search results matching tag: dealer

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (131)     Sift Talk (6)     Blogs (16)     Comments (465)   

My Drug Dealer Was A Doctor - Macklemore

eric3579 says...

They said it wasn't a gateway drug
My homie was takin' subs and he ain't wake up
The whole while, these billionaires, they kicked up
Paying out congress so we take their drugs
Murderers who will never face the judge
And we dancin' to a song about our face goin' numb
But I seen homies turn grey, noses draining blood
I could've been gone, off 30's, faded in that tub
That's Prince, Michael and Whitney, that's Amy, Ledger and Pimp C
That's Yams, that's DJ A.M
God damn they're making a killing
Now it's getting attention cause Sara, Katey and Billy
But this shit's been going on from Seattle out to South Philly
It just moved out about the city
And spread out to the 'burbs
Now it's everybody's problem, got a nation on the verge
Take Activis off the market, jack the price up on the syrup
But Purdue Pharma's 'bout to move that work

My drug dealer was a doctor, doctor
Had the plug from Big Pharma, Pharma
He said that he would heal me, heal me
But he only gave me problems, problems
My drug dealer was a doctor, doctor
Had the plug from Big Pharma, Pharma
I think he trying to kill me, kill me
He tried to kill me for a dollar, dollar

And these devils they keep on talkin' to me
They screamin', "Open the bottle," I wanna be at peace
My hand is gripping that throttle, I'm running out of speed
Try to close my eyes but I keep sweatin' through these sheets, through these sheets
Four horseman, they won't let me forget
I wanna forge a prescription, 'cause, doctor, I need some more of it
When Morphine and heroin is more your budget
I said I'd never use a needle, but sure, fuck it
I'm caught up, I'm on one, I'm nauseous
No options, exhausted
This is not what I started
Walkin' carcass, I lost everything I wanted
My blinds drawn, too gone to leave this apartment

My drug dealer was a doctor, doctor
Had the plug from Big Pharma, Pharma
He said that he would heal me, heal me
But he only gave me problems, problems
My drug dealer was a doctor, doctor
Had the plug from Big Pharma, Pharma
I think he trying to kill me, kill me
He tried to kill me for a dollar, dollar

More, more, more
Re-up, re-up

Death certificate signed the prenup
Ain't no coming back from this percocet
Actavis, ambien, adderral, xanax binge
Best friends with the thing that's killing me
Enemies with my best friend, there's no healing me
Refilling these, refilling these
They say it's death, death
Institutions and DOC's
So God grant me the serenity to accept the things I can not change
Courage to change the things I can
And the wisdom to know the difference
And the wisdom to know the difference

NOFX Oxy Moronic

eric3579 says...

I've been called an oxy-moron
Because I question which drugs our war's on
Why are there more drug stores than liquor stores
You can score on
The healers have become the harmers
They're just pharmaceutical farmers
What we used to call dealers
We now call doctors
I might be a seedy cynic
Cause that crack house is now a clinic
It's time they change the name of the oath to
The hypocritic or the parasitic

It isn't adder-altruistic
By over prescribing
How can we fight them in a [?]
I'll throw a proz-accusation
With a sub-keta-meaning
They'll say my fears are quaa-ludicrous
They should be ati-vanishing
With every demurr-altercation
They'll have a good xan-explanation
You're just cialis-tated
Cause we made your dick deflated

It's oxy-moronic
It's oxy-moronic

It should be doctors getting busted
For their klon-opinions we trusted
We're not the sinners there the ones
That served us the vico-dinners
I don't want to be an alarmist
But in that harmacy there's a harmacist
And those scrips are making us [?] minded pacifists

It's oxy-moronic
It's oxy-moronic
It's oxy-moronic

Don't think that I am being crazy
The medical industrial complex
Keeps us vi-aggravated and hard to come
Because of perco-sex
How can we hydro-condone
Their blatant misconduct
They don't care for patients
They care about pushing product

Are you oxy-moronic
For wanting your daily chronic
And making your mom's house hydroponic
You're oxy-moronic

I've been called an oxy-moron
For getting my metaphor on
Linoleum is the floor on
I'm an oxy-moron

