“Cheese” heroin killing kids in Dallas
posted at 8:01 am on April 17, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
The media turns everything into a crisis, but in this case it seems justified:
As many as 17 Dallas County teenagers have died since 2005 from overdoses of the popular new form of heroin known as “cheese” – the most visible sign yet that more youths are caught in the grip of a growing crisis.
The Dallas Morning News worked with the Dallas County medical examiner’s office to examine toxicology results from hundreds of autopsies and found more than four times as many cheese heroin deaths as previously reported.
Cheese first appeared nearly two years ago, though it went unnoticed by law enforcement and public health officials for quite a while. It’s a mix of illegal heroin and legal OTC drugs. Hispanics are disproportianate users, and therefore make up most of the dead. Keep that in mind, as it figures in how the drug is distributed:
“It definitely surprises me,” said Zachary Thompson, director of Dallas County Health and Human Services, who serves on a regional cheese task force made up of more than a dozen health, government, school and police agencies.
“We’ve had this drug in the community for some time and didn’t recognize it,” Mr. Thompson said. “It flew under the radar of all of us. The cheese heroin has been the most instantly addictive and deadliest drug … that we have seen since the crack cocaine epidemic.”
Its rise, addictiveness and deadliness mirrors a similar outbreak of “black tar heroin” use in the Dallas suburb of Plano, ten years ago.
All of this is fascinating, disturbing and maddening. I’m not big on the “war on drugs,” preferring to save declarations of war when we’re actually in real wars, but I’m also not a libertarian on the issue. The fact is, drugs and the gangs, networks and culture that thrive around their manufacture and distribution are a cancer on society. The whole system is set up to prey on kids and enslave or kill them without pity while criminals get rich or get killed trying to get rich.
This particular epidemic has its roots across the southern border. Many of our drug problems do. Notice how the Dallas Morning News chooses to report the facts:
Speculation abounds about why northwest Dallas is where cheese seems to have started and taken the greatest toll. Some say that it’s because the heroin traffickers are mostly Mexican, who are supplying the young Hispanics who crush the nighttime cold tablets, mix them with the black-tar heroin and then peddle it at their own schools.
Perpetuating the spread of the drug, some believe, is a fear among most illegal immigrants of speaking out to authorities for fear of deportation. Language barriers stymie the free flow of information between parents and their teachers.
The traffickers are merely “Mexican,” while the potential informants are “illegal immigrants,” and the latter is set up as just itching to help out if only they could rest assured that their status wouldn’t get them deported. If it occurred to the DMN reporter that the traffickers could also be “illegal immigrants,” and that they might have familial or other connections to the would-be informants, it’s not evident in the way the story is constructed. The story also doesn’t make the obvious connection: The smugglers appear to be using their cultural connections to develop the “cheese” market and keep it going. Hispanic students make up half the dead so far; Hispanics do not make up half of the total population in the Dallas area.
All around, it’s an awful story. Drug cartels will always stay a step or two ahead of law enforcement. Legalization really won’t work. Unless we find a way to license every weed patch, meth lab, crack house and “cheese” shop in every country in the hemisphere and enforce the relevant regulations, the drug networks will always find a way to operate outside the law. Legalize one drug, they’ll just invent another one or mix a couple of current ones for a whole new buzz, and then they’ll sell it to kids no matter what age restrictions we try to slap on. They’re criminals, and that’s just what criminals do. Our lax border laws aid and abet these criminals in preying on yet another generation, and the media and political elites just paper over the inconvenient particulars. It’s a shame and a disgrace.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
JUST SAY NO to “dairy”.
Pleeeez.
And why is it, exactly, that I am supposed to care about a bunch of “silver spooners” (to use a Rachelism) ??
Yaaaawn.
Next.
seejanemom on April 17, 2007 at 8:49 AM
There’s a fine Christian attitude for you.
Seventeen families are without their children. Perhaps you could grow a soul and show some empathy?
Damn silver spooners. They have money, so screw them. Right?
You might be happier to DailyKos. They’d certainly agree with what you just wrote.
Professor Blather on April 17, 2007 at 9:52 AM
And if your post was meant as liberal parody, I apologize in advance.
If it wasn’t, maybe you should apologize. Or hope to God it’s never your kids.
Professor Blather on April 17, 2007 at 9:53 AM
It’s true that the drug cartels will always stay one step ahead of law enforcement, but I think you fail to take into consideration the artificially inflated prices that the “War of Drugs” has created, which has allowed the cartels to not only stay in business but make billions of dollars. An ounce of marijuana runs around $300, whereas the same amount of tobacco costs maybe $5, despite the fact tobacco is much more difficult to grow and cultivate.
