It's so tragic that the antibiotic nasal spray she was using for her sinus infection was laced with fent- Oh wait, it was illegal recreational drugs.
If someone pirates video games and their computer gets a virus, you don't act like they're a horrific victim, you laugh at them for poor cybersecurity and say "don't pirate next time".
If someone tries to rob a store from the skylight and falls through like a cartoon, you don't act like they're a horrific victim, you laugh at them and say "don't steal next time".
So I laugh at these losers, and say "don't do illegal recreational drugs next time".
If someone pirates video games and their computer gets a virus, you don't act like they're a horrific victim, you laugh at them for poor cybersecurity and say "don't pirate next time".
I was sort of thinking it's a societal tragedy, even though I have no sympathy for the user, but you actually brought up a great analogy. Why are these situations treated so differently? (and in fact the opposite of what makes sense) Is it because drugs are addictive and people imagine addiction to be a "disease"?
Basically this. Former addicts played the PR campaign of addiction being a disease so they are never responsible their actions as long as they are trying to do better.
Because media and culture has divorced drugs from a starting point. So they are just somehow a poor addict who can't escape.
Which means nobody ever stops to consider "yeah but this dumb retard chose to start it in the first place" as a mitigating factor. This isn't the 80s where nobody knows what these drugs are.
Because it's people in the media shaping public perception of each? Rich people have no need for consumer-level copyright infringement, but they do like their illegal drugs, and they're in a position to be hurt by consumer-level copyright infringement but not to be hacked to pieces by the drug cartels.
It's so tragic that the antibiotic nasal spray she was using for her sinus infection was laced with fent- Oh wait, it was illegal recreational drugs.
If someone pirates video games and their computer gets a virus, you don't act like they're a horrific victim, you laugh at them for poor cybersecurity and say "don't pirate next time".
If someone tries to rob a store from the skylight and falls through like a cartoon, you don't act like they're a horrific victim, you laugh at them and say "don't steal next time".
So I laugh at these losers, and say "don't do illegal recreational drugs next time".
I was sort of thinking it's a societal tragedy, even though I have no sympathy for the user, but you actually brought up a great analogy. Why are these situations treated so differently? (and in fact the opposite of what makes sense) Is it because drugs are addictive and people imagine addiction to be a "disease"?
Basically this. Former addicts played the PR campaign of addiction being a disease so they are never responsible their actions as long as they are trying to do better.
Because media and culture has divorced drugs from a starting point. So they are just somehow a poor addict who can't escape.
Which means nobody ever stops to consider "yeah but this dumb retard chose to start it in the first place" as a mitigating factor. This isn't the 80s where nobody knows what these drugs are.
Because it's people in the media shaping public perception of each? Rich people have no need for consumer-level copyright infringement, but they do like their illegal drugs, and they're in a position to be hurt by consumer-level copyright infringement but not to be hacked to pieces by the drug cartels.