It's time to be alarmed
We're not being healed
We're being harmed
Our country's being factory farmed
It's Oxy-moronic
It's time to sound to alarm-a
We can't put our faith in karma
We got a common enemy
And they're called Big Pharma

And it's oxy-moronic
And it's oxy-moronic
It's all oxy-moronic
It's all oxy-moronic

Daily chronic, now most of your house is, okay
"Most of your house is" what does that even mean?
He's turned most of his house into hydroponic
Why wouldn't he have turned all of it into hydroponic?
Well cause he lives there
"Now all of your house is hydroponic"
Most is sappy
Really? It's like saying maybe
How about "Now your mom's house is hydroponic"
Yeah! That's fucking way better
God you fucking woke up
Come on Mike, where you been
Where you been all month?

*promote

moodonia (Member Profile)

Let’s face it — American breakfast is really dessert

Bill Maher: Who Needs Guns?

scheherazade says...

18 USC 922 :
- Is a danger to himself or others
- Lacks mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs
- Is found insane by a court in a criminal case
- Is found incompetent to stand trial, or not guilty by lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles 50a [blah blah blah]

The second line item is what applies to persons assigned a fiduciary due to a failure to manage their financial affairs (which is often elderly people).
This is why gun rights groups are crying about new measures to link medicare to the background check system.

But generally, yes, you have to do something to demonstrate that you're mental, in order to be found mental.

Gun registration is not required to know who has guns. The background check tells LEO which dealer ran it and about who. They go to the dealer and acquire the sale forms (retained at dealer by law) regarding that person.

The purpose of registration is not to know who has guns - that part is already known. Registration makes it a legal requirement to demonstrate custody. If you can't present a registered firearm, you're a criminal. Hence you have no ability to hide a registered firearm, because the act of hiding it sends you to jail. A large subset of gun owners have firearms strictly for "SHTF" (shit hits the fan). They squirrel them away with some food, and have them 'just in case' the world goes tits up. That's the segment of gun owners that drive against gun registration. They don't want their emergency kit confiscated by the government during a disaster (like happened during Katrina), and they don't want to go to jail for hiding it either.

In general, personally, I have nothing against training.
Ironically, AFAIK, LEO are the biggest offenders when it comes to accidental discharge (which makes sense, given that they point guns at people more often than regular folk, so their accidents are deadlier.).
(Police also commit [non-police-work-related] murder at a rate 8 x that of the general population.)
Training is an easy low hanging fruit to grab on to when looking for 'something to do [legislatively]', but in practice it isn't as significant as people would imagine. People that like to shoot will be well practiced, and are overall safe. Folks that bury their guns in a closet for emergencies won't be well practiced, but won't normally be in a position of opportunity to make mistakes.
Folks that legally concealed carry (hence are managing a firearm throughout the day) require a license that requires training in order to acquire. Granted, it's really not a hard test. It's driver's ed level proficiency. Just enough so you know which end to point where, you know what the controls do, and can hit a target inside of a required accuracy.
I honestly don't know the most common causes of accidental discharge - but I would assume that most are gonna be split between flubbing it with a holster (butter fingers), or forgetting to eject a chambered round after removing a magazine (derping out).

-scheherazade

newtboy said:

Kind of....but not as you describe.
Folks are already disqualified only if they have been found by the courts to be dangerously mentally defective after testing by a professional. That's a much bigger hurdle to leap than simply BEING defective, a hurdle that rarely is leaped.
You don't have to lie or hide anything if you've never been tested by a professional and deemed dangerous. Most mental defectives have not had that happen.
Guns MAY be confiscated after one is deemed legally dangerously mentally defective AND that determination is forwarded to the police AND they have the time and manpower to do something about it. That usually only happens when the person is already being prosecuted for some crime, they are found by the court to be dangerous to themselves and/or others, AND their guns are registered.

I have no idea where you got this idea that the law says indigence=criminally insane....it simply does not. Some elderly are having their firearms taken when they are put on welfare because they have dementia and can't manage their funds, but that's not what you said. It may be true that those forced by financial pressures to live in government run homes are not allowed to bring their firearms there, but again, that's not what you said.
The state does not move in and forcibly 'financially manage' the indigent in the US just because they're poor. Ever. If they did, we would not have a growing homeless population.

