www.eagletimes.com www.mychamplainvalley.com
Large heroin bust in Springfield
Posted: Jun 19, 2016 9:26 PM EDT
Updated: Jun 19, 2016 9:26 PM EDT
By WCAX NewsCONNECT
SPRINGFIELD, Vt. -
A large heroin bust in Springfield Sunday.
Police say 23-year-old Timothy Ksepka had 520 bags of heroin concealed in the headliner of the vehicle. Vermont State Police troopers searched his car at the Irving Gas Station in town after police say he was spotted driving erratically on Interstate 91. The Hardwick man is charged with possession and trafficking. He was lodge at the Southern State Correctional Facility for lack of $15-hundred dollars bail.
Shumlin has done wonders for the Heroin Epidemic. I can't imagine why he gives speeches on controlling addiction. .
ReplyDeleteShumlin has been a horrible failure. Under his administration hundreds of desirable technology sector jobs have left the state. The quality of life is so bad the population has actually decreased. Health insurance is even less affordable. The heroin epidemic is accelerating with no solution in sight. He has released dozens of convicted dealers as non violent offenders. The administrators he personally appointed oversaw a child welfare department that placed vulnerable children into the hands of their murders. Then Shumlin has the nerve to say he's resolved the problem by firing the same administrators he appointed! He has been caught repeatedly flat out lying. (YouTube to awash in video clips if you do a search.) He deliberately lied in an attempt to instill fear and panic after Irene to promote political agendas. His own wife divorced him for infidelity reaping a huge divorce settlement. Spends his ample free time on exotic jaunts with a mistress half his age which the liberal press refuses to mention. Screwed a simpleton out of his family's homestead. Bloated the budget by adding hundreds to the State payroll then raised taxes more than any other administration in recent history. Closed the State mental hospital, then took a bow as dozens of maniacs were unleashed upon small communities. Yet Springfield's electorate helped return him to office last fall. Further proving just how stupid and selfish our residents are.
ReplyDeleteThere is no controlling addiction. It is an all-consuming monster that destroys and kills. Hence the term ADDICTION! While I agree with the left on things like economics and environmental policy, they are absolutely clueless when it comes to drugs and crime.
ReplyDeleteThey have an economics policy? Huh I must b looking in wrong places I guess
DeleteThe Left has taken the Political Correct approach on addiction which has done nothing to help the people who need it. Non profits are making millions off of this. Light prison sentences mean the Dealers are back on the street selling in record time.
DeleteAppears you have an addiction to the failings of left wing politics!
Delete7:48: I don't know if you were responding to my post, (9:59) but in the interest of fairness, here goes: Supply side economics is a scam designed to bankrupt the working class, global warming does in fact exist and is caused by humans, fascism disguised as religious devotion is evil, and taxes and government regulations are necessary components in an equitable and functional society. Hey, that felt pretty good!
ReplyDeleteAddiction is only an "all-consuming monster" to those who become addicted. For people who drink alcohol, that is about 20% of all drinkers; for heroin users, that is about 23% of all users. Nevertheless, the drug traffickers depend upon society treating ALL users as addicts and criminals. That keeps the price high (known in economics as the "risk premium") and keeps drug trafficking attractive to would-be entrepreneurs who don't know how to satisfy their desire for a lucrative living in a more legal manner.
ReplyDeleteLegalize it all and put the billions spent on the DEA helicopters to re-train the SWAT teams to become substance abuse counselors. Or, keep doing stupid...
Congratulations, Chuck! You have an excellent command of the English language! It is your penchant for circular logic that's the problem. (Addicts are only addicts if they're addicts?) Chuck, give it up! There is no such thing as a casual heroin user! Or a casual cocaine user! I think that after 20 years of partying, I would have met one. I never did. There are only two kinds of drug users; the ones who get clean, and the ones who die! I said it before, I'll say it again; If these drugs are so safe, why are people dying? Why the seed for treatment centers? You remind me of the conservatives I used to know; no matter how many times they're proven wrong, they keep talking hoping someone will be stupid enough to believe them. I hope no one is.
DeleteActually in Europe there are clinics were heroin addicts go to get their shot before going to work. Life goes on.....
DeleteAlthough eventually, I suspect that we will declare the War on Drugs a bust, Vermont cannot afford to allow hard drugs like heroin and cocaine to go unchecked. The problem that I see with where the State leadership is going is they are moving away from incarceration without creating the residential treatment capacity to handle the people that are being diverted from jail. With the result that communities like Springfield are getting overwhelmed. Something has to be done about the current "catch and release" program that is in effect. In addition, this business of trying to sort out the addicts from the dealers isn't working very well. We have too many local addicts providing support and comfort to the dealers -- we aren't helping the situation by creating more amenities to serve the addicts. It just draws them to Springfield.
