Why Do the Media Keep Uncritically Repeating Implausible Police Fentanyl Overdose Stories?

Recycling a government press release is not good journalism.


Last month, something beyond imagination happened in Southern California: A San Diego sheriff's deputy appeared to overdose simply by touching fentanyl, or perhaps by just standing near it.

The thing that made it so astounding: Medical professionals agree that such a feat is essentially impossible. The thing that made it even more astounding: Several local, national, and international media uncritically regurgitated the claim. This episode is an important reminder that recycling government press releases does not qualify as reporting.

"'I'm not going to let you die': Fentanyl exposure almost kills San Diego County deputy," read a late Friday headline on a story written by The San Diego Union-Tribune, which was printed in the Los Angeles Times. (It has since been changed.) "Fentanyl exposure knocks officer off his feet in seconds," warned CNN. "Police trainee exposed to fentanyl during arrest collapses and almost dies but is saved by partner," said The Independent, a British publication.

The articles were based on a video released by the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, complete with last month's body camera footage and one-on-one confessionals with the officers involved.

In it, you see Deputy David Faiivae—who was in training—approach the trunk of a car, where he says he sees a white powder. Shortly thereafter, his arms slightly rise, and he wobbles backward, collapsing on the ground.

"He was OD'ing," narrates Corporal Scott Crane, as the video alternates between his body camera footage from above and Faiivae's from the ground. Crane goes to this truck and gets Narcan, the nasal spray used to treat emergency opioid overdoses.

"I remember just not feeling right and then I fell back," says Faiivae. "And then I don't remember anything after that." He then goes on to detail things after that, like how he was attempting "to gasp for breath."

"I'm trying to not let him go," Crane says. "Like, I'm just, I wanted him to know he wasn't alone. It's an invisible killer. He would have died in that parking lot if he was alone."

It's impossible to know if that's true. But whatever medical event Faiivae experienced is almost certainly not what was presented by the sheriff's department, and later by the media, because the science belies it—something that experts have known for a while now.

"If you have fentanyl powder on your hand for five or 10 minutes, it's inconceivable that that would be sufficient to cause you to have an overdose," David Juurlink, a toxicologist at the University of Toronto, told STAT news in 2017. (For those who are skeptical, here's a video of someone testing that hypothesis.)

But what about particles potentially inhaled through the air? A research report produced by the American College of Medical Toxicology concludes that such an event would also defy scientific scrutiny. The report found that industrial workers who produce fentanyl require 200 minutes of exposure, unmasked, to have 100 mcg of the drug in their system. That still isn't enough to overdose.

"Bizarre. Can't absorb fentanyl through touch," said Matthew W. Johnson, psychiatry professor and drug researcher at Johns Hopkins University, in response to the video. "Deputy likely had a psychological/panic reaction. And then release a PSA video of it? The level of ignorance is amazing." It could have been, for instance, what scientists call the "nocebo effect": the opposite of a placebo, where you panic over a drug because you know or feel it could be dangerous.

The video's closing monologue, delivered by San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore, hints at why the department would release the video to begin with. "Fentanyl deaths in California have increased almost 46 percent in just the last year," he says. "The dangers of fentanyl are real."

That's true. But police departments and media outlets need not lean into fantasies to raise awareness. For all the surprise the video elicited, this is not the first time such a narrative has taken shape. "'I was in total shock': Ohio police officer accidentally overdoses after traffic stop,'" a 2017 Washington Post headline reads, detailing a story of an Ohio cop who allegedly OD'd after merely brushing the drug off his uniform. Local media are particularly likely to push the myth. A March headline from the York News-Times of Nebraska reads, "Sheriff: Deployment of Fentanyl reversal kit likely saved deputy's life." There are many more such stories.

I don't subscribe to the belief that journalists have bad intentions when they accept the state's press releases at face value. But it's also not really journalism. More importantly, it has real-world effects. "Concerns about supposed occupational risks of fentanyl exposure to police have been especially persuasive in invigorating hyper-punitive laws, including drug-induced homicide and capital punishment for distributing this supposed 'weapon of mass destruction,'" writes a group of researchers for the International Journal of Drug Policy. "Given the fraught history of U.S. federal government messaging and policymaking in the wake of 9/11, the invocation of this trope is especially telling."

