# Stuff and Things > Guns and Self Defense >  Making Society Safe

## BleedingHeadKen

From druggies like this vicious criminal:

*Plea deal reached in prescription mix-up**CHARGES COULD BE DROPPED FOR 83-YEAR-OLD MAN WHO GOT WRONG MEDS*
BURLINGTON  A month after an 83-year-old man agreed to a plea deal on criminal charges, he said he still is upset despite knowing they will be dropped if he behaves himself for another 10½ months.Army veteran Robert Cirpinski, of Burlington, said a pharmacist with the Pharmacy Station in Burlington mistakenly filled a prescription for hydrocodone last year for him, in addition to a new medication prescribed by his doctor.When pharmacy staff sent police to the home Cirpinski shares with his wife, the retiree refused to give up his prescription without police signing for it, according to Cirpinski and court records.
Read more: http://journaltimes.com/tncms/asset/...#ixzz32yotujll

----------

Archer (05-28-2014)

----------


## squidward

he's a danger to society. Lock him up for good.

----------


## metheron

The best out come for him was not this plea deal but to drop the case altogether.

He claimed he did not take any of those pills, that he was shorted. I would have liked to know how they could have proven anything there. 

What bullshit. I mean I read the story and probably did not get a great account from both perspectives but come on now, these poeple are 80 years old. Sign for the pills and move on.

----------

Invayne (05-28-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

They should have never charged him or even went to his house. The pharmacy can't take back the pills and what's the big deal, he has taken these pills before. He had a prescription before for them or they wouldn't to have filled it. Hydrocodone isn't going to kill him and I don't care if he took the 6 pills. The officer not wanting to sign for it, that was wrong. He needed proof he gave them to him. I blame the pharmacy on this one calling the police. All they had to do was to call the Dr. and explain and he would have approved it instead they panicked afraid of federal regulations and got the guy arrested.

----------

fyrenza (05-28-2014),Invayne (05-28-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> The best out come for him was not this plea deal but to drop the case altogether.
> 
> He claimed he did not take any of those pills, that he was shorted. I would have liked to know how they could have proven anything there. 
> 
> What bullshit. I mean I read the story and probably did not get a great account from both perspectives but come on now, these poeple are 80 years old. Sign for the pills and move on.


He didn't even pick up the pills his wife did. How was she suppose to know the Dr. didn't prescribe it with the others. This could happen to any of us. Your husband or wife tells you they have prescriptions at the pharmacy, you pay and bring it home. Call them and let them know you got the wrong pills and they won't take it back even if you haven't opened the bottle. Or don't notice it's wrong and the police come knocking at your door because the pharmacy can't talk to the Dr. because he doesn't want his patient arrested. They could have worked this out without going to the police.

----------


## Roadmaster

This is upsetting because I would bet the police just thought he forged or stole the prescription. People do this a lot. That may be why the police acted that way towards them. Would love to hear the call the pharmacy said to the police.

----------


## St James

Again, I am appalled by the actions of the gestapo. A knee in the back of an old woman, manhandled by a thug. I saw no mention of a warrant, but I guess it doesn't matter anymore since cops think the Constitution protects them and not us.
I know for a fact that you cannot return wrong prescriptions. It is not the guy's fault. It is the pharmie's fault and I suspect she tried to cover up her fuckup by placing the blame on the guy............
I smell a setup. I'd be willing to get those 6 pills that were missing went into her [pharmie's] pocket.

----------

Invayne (05-28-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> Thats because Cirpinski pleaded no contest last month, on April 15, to two misdemeanor charges: theft and resisting an officer. A no-contest plea means* Cirpinski didnt admit to the allegations, but did not contest prosecutors ability to prove the charges in court.
> 
> *At the time of this incident, Mr. Cirpinski was 81 years old. *His actions on that day at the pharmacy and later with law enforcement were absolutely and completely inexcusable, Chiapete continued.* That being said, up to that day, he had led a productive and crime-free life. This agreement takes all of these circumstances into account. We believe that this resolution best serves the interests of the community.
> 
> http://journaltimes.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/plea-deal-reached-in-prescription-mix-up/article_01f3c784-e594-11e3-b072-0019bb2963f4.html#ixzz32yotujll


I know this is hard for some to understand, but there are two sides to the story and the man pled NO CONTEST.

