OC Register: Former Angels employee Eric Kay charged in connection with death of Tyler Skaggs

[failos]

The jokes here are inappropriate. Skaggs was a kid, and he was clearly taken advantage of. This organization is a cancer.

[nate]

2 hours ago, Randy Gradishar said:

Just wondering: do the waiters get jail time when people get salmonella?

Intentionally serving someone food tainted with salmonella would absolutely get you jail time.

@Stradling confirm?

[tdawg87]

1 minute ago, nate said:

Intentionally serving someone food tainted with salmonella would absolutely get you jail time.

@Stradling confirm?

Come on, these "In N Out fries" jokes aren't funny anymore.

[nate]

1 minute ago, tdawg87 said:

Come on, these "In N Out fries" jokes aren't funny anymore.

It was a Metallica joke 

[tdawg87]

Just now, nate said:

It was a Metallica joke 

[nate]

2 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Robert Trujillo is standing there in the background thinking "I should have quit when he wrote the 'love is a four letter word lyric.'"

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

5 hours ago, fan_since79 said:

It's a federal crime, and I believe there's no parole in federal prison.

 

Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Congress eliminated parole for federal defendants convicted of crimes committed after November 1, 1987. But while federal prisoners can no longer look forward to parole release, they may nevertheless earn reduced terms for good behavior.

[Tank]

4 hours ago, Stradling said:

Exhume and incarcerate?  

The Catholic Church did something like this to a pope, only they put him on trial. Dressed him up in his finest pope clothing, found him guilty, then threw him in the river.

Edited August 8, 2020 by Tank

[Lou]

7 minutes ago, Tank said:

The Catholic Church did something like this to a pope, only they put him on trial. Dressed him up in his finest pope clothing, found him guilty, then threw him in the river.

Pope Formosus 

[nate]

2 hours ago, Randy Gradishar said:

Was this intentional? I haven't seen that, but could have missed it.

Are you saying he unintentionally gave him a controlled substance?

[yk9001]

3 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

Come on, these "In N Out fries" jokes aren't funny anymore.

I laughed.  A good, hearty laugh.

[nate]

Fentanyl or Norco, it doesn't matter, it is illegal, and opiates are killing tons of people every year, not just fentanyl.

Hopefully Kay spends the rest of his life in jail.

[nate]

2 minutes ago, Randy Gradishar said:

So you do think waiters should go to jail? Or you think legality = morality?

If a waiter intentionally gives someone something deadly?  yes

[nate]

What the fuck are you even talking about.  Fentanyl doesn't even matter.  He was giving him the pills illegally.

 

[nate]

Just now, JocStrapling said:

He didn’t “fuck up” anyone’s life! Skaggs did that to himself.  I’ll tell you what’s “fucked up”,  that people not taking or assigning appropriate responsibility. 

He was dealing drugs, but other than that, totally...

[Stradling]

Ultimately it’s Skaggs fault.  However Kay played a role in his death assuming the report is true. 

[Tank]

22 minutes ago, JocStrapling said:

He didn’t “fuck up” anyone’s life! Skaggs did that to himself.  I’ll tell you what’s “fucked up”,  that people not taking or assigning appropriate responsibility. 

there is an impressive contradiction in this post.

[Jeff Fletcher]

I don’t think there’s a distinction to be made between “it’s Kay’s fault” or “it’s Skaggs’ fault.”

It isn’t one or the other. The DEA believes both were doing something wrong. Only one is alive to charge with a crime. 
 

The point is to prevent people from using fentanyl. Period. 
 

Since the suppliers are motivated by money and the users by addiction, it’s logical that it’s easier to work on the suppliers. Plus, every supplier you stop cuts off X users, so there’s an exponential affect.

Now you can argue that “it hasn’t worked so far.” I guess since people still use drugs, you can say that. I don’t think we really know how the world would look if it was just all legal. That’s a much broader argument. 
 

In this case, the DEA has someone they believe broke the law and they want everyone to know that if they catch you, they’re going to throw you in jail. I don’t understand why that would bother anyone. 