The media's approach to the police is altogether wonky. Critics zero in on journalists' penchant for jumping on police-related stories before having all the facts, saying their coverage doesn't always provide the full context. There's certainly some truth to those claims.

But the reverse—media giving complete deference to the state without question—is also a problem, though it goes largely unnoticed.

It's not exclusive to faux drug overdoses. "'Stolen Innocence' human trafficking investigation in Florida leads to 170 arrests," The Miami Herald reported last November. The only quotes come from law enforcement: "This investigation is a testament to how diligent our investigators work to enhance the quality of life for everyone in this community, especially our vulnerable population," the Tallahassee police chief said.

The problem: The department's report, copied and pasted into the piece, shows no evidence of a purported human trafficking operation as described by the officers. It shows a slew of arrests for prostitution. Nothing in the article interrogates that disconnect. The piece was written by a member of the Herald's breaking news team, which has won several Pulitzer Prizes.

NEXT: Kansas Wants This Experienced Eyebrow Entrepreneur To Get 1,000 More Hours of Training

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I got a buzz just reading about it.

    1. I’m pretty sure I’m teen pregnant now.

      1. I’ve just been trafficked!

        1. Fantastic work-from-home opportunity for everyone… Work for three to eight a day and start getting paid inSd the range of 17,000-19,000 dollars a month… Weekly payments Learn More details Good luck…

          See……………VISIT HERE

    2. Since I started with my online business, I earn $25 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable VGb but you won’t forgive yourself if you don’t check it out. Learn more about it here…

      This is what I do……………. VISIT HERE

    3. “It’s called free speech and you can choose to shut the fuck up. In fact, you might as well ”


  2. Did “The Media” spend as much time as this rag did whatabouting Cuomo?
    STFU, you are now even worse

    1. Just look to Sullum’s 50 plus articles on “Government says cleanest election ever.”

  3. Apparently this is how you win a Pulitzer Prize. That is by pandering to people’s fantasies and fears, and if the narrative fits the bill, print it.

  4. “Why Does the Media Keep Uncritically Repeating Implausible Police Fentanyl Overdose Stories?
    Why Does the Media Keep Uncritically Repeating Implausible Covid claims?
    Why Does the Media Keep Uncritically Repeating Fairest Election Ever?”


    1. Was it you that linked to that piece via Greenwald over the weekend?


      I appreciated that. It needs to be read by more people.

      Greenwald has become essential reading.

      How strange is the state of the news media, now, that Greenwald is a regular guest on Tucker Carlson–has the whole world gone mad?

      1. The only people who ever really attacked Greenwald from the right were the pro-intelligence neo-cons that now exist in the Bulwark/Lincoln Project/etc. The Bush’s and Romney’s of the world.

        1. But Greenwald identifies as a person of the left.

          He’s like George Orwell.

          1. He knows where the power is centered and who is dangerous to the liberties of the people.

          2. And leftists absolutely hate him

          3. Red-pilled leftists like Greenwald, Taibbi, Raimondo (pbuh) and Russell Brand are some on the most compelling to listen to.
            You know that they haven’t reached their conclusions via tribalism or naked self-interests.

            Blue-pilled righties, on the other hand, like Kristol, French and Max Boot, don’t even pretend they’re not in it for ‘attaboys’ from the political and corporate elite.

            1. Raimondo was on the right–if anything.

              He was anti-war like the isolationists on the right before Goldwater was anti-war.

  5. That performance is almost Golden Globe worthy!

  6. The news media is the enemy of the American people. I support the First Amendment despite the news media being the enemy of the American people, but just because we support the First Amendment doesn’t mean we bury our heads in the sand. Because we support freedom of religion doesn’t mean we should pretend that every religious group is beneficial either.

    The news media repeated lies about yellowcake in Niger and mobile WMD labs. They lied about Benghazi and Hillary Clinton’s email server. The news media lied about Trump’s relationship with the Russians, and they lied about the source of those allegations. The news media lied about Hunter Biden’s laptop, and they lied about the probable origin of the pandemic.