There are so many loopholes to 'compulsory service' that it's not compulsory at all, nor is it likely to ever be used again. Massive numbers of untrained soldiers is no longer a positive on the battlefield.

Being well trained in the proper use of firearms inhibits accidental misuse of firearms AND makes one reasonably 100% liable for their misuse if they ignore their training. If you were never trained what's proper and what's not, it makes it easy to misuse them and to then claim ignorance to avoid or mitigate liability for your actions.

-Newt

Samantha Bee on Orlando - Again? Again.

Mordhaus says...

It doesn't work like that. What you end up with is something akin to Australia's gun laws, which 'technically' still allow certain people to own guns, realistically most won't or can't

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), circuit loaded firearms. shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles including semi automatic, and paintball gun. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm. [AKA, you have to prove you have a reason to own these weapons. Newsflash, the majority of police will automatically deny you. Oh yeah, for a PAINTBALL gun as well.]

Category B: Centrefire rifles including bolt action, pump action, circuit loaded, and lever action (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. [Same as Cat A, must have a 'genuine reason' to own one, be registered, have a fee, ton of other limitations, so basically hard to own]

Category C: Pump-action or self-loading shotguns having a magazine capacity of 5 or fewer rounds and semi automatic rimfire rifles. [Only Primary producers, farm workers, firearm dealers, firearm safety officers, collectors and clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.]

Category D: Self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns have a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds. [Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies, occupational shooters and primary producers in some states. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.]

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. [This class is available to target shooters and certain security guards whose job requires possession of a firearm. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 6 months using club handguns, after which they may apply for a permit. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a paid-up member of an approved pistol club. Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38 or 9mm calibre or less and magazines may hold a maximum of 10 rounds. Participants in certain "approved" pistol competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is approved for 9mm/.38/.357 sig, handguns that meet the IPSC rules, larger calibres such as .45 were approved for IPSC handgun shooting contests in Australia in 2014. Barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94") long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72") for semi-automatic pistols unless the pistols are clearly ISSF target pistols; magazines are restricted to 10 rounds.]

Category R/E: Restricted weapons, such as machine guns, rocket launchers, full automatic self loading rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, howitzers and other artillery weapons [Obviously this class is right out...]

You can own some muzzleloading weapons without restrictions, although percussion cap pistols are restricted. In addition to these minor rules, all guns must be secured in a safe or other similar location, all must be fully registered so that the government knows the location of every single weapon/owner, and you can't sell them to another person, only to a dealer or the law to be destroyed.

After a few years of de-fanging and getting the citizens used to not having weapons, the Australian government and law enforcement routinely quietly hold gun buybacks to persuade more people to give up their weapons. They also do amnesty turn ins now and then.

So, that is the AMAZING suite of laws Australia put in place to stop mass shootings. Forgive me if, when combined, those type of laws would basically neuter the 2nd amendment. We've already neutered the 1st with 'hate speech' and the ability to sue over getting your feelings hurt. The 4th has been steadily under attack, because GOOD citizens shouldn't mind if the government rummages through everything you own or do. We haven't messed with the 5th amendment too much, so we could look at that next, maybe allow torture of everyone for confessions.

I'm getting tired of listing points, so let me just say this. I am incredibly sorry that people died, they shouldn't have and it is an utter shame. However, we are already fighting on a daily basis to keep a facsimile of the rights that were fought for when we built this country. Watering them down further only helps our government tighten the bonds of enslavement upon us. I can't agree with that.

kir_mokum said:

no single regulation is going to stop the shootings but a collection of regulations/laws/policies can definitely help and the right collection of regulations/laws/policies could very well stop these shootings. doing nothing or repealing regulations/laws/policies is clearly not working and those policy makers should have been able to figure that out by the time the thought had finished running through their minds.

The three girls and the cops controversy and this press conf

newtboy says...

Simple...the prisons are full of low level drug dealers for selling an ounce of pot, so thieves and abusers have to be set free.

ForgedReality said:

Why do brats get to commit adult crimes and then not go to prison just because they haven't been alive long enough? Somebody has to teach these fucking assholes how to behave.

