Beggar art in Civic

The contention that because heroin is illegal, that crime is commited is wrong.

Junkies on methadone STILL commit crimes.

The state owes a duty of care to all, junkies included, but it cannot hand them a tool with which they kill themselves, and harm society by their actions in the process.

Forcibly detox them. Boot camp them if necessary. Modify their behaviour and teach them social skils, self discipline and self respect.

Shoot dealers. Or send them to Denpasar.

For anyone who is truely interested. Danny’s mother wrote a book about his problems and diagnosis of schizophrenia.

The book is titled “What’s Daniel Doing?” and should be available from Monaro Books and Music (49 Vale Street, Cooma – 02 6452 4225) or directly from his mother.

A quick Google search will give you her contact address.

Bulldog, what’s ridiculous about legalization of heroin? There are several problems associated with heroin, one is the addiction and all that goes with it and the other is drug related crime which is a product of the addiction combined with prohibition. On top of it all, prohibition is what creates such a lucrative market for narcotics. Without prohibiition no one would be making the profits they do out of selling the damn stuff. Where there’s no market for something it has a tendency to evapourate. You should think a little yourself.
As to all talk and no action, that is something which could, rightfully or wrongfully, be levelled at anyone writing to this site. You don’t know my life and I don’t know yours so I’ll never levell that one on you. You’re just as guilty of being holier than thou in that respect.
And Slapp Monkey, it ain’t a baiting game. I’m just pissed off at your attitude.

S_M – your education is beside the point. Take a position and stick to it. Also – coming across all hostile (“blow me”, etc) from the get-go is going to get you flamed. Still – you’ve managed to put forward an arguement to counter mine/konrad’s/johnboy’s; so kudos.

I still reckon locking people of Danny’s ilk up is not the answer. A properly funded monitoring and support program to keep him on his meds would be a better, and less stigmatising way of sorting him out.

Locking people up fosters dependency on the institution. For example, a newsagency I used to work in was held up by a lady not actually wanting to rob it – just wanting to get arrested and sent back to Hennesy House (the mental health ward at Calvary) because she couldn’t deal with the outside world.

A community-based solution will keep people on the straight and narrow, but give them a degree of self reliance. We want to rehabilitate them don’t we?

Also – if you stabilise a person’s mental condition, in my experience (yes – I do have some experience, albeit limited, in mental health) you’re nine-tenths of the way to sorting out their substance abuse problems.

And another thing (I’m nearly done)…the heroin trial should have gone ahead. How else are we supposed to work out if that approach might work? If it’s an unmitigated disaster, I guess I’ll have to think of some other tack to take on solving the problem. But I guess we’ll never know now…

I would be very concerned if I was in your head random…

The only people who should be allowed to abuse any form of mind altering substance be it grog or drugs are those who produce amazing art…. everyone else are pretty much become annoyingk

Thanks Bulldog,

I’m not the most educated person and I suspect there are a lot better speakers on this forum then myself. I am glad that I have the chance to voice my opinion. The introduction of opium based products to the market/community is not one that can be safely predicted. the long term result are completely unknown there is no model we can base our release on. I’m not a smart person I don’t work in a high paying office job yet I suspect that introduction of opium based products will lead to the same old problems that occur with booze or smokes. Just with a much easier and valuable product to produce at home. All this is really another issue which is not Danny, perhaps it should be a new discussion topic.

As to the state of the current medical system that allows the disadvantaged like danny to go off the deep end. Yes something does need to be done, they are under funded and poorly empowered.

I prepose that He needs to be removed from access to any non-medicated drugs. One of his problems is not just smack but also his consumtion of other drugs even legal ones. Booze is just as bad.
This nutbar needs time to get clean and get in control of his life. Perhaps he never will in which case he should be kept out of harms way.

Yes locked up for good if he cannot be cured/or atleast treated to managable level.

I haven’t seen danny in awhile I wonder if someone as finally done something about him.

Sorry Konrad but I’m through with this baiting game of yours. Have a nice day.

Look, I’ve been harassed by a lot of people in Civic. Some of them are probably doing heroin. Others are, more than likely, alcoholics (I’m pretty sure that the chubby, easter-european sounding guy who’s hung around Electric Shadows for years is an alkie, not a junkie). Both of them are equally annoying, only the junkies are thinner so they take up less space.

Either ways, these are people who are not controlling their lives, and are being assisted in screwing up their lives by others (whoever’s giving the fat alkie his fix is pretty much as culpable as any heroin pusher, in my view, and should get their liscence revoked). But, of course, heroin’s illegal, and booze isn’t. Either way, intervention is necessary, both to stop people supplying tools that allow people to damage themselves, and to stop people from damaging themselves.

Konrad – there were plenty of oppurtunitites for you to jump in for SGS. Plenty; however you waited until there were a couple of people who shared you’re opinion on the matter before finding the balls to add your own gem – something about anyone posting under a pseudonym being a “snivelling swine-turd” and that everyone else was basically a gutless bully. That is holier than thou as opposed to moral high ground. But, I’ll move away from that because that is not what we’re discussing.