Criminalization has created these ridiculously inflated prices which in turn has created a lucrative market for these thugs and dealers to get rich, buy all sorts of illegal weapons, and use them to defend their territory. If marijuana and other drugs were decriminalized and regulated their prices would drop dramatically, even with heavy taxation. The cartels and street dealers would no longer be able to stay in business; I mean who would buy a joint from the sketchy guy on the corner if you could go into CVS and buy it for same price?
Granted this would do little to reduce the problems of abuse and addiction, but it would go a long way in eliminating the street dealers/gangs/cartels/violence/turf wars that I believe cause as many or more problems than the drugs themselves. On top of this, the money gained from taxation could be funneled back into education and rehabilitation programs and used clean up the neighborhoods that were ravaged by gangs and turf wars.
JaHerer22 on April 17, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Prof: I think the “silver spoon” thing was a drug world reference, not a rich kid reference.
Jaibones on April 17, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Also, calous as it may seem, suicide by heroin is still suicide. If people want to kill themselves, there’s not much we can do to stop them.
And anyone who thinks that they can buy heroin in the ghetto and inject it into their bloodstream without substantially risking death is just stupid.
All the same, I have great empathy for the families of people who find so little in this life to live for. This stays with them forever in the form of a very powerful guilt.
Jaibones on April 17, 2007 at 10:03 AM
I *gasp* agree with you.
JayHaw Phrenzie on April 17, 2007 at 10:08 AM
I don’t like legalization of drugs at all. Drugs are addicting, soul destroying items. Why legalize it and put our stamp of approval on them? It’s unfortunate that the drug gangs, etc. exist, but they are criminals anyway. My suggestion would be to put far more resources into curing addictions, with a liberal set of laws for those who are trying to quit.
But for those who aren’t…. no need to legalize them at all. Let them fry.
Vanceone on April 17, 2007 at 10:37 AM
JaHerer22 on April 17, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Jaibones on April 17, 2007 at 10:47 AM
(F**k that quote button)
Jaibones on April 17, 2007 at 10:48 AM
It had to be liberal parody.
Tim Burton on April 17, 2007 at 11:04 AM
The tobacco lawsuits (which I find ridiculous) all stem from the fact tobacco companies knew that their products were harmful to their users health and actively worked to conceal this information. Now that this is public knowledge and all tobacco products contain warning labels, the lawsuit frenzy is over and people can’t claim Big Tobacco is deceiving them. I think similar lawsuits involving drugs could be avoided if their negative effects were published from the get go.
I’m not saying legalizing and taxing is a great idea, but it’s far from brainless. Drugs are out there, they’re not going anywhere; humans will continue to use them until the end of time. The sooner we accept this and develop realistic laws for dealing with them the better off we will all be. My solution is far from perfect, but it’s infinitely better than the current “War on Drugs” which is a colossal failure no matter how you look at it. If you have a better solution, I’d love to hear it.
Furthermore, the basis for determining which drugs are legal and illegal is completely absurd; certain drugs were outlawed because it was a convenient way to solve other problems. Marijuana was outlawed during the depression because it was popular among Mexicans and the government needed a convenient way to deport them because jobs were no longer plentiful; hence they outlaw their favorite recreational activity and arrest and deport them in droves. The History Channel has a fascinating series on the history of drugs and how they became illegal; with few exceptions they were all outlawed for underlying political motives.
Finally, if we were really concerned about the ’soul-crushing’ power of drugs, wouldn’t we outlaw the ones that were the most harmful? Take a look at this article that was just released last month. It’s just further proof how asinine our current laws are.
JaHerer22 on April 17, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Simple solution: DON’T DO DRUGS! If you don’t want to take the risk of doing some heinous stuff and ending up dead from it… DON’T DO IT. Life has choices. These people made the wrong one.
I am sorry the users died, but they made the choice. I made my own poor choices earlier in life.
My choices put me in in jail. Again that was MY CHOICE, and the wrong one. I suffered the consequences, and learned from my mistakes. I value this experience because I learned the hard way that I wanted to STAY OUT OF JAIL AT ALL COSTS. It was very unpleasant. So, I altered my lifestyle to accomplish that goal.
I have spent the time after my ordeal encouraging others NOT TO GO DOWN THE SAME PATH I DID, it sucks, and isn’t worth the trouble you can get in.
These people that killed themselves doing hard drugs made their choice. It’s unfortunate that they died, but poor choices have consequences.
I can only hope that somebody will learn from those peoples’ (and my) mistakes, and MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE.
mojojojo on April 17, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Oh, Blather. It was pure satire, obviously.
tommy1 on April 17, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Susie Cream cheese ala creme fumase
Kini on April 17, 2007 at 12:40 PM
“Cheese” heroin killing kids in Dallas
That’s tantmount to say the 9 mm’s killed the people at VT.
When will people stop making excuses for the type of conduct that comes from a personal decision?
Chief1942 on April 17, 2007 at 12:46 PM
But in the case of “Cheese” It is a marketing tool by the pushers to get an immdeiate for life customer- our children. I mean how many of you as kids did anything on a dare when you were a kid. Heroin is highly addictive after first or second use. Mexico is getting it here because 911 security is keeping other countries drug cartels from the US. But since we ignore our border with Mexico the drug market is flourishing. Even the enemy Cartels in Mexico are joining forces because there is too much business to handle.
Drtuddle on April 17, 2007 at 1:05 PM
$10 bag of cocaine and a $5 bag of marijuana as “Macaroni and cheese”
Drtuddle on April 17, 2007 at 2:43 PM
Alcohol was produced, distributed, and marketed by vicious criminals such as the Kennedy clan. Murders, beatings, vandalism, turf wars, persistent high speed chases were all part and parcel of alcohol.
Did legalisation abet this, embedding vicious alcohol distributors in our communities? Outside of Massachusetts the rum runners are out of the violence business. Alcohol is readily and cheaply available even in Utah, though there is still far too much government involvement and needless restrictions.
Canada saw a violent cigarette smuggling trade when it taxed cigarettes so much that there was a lucrative opportunity for a black market. Does that make tobacco inherently a violent business? Or does that say something about black markets?
The NRA has a point - when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. For someone so in touch with gun rights you’re really not applying your knowledge and understanding of human behaviour to other spheres.
Legalise drugs and you take away the incentives for the black market, bring the trade within the protection of the law so that disputes are resolved in court rather than in drive-bys (if only they shot lawyers during drive-bys, instead of little kids), reduce inadvertent overdoses by getting reliable and guaranteed products, improve health by getting users out of crack dens and making needles easily accessible, and above all you free up billions of dollars so that violent criminals can be locked up longer and police can focus on dangerous crime and preventing terrorism.
All mammals seek drugs to manipulate their brain chemistry. It is a weakness and a failing, but one that is best managed within society rather than trying to outlaw it. Vice is eternal, but virtues are best encouraged rather than mandated. Laws against all vices (or what some seem to think are vices)- adultery, gambling, drinking, drugs, sodomy, dancing, women wearing pants… - are a bad idea for what unenforceable, widely flouted laws do to society and the rampant criminality that they create and encourage.
Not all bad things should be against the law. Blue laws and prohibition are but way-stations towards theocracy like Shariah or the Geneva of Calvin’s time. It is but a difference of degree rather than kind. Best to ensure that the culture encourages moderation and civility rather than relying on Leviathan to force it.
libertarianuberalles on April 17, 2007 at 3:10 PM
Ok, once and for all let’s get this straight. Drug dealers are not “one step ahead” of law enforcement. At most, the only time they are ahead of the police is when they begin selling. Fairly soon after the process has begun they are identified. So, why then can’t we do something about them?
Well, it’s a little thing called the Constitution. You can’t believe how often police know who is doing the selling, but for fear of not being able to prosecute or a desire to arrest the mythical kingpin, they sit around and wait for more evidence to make their case stronger. This has led to behavior by the police that is almost apologetic instead of proactive. They fear being sued more than they fear letting a criminal get away.
Ever wonder why other, less advanced countries don’t have our recreational drug problem? Because other countries don’t have our freedoms, they also don’t have protection from the police.
Suffice to say, the criminals are never one step ahead of law enforcement, they are merely well-versed enough in constitutional law to abuse their civil rights.
They also prey on the stupidity of parents and naivety of children. If you are a parent, watch your kids and involve yourself in their lives. It is almost impossible to get a kid to believe they shouldn’t do drugs when every other ad on television is for some pharmaceutical that can fix everything from your heart problem to your sex life and we tout the benefits of pills and supplements. They really don’t know the difference.
Reality is the only thing that can fix this problem. An old judge I once knew used to make every defendant placed on probation visit the hospital ER and wait until they had seen at least one death from a drug overdose. That caused more than a few people to quit. The others, well, there is a reason why you don’t see many old drug abusers.
lawman2 on April 17, 2007 at 3:14 PM
I agree, gasp with JaHerer22
When I was in high school in the late 1960’s, you could go to Mexico and buy a brick(2.2lbs)of Marijuana for $10.00-$15.00. Now it is sold by the pound starting at around $3,000.00 to $6,000.00.
This was before the war on drugs started its unconstitutional attack on our freedoms. Before prohibition, drugs were not regulated in the United States and the number of drug addicts was proportionately lower than today.
I am retired Law Enforcement and a member of LEAP.Criminal Justice Professionals Speaking Out Against the “War on Drugs”.
We are for legalizing drugs because we used to be part of the war on drugs and know it is utter disaster that cannot be won the way it is being carried out today. We are losing our Constitutional Freedoms in the name of the war on drugs and we are spending trillions with no results.