[Angels in 2030]

Well said Jeff. 

look, there’s obviously no winners here - just losers.   Skaggs is to blame for his death.  Nobody forced him to do drugs.  Nobody pulled that trigger.  It’s his fault 100%.  If Kay wasn’t around, there’d be another Kay in his place for Skaggs.  But that doesn’t mean Kay isn’t doing something illegal and bad.  He should be punished for his actions — murder no way.  But he was doing something illegal under the law and you do the crime, you do the time. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

2 minutes ago, Randy Gradishar said:

And Kay wasn't a supplier, as far as I know. I have no problem with arresting the guy that cut the pills.

I’m sure they’d like to do that too.

As for the whole “drugs should be legal” thing, I don’t feel qualified to know what society would look like if you made that drastic of a change. I am sure there are people who are prevented from using drugs because they’re illegal. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

It’s also worth noting that Kay was not charged with murder or even manslaughter so the government isn’t trying to say he is “responsible” for Skaggs’ death. 
 

All they are saying is he was doing something that is bad for society, in large part because it contributes to deaths. 

[Stradling]

21 minutes ago, Randy Gradishar said:

Eh, it bothers me because the laws and system are broken. If this was just a discussion about what the law says, it wouldn't be very interesting.

If drugs were legal, Skaggs would be alive and Kay would be free, in my estimation. If Kay had never been born or was put away a long time ago, Skaggs would still be dead.

I just prefer seeing people alive and happy rather than dead and in jail.

There’s a lot of no in this post

[Angels in 2030]

1 hour ago, Randy Gradishar said:

Imagine what our lives would be if we were punished to the full extent of the law for every California roll, or every time we wore a hat on a Tuesday in Topeka, Kansas.

Illegal <> bad

We all do some illegal things under state law — from big to small (speeding).  But we know it’s illegal. We usually don’t get caught. But when we do - say speeding, we know it and you deal with the consequences (traffic school, paying fine, etc.). We don’t yell blame at everyone else for it and say all laws should be abolished because I’m too important and immature to handle the consequences of my actions.  Maybe the speed in that section is too low and should be higher and you wouldn’t get a ticket.  But be a man and own up to it. 
 

now should drugs, chemically enhanced/ created, drugs be legal.  That’s a rabbit hole discussion right now. Fact is, 2019/2020, it’s illegal.  Both parties knew it and knew the consequences.  Stop momming for them.   

[DCAngelsFan]

53 minutes ago, Randy Gradishar said:

True, it's hard to conceptualize, but we do have a couple examples that I know of: Portugal in real life, which has gone very well; and "Bunnytown" or whatever it was called in The Wire, which was less ideal.

Maybe we don't have to dive right in with PCP and heron, but a relaxation of drug laws is certainly long overdue. I mean they can't even study the health effects of weed.

I have to say, you're kind of overlooking the fact that oxy, fentanyl, and other opiods *are* legal, when legally prescribed.  And look at the result - many , many addicts are people who were prescribed  (often unwisely) legal pain medications, became addicted, and only turned to illegal sources of supply after doctors cut them off.    We're looking at some 60-70k overdose deaths a year - TS was hardly alone. CDC says 70% of overdose deaths were due to illegally-obtained drugs - which means 30% or 20,000 people - die from overdoses of legally obtained medication a year.  Are you sure you want to increase the number of users - and addicts?  

Sometimes I wonder if you're right - heck just give it to people who want it - it would prevent a *lot* of crime and suffering as people rob and kill for these drugs (an elderly couple was killed in my area for her pain med scripts, because she had cancer, for example) but in the end, that doesn't change the physiology - as their tolerance to the drug increases, they take larger and larger doses, and eventually many will overdose and die.   

And I'm pretty confident the number of addicts - and number of overdoes - would increase exponentially if you made it *more* available or even gave it away to those who ask.  (I'm sure some would view that as a "Modest Proposal" or at least some weird kind of Darwinism - but I don't think we're that heartless, yet.)  

Weed isn't addictive, nor toxic, so isn't really a part of this conversation.  

ps  - it was "Hamsterdam" in the Wire.  But that was a misnomer - the Dutch tolerate the use of soft drugs - but trafficking in hard drugs, such as opium, heroin, are prosecuted.  The Dutch would never permit an open-air de facto legal place to sell heroin as was depicted in The Wire.  

 

[Stradling]

Oh, so us needing punishment is why we have crime.  Oh ok.  I mean, no, not at all, but ok.