I’m not even going to start on you about the foolishness of legalising heroin – think more carefully about calling others ‘a little dim witted’ before making ridiculous statements like that.

Once again however it seems you have waited until wonsworld has made the first move in defending the person before growing the balls to jump in yourself – and even then it seemed a game of one-upmanship i.e. wonsworld knew Daniel, but you had the time to sit and talk to him a couple of times thus making you (wait for it) holier than thou once again and giving you the angle to start berating shab and slapp.

Good on you Konrad – you have intentionally taken certain things out of context and in my opinion have been lucky to have gotten away with your attitiude condescending demeanor up until this point. I am surprised that Shab, Slapp (even though he was obviously ranting a little), and some of the others didn’t call you for what you are.

I hope you can prove me wrong one day mate – but you come accross as all talk and very little action.

It does kind of look like some of the crap art on those overly metro tshirts…

My thoughts exactly Abs. Get the fuck out of my head!

Oh, bulldog, I might also add that my criticism of Slapp Monkey was quite clearly that he was too stupid to have noticed that he’d directed an insult in my direction just a few hours before. To me this does seem a little dimwitted and it does seem valid that I’d call him on it. Seems part of my “high moral ground” in your eyes is simply based on me replying to previous posts.

Bulldog, aren’t most of the people on this site taking their own percieved high moral ground, especially Slapp Monkey. I don’t know how dividing the world into the “parasites” and the “decent folk” and putting yourself into the latteer category and anyone who annoys you into the former can’t be seen as taking high moral ground. Or is it that if I criticize a bully then I’m the one with the high moral ground? As far as inaction over SGS goes, maybe I should have stood up for him sooner but if you didn’t notice people were still bullying him in that entry, so I don’t really get where you’re coming from. I’d sort of gotten to the point where I thought enough was enough and I said so. Exactly what you’re telling me I should have done. And on the subject of SGS lots of people are still bullying him online which is just stupid. If they were to criticize him, fine. But rampant abuse? Yeh, great stuff.

Mael and Bonfire are making the most sense;

IMHO It’s not the loonies but the junkies that are the real problem – it seems that everyone concurs that a shitty healthcare system is to blame for the fact that the loonies frequently end up using drugs if unsupervised – however has anyone been able to confirm whether this “Daniel” is in fact a junky or just a nutter?

And as for my position on smack, I’ll have to go with bonfire, and if the junkies are selling as well then line ’em up. The insane and mentally ill however should not be tarred with the same brush.

Konrad – you took the same moral high ground when SGS decided he wasn’t going to stay at the RiotAct and stated that we were basically all slack pricks for “bullying” him. As I said at the time, I don’t recall you standing up and saying “Enough people, leave the poor kid alone”. In my eyes that inaction, your attitude to this subject and your rambling critique of Slapp’s grasp on the English Language only reinforces my suspicion that you enjoy playing holier than thou…

And Slapp – I can kinda understand where you’re coming from, but it appears you have skewed your opinion slightly and won no friends in the process. I suggest thinking things through before hacking away at the keyboard because you’re ideas aren’t all bad when you have time to reflect and refine them.

Finally I say don’t censure anyone. Not because I’m left or right or I’m worried about freedom of speach – but becasue it is healthy for people to have the oppurtunity to try and see something through someone elses experience. At the same time I would like to think we are all above name calling.

I suggest a beer or two tomorrow evening to see who has the nuts to speak their mind in an open forum?

It does kind of look like some of the crap art on those overly metro tshirts…

That art would work well on a Roger David T-shirt actually.

There now S_M – that’s an arguement. Kudos, Bonfire.

Gotta disagree with you on the whole junkie thing. Having been on the receiving end of more than enough crap from junkies in my time (an I don’t just mean being hassled for spare change…) I find it very hard to by sympathetic. But the usual approach of “shoot the dealers and forcibly detox the junkies” is overly simplistic.

“Dealer” and “Junkie” are frequently the same thing. A lot of junkies shift a bit of gear to help finance their habit, in addition to other loveable activities. At what point (or weight) does one arbitrate on the difference. Hard-core 5-hit-a-day types probably have more smack on their person than your average street dealer, but may well be uninvolved in dealing. Hell – I know some of them that even have jobs to finance thier habit (I’ll admit they’re a small minority, though).

Drugs and mental illness go hand in hand. Heroin and other drugs are often an escape from the illness itself. Do we give clemency to the mentally ill addict, and brutality to the sane addict?

Finally, you can’t force someone to stop taking drugs (well, not in any practical way) unless you give them a damn good reason to stop (a good reason for them, not you.) Forced rehab won’t achieve any kind of result commensurate with the bucket load of money it will cost.