DeleteVery well put. You should stay on the Selectboard, this town needs you.
Delete4:13, what do you make of the fact that 77% of heroin users use less far less than once a week? Those people are as addicted to heroin as my one-a-day mother was to cigarettes. They do not commit crimes to pay for their habit; they are no more likely than alcohol or tobacco users to have their habit spill over into crime or domestic abuse/violence.
ReplyDeleteYou need to understand there is a difference between a user, a functioning addict and an addict.
The main reason people are dying is they are injecting heroin that has been adulterated.
When heroin WAS legal back in the nineteenth century, it helped housewives and farm wives get through the day. It began to be noticed as a problem as too many people got too sick from overuse, and our Christian morality at the time decided that it was sinful to have that happen. Not knowing about the causes and cures for addiction led society to believe that criminalizing it (and alcohol eventually) would solve the problem. It never did; it only gave birth to organized crime.
So, what's your solution in order to get all heroin users-- the addicts and the functional ones-- to stop using it?
So, to allow people to "get through the day", we sacrifice a predictable 20+% of them to dire problems for their lives, for their families, and for society, is that it? It would be better to bring back religion to remind people that there's right and wrong, and that has nothing to do with money, and there are no easy answers such as drugs pretend to be.
DeletePhillip, religion was an extremely strong social force in the late 1900's, when opiates and alcohol were recognized as harmful to people. The resulting crusade focused on the evils simply because religion assumed relying on God would solve it. That attitude gave us Prohibition and the creation of the Cosa Rostra.
DeleteBill W, who created Alcoholics Anonymous, put religion in the proper perspective to drug addiction by calling on participants to rely on a Higher Power as they confronted their own weaknesses and built upon their own strengths to begin recovery. And government funding of studies about addiction produced programs that can help even the non-religious.
Hey Chuck, took you a while to manufacture some more "facts." You must be slipping. Housewives suffering from addiction and dying are why it was made illegal in the first place. I saw that on a PBS special, so I guess they're a part of your Nixonian conspiracy too. Funny, I don't recall Jesus saying "Feed the hungry and heal the sick by selling them cheap dope" but you've probably never read the Bible before condemning it. Whoa, what do we have here? A trick question! Functional addicts are nothing more than a left-wing delusion. (Besides being a contradiction in terms.) Nice try, though! The way to stop drug abusers (what you call users) is to cut off their supply, or at least make it so difficult and dangerous to get that they give up and, hopefully, do something positive with their lives. You see, booze can be made by nearly anyone using ingredients purchased at any grocery store. Hard to get rid of. Opium poppies, however, are rather difficult to grow, requiring a rather large, very expensive greenhouse since the climate in North America isn't particularly suitable. Then, one would need an advanced degree in Chemistry, and an expensive lab, to make them into heroin. Most heroin comes from Afghanistan. When we overthrew the Taliban, who used to shoot opium growers, we opened the floodgates. (Thanks W.) Should we put the Taliban back in power? I don't know, but that would stop most of the smack from coming in. I guess the only thing other than shooting the growers, would be to execute the dealers (which, by the way, is how the Chinese did it in the 19th century.) There you have it; two solutions that have been proven to work in other countries, for over 100 years!
ReplyDeleteThe Taliban, a criminal organization, encourage and finance their operations through the opium trade. Many of the ornamental poppy plants you see in North American gardens, including Vermont, are, in fact, of the opium producing variety.
DeleteI was being facetious about the Taliban. No, I do not believe that to be a solution. I was serious about the Chinese solution. The point I was making about poppy growing is that it is not easy, and requires a lot of space, making detection easier. You still have to turn it into heroin, which is also not easy. Most of the growing and chemistry are done overseas for that reason. In the absence of some type of foreign control, targeting the dealers in America is the only real solution.
DeleteThat's the solution we've been attempting, and it's working just as well as it did in Prohibition.
DeleteWhat's the definition of insanity?
The Chinese outlawed opium use and sale under penalty of death in the 19th century. This did nothing to stop the import and distribution of the drug, by the British.This continued well into the 20th century. Another "war on drugs" failure.
