for the sake of a few more days or weeks of pointless existence. Other countries seem to be able to cope with this without collapsing into murderous moral decay andI'm sure we can too.

The way I took your opening post and header was reference to the police handling of it not the justification, or not, of euthanasia.

Galaxy S8

Garmin Vivoactive 3

Rikkitic

Glurp
9514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4510

Subscriber

Reply # 1653105 18-Oct-2016 18:30

It started off that way but the subject is much bigger than that and it drifted. Initially I felt outraged that the police were even bothering with something like this but of course the real discussion is about euthanisa.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

Fred99

7997 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4338

Reply # 1653137 18-Oct-2016 20:06

Rikkitic:

It started off that way but the subject is much bigger than that and it drifted. Initially I felt outraged that the police were even bothering with something like this but of course the real discussion is about euthanisa.

Yes. Superficially - and in the way it was presented - it looks awful - "police state".

Dig a little deeper, and it's a complex ethical issue. One of the worst kind really - as although "there's something we need to talk about", there's potential that merely talking about it can cause harm.

I'm conflicted - and the more I think about it - I don't become less conflicted.

It's polarised ACT against right for life folks. Both have ideological positions - not reasoned argument. I wish they'd keep out of it.

Rikkitic

Glurp
9514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4510

Subscriber

Reply # 1653163 18-Oct-2016 20:44

So do I. This issue is way too important for politics or ideology. It is a deeply personal matter that ultimately I don't think is anyone else's business. I want to have the choice for myself, but I don't want to impose it on anyone else and I don't want anyone else telling me what to do.

I apologise for the way I presented it but there are multiple things mixed up with this and I have different reactions to each of them.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

JimmyH

2613 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1285

Reply # 1653173 18-Oct-2016 21:11

Fred99:

Very difficult to pick up in post mortem. If it (or other types / method) was to be approved in certain cases, then there'd need to be very strict protocols in place. Freely available DIY kits with instructions is a crazy idea (IMO).

I'm not sure how the hell you could rationally have a system where DIY suicide kits were freely available and/or "common knowledge", but avoid having others who are emotionally involved (for better or worse) in some way aiding or "encouraging" use. It gets back to the above - very strict protocols would be needed.

DIY suicide kits are already freely available and readily accessible, and they are also cheap and in many cases have no age restriction. In most shopping centres you are able to purchase razor blades, plastic bags, rope and sharp knives. Any one of which can be readily utilised should a person feel the need. Heck, I even have all of those in my house already......

If someone is really determined to do themselves in then they almost certainly will, with what is already available, and there is very little that can be done to stop them. Even if you do manage, they can always try again later.

Fred99

7997 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4338

Reply # 1653200 18-Oct-2016 22:51

JimmyH:

Fred99:

Very difficult to pick up in post mortem. If it (or other types / method) was to be approved in certain cases, then there'd need to be very strict protocols in place. Freely available DIY kits with instructions is a crazy idea (IMO).

I'm not sure how the hell you could rationally have a system where DIY suicide kits were freely available and/or "common knowledge", but avoid having others who are emotionally involved (for better or worse) in some way aiding or "encouraging" use. It gets back to the above - very strict protocols would be needed.

DIY suicide kits are already freely available and readily accessible, and they are also cheap and in many cases have no age restriction. In most shopping centres you are able to purchase razor blades, plastic bags, rope and sharp knives. Any one of which can be readily utilised should a person feel the need. Heck, I even have all of those in my house already......

If someone is really determined to do themselves in then they almost certainly will, with what is already available, and there is very little that can be done to stop them. Even if you do manage, they can always try again later.

You actually can't easily obtain "kits" which are nearly failsafe, quick, non-violent, and painless. I should probably leave this discussion now - there's nothing positive to be gained by talking about it any more.

Lias

3625 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2117

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1653221 19-Oct-2016 01:08

Fred99:

there's nothing positive to be gained by talking about it any more.

I kind of felt that way about joining it :-P Then I thought feck it.

Personally I consider euthanasia a non-derogable human right, any law that prevents it is unjust, and the police who arrested this woman should have chosen to conscientiously object rather than follow out the orders to do so.

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

Dratsab

3235 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1038

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1653222 19-Oct-2016 02:11

One person supports this post

Lias:

Fred99:

there's nothing positive to be gained by talking about it any more.

I kind of felt that way about joining it :-P Then I thought feck it.

Personally I consider euthanasia a non-derogable human right, any law that prevents it is unjust, and the police who arrested this woman should have chosen to conscientiously object rather than follow out the orders to do so.