As repugnant an idea as it may be, I think the only way to stop drug crime, and the smack culture, is to have the government provide medical-grade heroin to registered addicts on prescription, in much the same way methadone is administered (i.e, in an injecting room, with fits supplied).

No – I don’t like the idea of giving addicts the very substance that causes their problems, but the merry-go-round of enforced rehab and methadone programs either don’t work or gets abused.

S_M – Once Danny’s been locked up; then what? Leave him to rot, a la Bedlam? “Treat” him and kick him back out; only to stop his meds, lose it and start hassling people to buy his “art” and bum smokes?

We’ve tried the tough approach, and it doesn’t work (need I mention US Prohibition c 1920’s & 30’s as a case study). Nor does this half-arsed approach of one side advocating harm minimisation and the other being “tough on drugs”. It’s throwing good money after bad.

Some people will suffer under a program of regulated legalisation, but I guess that’s your rights of society over the individual, eh Slappy.

I can’t see anyone having the political will, though.

I’d take a wild guess that the name “asylumn” is going to be in the doghouse for a while yet- however they’ll be called “intensive mental health care facililty” (which means the same thing, but without the negative connotation, kinda like you no longer have slums, just “low income housing”).

i find labels of the left and right useful for describing ideas but not individuals – caveat being that they themselves havent already identified themselves publically as being of the left or right.

in their most extreme strains left has mao/stalin/pol pot and the right has hitler/pinochet etc.

i think naive young people are entranced by the socialist aspects of leftist thought and dont give too much credence to the darker elements of socialism. i think that instead of marching in the streets they need to read and read and read. you come across truths and lies, unspun spin.

form your own ideas, live outside your comfort zone, debate arguments. avoid the socialist left or green left or any other organised political body until you have a strong sense of yourself. otherwise they will use your enthusiasm and energy. as lenin would say as ‘useful fools’.

fwiw i regard australia as a socialist country, but by the choice of the people. fortunately its bedrock is the weberian protestant work ethic of the 19th century and the energy of waves of immigrants. this energy continues to drive an economy which can sustain the socialist elements liek healthcare, education and provision of basic infrastructure at a reasonable cost to even the remote parts of our country.

i think that the current mental health/prisons whirlpool is an issue which cannot be ignored much longer. when it is, i would hope that asylums or whatever the acceptable name will be, make a return.

imagine if danny knew that he coudl have a bed every night, he coudl get breakfast, his medication etc – yet was free to come and go. he might even be able to hold down a part time job. perhaps his art could be sold for a decent price. he may never be normal, but his mental health could be supervised.

as for heroin – im sorry, but all dealers should be shot and junkies forcibly treated for their addiction.

Slapp Monkey, yes I can see that you are talking to me, though you were before also, a point which eluded you completely a short time later (which makes me question your own sanity and powers of cognition further.) Your initial comments about Danny were that you thought he should be locked away because “he has the nerve to try and sell this peice of junk as art, then wants a smoke” and that he “makes our city look ugly.” As I repeatedly stated these are not solid grounds for locking someone away. Go to the art gallery and there’s a million examples of junk being sold as art and as I stated before, there’s a million examples of people who are annoying. If Daniel is a threat that’s another matter but these weren’t your problems with him at the outset. Your initial diatribe was very different.

I have no idea if Daniel is a threat or not. He’s never been a threat to me and doesn’t even bother to ask me for money from me anymore since he knows I’m always skint.

Also its amazing what medication can do for some of the most extreme cases. A case like Danny would have to be supervised though to ensure he takes it.

Locking people away is a last resort though I agree that in some cases its neccessary.

And no, In my case I’m not of the left at all. In a lot of ways I could be seen to be but in a lot of other ways I’m all over the place. Life’s more complicated than left/right. Compassion isn’t owned by the left. Its something people across the political spectrum can posess. A lot of the people writing on this site are of the right also,. You’re not the only right winger, you’re just a dumb one. I’ve known smart right wingers before, including ones that would disagree with me in regards to this issue.

Konrad,

Yes now I’m talking to you.

Ok so you do not believe that danny’s behaviour is bad enough for him to be locked up. Then after what point should he be? when he is an addict? when he really hurts somebody?

He is constantly breaking the law and has proven himself to be a unable to cope with society.

There will come a time when someone decides that he has annoyed them for the last time or that has driven enough customers away. Then Danny will get really hurt, have you not heard the other people comment on the fresh cuts on his head and so forth. If you actually gave a toss about this nutbar junkie you would want him in protective custody. For sadly the end result I suspect for this junkie is a trip to hospital or the grave.

Either way My result of getting this parasite off the streets is achieved.

Caf,

I can see your point both sides agree that something needs to be done about the problem and our solutions seem to be the same. The difference as I would see it is that in method and reasoning. I see him as a pest and parasite on the general public hence should not be a part of it. Now how that comes about is the removial of his personal rights to freedom and forced program of medical treatment. This I do not believe the far left would agree with.

