OT: Billy Mays' Autopsy

Page 1 of 4  
TAMPA, Fla. An autopsy report shows that cocaine use contributed to the heart disease that suddenly killed TV pitchman Billy Mays in June, officials announced Friday.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/6564722.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I saw he was getting thinner, the crack head Mays. Now I hope they stop using showing those annoying infomertials, he probably couldnt sell anything without being coked up.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ransley wrote:

If he had the surgery he might have died on the operating table. Pain can cause people to use drugs to try and cope. You ought to know by now that anyone is capable of using drugs, for any number of reasons, even high profile celebrities.
Something to look forward to, with cocaine restricting arteries, think how many low life criminals and street people could fall over dead at any time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Some shows about this show the arrest pictures for a suspect over a span of a few years. They age 25 years in 5. None of them die from old age.
Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mysterious Traveler wrote:

If the only reason they are criminals is because they use illicit drugs, then why do they deserve to die in your opinion?
And the "street people", you want them all dead too?
Drug & alcohol abuse is a medical DISEASE, not a sign of low morality.
Everyone, and I mean -everyone- of you reading this knows someone personally affected by chemical dependence. I guess according to your theory, they should all just die because that would make YOU feel better?
That's why we (in the USA) have the highest percentage of our populace in prison. Idiots like you who think chemical dependence is a crime, rather than a very serious medical problem.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009 20:00:11 +0000 (UTC), G. Morgan

I disagree. It is medical PROBLEM after they are hooked but not a disease.
What? Do you think they just wake up one morning thinking, "Dang, I need some coke." Other than prescibed medicine, they at some time made a decision to try drugs. And became hooked.
I do agree that whatever you want to snort or ingest should be your business and no one else's. The penalty for supplying drugs to anyone under 21 should be death.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

It's not open for debate, the doctors and some government agencies already subscribe to the idea. That's why in more progressive localities they have "drug court", and various other prevention and treatment programs. Only a small percentage of druggies/alkies resort to crime to get their "fix".
Google "American Society of Addiction Medicine" and read some of the research.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think life is a 49/51 deal. Any person is where they want to be, doing exactly what they want to be doing with exactly who they want to be with. Whenever the desire gets stronger one way or the other, the person goes that way. If they don't like where they are, they leave. If they don't like who they're with, they leave. If they don't like what they're doing, they quit.
It's all just a choice. You do what you want to do.
At all times.
BTDT
Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
G. Morgan wrote:

Those some progress communities probably also believe that the actions a person performs is out of their control and that we should just chalk it up to something out of their control such as a disease. That means they aren't responsible for their actions. However they have to make a conscious choice to go to someone on the street and buy more drugs or alcohol or whatever. They made the choice. They could have said no. The reward for using the substance was too great for them to do so though.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 08 Aug 2009 17:36:41 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Just to make a point. It cost millions to execute a man. The OK City bomber was cheaper. He appealed and was dispatched. First federal case in many years. Feds has a perfect place and honored his wishes.
Death Row guys can sit for years, maybe 17-25?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The average time between sentencing and execution in 2007 was 153 months (12.75 years). Highest it has been since at least 1977 when it was 51 months (4.25 years).
--
Searching is half the fun: life is much more manageable when thought
of as a scavenger hunt as opposed to a surprise party.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I remember this case. We walked the yard, keeping disruption to a minimum, not even near death row.
John Arthur Spenkelink (March 29, 1949 in Le Mars, Iowa May 25, 1979 in Starke, Florida) was the first person executed in Florida and the second nationwide since the reintroduction of the death penalty in the United States in 1976.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Spenkelink
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:
<SNIP some repeated stuff to edit for space>

I propose that USA overtly totally bans capital punishment, effective including and onward from the day after whenever (if) "Mumia Abu Jamal" gets executed.
I find "death penalty opponents" to be disserving themselves by making any effort so much as .001% specific towards that specific perp,
in light of how easily the "evidence" in favor of this perp presented somewhere or another has a high rate of being negated by scrutiny via critical thinking.
===================================== One reason I oppose the "death penalty" is that there are fates worse than death. One severe punishment that I propose to be worse than execution and to be legal in USA is to be life imprisonment with "solitary confinement", along with prison cell climate control and air odor along with prisoner's food/beverage flavor testing via Supreme Court the USA constitutional limits on cruel/unusual punishment.
I thought that a penintentiary (an earlier idea for "penalty imprisonment of criminals *My Words*) was originally imprisoning criminals into solitary confinement cells, where their prospective main contact with the outside world by physical means was proposed to be from reading the "holy books" of a small number of more-notable religious faiths achieving larger annual distribution of free copies of their "holy books".
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'll support a death penalty for talking on a cell phone while driving.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Red Green wrote:

I often have to answer a call while driving but like the more intelligent people, I pull over if I have to write something down.
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh, it's a good thing the guy who hit me head on, totaled my car and resulted in damage to two other cars wasn't writing something down. Could have been a serious acident.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Red Green wrote:

I don't try to carry on an involved conversation and I won't try to argue with someone over the phone while driving. I'm quite able to answer the phone, say I'm driving right now, I'll call you later or I'll be there in 10 minutes, goodbye. In truth, my cellphone is usually turned off and my pager is the point of contact. I rarely take my eyes off the road while driving.
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

IMO it's not the eyes on the road with cells, it's the mind.
In early cell phone years I had one for a year. As soon as I talked to anyone I found myself not correcteing to the center of the lane as I normally would. I found my speed was not as constant as it normally would be. Other things as well and my eyes were on the road in a normal manner. There was no display/screen on those except for the number dialed. It was WHILE talking that was the issue. And the thing is, surprising to me, it's totally different than talking to someone who sitting in the vehicle. I don't know why.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Red Green wrote:

I suppose it depends on how your mind works and whether or not you can multi-task. The same sort of problems happen when some drivers tune the radio or adjust the heat or air conditioning and worst of all, scream at a carload of kids. The most dangerous to me have been two women in a car yacking away. It's not just cellphones, it's any inattentive or distracted driving.
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The cellphone thing is well proven to be a big distraction. As for safety, it does depend on circumstances, traffic, etc. Cruising on the interstate with no other cars visible on a sunny day is not so bad, but in heavy fast traffic, it can bite you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.