Couple arrested after 4 children test positive for meth

https://localtvwghp.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/methmcd.jpg[/img]

http://wgntv.com/2016/04/06/couple-arrested-after-4-children-test-positive-for-meth/
NEBO, N.C. — Cops arrested a North Carolina couple after four children tested positive for methamphetamine.

Kimberly Dawn Lowery, 29, and Nathan Todd Vallini, 27, both of Nebo, are each charged with four counts of misdemeanor contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, WGHP reported.

McDowell County deputies said that four children — ranging in ages from 4 to 12 — were living with the suspects when a relative filed a complaint about possible drug use in the house.
​

How low do you have to go to give your young children meth? Hopefully, they will take these poor kids out of this destructive home.

 

Meth is actually prescribed to children as well, crazy isnt it??

 

So what if drugs were legal, would they still have been arrested?

 

And here is my problem with making hardcore drugs legal.

 

I dunno... if you get your 4 year old drunk will you be arrested?

Oh. I guess I do.

 

In Texas you can give booze to your kids as long as they're supervised, not sure about other states.

 

At least that explains why Trump won North Carolina.

 

Both cases could be harmful, but you going to tell me a 4 year old would be better off getting into mommies heroin than taking a drink of beer?

 

Look to church control over Academia and psychology for the reason there is no real treatment/recovery for meth addiction Or to government to the allowing of the abridging of the purpose of free speech for the public ability to educate itself upon substances or parental
responsibility.

Or look to the courts and law enforcement inability to recognize, follow and uphold laws relating to developing effective mental health care.



The subpoenaed evidence would have proven something that could force psychology to oppose the church/state licensure authority. That would have been happening by 2000. But no, failure to appear is okay when pleading are filed indicating homicides and suicides were caused by missing records subpoenaed evidence proving that other court records were absent. This declaration show the records were in possession of the county a year earlier.



The sheriffs dept lied in the letter at the direction of the county counsel.
How 'bout that ! Public legal employees paid to violate laws that support health and safety code, drug and alcohol, effective mental
Health care. The entities collectively obstructing justice.

Here's a woman judge ignoring a huge mound of evidence showing a part time meth lab, hah, "fire in bed of pickup parked at curb," in a house where I rented a room.

http://algoxy.com/law/ud.glenbrook/sbmethcook+court.html

Here's s letter from Santa Barbara counties top mental health professional showing a defacto approval of a potentially effective, new treatment. Actually old treatment, 1970's, shunned by church interests controlling gov.



A FOIA was ignored for that "written response". Filed with the clerk, then disappeared, then re filed.



Then I try to get the paper to do a story about the suit and history of law violation by Santa Barbara county related to the development of effective mental health.

http://algoxy.com/law/no_free_press/sbsecretsofmedia.html

17 reporters and editors fired, starting 2 weeks after dropping off a copy of the lawsuit to a reporter



The tweaker parents were smoking meth around the kids. Second hand meth smoke is actually really powerful and toxic to people who are not using it.
They did it because gov violating law Immorally and unethical and illegally evaded development of effective mental health care that could help them stop themselves.

Think anyone will notice? No.

Naw, those stupid parents acting like animals get noticed and whined about instead.

Ta da!!!!!!

Your thread toddwv. Sort of anticlimactic in a dramatic kind of way.

Now, how fast can you run from the truth? The great thread killer truth.

 

Um dude, Hillary won NC as well. So yeah the pro drug meth heads got their way.

 

True.

But, low-income, undereducated, trailer-dwelling, meth-head, hillbilly white voters were right in Trump's wheelhouse.

And, the above described voters were 99% more likely to vote for Trump and made up a key part of his base in NC.

Just saying. Don't shoot the messenger.

 

What would Trump think about the issues I brought up here?

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=451890&p=1066068709#post1066068709

 

Would it be worse getting into heroin, or... liquid draino?

 

Not the question I asked.

 

I believe drugs, whether legal/illegal, should be used only by responsible individuals. That doesn't quantify an age limit, as I don't know what that is, but whose to say a 13-16 year old isn't responsible enough to drink alcohol and/or take drugs? If folks are able to truly understand the potential risks/concerns of any element they plan on putting into their body, I feel it should be the person, whose taking said element, responsibility to ensure it's done reasonably. Sure, giving a 4 year old a rather rough drug, in my opinion, is a bit extreme, but how many children are being prescribed medicine that can do equally, if not far worse, damage to their system? Whose right and whose wrong, in that scenario?

In that same breath, if in Texas it's OK to give children alcohol, under supervision, then why not do the same thing for any drug, as well? Alcohol has been proven to do a pretty good amount of damage on our system, in particular the liver, in yet, folks are allowed to give it to their children in Texas. I shrug my shoulders at it and say, I plan on educating my children very well on the various things out there in the world. As they get older and venture outside of my house, with their friends, let's admit it, they're going to experiment, potentially. If they do, I want them to understand the risks they're going to endure, when they take these substances. I, personally, won't hand them anything until I feel they're ready to enjoy it responsibly.

However, this will be through voluntary exchange between two level headed adults. Not by forcing it upon my children, because I'm a moron, who doesn't care about the health of my kids.

 

This is a question:

"Which American mother and father is going to choose a future for their child where government destructive to unalienable rights cannot be altered or abolished because it was decided that free speech should NOT serve the purpose of enabling the unity required to effectively do it."

So far nearly all are doing that by default. However, there are perhaps 4-5 fathers here that have basically accepted these prime constitutional intents.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

I don't bug them about spreading this agreement upon prime constitutional
intent that is at the foundation of our lawful and peaceful revolution because that would be asking them to oppose their society in its unconscious agenda of indulgence.

 

Drug up your kids, and get a misdemeanor charge.
Sounds like white privilege.

 

Crazy isn't it? I mean it sounds like the cops didn't even flash-bang the nursery...

 

Or kill the dog with a warning shot.

 

Is little Billy better off getting mommies gun ?

 

Hmmmm, I just surprised at the responses I have read so far.

 

You have proof for this, or is this just more rhetoric?

BTW how perfectly racist of you. Since you can say that it's likely hillary got her votes from the typical low income, uneducated, hood rat, dope slangin, drive by shootin', ebonics speaking black voters who are just looking for more free handouts.

Sounds about fair right? I mean remember the last 2 elections North Carolina chose Barack Obama, so apparently the meth heads and gang bangers prefer liberals more no?

 

dont run. Answer the question, dont be a sissy.

 

How often does that honestly happen?

And you want to (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about gun deaths but drug overdoses kill more people than guns every year. But hey, go cry about that 9 milly like you care.

 

Well, kudos to the relative who reported the demented little cockroaches who called themselves 'mom and dad'. Many won't b/c they don't want to get involved........