DeleteHey, Chuck! I just remembered a personal experience with one of your "functional" addicts. About 12 years ago I worked for an electrical contractor. My boss was in a county funded methadone program. I asked him how long he had been in it and he told me six years. I asked him why he didn't wean himself off, like the programs were supposed to do, and he said "Why should I, it's free." Then his car broke down. I was forced to wake up an hour earlier, and go out of my way to drive him to get his fix, (off the clock) or else I was fired. After about two weeks, I'd had enough. I went through hell getting clean and sober and here I was supporting someone else's drug habit, with my tax dollars as well as my time and gas. I told him that if he fired me, I'd tell the company owner why. His car was running the next day. So, in summation, he was perfectly willing to feed his habit on the backs of the taxpayers, inconvenience everyone around him, (illegally) all the while being too lazy to fix his car! He wasn't exactly a ball of fire on the job either. So much for functionality! Or maybe you think that's normal?
ReplyDeleteRe-think that episode, 7:58. Imagine what it would have developed if heroin were decriminalized. Would you still have been forced to help him get to a clinic? And, by the way, what was your experience about getting clean and sober?
DeleteNice try, but I will not be psychoanalyzed by Springfield's Pope of Dope. You never did tell me what your credentials were so I will assume you have none, as I suspected.
Delete12:37, when you asked for my credentials on 6/25, I provided them (your 1:20 post). The you think I'm "psychoanalyzing" you (by asking you to imagine what might have been different in the experience you posted) says quite a bit about your grasp of the issue.
DeleteHey, Chuck! I just remembered ANOTHER story about a "functional" addict. The postman who deliverd mail to my buddy's house years ago. He used to stop in, and he'd do a few bongs, drink a few beers, maybe some coke if he had it, then he'd leave, leaving a stack of people's mail on the coffee table. Oh, he'd be back after about an hour (freaking out) and we were honest enough to give him the mail. That all worked out (sort of) until he left a stack of Social Security checks at someone's house that WASN'T so honest, and about two dozen senior citizens lost their incomes for that month. (Gee, I hope they weren't too hungry.) He lost his job, couldn't get another one, and drugged himself into a mental institution. And so it goes. Too bad, really, he was a decent guy, but once the drugs got a hold on him, it was over. If I think of any more "functional" addicts I'll let you know.
ReplyDeleteHey, Chuck! You love statistics, right? Got a couple of beauties for ya! In 2014, opioid drugs killed more than 28,000 people. Guns killed only 11,000. So I guess guns are safer than drugs! Statistics don't lie, unless the CDC was created by......RICHARD NIXON!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteUpdate to my last post. Homicides committed with firearms have been on a steady decline since the 1960s, despite what some would have us believe. Drug deaths have been skyrocketing for years. OVER HALF of these deaths are from prescription drugs. So, "legal and regulated" drugs kill 15,000 people every year, STILL more than guns. This is according to the CDC. Does anyone else see the dangerously flawed logic here? (Sorry I didn't look this up sooner, it would have saved a lot of time.)
DeleteHey, Chuck. I just Googled your name and found out who you are. All this time I thought you were a private citizen expressing your views (as everyone has a right to do.) Had I known you were a politician, I would not have wasted much time debating you, as you have vested interests (both political and financial) in maintaining your positions, and will therefore never be swayed. I only hope that I have been able to convince the voters here of the madness of your ideas, and they vote you out of office as soon as possible. Perhaps, if my schedule permits, I will run against you, in which case I see an easy victory. That is, of course, if the local electorate has any sense whatsoever. Good day, sir; you may continue to deceive the masses without interruption. (For now.)
ReplyDeleteYou've left me quaking in my boots, 11:29. I tremble in fear at your approach and have barricaded the door to the office of my campaign headquarters. Best of luck in your campaign, and be merciful to me in your victory.
DeleteChuck Gregory vs. The Anonymous Googler. Can't wait.
DeleteIt's a funny post, though. They won't waste time debating a politician, but they can be a better one. They accuse someone by name of deceiving the masses, but they themselves post anonymously.
I disagree with Chuck's opinion here, and elsewhere at times, but he earns credit for speaking up. On the other hand, anonymous opinions have zero credibility. Which makes reading this site problematic.
Pay attention to the election results, Philip-- you'll be able to discern the number of anonymous bloggers here by the size of their voting bloc. I figure it's about 952.
DeleteI post as anonymous because the option is easily available, as do most others do. The other, more important reason, is to ensure the safety of family. You want to talk credibility? All last year, I was harassed and threatened by a heroin dealer and her customers, while the cops investigated ME for dealing, just for having out-of-state plates. Sorry, but the safety of me and mine comes WAY before concern for someone else's opinion as to MY credibility.
Delete3:11, it was the use of second-hand guns (ones which owners had lost, left unsecured, sold, pawned, given away or lent) which killed 11,000 people in crimes. Approximately 22,000 died of suicide by firearm, and then there were the legally-sanctioned (law enforcement) deaths and the deaths by accident, so firearms killed about 7,000 more than you claim (you didn't cite your source).