----------


## DonGlock26

> I'd be willing to get those 6 pills that were missing went into her [pharmie's] pocket.


Now, you are being gestapo.

----------


## fyrenza

> From druggies like this vicious criminal:
> 
> *Plea deal reached in prescription mix-up*
> 
> *CHARGES COULD BE DROPPED FOR 83-YEAR-OLD MAN WHO GOT WRONG MEDS*
> 
> 
> BURLINGTON — A month after an 83-year-old man agreed to a plea deal on criminal charges, he said he still is upset despite knowing they will be dropped if he behaves himself for another 10½ months.Army veteran Robert Cirpinski, of Burlington, said a pharmacist with the Pharmacy Station in Burlington mistakenly filled a prescription for hydrocodone last year for him, in addition to a new medication prescribed by his doctor.When pharmacy staff sent police to the home Cirpinski shares with his wife, the retiree refused to give up his prescription without police signing for it, according to Cirpinski and court records.
> Read more: http://journaltimes.com/tncms/asset/...#ixzz32yotujll




Yeah, because there aren't any actually dangerous folks out there,

MAKING/Selling/Transporting any illegal drugs to keep any police busy.

Cripes.

----------

Invayne (05-28-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> And you have a problem with this? Why do they have the right to commit any outrage so long as it is sanctioned by a government bureaucrat or politician, yet civilians do not get to apply their own rules to situations? Oh, I know why. You are a totalitarian. You believe that government can define intent and change the nature of thoughts from right thinking to wrong thinking by the stroke of a legislator's pen. To you, the armed bureaucrats it employs to enforce it's rules are sacrosanct. 
> 
> When they don they uniform and kidnap, cage, and kill people who have not committed force or fraud nor have threatened to, they serve evil.



Kenneth, I think you just have an authority issue. Are you against speed limits too?

----------


## michaelr

> He turned this incident into an arrest. Asshole meets cop is a story as old as the hills.........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If he already popped six pills, he has a serious drug problem.


No, he had serious pain. Fucking scum pigs had no right to arrest this hero. Of course heroes to put babies into comas!

----------


## fyrenza

> He turned this incident into an arrest. Asshole meets cop is a story as old as the hills.........
> 
> If he already popped six pills, he has a serious drug problem.


What makes you think he "popped" ANY of them?

----------


## DonGlock26

> He broke no laws, but oddly you don't care. But hey, nice use of the emoticon, shows you're smart.


He pled NO CONTEST to several criminal charges. You are simply unable to deal with reality.

----------


## DonGlock26

> No one is, thats the voice in your head!


You and a few others always take the side of the law breaker, criminals, and dopers. Why?

Do you have a criminal fetish?

----------


## Longshot

I can see no good reason for any law regarding what sort of pain medication a person may take. That is his business and nobody else's.

----------

Victory (05-31-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> * @DonGlock26* :
> 
> We DO NOT _hate cops_ ~
> 
> we hate injustice, and tyranny, and sadism.
> 
> What is so hard to understand about people having empathy for others whom are treated callously?
> 
> You know, not ALL black folks are out playing the knock-out game,
> ...


You are putting yourself in that camp- not me. 

How is arresting lawbreakers wrong? Don't you think resisting arrest is wrong?

----------


## michaelr

> He pled NO CONTEST to several criminal charges. You are simply unable to deal with reality.


You keep repeating yourself. Drunk people do that all the time. Are you drunk? 

Reality, you think reality is excusing scum for child abuse!

----------


## michaelr

> You and a few others always take the side of the law breaker, criminals, and dopers. Why?
> 
> Do you have a criminal fetish?


