3 ms·

I wasn't talking about addicts. Spiking is a thing. Being a victim of spiking puts one in an extremely vulnerable state, and filming someone in that state is ab

by aaplok 3y ago

I wasn't talking about addicts. Spiking is a thing. Being a victim of spiking puts one in an extremely vulnerable state, and filming someone in that state is abject, whether or not you are aware they've been spiked. Nobody pretends that addicts are being forced to take drugs. However addiction is generally seen a a compulsion to consume. The key term here, compulsion, indicates an absence of choice (Merriam Webster [0] defines it as an "an irresistible persistent impulse to perform an act." If you can't resist, you're not deciding). [0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compulsion https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compulsion

brutusborn 3y ago
I doubt even 0.01% of the people in this this thread are talking about spiking. That is a strawman. Your dictionary definition does not convince me that there is no decision been made, it is semantics.
- aaplok 3y ago
  > I doubt even 0.01% of the people in this this thread are talking about spiking. That is a strawman. At least two different people referenced spiking explicitly in their comments. There are 136 comments in this thread at the time of writing this one. That is a lot more than 0.01% of commenters. Regardless, your original comment was "An inebriated person on the street has decided to accept that people will see them in a compromising situation." If you want the discussion to only concern addicts then it is better to say it explicitly than assume it's obvious. > Your dictionary definition does not convince me that there is no decision been made, it is semantics. Well the meaning of words matters. Addiction is defined or described as a compulsion. If you prefer, the WHO defines it as "the user (referred to as an addict) is periodically or chronically intoxicated, shows a compulsion to take the preferred substance (or substances), has great difficulty in voluntarily ceasing or modifying substance use, and exhibits determination to obtain psychoactive substances by almost any means." We can play semantics all day, but ultimately the words "great difficulty in voluntarily..." are pretty clear...
flextheruler 3y ago
The studies I have seen show evidence that drink spiking with other drugs is rare with around 1% or less of reported cases. This is confirmed in the studies with toxin screening occurring only hours after the supposed ingestion. When “spiking” does occur it always involves alcohol and mostly does not involve literal spiking but rather manipulating people who are already drinking to over drink either by pushing strong drinks and/or drinks with caffeine. Businesses take great advantage of this. If you’ve been to a casino or a strip club they are prime examples of it. In my opinion, for the individual predator, all this seems much harder than just scanning the crowd looking for someone who has drank too much, no spiking involved at least not done by the predator, and then manipulating them into leaving with you. You could make the case there are complicit bartenders making the drinks subtlety stronger than they should be, but who’s to say how strong the drink should be? Unless the bartender lies to you about how much alcohol they put in the drink then it’s up to them and their menu and it’s up to you to not have too many mixed drinks. Alcohol serving businesses are economically incentivized to serve strong drinks with a mix to cover the taste of how strong it is. It’s why mixed drinks are on the menu and not just beer and straight liquor. We’ve designed and marketed a legal product and social life that makes becoming inebriated and vulnerable as easy as it can possibly by way of mixed drinks and then we’ve sat back and watched people get taken advantage of and then pointed our fingers at “spiking” and “drugging”… sheesh give me a break “Of the 97 alleged drink spiking cases included, there were only 9 plausible cases. We did not identify a single case where a sedative drug was likely to have been illegally placed in a drink in a pub or nightclub.” “Our study did not reflect the current public perception of drink spiking. Drink spiking with sedative or illicit drugs appears to be rare. If drink spiking does occur, ethanol appears to be the most common agent used”

by aaplok 3y ago

brutusborn 3y ago

I doubt even 0.01% of the people in this this thread are talking about spiking. That is a strawman. Your dictionary definition does not convince me that there is no decision been made, it is semantics.

aaplok 3y ago
> I doubt even 0.01% of the people in this this thread are talking about spiking. That is a strawman. At least two different people referenced spiking explicitly in their comments. There are 136 comments in this thread at the time of writing this one. That is a lot more than 0.01% of commenters. Regardless, your original comment was "An inebriated person on the street has decided to accept that people will see them in a compromising situation." If you want the discussion to only concern addicts then it is better to say it explicitly than assume it's obvious. > Your dictionary definition does not convince me that there is no decision been made, it is semantics. Well the meaning of words matters. Addiction is defined or described as a compulsion. If you prefer, the WHO defines it as "the user (referred to as an addict) is periodically or chronically intoxicated, shows a compulsion to take the preferred substance (or substances), has great difficulty in voluntarily ceasing or modifying substance use, and exhibits determination to obtain psychoactive substances by almost any means." We can play semantics all day, but ultimately the words "great difficulty in voluntarily..." are pretty clear...

flextheruler 3y ago

The studies I have seen show evidence that drink spiking with other drugs is rare with around 1% or less of reported cases. This is confirmed in the studies with toxin screening occurring only hours after the supposed ingestion. When “spiking” does occur it always involves alcohol and mostly does not involve literal spiking but rather manipulating people who are already drinking to over drink either by pushing strong drinks and/or drinks with caffeine. Businesses take great advantage of this. If you’ve been to a casino or a strip club they are prime examples of it. In my opinion, for the individual predator, all this seems much harder than just scanning the crowd looking for someone who has drank too much, no spiking involved at least not done by the predator, and then manipulating them into leaving with you. You could make the case there are complicit bartenders making the drinks subtlety stronger than they should be, but who’s to say how strong the drink should be? Unless the bartender lies to you about how much alcohol they put in the drink then it’s up to them and their menu and it’s up to you to not have too many mixed drinks. Alcohol serving businesses are economically incentivized to serve strong drinks with a mix to cover the taste of how strong it is. It’s why mixed drinks are on the menu and not just beer and straight liquor. We’ve designed and marketed a legal product and social life that makes becoming inebriated and vulnerable as easy as it can possibly by way of mixed drinks and then we’ve sat back and watched people get taken advantage of and then pointed our fingers at “spiking” and “drugging”… sheesh give me a break “Of the 97 alleged drink spiking cases included, there were only 9 plausible cases. We did not identify a single case where a sedative drug was likely to have been illegally placed in a drink in a pub or nightclub.” “Our study did not reflect the current public perception of drink spiking. Drink spiking with sedative or illicit drugs appears to be rare. If drink spiking does occur, ethanol appears to be the most common agent used”