People need to open their eyes. The only people that are profiting from this are the Corrupted Politicians, Judges, law enforcement and of course, the drug dealers.
There is no difference from Prohibition during the 20’s and today, except the Al Capone’s are not widely publicized in the MSM. After 30 years of drug war, illegal narcotics are decreasing in price, increasing in purity and demand continues to surge.See End Prohibition Now
If drugs were legalized, the criminal element would be out of business over night. The gangs and narco terrorists would have no market and the corrupted would be not be able to make the payments on their toys that they get through payoffs and corruption of our legal system.
Mexico would have to find exports to replace the 70 billion of illegal drugs they send to the United States every year.
Yes, the drug addicts would be still here but isn’t it time we try and treat the illness instead of throwing them all in jail. Drugs are currently illegal and the war on drugs has not decreased the number addicts. In fact, the demand has never been higher and number of addicts increases every year.
Drugs could be legalized, regulated and taxed under Government control instead of being run by organized crime.
I urge you to use our Multimedia Page and see why Current and former members of law enforcement who support drug regulation rather than prohibition.
For 150 years this country prospered without the draconian drug laws that we have today and we had more Freedoms than we have today.
ScottyDog on April 17, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Dude I love Mac and Cheese; Easy Mac is the best…
On a serious note, this is a sad state of affairs. I see the Scotty Dog argument but I can’t side with it as drugs, legal or illegal, create “Do Nothings”.
They just lie around all day; infuriating to extremes…
On top of that, dope will never be legal (as previously) because it’s associated with behaviors - other criminally egregious behaviors…
“He bought that PCP legally, but for some odd reason he still went on a murderous rampage”
ar_basin on April 17, 2007 at 4:02 PM
I am in no way advocating for drug use but speaking up for changing the way we go about Discouraging its use. I am for taking organized crime out of the equation and regulating its use by the Government.
Do you think that Society benefits from the lazy do nothings financing and supporting their habit in the shadows through theft and criminal enterprise.
Or maybe you think that it was OK for former President Bill Clinton to run for President with the proceeds from selling cocaine and smuggling marijuana into this country in Mena, AK.
In one of my former assignments in law enforcement, I learned more than I wanted to learn(for my own health)about the drug operation at Mena,AK.
It caused me to re-evaluate my career in Law Enforcement, and I decided to resign.
Peter Christ retired as a police captain after a 20-year career enforcing drug laws in upstate New York.
“It only took us 13 years to learn the lesson, and the lesson was: alcohol did not create Al Capone. Prohibition of alcohol created Al Capone, and the gangsters that roamed our streets. And the legalization of alcohol — we knew was not going to do anything to solve our alcohol problem — but the legalization of alcohol put a huge dent in our crime and violence problem.”
ScottyDog on April 17, 2007 at 7:46 PM
JaHerer22 on April 17, 2007 at 11:37 AM
OK, bad choice of condemnations, but let’s review:
I completely agree with your economic argument. I have no doubt that the real financial power behind the drug trade is scarcity produced by its illegality. But scarcity means nothing without demand, so demand drives the equation.
I am pretty sure that cigarettes contained warning labels long before the first law suit, but it doesn’t matter: there wasn’t a smoker in America in 1960 that was not aware that smoking has significant health risks. They were commonly referred to as “coffin nails”, as in “have another nail in your coffin”. The law suits were junk, filed in friendly jurisdictions by crooked AGs.
Yes, it sounds like great fun to have the government grow “the best weed ever, Dude!” and sell it at astonishing profit and then tax you into a coma. Billion$!
But it doesn’t matter. There is no way for the government to create a new, legal distribution system for a recreational drug without inheriting unlimited liability.
I personally feel that the cost of jailing millions of stupid people for possession and sale of marijuana is insane, and the benefit is non-existent. It’s the full employment for prison guards act. But anything that even resembles decriminalization of hard drugs is impossible, and would be stupid.
Jaibones on April 17, 2007 at 8:37 PM
OK, I read the Lancet piece. The logical flaw, to me, is that they rank cigarettes and alcohol so high on the danger list because of the social costs, measured in “emergency room visits and hospital costs”, but they are comparing them against a list of drugs that are all Class X felonies for possession.
If Meth and Ecstasy were legal, don’t you think their social costs would climb the ladder just a bit?
Jaibones on April 17, 2007 at 8:41 PM
I personally support the total legalization of all drugs, illicit and all. They should be made cheap, available , and strong. Those who wish to avail themselves of such will eventually remove themselves from the gene pool. Any addictive narcotic is logrithmic in it’s effect. Each time it takes more of the substance to acquire the same effect as the first use, which is what the users chase after. After 30 years of putting them in body bags, I have no sympathy for the self destructive personal choice to go down that path.
Chief1942 on April 18, 2007 at 3:44 PM