He didn't break the law. Do you have a copsucking fetish?

----------


## DonGlock26

> All because of a mistake made by a pharmacist and bad advise. He's no criminal! I get it, and explained it, boot lickers and cop suckers hate Americans!


He obstructed the police. They were investigating a complaint and he wouldn't give them the pills that he wasn't supposed to have been given. 

He kept it up and got himself arrested, then he pled NO CONTEST. Yet, here you are defending the convicted criminal.

----------


## DonGlock26

> No, he had serious pain. Fucking scum pigs had no right to arrest this hero. Of course heroes to put babies into comas!


So, serious that the doctor prescribed a non-narcotic pain reliever? Such emotion out of you. LOL!!!

Hey, if the cops are military vets, are they heroes too?

----------


## michaelr

> He obstructed the police. They were investigating a complaint and he wouldn't give them the pills that he wasn't supposed to have been given. 
> 
> He kept it up and got himself arrested, then he pled NO CONTEST. Yet, here you are defending the convicted criminal.


He asked for a recipt. That's normal....i got to tell you that because you're abnormal!

----------


## DonGlock26

> What makes you think he "popped" ANY of them?


Where did they go? He claimed that he never opened the bottle. The pharmacist called the police not him. 

He didn't want to give the drugs to the police AFTER admitting that he should have gotten them in the first place. Why? 

Was he trying to conceal that he had already popped six pills? It is quite possible.

It is possible that he has a drug problem and was caught in a compromising position. That would explain the resistance. 

People do become addicted to prescription pain killers and go on to commit criminal acts to get more. Have you ever heard of "doctor shopping"?

----------


## michaelr

> So, serious that the doctor prescribed a non-narcotic pain reliever? Such emotion out of you. LOL!!!
> 
> Hey, if the cops are military vets, are they heroes too?


Know you're showing your ignorance. Hydrocodone is vicodin, and that's a narcotic genius. I take it for my pain. Good lord copsuckers can say the most stupid things!

----------


## DonGlock26

> I can see no good reason for any law regarding what sort of pain medication a person may take. That is his business and nobody else's.


I say we get rid of all drug laws and scrap the welfare state. What do you think?

----------


## DonGlock26

> You keep repeating yourself. Drunk people do that all the time. Are you drunk? 
> 
> Reality, you think reality is excusing scum for child abuse!


I'm reminding you of what happened in the real world not what is at the bottom of your liquor bottle.

----------


## michaelr

> I'm reminding you of what happened in the real world not what is at the bottom of your liquor bottle.


I don't even have a bottle in the house fool. Lobbing gernades at children lately?

----------


## DonGlock26

> He didn't break the law. Do you have a copsucking fetish?


He did and he pled NO CONTEST to several criminal charges. He's a criminal and you are defending a convicted criminal, which comes as no surprise to me. 

Why no, the cop-haters seem to have some sexual longings for cops and robbers though. It is all that they talk about.

----------


## michaelr

> He did and he pled NO CONTEST to several criminal charges. He's a criminal and you are defending a convicted criminal, which comes as no surprise to me. 
> 
> Why no, the cop-haters seem to have some sexual longings for cops and robbers though. It is all that they talk about.


You again repeat yourseof. What is your problem?

----------


## DonGlock26

> He asked for a recipt. That's normal....i got to tell you that because you're abnormal!


LOL!!! He could have got a copy of the police report. I think he was hiding the fact that six pills were already missing.

----------


## michaelr

> LOL!!! He could have got a copy of the police report. I think he was hiding the fact that six pills were already missing.


The scum could have gave the hero a recipt. I think your alcohol has messed up your thought pattern.

----------


## fyrenza

> You are putting yourself in that camp- not me. 
> 
> How is arresting lawbreakers wrong? Don't you think resisting arrest is wrong?


I don't think it's wrong when you're being arrested, unjustly,

and I believe that you should have every right to ask a PUBLIC SERVANT 
to do you the courtesy of complying with your reasonable request ~

my God ~ he was ALREADY shorted 6 of the pills;
what if a cop stole a couple more?