Bernie Sanders “The View” - Full Interview

00Scud00 says...

The reason many in the NRA are so against smart guns is because some places (New Jersey is one I think) have it written into law that when smart guns become technically and commercially viable then all arms dealers must switch to selling only smart guns within something like 3 years. Essentially making the sale of all other guns illegal I guess.
And the gun manufacturers pretty much already have immunity from being sued for how someone uses their products. There is no reasonable way that the makers of a firearm could possibly insure that someone they sell a gun to will not use it in either a criminal or just recklessly.
Personally I think smart guns are a great idea but I think lawmakers didn't consider how their own laws might wind up hindering the adoption of smart guns.
Here's the story I heard on NPR about it a week or two back.
http://www.npr.org/2016/04/07/473416699/how-an-idea-to-develop-a-safer-smart-gun-backfired

spawnflagger said:

I think the main reason gun manufacturers don't make the biometric locks (as Obama and many other politicians call for) is fear of litigation when that lock fails.

To see safer guns (from children finding and using them) I would support a bill with some form of legal immunity from these types of lawsuits.

Bill Maher: New Rule – There's No Shame in Punting

heropsycho says...

Pedophile Bill Clinton?! Based on what? Dead bodies?!

While you are completely making things up, Trump said publicly that most Mexicans coming over the border are drug dealers and rapists. I wonder when faced with a choice between them, which negatives will Latinos focus on. Or if you are a woman, will you focus on Bill Clinton's negatives or the actual GOP candidate saying only the woman should be punished for getting an abortion?

If you honestly believe the BS you are shoveling, prepare to be shocked when Trump gets crushed should he get nominated.

bobknight33 said:

I think that if it did become down between Trump and Clinton Trump will bring up all the Clinton negatives over the last 25 years.

From the 47 suspicious dead bodies to drug running as Governor to pedophile Bill and all that entails.

The media will clearly cover for the left but Trump would be able to cut through it.

The media pokes fun at Democrats but demonizes Republicans.
http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/5709a92252bcd05b008bbc36-1500-1125/fakebostonglobetrumpfrontpage.png

http://15130-presscdn-0-89.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CfZpQU0UkAAQyIN.jpg

Painkillers

newtboy says...

What sucks ass is that because so many people DO abuse pain killers, it's becoming harder and harder to find a doctor that will prescribe them when they're needed and are the proper treatment out of a fear of being labeled a drug dealer.
My long term doctor just retired. I've been on heavy pain medications for over a decade for chronic back pain, and I have never abused them. The office has told me they have other doctors to take over his patients (lucky me, we have a severe doctor shortage here), but that they will NOT prescribe pain medication. This leaves me in a position where I've tried almost every non-medicinal treatment (PT, acupressure, acupuncture, chiropractors, heat, cold, etc) to no effect and I'm about to be deprived of the one treatment that works to make life bearable for me because other people abuse it.
It's like they are TRYING to force me (and others) to move to the black market and take more dangerous street drugs because some people do that after taking prescriptions.
That sucks ass.

Side note, I'm also a legal medical marijuana patient. That may have something to do with my not ever abusing my medications.

Why The War on Drugs Is a Huge Failure

StukaFox says...

I live in Washington state. We legalized pot here. People who were going to smoke pot anyway instead of taking from the tax base now contribute to it. Instead of a bunch of scuzzy street dealers, we have clean, well-regulated marijuana shops. Crime has gone down. Cops now can focus on more serious crime.

We legalized and the sky didn't fall. It's a lesson for the rest of the US.

Stephanie Kelton: Understanding Deficits in a Modern Economy

radx says...

@greatgooglymoogly

Thanks for taking the time to watch it.

Like I said in my previous comment, this talk needs to take a lot of shortcuts, otherwise its length would surpass anyone's attention span.

So, point by point.

By "balanced budget", I suppose you refer to the federal budget. A balanced budget is not neccessarily a bad thing, but it is undesirable in most case. The key reason is sectoral balances. The economy can divided into three sectors: public, private, foreign. Since one person's spending is another person's income, the sum of all spending and income of these three sectors is zero by definition.