    If we don’t support freedom of the press–in spite of the evil they do–then we don’t really support freedom of the press. I suppose some of this has to do with not holding average people in contempt. Average people are perfectly capable of smelling out bullshit, and not automatically believing everything you’re told by your betters is the beginning of all critical thinking.

    “Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe, but in proportion to their readiness to doubt”

    —-H. L. Mencken

    1. The news media is the enemy of the American people.

      But your social media feed, and your collection of personal anecdotes, now those are *real* news sources!

      1. I for one am shocked that Jeff is defending the pro-elite, pro-democratic media industry.

        1. I can hear the boot licking from way over here.

          1. They like him because he cleans between the toes.

        2. If ChemJeff can’t tell the difference between being uninformed and critical thinking, that doesn’t surprise me.

          Oh, and principled observations we develop over dozens of years can’t be overturned by the disputed facts of any new story. Invading and occupying Syria either was or wasn’t in the best interests of the United States–regardless of whether intelligence and news media reports of Assad using WMD were accurate.

          The Green New Deal would destroy our liberty and harm our standard of living (or not)–regardless of the results of the latest polar bear population survey. If Supreme Court nominees shouldn’t be disqualified on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations, how accurately the news media reports the details of those unsubstantiated allegations is beside the point.

          Depending on the accuracy of irrelevant facts to make judgements about what we think should be done isn’t as stupid as making judgements based solely on who’s telling you the facts, and if that’s the kind of bad “logic” ChemJeff uses to make his judgements about things, that would help explain why so may of the things he says are so stupid.

          1. It does not surprise me that you ignore my actual words and instead listen to whatever Lying Jesse told you about me in order to form your opinion about me.

            If Supreme Court nominees shouldn’t be disqualified on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations, how accurately the news media reports the details of those unsubstantiated allegations is beside the point.

            So what do you want from the media then, Ken? Regardless of what you thought about Blasey Ford’s allegations, they concerned a matter of national importance. Should the media have ignored her? What?

            Bitching about the media is just a standard right-wing trick to try to change the subject. The major media certainly has its problems, but what is the alternative? Some guy’s Youtube channel? Your personal collection of anecdotes? Your social media feed? Spending 20 hours a day researching primary sources?

            1. The alternative is to not listen to them.

              1. And get your news from where?

                1. Really get along fine without.

                  1. If ChemJeff can’t comprehend the difference between facts that have been independently confirmed and verified, on the one hand, and, for instance, anonymous sources, intelligence reports, and opinion pieces promoted as facts, etc., on the other, then that would also help explain why so many of the things ChemJeff believes are stupid.

                    Every fact has a measure of uncertainty attached to it in the real world–some more so than others. The earth orbiting the sun has survived a lot of scrutiny. Democrat claims about Trump and Russia much less so. Even in mathematically true statements, like 12 + 15 = 27, in the real world, there are open questions about typos, whether things have been counted properly, etc. Never did a lab in school that didn’t ask for an uncertainty analysis and a potential source of errors at the end.


                    Not being able to account for the uncertainty associated with data collection is not being able to account for the real world, and if ChemJeff thinks committing the appeal to authority fallacy is the alternative to critical thinking, in the real world, again, that’s another part of the puzzle that might help explain his persistent stupidity.

                    No one should ever believe anything with an extremely low degree of uncertainty just because a newspaper said so, and, no, we are not at the mercy of the news media for facts. Data is preliminarily reported, scrutinized, and either revised, confirmed or rejected all the time. Meanwhile, the rational argument for opposing the expense, constitutionality, morality, and strategic value of Obama invading and occupying Syria, for instance, can be analyzed without knowing whether Assad actually used WMD.

                    If Obama’s plan to invade and occupy Syria should be rejected regardless of whether Assad used WMD for other reasons, then the intelligence report that Assad used WMD is a red herring. It might seem strange that someone like ChemJeff would base everything he believes on appeal to authority fallacies and red herrings, but look at the stupid things he believes. That really does seem to be the way he uses his think-bone.