The elderly in this country are marginalized,
and treated like addlepated children,
that can be "fooled,"
and made fools of,
because, Hey!
They're OLD and probably a bit senile, eh?

You scare an older person,
and they FREAK,
because they remember what it was like, 
when they were strong enough to handle these things,
but see themselves for the PREY that they have become.

I honestly consider this entire incident an Assault on the Elderly,

and if our POLICE aren't willing to give our very parents any sort of respect,
either mental,
OR physical,

I have no use for them;

they are NOT serving the public that I'm a member of,
and those were NOT the job requirements I hired them to perform.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> Know you're showing your ignorance. Hydrocodone is vicodin, and that's a narcotic genius. I take it for my pain. Good lord copsuckers can say the most stupid things!


You don't have a clue again.  :Smiley ROFLMAO: 




> The pharmacy clerk told Beverly Cirpinski *the new, non-narcotic cost $6* and the other  for hydrocodone  was $45, he said. 
> 
> Read more: http://journaltimes.com/tncms/asset/...#ixzz33EZt7WNJ


You've become boring.

----------


## DonGlock26

> I don't even have a bottle in the house fool. Lobbing gernades at children lately?


Do you mean grenades?

----------


## DonGlock26

> I don't think it's wrong when you're being arrested, unjustly,
> 
> and I believe that you should have every right to ask a PUBLIC SERVANT 
> to do you the courtesy of complying with your reasonable request ~
> 
> my God ~ he was ALREADY shorted 6 of the pills;
> what if a cop stole a couple more?
> 
> The elderly in this country are marginalized,
> ...


Who was arrested unjustly? How do you know that he was shorted pills and didn't pop them?

----------


## michaelr

> You don't have a clue again.


 Oh really? I take the thing yet I have no clue. This what you do when proved wrong, you show that you're just a liar, the hit the emotions.

You're on my ignore, i think you're a lying troll. You have zero credibility, and you support child abuse!




> You've become boring.


 bye

----------


## fyrenza

> Know you're showing your ignorance. Hydrocodone is vicodin, and that's a narcotic genius. I take it for my pain. Good lord copsuckers can say the most stupid things!


It's opium.

----------


## michaelr

> It's opium.


I know. I hate it, but not using it cripples me bad.

----------


## DonGlock26

> You're on my ignore,



Thank God!      :Applause:

----------


## fyrenza

> Who was arrested unjustly? How do you know that he was shorted pills and didn't pop them?


How do you know he DID?

In one of your posts, you quoted him telling the cop that 6 were missing,
if I read that correctly?

But here's the thing ~

WHY couldn't the policewoman just TALK to him,
and,
even if it wasn't department policy,
just do what he asked?

It wasn't anything big ~
a handwritten receipt would have sufficed, I'd imagine,
and it would have taken a SHITLOAD less than 30 minutes to do.

Why wasn't that man treated like HER father, or grandfather?

Just some basic human kindness towards the folks that pay,
or HAVE paid, their entire lives,
for the service that you are now responsible for providing.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

> I know. I hate it, but not using it cripples me bad.


I didn't mean it ^that^ way!  lol

If all natural drugs were legal, you could just grow and harvest your own,
and cut out any additives.

----------


## michaelr

> I didn't mean it ^that^ way!  lol
> 
> If all natural drugs were legal, you could just grow and harvest your own,
> and cut out any additives.


Well, we can't have that in a ''free society''!

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## Longshot

> I say we get rid of all drug laws and scrap the welfare state. What do you think?


Okay. Sounds good.

----------


## Invayne

> If he already popped six pills, he has a serious drug problem.


So now you're calling him a liar. 



How much do you get paid to do this?

----------


## Invayne

> You keep repeating yourself. Drunk people do that all the time. Are you drunk? 
> 
> Reality, you think reality is excusing scum for child abuse!


That's what paid shills do.