I guess it comes down to the methods and reasons for the action.

Oh, Bon, I don’t regard junkies as dead already. I’ve known two ex-heroin addicts who turned their life around and cleaned themselves up for good. The statistics are extremely bad in that respect though so I know what you mean. Most heroin addicts are terminal cases. They’ll never change. But there are exceptions. And where there are excceptions there’s always possibilities however remote…

Hey Slap Monkey, you asked the following before slagging me off – “Konrad did you think I was talking to you.” Considering I was answering something you had personally adressed to me (namely – “Wow way to go Konrad you just solved all the mental health problems of canberra…”) then I will presume you were talking to me, you dimwitted Neanderthal psychpath. If you weren’t intending to address me then you have a very peculiar grasp of the English language or perhaps none at all. As far as living with people with mental illness goes, I lived for 6 years with a schizophrenic girlfriend though that has little to do with this current debate. I also worked for years trying to help my friend Michael who was way beyond help, he was alcoholic, schizophrenic and sometimes violent. But I really don’t see any logic to your proposal anyway. My arguement as I stated it is that Daniel can indeed be annoying but that that isn’t valid grounds to lock him up and throw away the key. So what if he annoys you. A hell of a lot of people annoy me too and I don’t expect that they should be locked up on those grounds. But Slapp Monkey, you’re obviously beyond therapy. Just start beating your head against a brick wall now, it might do you some good.
As far as Danny goes, perhaps he’d be better off in an asylum, I have no idea really, but the reasons would have to be for his welfare or for public safety or both, NOT because of how annoying he is. Annoying isn’t exactly strong enough criterea to lock someone away and neither is extremely annoying.
As far as heroin goes, legalize the bloody stuff, administer it on prescription, it’ll kill the black market and stop most drug related crime immediately. Its certainly not the solution to drug addiction but its a beginning. And its also the cheapest option for the taxpayer.

Quoting SM:

We are far to concerned about the rights of the individual over the rights of the community.

Isn’t it funny how far right (SM as self-described) and far left actually end up agreeing on a fundamental level?

Mr Shab,

Sorry but you have me wrong, I have not changed my arguement from junkies are scum and should not be allowed in public. Since the begining of this discussion, I have only advocated killing them as a possibility after you suggested it and that was always with maybe. My prefered solution was the removal of them from society. Perhaps you are seeing something in my words that is not there.

Perhaps it is the use of words like junkie scum and nutbar that gets people all angery.

As to the treatment of danny I doubt he will ever be able to function in society that allows him access to other forms of mind altering substances. Be that in the form alcohol, pot, or any other drug. The problem is the lack of his self control. I believe it is the duty of society and the community to remove him from it and treat him. To the taxes point I am annoyed that my taxes are not being spent to keep these nutters in a seperate area from the rest of society. So that the rest of us can function without him annoying us.

Danny will never be fine, and yeah he needs constant supervision.

Bring asylums back, centralise the care.

Stop relying on the legal system to resolve mental health issues.

But dont expct any flavour of govt or party to accept the obvious – its expensive. which is why they close them down in the first place.

i loathe junkies and regard them as dead already. i would never give them a cent.

but i believe that society owes a duty of care to those in it who cannot cope. does this mean danny can sleep in my spare room – hell no.

its a problem which cant be ignored, but it is.

if you dont like danny, just walk the other way.

S_M, you seem to change your mind on what you position is so frequently that I can’t keep track.

First you were (implicitly) advocating liquidating the mentally ill. Then locking them up. Then treating them. Pick an arguement and stick with it, or admit your initial premise was flawed. If I’m misinterpreting your arguement, correct me. Don’t bend your arguement to suit the situation.

Danny-boy would probably be fine If he had a properly trained and supported case worker making sure he took his meds every day. Sadly, he doesn’t, and stays off his meds, can’t deal with reality, and makes a bloody nuisance of himself. If he stayed on his meds, there’s absolutely no need to lock him up. Very few mentally ill people need constant care if they stick to their meds.

And wonsworld/random – it was me that mentioned the Final Solution, but only by analogy. Sorry to all. I won’t do it again. Unless we’re talking about European history.

I think everyone says “Now, or indeed, a couple of years ago when it became obvious he wasn’t conrolling his own medication properly”. So you’ve basically got a number of people massively offside who actually agreed with your point.

Well done, slappy!

I didn’t start the suggestion of “final solution” Although it is a very economical. I don’t think it is very useful for society. You can thank Mr Shab for that one.

I never disagreed with your points that he shouldn’t be cared for but the questions arise at what point does he lose his rights to interact with the everyday public. This individual who we mention has been on and off medical treatment for years and it has been reliable proven that he has failed to self medicate. He is an annoyance to almost everyone. When should he be removed from society to an environment he can be treated in?

Johnny your Turn

removed from society. Until he is able to function in it.