                    1. Here’s an excellent example of what I’m talking about from earlier today.

                      Earlier today, it was reported that someone at a Colorado Rockies game screamed out the n-word at Marlins player while he was at bat yesterday. You could hear something like that screamed at the player during the live broadcast, and people were really upset about it. The Rockies’ office promised to find the fan responsible and hold him accountable (probably ban him from the stadium for life). And they finally found the fan–and interviewed other fans nearby. Here’s what the found:

                      The Colorado Rockies say that a fan did not yell racial slurs during Sunday’s game against the Miami Marlins and that the man instead was shouting at the team’s mascot.

                      The Rockies said Sunday that they were “disgusted” at what was widely believed to be a racial slur directed at Miami’s Lewis Brinson, who is Black. But the organization told ESPN on Monday that the fan was shouting at Dinger, the team’s dinosaur-themed mascot.

                      A source confirmed to ESPN that the Rockies reached out and spoke to the fan as part of the team’s investigation of the incident. The Rockies also contacted another fan sitting near the man, who also told the team that the man was shouting “Dinger,” according to the source.


                      No fan screamed the “n-word” at an opposing player. He was yelling for Dinger, trying to get the attention of the Colorado Rockies’ mascot, but earlier today, the story that someone at the game yesterday was screaming racial slurs at an African-American player was reported as fact. In that situation, no one voted differently, changed their opinion on policy, or invaded a foreign country on the basis of this bad report in the news media.

                      Other times, we’re not so lucky. Other times, it turns out that the laptop and its messages are legit, and that the pandemic probably originated from a lab in Wuhan, that was conducting extremely dangerous research financed by none other than the U.S. taxpayers. Sometimes, it turns out that the Democrats are trying to overthrow the result of the 2016 election on the basis of “facts” that turn out to be entirely false.

  7. Same reason that 100% of the unvaccinated die from the Delta?

  8. I don’t subscribe to the belief that journalists have bad intentions when they accept the state’s press releases at face value. But it’s also not really journalism.

    Yeah I think this is pretty much right. The journalists in this case aren’t evil, they either lack the critical thinking skills to dig deeper into the story, or are too harried by tight deadlines to write anything deeper.

    Plus, I think part of it might be a bit of overwrought self-importance: that if they don’t portray fentanyl as the scariest drug ever that can kill you just by looking at it, that they may think that they are enabling people who might suffer at the hands of it. “If I had only scared people more against fentanyl, I could have saved all of those lives!” They did a lot of the same things with COVID. But they shouldn’t infantilize adults, they should explain the risks and dangers clearly and accurately, and if they want to be more cautious than they normally might be because they do have bigger platforms than your typical random person, but don’t go overboard like on this type of story.

    1. Journalist says journalists aren’t bad. FILM AT 11!

    2. Seems to me like there’s just certain boilerplate that gets put into certain stories. Anything drug related must mention fentanyl overdoes just as any story on the weather or environment must mention climate change. I’m sure there’s more but that’s what came off the top of my head.

      1. Sorta like how almost all of your comments have to do with you being victimized?

    3. “Why Do the Media Keep Uncritically Repeating Implausible Police Fentanyl Overdose Stories?”

      Because they’re lazy pseudo-reporters (I wouldn’t insult whores or sluts by inserting one of those words here), and the police press releases give them the bleeding stories to lead and sell advertising with no work on their part. Because questioning those press releases might get them cut off from the source. Because anyone that isn’t eager to lick totalitarian boots isn’t hired by the MSM, and the police, Democrats, “Anti”fa, and BLM are as close as they can get to totalitarians in the USA.

  9. Why Does the Media Keep Uncritically Repeating _______________________ Stories?

    Open thread, go.

    1. Orange Man Bad

  10. With carfentenal an amount smaller than a grain of salt can kill a person through skin absorption.

    Do you want freaks walking around in public with this shit? I don’t.

    Hell the US invaded Iraq, killing tens of thousands and destroying the cradle of earths civilization over false rumours of WMD.

    What is it then, are WMD in the hands of freaks good or bad?

    1. Nobody cares what a Holocaust denier thinks.

      1. It’s called free speech and you can choose to shut the fuck up. In fact, you might as well because if you don’t value truth nothing you can say needs to be heard.

        I refute what I deny. You have never refuted anything I’ve said. Cite where you have. Crickets.

        Tell me, is it easier to be a two dimensional bigot? is your circle jerk achieving your objectives?

        I’ve never seen a libertarian here admit that they can’t refute the truth.

        The fact that truth can’t be refuted is the basic premise of logical arguments and I’ve refuted the bullshit of anyone denying my statements.

        Cite provided.


        1. Oooh. Hit a nerve.

          1. Like I said, crickets.

        2. “It’s called free speech and you can choose to shut the fuck up. In fact, you might as well


        3. Don’t look at me! was one of the first trolls that I muted.

          1. I think he muted me after I debunked one of his ZOG-ridden conspiracy theories.

            1. Click Show username on the grey turds clinging to my posts and it’s him, JesseAz, Mother’s Lament, or R Mac.

              1. Gee, TDS-addled asshole, I was hoping it was me.

              2. Here’s the attention that you’re craving, sarcasmic.

                Happy now?

          2. And yet you can still read my stuff.

    2. Hazmat Nation is a group of current and former first responders and military professionals. We are the leading organization in providing training content, actively scouting and delivering innovative solutions and integration of products within the training, hazardous materials management, and emergency response markets. We provide consultancy on planning and managing incidents involving hazardous materials, whether they be as a result of an accident or a deliberate terrorist or adversary release

      But hey, at least they don’t have an agenda.

    3. So, dangerous substances exist, therefore you can’t legalize drugs? That doesn’t seem like a very good argument.

      1. That drivel is all yours.

        The article sarcastically minimizes the real threat to everyone that some of these substances can pose.

        If you want to volunteer to test the lethality of Carfentanil by skin absorption, fill your boots.

        Until you do, It’s cowardice to criticize first responders who face that real threat every day.

        1. There wouldn’t be much demand for dangerous drugs if you could go to the store and pick up some quality controlled products of your choice.

        2. You are so fucking full of shit. I have to kill myself with carfentanyl or I’m not allowed to criticize police? That same argument excuses all kinds of police overreaction.

          1. What are you criticizing if you admit to recognizing that Carfentanil contact with your skin can kill you?

            That’s what this article is about.

            1. No, the article is about how cops are lying sacks of shit, and the whole “incident” was just a bunch of bad acting.

              1. So your point is that cops are just like you.

                Is that the only point being made by the article?

                1. The point is that there’s no possible way they say what happened could have happened. And if you watch the video the “incapacitated” cop is trying hard to hold a straight face.

                  It’s totally staged bullshit.

                  1. I’ll be the first to agree that conspiracies and propaganda are perpetrated all the time, by all kinds of actors with agendas. I’ve demonstrated irrefutable evidence of that many times here.

                    The article doesn’t mention Carfentanil because then the cops symptoms may have been reasonable.

                    If the outrage is because the article claims fentanyl couldn’t have elicited those symptoms, some mixture of Carfentanil certainty could have. It’s not like the drugs were mixed by a regulated lab.

                    The bottom line is that this or worse could happen with street drugs today. That hasn’t been exaggerated.

                    1. “Street drugs today”, meaning not like the good ol drugs you gobbled and slammed all the time?
                      Keep a drug or two in “deadly” spotlight so all things can be equal. And
                      if you learn about drugs from government then you know nothing.

                    2. What makes you believe that to be true?

            2. No, that’s not what this story is about. Carfentanyl isn’t mentioned at all. And if it ever does make it to illegal drug markets, it’s only because it costs less than heroin. No one would deliberately take it unless they wanted to die.

              1. Bullshit! Ever does? It’s concentrated dope in use everywhere and ALL first responders need to beware. It is a potential WMD.

                Here’s a recent bust from Ohio.

                “At 54 grams of the illegal substance and 2 milligrams can be lethal the amount of the Carfentanil itself could potentially kill 27,000 people.”


                1. Yes first responders do need to be aware they shouldn’t put random powders they find in their nose, mouth, or circulatory system.

                  If a cop did one of those dumbass moves from the movies where he sticks his finger in a powder, rubs it on his gums, and goes “Yeah that’s the good stuff!”… ok, *then* he’ll be in trouble if it was carfentanil.

                  1. Yeah all of that plus absorption through the skin.

                    Your agreement is noted.

          2. What do you expect from someone with an Ernst Roehm stroke book?

  11. Surely police and EMS procedure is that anyone ‘rescued’ from OD goes to the emergency room, as there is the risk of relapse (when the naloxone wears off before the exposure is over) or that there is a second substance.

    So, all I’m asking, is what did his urine drug screen show. Then maybe take a hair sample for good measure to see what else he’s been using over the past year or so.

  12. I’m not sure what happened. I read the word “Fentanyl” in a Reason headline and suddenly felt dizzy. Next thing I remember is waking up naked and chained in ENB’s basement…

    1. Missing a kidney? Or did she just peg you repeatedly while yelling, “make me a sandwich, bitch”?

      1. So you think I should have claimed I was a sex worker and made her pay for it?

  13. Because they suck politician cock and expect you to be proud of them for it.

    1. It’s almost like the news media is Greek mythology.

      The stories may have been inspired by true events, but over time, the people who told the stories embellished them and they assumed mythic proportions. Afterwards, people came to believe those myths to be the gospel truth. Nowadays, people still read stories based on those myths, but they don’t believe them to be true. They just read them for entertainment purposes.

      The news media is like that.

      For a lot of people, it’s like watching Saving Private Ryan. It’s set in the midst of real events. On an emotional level, they experience those events as if they’re really happening. They get sad when Tom Hanks dies at the end. On an intellectual level, of course, they know that Tom Hanks is still alive. It’s just a movie. Tom Hanks was never actually in any danger. It isn’t a true story, but they like to feel like it is.

      That’s how people watch the news. On some level, they may know that what they’re seeing may not be real, but on the other hand, they react to it on an emotional level as if it were the real thing. They start internalizing the message. They come away feeling like they’re informed. They feel like their opinions are based on reality. And you’re supposed to feel the same way they do after you see the news.

  14. Sounds like Fentanyl is the COVID-19 of drugs: it’s primarily a plot device that does whatever the ruling class needs it to do at any given time.

  15. At one point, you could have gotten away with blaming journalists for a lazy bias towards sensationalism and conflict as a requirement for the 24 hour news cycle, as Jon Stewart once suggested.

    But then the media piled on anyone who suggested COVID came from a lab.

    And then the media ignored and buried Tara Reid.

    And then the media ignored and buried Hunter’s laptop.

    All of this goes against the theory that they focus on sensationalism and conflict.

    It is all consistent with the theory that they’re lapdog bitches.

    1. No, Jon Stewart is right – they still focus on sensationalism and conflict. But it doesn’t end there. They now have a greater sense of self-importance. That they are the “guardians of truth” and whatnot. So my hypothesis is that many media outlets tried to downplay the “lab leak” theory because they thought if it became generally accepted, right at the height of the lockdowns, that the virus that was ruining their livelihoods had a manmade origin, that it would lead to anti-Asian pogroms. That ordinary people would take out their frustrations against anyone who looked like they were from China. And that *is* a bit of a concern, but it’s not necessary to suppress all discussion of it based on that concern.

      1. Occam’s razor says the simplest theory works.

        “They’re focused on sensationalism and conflict… except when they’re the guardians of truth, and then they avoid sensationalism and conflict, but only for a few stories, and not others, for some random reason”


        “They’re propaganda arms for the government”

        I really don’t have to carve out special exceptions for the last one. It’s simpler.

        Occam’s razor says they’re lapdog bitches.

        1. I don’t think it’s obvious which of those possibilities is the “simpler” one.

          1. Lol, sure you don’t.

    2. That’s why I read The Daily Mail. Being a British tabloid they don’t bow to the same political pressures as domestic news outlets. They were all over all the things you mentioned.

    3. And then the media ignored and buried Tara Reid.

      In all fairness, she’s aged a lot since Josie and the Pussycats.

    4. -They covered Reid as long as it took to show it was ridiculous bullshit. Yes there’s the hypocrisy angle with Title IX evidentiary standards but that’s not front page news for weeks; there was no serious claim.

      -Nobody gives a flying fuck about Hunter Biden and the laptop that was obviously planted.

      -I’ll believe you’re standing up for journalist integrity when you’re 1/100th as critical of Fox News instead of having your tongue permanently jammed up their, and Trump’s, ass.

  16. What the hell! If you can die from exposure to fire extinguishers almost dying from Fentanyl exposure is always possible.

  17. The “media” is composed mainly with ill educated millennial sheep. They can’t be bothered to discover facts, just bleat whatever another sheep bleated.

  18. When I first read abut this I was thinking the idiot newbie thought it was something else and gave it a sniff, getting a good dose of it.

    1. That actually might be what happened.

  19. LIFE CHANGING OPPORTUNITY BE an Internet HOME-BASED real Earner.I am just working on facebook hal only 3 to 4 hours a Day and earning $47786 a month easily, that is handsome earning to meet my extra expenses and that is really life changing opportunity. Let me give you a little insight into what I do….. http://Www.SmartPay1.com

  20. Every overdose is caused by the cops enforcing drug prohibition.

  21. Wait, you mean fentanyl isn’t 200 times worse than VX? Who’d-a-thunk-it.

  22. I couldn’t help but laugh at this story is was so ridiculous.

    The other cop is behind him yelling ‘Be careful! Back up! It’s dangerous!’, yeah that’s totally magical drugs, not a panic attack.

    He kept passing *right back out* despite naloxone? Oh gee, I wonder why the naloxone isn’t working? Fucking morons. (Yes there’s a real issue here, but it involves when the naloxone wears off while you’re still at a dangerous level, which isn’t *seconds*)

  23. Haven’t you heard? Sex work is now called “sex trafficking” in the media. I don’t know if it is the same on the law books, but definitely the press. I always thought that sex trafficking was forcing or coercing people who are not willing to engage in sex work into doing so. Apparently I don’t know how it works.

    1. “Sex trafficking” is forcing people into prostitution when they’re arguing for stronger laws against anything related to prostitution, but when they enforce the laws, it’s just plain old prostitution. It’s just like:

      –24-year-old gangbangers are “children killed by guns” to justify violating the 2nd Amendment.

      –Accusations against Kavanaugh made 30 years later by a mental patient who can’t remember the time, place, or any witness’s name are “credible” while neither a similar but more recent accusation against Biden that gave the time and place wasn’t even worth checking out, nor do all the creepy videos mean anything.

      Rioters who burned buildings and killed a few people are “mostly peaceful” but people who milled around the capital building without injuring anyone or doing any property damage other than a few broken windows are “insurrectionists”.

  24. I was always taught that it was LSD that instantly killed any cop who so much as glanced at it.

  25. –I thought I smelled marijuana. Mind if I look in your trunk, sir?
    –Knock yourself out, offissa…

  26. Regurgitating the press releases of bureaucrats and politicians has become the modus operandi of the press. Witness either the reporting around the IPCC’s latest report or the reporting that surrounded Cuomo for all of his career until the past month.

  27. *Sticks finger into white powder in a Sucrets box and licks it*

    “Pure horse, book ’em”

    The Mod Squad promo that aired 10,000+ times when I was a child

  28. Derek Chauvin had a trace of fentanyl on his knee when he murdered Saint Floyd by using a neck restraint on the side of his neck per the training handbook. He was pressing so hard it didn’t even shut him up. That’s why it showed up on the medical examiner’s report. If it weren’t for that slight trace of fentanyl on the murderer’s knee, George Floyd would be alive today and on the Supreme Court like his teacher, Waynel Sexton, of CNN fame, could tell you. The trace of fentanyl was so powerful, Saint Floyd was having trouble breathing even before the trace on the knee was applied to the neck.

    In other news, Jo Jorgansen admits she was under the influence of fentanyl when she decided to support BLM. “Magic fentanyl should not be legal” she said, lamenting the fact she decided to support Marxism in the middle of a presidential campaign.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.