----------

michaelr (05-30-2014)

----------


## michaelr

> That's what paid shills do.


I think he abuses drugs too. He can't be not stoned.

----------


## Victory

> You've authorized the police to do what ever is needed to get them off the streets, remember? You called them a danger to the public.


Nope.  I didn't say "what ever is needed."

And you must not have read my reply to your biblical quote taken out of context because. . .there's the same quote taken out of context right in your sig.

----------


## fyrenza

> I think he abuses drugs too. He can't be not stoned.


Hey, mang, I really like you, and all,

but you can't do ^that;^

accuse other folks of things that you're guessing about,

especially not if it's just to make them sound "bad."

----------

Longshot (05-30-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> How do you know he DID?
> 
> In one of your posts, you quoted him telling the cop that 6 were missing,
> if I read that correctly?
> 
> But here's the thing ~
> 
> WHY couldn't the policewoman just TALK to him,
> and,
> ...



I don't for sure. That's why I used the word "if". It certainly makes sense considering his reaction.

She did and he did not cooperate. Did you even read the OP article and the one that I posted a link to? Because they don't write receipts for confiscated contraband or evidence.
They do police reports and tag evidence. He could have got a copy of the police report.

Do your elders obstruct the police? Mine don't. That guy is not your kin or the officer's kin.
He pled no contest, remember?

Are saying that the officer was unprofessional until he started obstructing her?

----------


## DonGlock26

> So now you're calling him a liar.


He's a convicted criminal. They often lie.

----------


## fyrenza

> I don't for sure. That's why I used the word "if". It certainly makes sense considering his reaction.
> 
> She did and he did not cooperate. Did you even read the OP article and the one that I posted a link to? Because they don't write receipts for confiscated contraband or evidence.
> They do police reports and tag evidence. He could have got a copy of the police report.
> 
> Do your elders obstruct the police? Mine don't. That guy is not your kin or the officer's kin.
> He pled no contest, remember?
> 
> Are saying that the officer was unprofessional until he started obstructing her?


I know that department policy is to just write up the report,

but that man was already freaked out that his flippin' PHARMACIST had shorted him, or stolen some,

and I treat ALL elderly folks as though they were my kin,
because as a nurse,
as someone ENTRUSTED to take care of others,
not just in some professional, they're-a-slab-of-meat way,

*every*one deserves my best,

and the lovingkindness my God gave me for my spirit.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014),Longshot (05-30-2014),St James (05-31-2014)

----------


## DonGlock26

> I know that department policy is to just write up the report,
> 
> but that man was already freaked out that his flippin' PHARMACIST had shorted him, or stolen some,
> 
> and I treat ALL elderly folks as though they were my kin,
> because as a nurse,
> as someone ENTRUSTED to take care of others,
> not just in some professional, they're-a-slab-of-meat way,
> 
> ...


Or, he freaked out because six were in his stomach.

----------


## Longshot

> Or, he freaked out because six were in his stomach.


And putting drugs into one's stomach is a heinous act of violence against....uh who exactly?

----------


## fyrenza

> Or, he freaked out because six were in his stomach.


If you'll produce the actual scrip, so I can see how they were prescribed,

I'll tell you, straight up, if he would have EVAH thought of gulping down SIX at a time.

Older folks don't need as much as younger ones do,
and are generally more careful to NOT take them, if it isn't absolutely necessary.

And you know what?

I'll just state, categorically, that :

He would NEVER have just taken all of the missing ones.

Don?

The man is now 83; he was 80, at the time.

How much longer do you think he has?
Should he NOT be allowed to self-medicate?
Even hospitals allow ^that,^ for terminal patients,
and at 80 years old?
Believe me when I tell you that you are considered "terminal,"
regardless of what you're there for, for the most part,
in every hospital in America.

----------


## DonGlock26

> If you'll produce the actual scrip, so I can see how they were prescribed,
> 
> I'll tell you, straight up, if he would have EVAH thought of gulping down SIX at a time.
> 
> Older folks don't need as much as younger ones do,
> and are generally more careful to NOT take them, if it isn't absolutely necessary.
> 
> And you know what?
> 
> ...