More precisely: if the public sector runs a surplus and the private sector runs a surplus, the foreign sector needs to run a deficit of a corresponding size.

Two examples:
- the government runs a balanced budget, no surplus, no deficit
- the private sector runs a surplus (savings) of 2% of GDP
- the foreign sector must, by definition, run a deficit of 2% of GDP (your country runs a current account surplus of 2% of GDP)

- the government runs a deficit of 2% of GDP
- the foreign sector runs a surplus of 3% (your current account deficit of 3%)
- your private sector must, by definition, run a deficit of 1% of GDP, aka burn through savings or run up debt

If you intend to allow the private sector to net save, you need to run either a current account surplus or a public sector deficit, or both. Since we don't export goods to Mars just yet, not all countries can run current account surpluses, so you need to run a public sector deficit if you want your private sector to net save. No two ways about it.

Germany runs a balanced public budget, sort of, and its private sector net saves. But that comes at the cost of a current account surplus to the tune of €250B. That's 250 billion Euros worth of debt other countries have to accumulate so that both the private and public sector in Germany can avoid deficits. Parasitic is what I'd call this behaviour, and I'm German.

If you feel ambitious, you could try to have both surplus and deficit within the private sector by allowing households to net save while "forcing" corporations to run the corresponding deficits. But to any politician trying that, I'd advise to avoid air travel.

As for the "devaluation of the currency", see my previous comment.

Also, she didn't use real numbers, because a) the talk is short and numbers kill people's attention rather quickly, and b) it's a policy decision to use debt to finance a deficit. One might just as well monetise it, like I explained in my previous comment.

Helicopter money would be quite helpful these days, actually. Even monetarists like AEP say so. If fiscal policy is off the table (deficit hawkery), what else are you left with...

As for your question related to the Fed, let me quote Eric Tymoigne on why MMT views both central bank and Treasury as part of the consolidated government:

"MMT authors tend to like to work with a consolidated government because they see it as an effective strategy for policy purpose (see next section), but also because the unconsolidated case just hides under layers of institutional complexity the main point: one way or another the Fed finances the Treasury, always. This monetary financing is not an option and is not by itself inflationary."

MMT principle: the central bank needs to be under democratic control, aka be part of government. The Fed in particular can pride itself on its independance all it wants, it still cannot fulfill any of its goals without the Treasury's help. It cannot diverge from government policies too long. Unlike the ECB, which is a nightmare in its construction.

Anyway, what does he mean by "one way or another the Fed finances the Treasury, always"? Well, the simple case is debt monetisation, direct financing. However, the Fed also participates by ensuring that Primary Dealers have enough reserves to make a reasonable bid on treasuries. The Fed makes sure that auctions of treasuries will always succeed. Always. Either by providing reserves to ensure buyers can afford the treasuries, by replacing maturing treasuries or buying them outright. No chance whatsoever for bond vigilantes. Betting against treasuries is pointless, you will always lose.

But what about taxation as a means to finance the Treasury? Well, the video's Monopoly example illustrated quite nicely, you cannot collect taxes until you have spent currency into circulation. Spending comes before taxation, it does not depend on it. Until reserves are injected into the banking system, either by the Fed through asset purchases or the Treasury through spending, taxes cannot be paid. Again, monetary financing is not optional. If the Treasury borrows money from the public, it borrows back money it previously spent.

Yes, I ignored the distribution of wealth, taxation, the fixation on growth and a million other things. That's a different discussion.

Admitted weed traffickers get high/paranoid and call 911

artician says...

Isn't there some saying... like "don't use your own stash", or "dealers don't sample from their own supply", or something? Well, I can't remember it and obviously neither could these two!

How The DEA Created 'Narco-Terrorism'

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

oritteropo says...

Likewise.

I did find an article in the Sunshine Coast Daily which explained some of his problems - http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/music-video-offers-funny-new-take-campaign-lemon-l/2837465/

It's the dealer who is responsible for either rectifying the faults or giving him a refund and not FCA (although they are subject to a separate ACCC order and are dragging their feet to the maximum extent allowed by the law).

Mordhaus said:

Hope something good happens, at least the Australia law does seem to cover some things Canada doesn't



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon