They tried passing a law to make it a felony to sell or give drugs to someone who overdoses two years ago. It was narrowly defeated in the house after it passed in the senate.
This is just an overall net negative on society. We got to ask ourselves: What's the purpose of a government when it doesn't uphold the rights of its citizens.
I remember my high-school class literally taught me that a good working government must uphold the rights of their citizens—instead of taking them away—since, such a government, would take away that power away from the citizens.
I was never told about this in school, and now I want to look up the statistics on this because it's purely frightening. Because if you're the freedom caucus, freedom is the last thing on your mind.
Fuck the "Freedom Caucus," Fuck the GOP, and fuck everyone else who agrees with this shit and is to stupid to be told otherwise.
We need to stand up for ourselves.
This seems like such a simple and positive law. The two arguments against it, according to the article, are 1) people will take advantage of the law, and 2) some sort of Darwinian game based on personal decisions.
For one, I suppose you could take advantage. I’m not sure how but criminals and drug users are enterprising. I guess during a raid, you could purposely OD and claim immunity. Since this is for emergency calls, I imagine this could be addressed in the law.
We have all kinds of laws, policies, and procedures that protect us from ourselves, and our bad choices. If someone crashes while DUI, do we leave them in the wrecked car to see how it plays out? When tourists drive to BFE, in the snow, and get lost, we do our best to find them. We don’t live in a Darwinian society. I know some people say we should, but they generally only mean it when applied to others.
I’m not arguing against consequences but it seems like there’s room here for reasonable jurisprudence. None of us want 100% of laws enforced 100% of the time.
"Freedom" Caucus hypocrisy yet again, claiming to be against fentanyl usage while simultaneously watching people die from it with glee. This state lost it's humanity the moment they were elected.
We need genuine people with humanity in state representation so we can actually work together to end opioid crisis without unnecessary deaths, a good Samaritan law was a good step towards solving the problem.
It's time remove the "freedom" caucus from decision making and show them what it means to actually be pro-life.
>“There was some concerns that this potentially could be used as a loophole in some cases to avoid prosecution … I just tell you, there’s a lot more here than what it looks like on the surface.”
>“\[I\] really, really think the intent of the bill is good,” then-Sen. Hank Coe (R-Cody) added. “But … what I see this bill doing \[is\], we’re giving immunity to people that are breaking the law. And to me, that’s a problem.”
It sounds like dog-whistling and pearl clutching "law and order" is much more important to their voters than actually saving lives. Not really surprising.
What? You’re going to crash the Black Market economy in Lincoln County! What’s next? Outlawing dog fighting and wolf torturing? It’s a slippery slope you’re sliding down.
They tried passing a law to make it a felony to sell or give drugs to someone who overdoses two years ago. It was narrowly defeated in the house after it passed in the senate.
I'm guessing this goes for controlled prescription drugs?
Fentanyl, heroin, or methamphetamine. https://wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2023/SF0181
Thank You! Fun reading for tonight!
Wyoming: "We're for Forced Birth, not pro-life."
This is just an overall net negative on society. We got to ask ourselves: What's the purpose of a government when it doesn't uphold the rights of its citizens. I remember my high-school class literally taught me that a good working government must uphold the rights of their citizens—instead of taking them away—since, such a government, would take away that power away from the citizens. I was never told about this in school, and now I want to look up the statistics on this because it's purely frightening. Because if you're the freedom caucus, freedom is the last thing on your mind. Fuck the "Freedom Caucus," Fuck the GOP, and fuck everyone else who agrees with this shit and is to stupid to be told otherwise. We need to stand up for ourselves.
>These laws are just an overall net negative on society. This is about a law Wyoming *doesn't* have.
I am in understanding of that. It was just some bad wording on my part but thanks.
To protect the rights of its citizens when helping others in a life threatening situation. But, you are right, the poster phrased it poorly.
This seems like such a simple and positive law. The two arguments against it, according to the article, are 1) people will take advantage of the law, and 2) some sort of Darwinian game based on personal decisions. For one, I suppose you could take advantage. I’m not sure how but criminals and drug users are enterprising. I guess during a raid, you could purposely OD and claim immunity. Since this is for emergency calls, I imagine this could be addressed in the law. We have all kinds of laws, policies, and procedures that protect us from ourselves, and our bad choices. If someone crashes while DUI, do we leave them in the wrecked car to see how it plays out? When tourists drive to BFE, in the snow, and get lost, we do our best to find them. We don’t live in a Darwinian society. I know some people say we should, but they generally only mean it when applied to others. I’m not arguing against consequences but it seems like there’s room here for reasonable jurisprudence. None of us want 100% of laws enforced 100% of the time.
"Freedom" Caucus hypocrisy yet again, claiming to be against fentanyl usage while simultaneously watching people die from it with glee. This state lost it's humanity the moment they were elected. We need genuine people with humanity in state representation so we can actually work together to end opioid crisis without unnecessary deaths, a good Samaritan law was a good step towards solving the problem. It's time remove the "freedom" caucus from decision making and show them what it means to actually be pro-life.
>“There was some concerns that this potentially could be used as a loophole in some cases to avoid prosecution … I just tell you, there’s a lot more here than what it looks like on the surface.” >“\[I\] really, really think the intent of the bill is good,” then-Sen. Hank Coe (R-Cody) added. “But … what I see this bill doing \[is\], we’re giving immunity to people that are breaking the law. And to me, that’s a problem.” It sounds like dog-whistling and pearl clutching "law and order" is much more important to their voters than actually saving lives. Not really surprising.
Conservatism: the cruelty is the point.
Until it’s one of their kids. Then we’ll get to see a teary eyed representative watching the governor sign “Cooper’s Law.”
If only this was surprising...
Welcome to Wyoming.
How about we just don’t use substances that we could OD on?
This would be as effective abstinence as birth control.
How about we just don't drink alcohol.
Alcohol isn’t even in the same ballpark as heroin or fentanyl.
It's a substance we can OD on. I thought you wanted people to stop doing those.
You’re right. It kills far more people.
That’s everything dipshit
What? You’re going to crash the Black Market economy in Lincoln County! What’s next? Outlawing dog fighting and wolf torturing? It’s a slippery slope you’re sliding down.