Then, there's reality.......




> *Drug Abuse and the Elderly*
> 
> *Prescription drug abuse is not just something  that happens in the young. People over age 65 also are at risk for drug  abuse -- and perhaps even more so. That's because Americans age 65 and  older make up 13% of the population but consume about one third of all  prescription drugs. Older individuals also take more potentially  addictive medications than any other age group.* 
> 
>   Prescription drug abuse is difficult to detect in the elderly. Drug  abuse is often masked by the myth that addiction is a disease of the  young and that if older people do develop a problem, it is with alcohol.  What's more, symptoms of drug abuse such as forgetfulness and  irritability may be dismissed as the person "just getting old." 
> 
>   Even more worrisome, prescription drug abuse can lead to more dire  consequences in the elderly. With age, the liver becomes less efficient  at filtering out medications from the body. Because of this slowed drug  metabolism, an older person may get addicted -- or suffer serious side  effects -- at lower doses than a younger person would. These side  effects include falls that can lead to debilitating fractures and an  early death. 
> 
> *How Common Is Prescription Drug Abuse in the Elderly? * Statistics suggest that drug abuse among older Americans is substantial and growing. A study in _Annals of Epidemiology_ projected  that the number of people age 50 and older abusing prescription drugs  could increase 190% over the next two decades from 911,000 in 2001 to  almost 2.7 million by 2020. According to the U.S. Substance Abuse and  Mental Health Services Administration of 184,000 Americans who started  treatment for any type of drug abuse in 2005, 10% were age 50 or older. 
> ...

----------


## fyrenza

Not tonight, probably, but tomorrow, sometime,

I'll post about prescription drug abuse, across all age groups,

and we'll see how the elderly "stack up" to the rest.

----------


## fyrenza

And just in case you didn't realize this?

A lot of elderly patients are PURPOSEFULLY given scrips for more than they need,
because most health care workers would rather not see them,
in pain,
that is treatable.

And this dirty little secret ~
wtf cares if they become addicted?
It WILL happen,
and dosages will have to be adjusted, UP,

but they're dying,

and at some point,

THEY get to say how much they want/need.

----------

Invayne (05-30-2014),Longshot (05-30-2014)

----------


## Longshot

> And just in case you didn't realize this?
> 
> A lot of elderly patients are PURPOSEFULLY given scrips for more than they need,
> because most health care workers would rather not see them,
> in pain,
> that is treatable.
> 
> And this dirty little secret ~
> wtf cares if they become addicted?
> ...


Good post. My only criticism is that is should not be considered a "dirty little secret". There's nothing "dirty" about a doctor giving medicine/pain killer/euthanasia to a patient. Nobody has the right to tell a person what drugs he may ingest.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (05-30-2014),Invayne (05-30-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

> Good post. My only criticism is that is should not be considered a "dirty little secret". There's nothing "dirty" about a doctor giving medicine/pain killer/euthanasia to a patient. Nobody has the right to tell a person what drugs he may ingest.


<~  BUSTED!

That was my lame attempt to be PC.

I'm not very good at it, I don't guess.  lol

----------

Longshot (05-30-2014)

----------


## Invayne

> He's a convicted criminal. They often lie.


Pathetic.

No raise for you.

----------

Longshot (05-30-2014)

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> Good post. My only criticism is that is should not be considered a "dirty little secret". There's nothing "dirty" about a doctor giving medicine/pain killer/euthanasia to a patient. Nobody has the right to tell a person what drugs he may ingest.


Well, Don can be cheering over the fact that Obamacare will make it that much more difficult to for doctors to prescribe narcotics, no matter how in pain their patients are. They will be subject to far greater DEA scrutiny, and we know who important it is to keep healers under the thumb of government.

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> Pathetic.
> 
> No raise for you.


And, yet, he believes 100% in the rightness of legislation, created by politicians, who always lie.

----------


## St James

> Or, he freaked out because six were in his stomach.


Again, you defend the cop who may have had some mental issue, but destroy the private citizen.................
The cop (who may have issues) and it's all justified by you, but the 80 yr old(who may have issues) is a criminal
One law for pigs and another for us, eh, Don?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Well, Don can be cheering over the fact that Obamacare will make it that much more difficult to for doctors to prescribe narcotics, no matter how in pain their patients are. They will be subject to far greater DEA scrutiny, and we know who important it is to keep healers under the thumb of government.


I oppose Obamacare.

----------


## St James

but promote the Police State..one tyrant for another

----------

Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## Invayne

> but promote the Police State..one tyrant for another


I'll tolerate Obamacare over his beloved Police State any day of the week.

----------


## Sheldonna

> From druggies like this vicious criminal:
> 
> *Plea deal reached in prescription mix-up*
> 
> *CHARGES COULD BE DROPPED FOR 83-YEAR-OLD MAN WHO GOT WRONG MEDS*
> 
> 
> BURLINGTON  A month after an 83-year-old man agreed to a plea deal on criminal charges, he said he still is upset despite knowing they will be dropped if he behaves himself for another 10½ months.Army veteran Robert Cirpinski, of Burlington, said a pharmacist with the Pharmacy Station in Burlington mistakenly filled a prescription for hydrocodone last year for him, in addition to a new medication prescribed by his doctor.When pharmacy staff sent police to the home Cirpinski shares with his wife, the retiree refused to give up his prescription without police signing for it, according to Cirpinski and court records.
> Read more: http://journaltimes.com/tncms/asset/...#ixzz32yotujll


First of all...why the hell would the pharmacy call the cops? * They* are the ones who screwed up, not Cirpinski.  I would sue the hell out of the pharmacy for sublime IDIOCY.  This country is getting closer and closer to being overrun by the insane [shaking head].

----------

Calypso Jones (05-31-2014),Invayne (05-31-2014),Victory (05-31-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> I can see no good reason for any law regarding what sort of pain medication a person may take. That is his business and nobody else's.


The doctor prescribed it.  It was a LEGAL prescription.  I just don't get it.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> First of all...why the hell would the pharmacy call the cops? * They* are the ones who screwed up, not Cirpinski.  I would sue the hell out of the pharmacy for sublime IDIOCY.  This country is getting closer and closer to being overrun by the insane [shaking head].


I'm with you on this.   Who the hell is at fault here?  It's the bleeping pharmacy.

----------

Sheldonna (05-31-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> I say we get rid of all drug laws and scrap the welfare state. What do you think?


Yeah, and then we can ALL be forced into working as policemen, which would be necessary, with so many _more_ folks running around and driving around doped up.  Good luck with that.

----------


## Calypso Jones

what kind of person anymore would be the one to turn in fellow citizens.   They want us to report stuff in the neighborhood, tax avoiders, law breakers.  I tell ya.  I don't report anyone.  I don't call the law on anyone EXCEPT when there's a strange person walking around my property and if I do that, I  put up my dogs.  

That doesn't mean though that if you show up on my property and you have no business there that  I won't do 'something'.

----------

Invayne (05-31-2014)

----------


## Victory

> The doctor prescribed it.  It was a LEGAL prescription.  I just don't get it.


Not only that but the one prescription in question was for pain meds he was already taking up to that point.  The doctor changed meds on him, the pharmacy screwed up, and he would be just fine on the prescription delivered as is.  None of what the pharmacy or cops did makes sense.

----------

Sheldonna (05-31-2014)

----------


## Victory

> I've answered you before. Don't you read? They do not mean the same thing.


Oh I know.  And it seems like with every post you make you try to make your morality depend on the legality.




> I know this is hard for some to understand, but there are two sides to the story *and the man pled NO CONTEST*.