OK, so you’re actually agreeing with us that what he needs is an appropriate level of care?

i.e. a roof over his head and food and someone to make sure he takes his meds, and the threat of confinement if he doesn’t come back every night?

well done Random 🙂

However that site also states that “In general, Godwin’s Law does not apply in situations wherein one could reasonably expect Hitler or Nazis to be mentioned, such as a discussion of Germany in World War II. Exceptions, of course, may exist and should be obvious given the preceding discussion”

.. and someone well before me had mentioned “the Final Solution”

Bloody Hell! Was that an arguement I read?

I’ll refute it later, but for the time being; Bravo, S_M.

So Shab,

My several comments about him being unable to control himself and addictions, hence he should be removed from society. Until he is able to function in it. Those are points and even a possible solution.

how did your tree hugging go?

I believe it comes down to a matter of choice he has lost the ability to make choices for himself being this due to his mental instability or his addictions. His inability to function in society has created problems for the general public. Now either society has to change or he does. It becomes a basic cost issue it is easier to fix the Junkie as the problem.

If he won’t do something about the situation then the government or local powers that be should step in and remove him from the public space until he is able to function in it. Besides he can still peddle his art from mental care institute.

We are far to concerned about the rights of the individual over the rights of the community. We allow people to believe that as individuals they have the freedom to do as they please. But the kicker is we don’t tell them that they shouldn’t harm or be harmful to the community.

We are brought up to be to concerned about our personal feelings and the feelings of other individuals rather then the concerns of the community and the country.

S_M – “I would like to point out that any personal comments directed at individuals was only made after personal abuse was levelled at me.”

WTF? I believe that you said something along the lines of “blow me” (on another thread). Not only are you a roid-addled borderline retard, you’re delusional.

The reason you’re hacking people off is that you’re ranting without any kind of arguement or rhetoric. I think Bonfire is a bit of a psycho and I don’t agree with his politics, but at least he can make a cogent arguement. I can respect him for that at least. Even if he has has called me a dickhead and told me to fist myself.

You, I can’t say the same for. You make no arguement beyond “you pinkoes are soft and out of touch with reality” and…well, that’s about it.

Go SM do us monkeys proud!!!

But me thinks this Jay has gotten to close to you!

The measure of a man is not how he treats his equals, it’s how he treats his inferiors.

Not sure who said this but it seems about right.

(Off topic) Funny that some people see this forum as dominated by politically correct anti-right-wingers – I would’ve said the opposite. Guess the balance is about right then.

the only valid point I see you making is that something needs to be done about people like this roaming the streets. I agree with that … I have been attacked by all sorts of crazies… they seem attracted to me…. But then on the flipside if you lock all the crazies up.. you miss out on some of the beauties such as Wesley Willis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Willis
who is brilliant in his simplicity and repetition.. It’s just one of those where everyone agrees that something should be done.. but what!!!

Sorry Jay if you feel that my words should only becoming from a roid ridden bouncer.

I would like to point out that any personal comments directed at individuals was only made after personal abuse was levelled at me.

I have had the misfortune of working in the city for a number of years and seeing some of the scum that wander the streets claiming to be victems of society.

Life is about choices and if you cannot make those choices and live them. As it would appear this junkie is unable to do, then society should be able to make it for him. Now in the extreme he should be removed to a mental heath care environment which he is unable to harm himself and others.

I for one would be interested to see what this junkies previous convictions are like? I suspect it would shock most the liberal do gooders on this web page if they found out that danny used to assualt people for their cash.

How does the nations capital appear to others? If tourists and visiting officals are being put apon by stinking filth ridden junkie scum when they go out to dinner.

You want to discuss the issue or hide from it?

I did have a comment written up, an extremely long breakdown of what I thought Slapp Monkey was getting at, without the right of right, right wing stuff included, but then I thought to myself – why bother ? SM can defend himself.

In his credit, I think the art has a bit of a Brett Whitely feel to it, I’d buy up a few and put them in the attic for a few decades if I saw it, not a bad investment for a couple of bucks if it turns out to be worth a few bob, if not it can go out with the childrens drawings from preschool.

I think SM has a point though, as a society we have become this weak-willed, no backbone group of tolerant politically correct at all costs wankers.

The problem here is that all the assistance has been taken up by all the lazy wankers who are riding the system and leaving no resources for those who genuinely need it.

It sounds to me that this guy genuinely needs help, and I’m frankly quite surprised that he isn’t receiving any, because his situation sounds quite chronic, and ‘out’ (to coin a phrase).

I’m not going to invite him into my house though, cause charity for me ends at Woolworths on a Saturday morning. Perhaps the Government might like to lend some assistance on my taxed-to-hell ass’s behalf instead of continuing to invest in silly little international community butt kissing exercises. They might find a few pennies here and there if they considered a few other things closer to home as well, a complete reform of Centrelink, encompassing healthcare benefits (Medicare) in conjunction with welfare benefits springs to mind.