ReplyDeleteIn addition, people have a reason not to confront a loved one's or family member's use of opioids, because they fear getting visited by a SWAT team. I used to deal professionally with families with kids who were exhibiting major, major emotional development problems. Those who were advised by school staff to seek counseling were of two types: those who would because they had nothing to hide, and those who wouldn't because they didn't want the kid to tell the shrink, "Daddy puts a needle with special stuff into his arm.
Legalize it all, and you will have far fewer deaths from opioid use.
If you have a better solution to the problem, please tell us about it.
My earlier reply to this, like some other of my posts in the past, has not appeared, for reasons I cannot imagine. So I will let it go.
DeleteChuck, you're loosing it. I will type slower so you will understand. 15,000 people die every year from LEGAL, REGULATED drugs. The others are from HEROIN. If you legalize heroin, that will be 28,000-plus deaths from LEGAL drugs. SWAT teams? Yikes! I suppose the black helicopters will be arriving any minute now! I believe that you have successfully defined insanity! As usual, you keep denying that which does not fit your ideology. I have a Minor in Sociology, as well as years of experience as a substance abuse counselor at the #1 rated rated treatment unit in the country! What are your credentials, please?
ReplyDeleteStatistics, statistics. Growing up with an alcoholic motheris no fun. It's fine if she wanted to drink all these years but her kids should have had the option to go to Kurn Hattin. I would have gone in a heart beat. Protect the children.
ReplyDelete@ 10:51, I couldn't agree more. Young children subjected to the abuse and neglect of an addict is heart wrenching. To even suggest making these children's suffering a non factor in the proposal to legalize its root cause is despicable.
DeleteFurther, the assertation that draconian sentences in Asia being a failure is complete B.S. Having made several business trips to S.E. Asia can vouch first hand that opiate use compared to Springfield is essentially non existent. That even an inquiry of laws and trafficking bring looks of horror and an immediate change of subject. So Chuck, please cease spreading disinformation and text reference for subject matter you have never experienced.
You may disagree with Chuck, however, his facts are just that, FACTS. Not reactionary emotions.
DeleteThank you! (1:20)
Delete8:42, Would you like people to get caned in Springfield for chewing gum in public, as they are in Singapore?
ReplyDeleteAre you willing to live in such a hyper-vigilant, over-controlling state? I don't think most Vermonters are willing to trade that much of their own freedom for an addict-free community.d
As for opining on subject matter I have never experienced,the absolutely worst citizen is the one who bases all his political choices on his personal experience, e.g., "I've never been sick, so why should kids have universal medical coverage?" or, "Yeah, I was cut off in traffic once, so we should have laws about drivers who cut off other drivers."
If you don't have the ability to see patterns and to think about their significance, you are very, very likely to be the victim of those who do.
For example, Florida orange growers, hating big government, elected Ronald Reagan, who started the wave of "privatization." One of the government services privatized was weather forecasting. So, because they didn't recognize patterns, the orange growers LOST the frost alerts NOAA used to broadcast. They had to PAY private forecasting companies to be given alerts.
As a T-shirt says, "If you're not at the table, you're probably on the menu." If you don't know the bigger picture, how do you know you're at the table?
1:20, there is judgment made from personal experience and judgment made from public health data. Your personal experience leads you to believe that 100% of substance abusers have a problem, because 100% of the ones you know have a problem. However, public health data shows that only 23% of all heroin users use it more than weekly. The other 77% do not have the $50-$500 a day habit (o other behavior) that indicates an addiction problem. Global health data indicates that where drug possession is decriminalized AND there is a commitment to a decent public health system, abuse rates decline. So, assuming we do not let the NRA and the teabaggers continue to call the shots in Congress, we will continue to have a public health system that will deal with users and their family who will be able to admit they have a problem because they no longer fear being arrested.
ReplyDeleteI worked for decades with many families who refused to allow counseling services for their high-risk children because they were afraid that Junior would (as one recently did in a Vermont school) admit that "Daddy grows special plants," or "Mommy sticks a needle into her arm every day." Decriminalization will remove all of the fear and a lot of the shame, and families WILL seek help.
8:42, I'll bet you didn't see any gum chewers as well in Singapore. The last time I checked, chewing gum there in public was punishable by caning (don't ask for a sample; it's brutal). I don't think too many Americans want to live in a country that's run like a high school. Vermonters especially will not want to live in fear of such an authoritarian government. Furthermore, punishing the behavior doesn't ban it; it just drives it underground: Did you know that while James Hartness was governor of Vermont, he was running a speakeasy at the Hartness House?
Letter to editor: PLEASE kill this article. The comment section has become an indeciferable mess! Thank you.
ReplyDelete