See, there it is right there at the end of your quote.  "And the man pled NO CONTEST."  So we're supposed to believe. . .what?  You tell me.  He pled no contest and that means. . .what?  He's an immoral drug criminal?  A lousy drug using felon?  What?

----------


## DonGlock26

> First of all...why the hell would the pharmacy call the cops? * They* are the ones who screwed up, not Cirpinski.  I would sue the hell out of the pharmacy for sublime IDIOCY.  This country is getting closer and closer to being overrun by the insane [shaking head].


Remember, we are only being told what the media wants us to know about this case. The story is largely based on the claims of the man who pled no contest to several criminal charges.

Could the media have gotten copies of the police reports and let the the readers read the other side of the story? Sure, but why make the reader better informed and able to make an educated decision?

Stories like these are carefully selected and crafted to excite emotion.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Oh I know.  And it seems like with every post you make you try to make your morality depend on the legality.
> 
> 
> 
> See, there it is right there at the end of your quote.  "And the man pled NO CONTEST."  So we're supposed to believe. . .what?  You tell me.  He pled no contest and that means. . .what?  He's an immoral drug criminal?  A lousy drug using felon?  What?


It seems? I answered your question in detail. Did you respond to it in a rational manner? I don't think so. 

The article told you what that means. The prosecutor could most likely prove the charges in trial. The man folded and took a plea deal.

----------


## DonGlock26

> Not only that but the one prescription in question was for pain meds he was already taking up to that point.  The doctor changed meds on him, the pharmacy screwed up, and he would be just fine on the prescription delivered as is.  None of what the pharmacy or cops did makes sense.


Perhaps, just perhaps, it doesn't make sense because you haven't been given all the facts of the case?

----------


## fyrenza

This is just me GUESSING, at this point,
though I will try to research it,

but most prescription med databases are "overseen" by a computer program,
to keep health care folks from inadvertently administering incorrect drugs,
wrong dosages, meds that would cause adverse reactions,
such as known drug allergies, and/or drugs that interfere with each other.

I guessed that it was the pharma tech that is the "criminal,"
because I believe that s/he saw the oxy scrip,
and that it had been replaced,
and thought that they could dispense BOTH,
giving them the opportunity to palm some of the pills.

AFTER the fact, the head pharmacist probably got an alert,
that only s/he could "sign off" on,

cut the tech some slack for the mistake,

and the actual PROBLEM didn't occur until it was discovered that 6 of the pills were missing.

It could also have been that the man called about the mistaken scrip,
stating that it was short the 6 pills,

and because oxy's ARE a controlled substance,

that's when the police had to be informed,
especially considering that a business was also involved.

----------


## Victory

> Perhaps, just perhaps, it doesn't make sense because you haven't been given all the facts of the case?


Providing all the facts wouldn't do you any good anyway.  If a grenade goes off in a baby's face. . .it's the mother's fault, right?

----------


## DonGlock26

> Providing all the facts wouldn't do you any good anyway.


To your closed mind, probably not.

----------


## Sheldonna

> Remember, we are only being told what the media wants us to know about this case. The story is largely based on the claims of the man who pled no contest to several criminal charges.
> 
> Could the media have gotten copies of the police reports and let the the readers read the other side of the story? Sure, but why make the reader better informed and able to make an educated decision?
> 
> Stories like these are carefully selected and crafted to excite emotion.


Yeah....I know.  Just another example of how the left is "playing us".

----------


## Victory

> To your closed mind, probably not.


Projection is a deceptive thing.  Recognize it at every instance.

----------


## Victory

> It seems? I answered your question in detail. Did you respond to it in a rational manner? I don't think so. 
> 
> The article told you what that means. The prosecutor could most likely prove the charges in trial. The man folded and took a plea deal.


I know what "no contest" means.  What are we to conclude?  What did YOU conclude?  THAT is unanswered at least by you.

----------


## Invayne

> I know what "no contest" means.  What are we to conclude?  What did YOU conclude?  THAT is unanswered at least by you.


I believe he considers that an admission of guilt. Which couldn't be farther from the truth...

----------