They could always take a paycut as well…

wonsworld, I call Godwins Law!!!

Discussion over.

Slapp Monkey.

I have thought the same thing. Why not offer him a spare room? The main problem is that I am not financially, physically nor emotionally trained, educated or funded to deal with a person who suffers from Danny’s illness.

As Mael suggested there “were” people who were trained to deal with these issues but it’s no longer PC to keep them cared for. And before you go on about taxes and your dollars paying for it, what about Danny’s parents? Didn’t they pay taxes all their lives? Don’t they have some expectation that the funds that their work provided to the government, would ensure that their son would be cared for? They are good and hard working people and I still know them very well.

The only times I have known Danny to be this side of lucid was immediately after his visits (long term) to the then established hospitals. But all too soon he was back to somewhere close to where he is now. He cannot function properly without the proper care. But that care is no longer provided.

BTW… I found out only last year that my great grandmother suffered the fate you suggest we implement on the streets of Canberra. Only she wasn’t a junkie. All of a sudden in Germany in 1944 there were no more mental patients. The family at the time was told that she simply died. However the official papers that we have recently located (the Nazi’s loved paperwork) state that one night an old and frail lady was dealt your solution. It doesn’t work!

If only a cohesive opinion was being presented with the abuse G.

But I know this guy is a troll in the truest sense of the word now, so we can happily ignore him.

I see that no-one is seconding that motion JB. A good stoush is what the site is all about. SGS just couldn’t take it and got out.

Mental Health would have him on a treatment program. If he was not self medicating then they would attend regularly and give him his meds, and assess him at the same time.

The rest of the crap that he is probably taking instead of his medication is a choice issue. Anyone who has compassion for people shooting shit into themselves is delusional.

Smoking is more addictive that Heroin. People give up smoking all the time because they choose to. Its all a lifestyle choice. Be a junkie and bludge off the system or get a job, pay taxes and be a useful member of society.

I’ve known people from school that I used to get along with who became junkies. I don’t feel sorry for them. I feel sorry for their families who have to deal with the f@#kers.

Bring it on Slapp-Monkey. I love a controversial opinion.

haha good call JW

Slapp_monkey, you’re sounding more and more like a ‘roid’ ridden bouncer. I hope for your sake that i’m wrong.

Your aggressive intolerance of the general public says that you should take a long holiday. Maybe back in time to be with the vikings.

Can anyone tell me if steroids are classed as narcotics ? If they are, check out this link everyone: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=junkie

Some shocking abuse goes on here. Phenomenal abuse. But it always come with a case to argue. Your invective is starting to run on its own with no backing, your time with the conch is over.

Do it Johnny block me.

Prove how liberal you are by not allowing me to speak. I didn’t start abusing the individual who made the comments until after they called me a psycho.

But hey maybe a right wing voice does not have the right to speak on the riot act.

Do it Johnnyboy Ban me.

Seconded, ban az.

I move that Slapp_mokey no longer be heard.

Oh,

Konrad did you think I was talking to you.

You are nothing to me but a pathetic little wannabe hero who thinks he can save the world without leaving his computer. You certainly sound like poor company and maybe thats why you only have your dog and computer as friends. The challange still stands gutless prove me wrong take nutbar junkie into your home and care for him. You will get screwed over, Coward.

My last sentence is trucated… it should read, What I am suggesting is that removing what you term an “annoyance” from the streets so that “decent folk” can live on streets without “ugliness” is absolutely mad. Wonderful logic there…

Slap Monkey, did I suggest I had any solutions? Read the words I wrote dum brain. You’re the one offering the Final Solution. I’m not giving any solutions, life’s a bit more complicated than that. On the issue of heroin, if it were legalized and a junkie was living with me, NONE of my possessions would go missing. Though that would only be a part the problem solved.
And anyway, I stated quite clearly that I don’t see the need to clean people off the streets. Who I choose to live with in my own home tends to be narrowed down to one person, my dog. I’m not very good company. Maybe though, I should take you under my wing and we can live together. You’re a sicker person than Daniel and obviously in need of more guidance.
What I am suggesting is that removing what you term an “annoyance” from the streets so that “decent folk” can live on streets without “ugliness.” Wonderful logic there…

The Asylum’s needed reform, and more half-way options.

but de-institutionalisation had been a massive failure by any measure.

Mr_Shab

I do not tolerate this junkie’s behaviour in my pressence. I have requested from several venues, that I frequent, that he not be allowed to annoy the customers. Some of these venues have even asked me to escort him from the location.

This junkie is a lost cause, a complete burden, you are right Shab “offing him” maybe the alternative. Also quite cheap, Johnnyboy.

You are just too afraid to admit that the truth is this nutbar junkie does not deserve to be in the public space.

JB, there used to be dedicated facilities that handled the actual demand.