Nobody arrested her. A police state where nobody got arrested, incredible...

dickytim

2515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 541
Inactive user

Reply # 1653224 19-Oct-2016 06:21

Fred99:

Sure - but making available methods and advice for clean painless suicide will encourage more suicide, as it's "normalised" to the point where it's acceptable. In most cases it's not very good at all. I don't know (personally) of one person who when faced with a terminal illness asked to die (yes it does happen - ie Robin Williams and others) . I do know of many cases where (ordinary) people killed themselves for crazy reasons - when there was no need, leaving behind a tragedy.

And that brings up palliative care, perhaps the subject of Helen Kelly as it's topical. She should have been allowed to use marijuana, heroin too if she wanted - I'm very comfortable with that. Assisted suicide - perhaps, had that been her wish, but AFAIK it wasn't (and seldom is in cases like that). That should never be a DIY option. Plenty of Drs OTOH would happily prescribe heroin (diamorphine) though and already do prescribe morphine, knowing that it will bring forward a (relatively) painless death. It (present law) kind of works as it is, some revision/change is needed, but it doesn't need to be turned on it's head - as some advocates seem to be demanding. In my opinion - of course.

I wholeheartedly disagree with all of this, is there any evidence to suggest that these kits being available have increased the suicide rate for the mentally ill?

I have been quite lucky that both of my grandmothers didn't linger when they were sick. My Nana in NZ simple stopped eating to end it all as she couldn't stand the pain she was living with, I if there was a quick painless way for her to go on her terms and save weeks of pain an misery she should have been given, or had that choice.

Fred99

7997 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4338

Reply # 1653370 19-Oct-2016 10:39

dickytim:

I have been quite lucky that both of my grandmothers didn't linger when they were sick.

I said I was done with this topic.

Could be semantics - nothing more, but you say "I have been quite lucky" - not "they were quite lucky".

I am now done with this topic.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900

Reply # 1653375 19-Oct-2016 10:48

Fred99:

dickytim:

I have been quite lucky that both of my grandmothers didn't linger when they were sick.

I said I was done with this topic.

Could be semantics - nothing more, but you say "I have been quite lucky" - not "they were quite lucky".

I am now done with this topic.

You may be done with it..but perhaps others are not!!

Talking about suicide should be encouraged.

Rikkitic

Glurp
9514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4510

Subscriber

Reply # 1653411 19-Oct-2016 11:11

One person supports this post

I agree, but it has to be done in a way that is respectful and doesn't trivialise (not accusing you of that). I do make a distinction between suicide and euthanasia. The former is a choice people make, for whatever reason. The latter is an act of mercy for those who are in the process of dying, are suffering unbearable pain, and do not want to go on any longer. This is what I was referring to when I started this thread, and it is what submissions are currently being heard on.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

gzt

10611 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1714

Reply # 1657617 25-Oct-2016 18:24

I can see why the Police would be somewhat concerned with the activities of Philip Nitschke. I'm not aware of any reason to suspect his sincerity, it's just that he tends to attract issues that the police would be concerned with. It's a catch 22 of course because the reason is that an ethical framework has not been established. Maybe the government is hoping for a bill of rights case or something similar to give them some reason to move forward in an ethical way. It will require a lot more than a judicial resolution but maybe that kind of input will kick start it.

JimmyH

2613 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1285

Reply # 1657624 25-Oct-2016 18:39

One person supports this post

My issue is that they are harassing (and bordering on intimidation) old people who have done nothing more than, in essence, attend a meeting where the law and various matters related to it are discussed. Which, in my view, is pretty much a political meeting rather than something more nefarious.

Firstly, I have an issue with law enforcement acting in such a heavy-handed manner to suppress free speech and open political discussion.

Secondly, even if some of the topics discussed were borderline illegal, it's not exactly the Mafia. I am surprised that the Police seem to have the personnel and resources to devote to this issue (which, according to yesterday's DomPost, includes a faux drink-drive checkpoint, a spy in the meeting, and individual visits to attendees). I would have thought that they had many more important crimes (P dealers, unsolved burglaries) to devote their resources to than a bunch of people holding a political discussion over cups of tea.

In fact, far from being underfunded and needing more Police officers, it's starting to look like the Police are overfunded and scratching around for something to spend their time on?

Rikkitic

Glurp
9514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4510

Subscriber

Reply # 1657661 25-Oct-2016 19:42

Well said.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

1 | 2 | 3 | 4