Nobody actually realised it at the time, although the tell-tale signs were actually there, for example, most families thought they were unique in the fact that they had a ‘strange’ uncle, or an ‘absent’ auntie who never visited.

Then Asylum became a bad word, and they no longer exist.

S_M – you seem to be doing a fair bit of whining about how the world should be better. Pity your ideas don’t extend too far beyond offing people who annoy you.

Maybe if you care so much for this junkie you can have him live with you.

Or maybe we should spend more on having dedicated facilities to handle the actual demand.

You never know but it might actually cost less in the long run.

Wow way to go Konrad you just solved all the mental health problems of canberra. Maybe if you care so much for this junkie you can have him live with you.

Prove me wrong take him into your house and care for him like you have so clearly said he needs.

I wonder how long it will be before you have no possessions, your children are smacky wh*res and you’ve joined danny on the streets?

Wait maybe you are one of those pissweak liberal types who likes to talk big about their caring ideals. But when it comes to actually doing something they would rather someone else got their hands dirty.

At the end you are nothing but a coward hiding behind a barrier of the moral high ground. Too gutless to actually doing anything except piss and moan about how the world should be better.

Slapp_monkey also thinks people wearing pink shirts deserve a good bashing in the pub.

Sure the occasional W*nker who wore a pink shirt got the cocky slapped out of him. But hey thats just a good life lession.

He also doesn’t know how to spell “poseur”.

“Good folk and rotten ones.” Your language and attitude puts you in the latter Slapp_monkey. Totally rotten. Hope I don’t have to run into you in Civic mate, it would ruin my day. Yeh, I’ve had Daniel come and bother me when I’ve been having a nice quiet dinner with someone and yeah, it may have been an annoyance, it may even have ruined my evening but if an occasional annoyance is your only difficulty in life then count yourself lucky. I find Daniel a lot less annoying than a lot of better dressed, well perfumed and more presentable loonies who lead so called “normal” lives. The whole myth of the “decent folk” is troubling, just what constitutes “decent folk” anyway? Its us and them mentality. Its extremely childish and simplistic. If we locked away everyone who was an annoyance there wouldn’t be anyone left on the streets. Why don’t we just have it your way and clean away everyone. As I said before you’re an A-grade psychopath.

Konrad – okay, the middle class welfare is just my current pet hate. It’s outside the realm of this debate.

Slapp_monkey; maybe if we “held the hand” of the little shit a bit more, he’d be off the junk, back on his meds and not bothering the “common decent folk” of this city. A guy like him is never going to be a normal member of society, but maybe he won’t spend so much time making a nuisance of himself.

Yeah, I can understand your feelings Mr Shab & I agree totally that not enough money is going towards mental health. I don’t know what “middle class welfare” means but I’m not going to start an arguement there right now. I’ve known quite a few people who couldn’t get the attntion or help that they needed in the past in regards to their mental condions. I think in Daniel’s case he always would have been round the bend no matter what help he got but maybe he wouldn’t be as lost as he is if more help had been provided. I don’t know.

This holding hands approaching and discussing our feelings about his condition is pointless. He should not be on the streets where he can annoy the common decent folk of this city. The people who work hard, pay there taxes and just want to go out for a quite meal with someone they care about. Rather then have their dinner interupted by some smelly cesspit of junkie, who wants to get his filth ridden hands on your hard earned cash.

Yeah I’m talking about a final solution, he should be locked away until cured or moved on. Too meny good folk taking care of some rotten ones.

The junkie is a parasite on our society and should removed.

No Slapp_monkey, I haven’t thought the same thing, except I have thought how dumb and simplistic your solution is. Maybe the streets should be cleaned of the likes you as well. The currently chic term for what you’re expressing is “compassion fatigue” though I’d just call you a plain old psychopath. Look it up in the dictionary, it fits your attitude quite well.

Point taken Konrad – my comment was was ill-considered (though fundamentally accurate). I withdraw it.

I still think he’s a prick.

Interesting and sad to hear the reality of this persons life. Maybe give us pause to think that perhaps somewhere there is a real person behind these ‘annoying bums’ we see around the place.

Thanks Wonsworld

Wonsworld – like I said, I’d like to feel sorry for the guy, but he’s pissed me off too many times.

He’s a symptom of the failures of the mental health system (not just in the ACT; the whole country is in trouble).

Dunno about you folks, but I’d rather see money go to sorting out the lives of people like Daniel than being doled out as middle-class welfare.

Yeah Slapp_monkey; I have thought the same thing – but I’m guessing you’re advocating some kind of “Final Solution” rather than my preference of a properly funded mental health and rehab system.

I’ve known Daniel for a while now and yes he can be an annoyance but I feel its simplistic for Mr Shab to say “I’ve met plenty of manic-depressives who can get through life with this condition without acting like stinking pricks” when its pretty obvious that the degree of a mental illness differs from person to person. Conditions like manic depression or schizophrenia differ, they’re not so cut and dried. And anyway, I think Daniel has more than just manic depression going on.
Daniel can be hard to deal with most of the time, he can be an outright pain but generally I’ll say hello and talk with him. I’ve only once had a conversation with him where he was totally normal and lucid and totally there but this made his current state all the more sad. I can understand people who’d want to avoid him and I can understand cafe’s and venues wanting to exclude him, he is hard to deal with but to state clearly that you can’t have any compassion for him is pretty harsh. We’re all pretty lucky not to have to deal day to day with the same difficulties that Daniel has to inside his own head.
I’ve heard reports from a lot of people who used to know him about how good an artist he used to be before he really lost it. I’ve also heard from people who knew him as a child that he was always a little off beam. The main thing I feel when I think of Daniel or when I speak with him is sadness. How else could I feel…

He is a dumb junkie that doesn’t deserve to be on the streets, I’m sick of watching my taxes go supporting this addict. He has the nerve to try and sell this peice of junk as art, then wants a smoke.

This junkie makes our city look ugly we should have him put somewhere where he cannot annoy the rest of us.

You may think I’m being harsh but you have thought the same thing.

I used to go to school with Danny. He was a good school friend. It’s sad to see what he has become.

I have to say that there have been periods of his life in the past (when under supervised medical treatment) that he has been lucid and like he was back then.

The main problem is that he requires constant medical care and in this day and age where costs govern treatment (not needs) that the treatment is just not provided and he is placed back on the streets. the thought process I gather is that he is able to look after himself. Obviously not.

His family have tried everything possible to care for him but his mental state (when non supervised) is that his depression/confusion/paranoia allows him to believe that his medication is poison and he will not participate in any self-help programs. He also believes that those who care for him are out to get him.

Now you can say it’s his fault that he is like he is because he chooses not to take the medication. That is sadly not the case as he is in no condition to make that choice for himself. Danny’s “reality” and ours differs greatly.

I look at that piece of art and I can see bits of his past life in there and I think that there is more depth in his work than most people realise.

The last time I saw Danny in Civic, he bummed a cigarette from me like he does with everyone else. He didn’t recognise me.

To you he may just be some annoying vagrant at bars and restaurants, but to me he is an old friend who is very lost.

A way to ensure he gets the hint is to threaten to “gut him like a fish and put him on the specials menu”, as a fellow chef once did.

The guy didn’t see him for months…

Keep it, frame it – could be worth a fortune one day. Like Ken Done.

I wouldn’t go near him with a barge pole unless I had to. Say hello to Hep alphabet and everything else under the sun that he’s probably got.
Used to have to eject him from O’Malleys when I worked there every weekend. He just doesn’t get the hint.

please tell me beggars selling photocopied poetry/art havent infiltrated oz…

As for a critique of the work, I think he may have stolen one of the government funded Rorschach samples for the centre of his drawing.

Other than that there’s not much of art in it to my eye – at least you could tell Picasso could draw and that he just couldn’t be arsed. This on the other hand seems to be a drunken spider has traversed a page with after crawling through an ink-well.

I thought Filthy was a James Joyce character and that was behind the naming of Filthy’s.

Won’t swear to it though

That Canberra has a McFadden who is undeniably filthy is at the heart of this strange religion.

But he *Could* have been the influence and they just made up the story about the other bloke in order top stop him demanding entrance or a share of the take.

That’s what I choose to believe.

Yeah, I know that story, too…
http://www.smh.com.au/yoursay/2003/06/13/ (somewhere buried in the comments).
We might have to emply Nigel McLoadedog to call this one.

Slinkas, I thought Filthy McFaddens was based on an eccentric academic from a UK uni, not a local personality (scuse the lack of detail, only been to Filthies once), they have it written on their wall don’t they?

Was that the fat guy with a beard who is now skinny as a rake with a beard… who used to bug everyone to buy his art work

A bloody nuisance is what he is…especially if you have to eject him from a restaurant (yet again) and face one of his delusional, spittle-laced tirades about being a great artist and you being an ignorant shit.

Oh yeah, he does a great line in threatening small women with violence, and cowering and wimpering with fear when the large, mad-eyed chefs step up.

It all depends on what phase of his manic-depression he’s at. I’d like to feel sorry for him, but I’ve met plenty of manic-depressives who can get through life with this condition without acting like stinking pricks.

I think I might have sat in with one of my former bands one alcohol fuelled night at the Phoenix… Can’t quite remember, though 🙂

he’s a brilliant pianist if you ever get to hear him.

PS. Daniel McFadden already has a wikipedia entry. I doubt it’s the same guy, though…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_McFadden

That’s Daniel McFadden’s work. Legend says that Filty McFadden’s was named after him. He used to basically live at the Phoenix, but was banned a few years ago.
Maybe we should open a wikipedia entry for Dan 😉

Slinky the Shocker, Bar historian