Doors close on Tewksbury detox facility

Doors close on Tewksbury detox facility

There are 202 comments on the Lowell Sun story from Dec 29, 2010, titled Doors close on Tewksbury detox facility. In it, Lowell Sun reports that:

The region's only in-patient detoxification facility will close its doors today, after last-ditch efforts to keep the facility open into the new year failed.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Lowell Sun.

Lou

Chelmsford, MA

#167 Jan 20, 2011
townie wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because a few PHDs got together and decided to call addiction a "diesease" doesn't make it fact. Here is a fact. Addicts can stop. They can fix themselves by changing their behavior. That is not a characteristic of any disease. Still following the facts?
Fact: well over half of the people who graced the door of the detox facility in question were indigent, out of work junkies whose treatment was being paid for with tax money. That is money taken from working people and redistributed to said junkies. These junkies have no "right" to our money so they can go to the facility for 3 squares and a roof for a few weeks. Some self described libertarians might dissagree but they aren't really libertarians.
You got snide remarks but nothing else to offer.
You are right, I should join you in making things up and then i'd be so smart. The FACTS are that addiction to drugs and alcohol is a disease that some can get over and lead productive lives. When they do this, they then become tax paying citizens who no longer need to suck off of hard working, fact making up, nonsensical people like yourself.
Cosmic Ray

Billerica, MA

#168 Jan 20, 2011
townie wrote:
<quoted text>
So your definition of the word "junkie" is limited tosomeone who "shoots heroin". Now you're showing YOUR ignorance. Go away and come back when you know what you are talking about.
My solution to the problem is very cost effective and would help relieve the tax burden and risk to those of us who have control of our lives and work to support ourselves. The first step it to legalize all currently illegal drugs. That way the traffic and sales of drugs could be controlled and taxed like cigarettes and alcohol. It would also pull the rug out from under the criminal element of the drug distribution trade and clear more room in our jails for the next step. The second step would be to hold anybody who commits a crime in order to support his drug habbit accountable for his actions and punish him to the full extent of the law. This would help reduce the risk to hard working and law abiding citizens that junkies currently pose.
There you have it. Two steps to relieve three problems. The government needs more money to help pay down the debt and reduce the nececity to keep borrowing money. My plan would address that by taxing the legal distribution of drugs. Currently, drug traders are all criminals, many of who are murderers as well. My plan would take away the criminal element and open new opportunities for hard working law abiding people to make a living supplying a product that there is obviously a high demand for. And, most importantly, my plan would shift the junkie's problem from one that is currently a burden on all of society to one that is a burden only on themselves. Let them rot in jail if they are too weak to stop using.
As any good libertarian would tell you, its not the government's role to provide free drug rehab to anybody.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/junkie

A slang term for heroin is "junk", I thought this was common knowledge to those who know a thing or two about drugs and addiction. Thus the term "junkies" became a popular way to describe heroin addicts. Aptly named for Chinese ships where the heroin would be shipped from. Over the years, people have used the term to describe an addiction to just about anything. However when calling an addict a "junkie" it conjures the picture of a person whose drug of choice is heroin, not an alcoholic.

As far as free drug rehab, unless you're referring specifically to masshealth picking up the tab for rehab, private insurance pays for rehab. Why is it okay for insurance to pay for a smoker to get a new lung but not pay for rehab for someone who is trying to better themselves? Why is it okay to pay for gastric bypass surgery? Should doctors just tell these people to stop eating so much and learn some self control? Anything can be an addiction. Many ailments are the result of poor choices. Millions of Americans have type II diabetes due to poor diet and unhealthy choices. People get cancer from smoking, tanning, eating too much red meat and the list goes on. should those people be denied insurance coverage for those ailments because they did it to themselves? Why should addiction be treated any different from any other medical condition brought on by poor choices?

Also are you really suggesting that every single known drug should be legally sold here in the USA? Do you realize what the US would be opening itself up to? Consider Meth for example. It is made with household cleaners such as Draino. Do you really believe its the governments place to be selling toxic poisons to its citizens? Is this the USA you see for our future? You'd rather live in a country where every drug is legal and readily available regardless of how lethal rather than simply rehabilitating people? That some real backwards thinking.
TIM

Lowell, MA

#169 Jan 21, 2011
townie wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because a few PHDs got together and decided to call addiction a "diesease" doesn't make it fact. Here is a fact. Addicts can stop. They can fix themselves by changing their behavior. That is not a characteristic of any disease. Still following the facts?
Fact: well over half of the people who graced the door of the detox facility in question were indigent, out of work junkies whose treatment was being paid for with tax money. That is money taken from working people and redistributed to said junkies. These junkies have no "right" to our money so they can go to the facility for 3 squares and a roof for a few weeks. Some self described libertarians might dissagree but they aren't really libertarians.
You got snide remarks but nothing else to offer.
extremely well put
What

Worcester, MA

#170 Jan 21, 2011
townie wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because a few PHDs got together and decided to call addiction a "diesease" doesn't make it fact. Here is a fact. Addicts can stop. They can fix themselves by changing their behavior. That is not a characteristic of any disease. Still following the facts?
Fact: well over half of the people who graced the door of the detox facility in question were indigent, out of work junkies whose treatment was being paid for with tax money. That is money taken from working people and redistributed to said junkies. These junkies have no "right" to our money so they can go to the facility for 3 squares and a roof for a few weeks. Some self described libertarians might dissagree but they aren't really libertarians.
You got snide remarks but nothing else to offer.
So what would be the difference between a food addiction that causes someone to eat themselves into an early grave, versus an addiction to a substance? What about gambling, cigarettes, sex, video games and the list goes on? All can be serious addictions that impact a person's quality of life. Doesn't matter what the addiction is to, it's a human response, a self soothing that man has been engaging in since he evolved. You can't grasp that addiction itself regardless of what it's to, is a serious human condition that is not yet fully understood and affects people from all socio-economic and cultural divides all over the globe? In studies, rats in a cage will repeatedly hit the button for more drugs until they die. Obviously all a person has to do to stop is put down the drug or drink but if it were really as simple as that various addictions would not be so rampant. So because you're but one example of a person who is able to do it that way the rest of the world should conform to your view?
townie

Nashua, NH

#171 Jan 21, 2011
What wrote:
<quoted text>
So what would be the difference between a food addiction that causes someone to eat themselves into an early grave, versus an addiction to a substance? What about gambling, cigarettes, sex, video games and the list goes on? All can be serious addictions that impact a person's quality of life. Doesn't matter what the addiction is to, it's a human response, a self soothing that man has been engaging in since he evolved. You can't grasp that addiction itself regardless of what it's to, is a serious human condition that is not yet fully understood and affects people from all socio-economic and cultural divides all over the globe? In studies, rats in a cage will repeatedly hit the button for more drugs until they die. Obviously all a person has to do to stop is put down the drug or drink but if it were really as simple as that various addictions would not be so rampant. So because you're but one example of a person who is able to do it that way the rest of the world should conform to your view?
There is no difference between a food addiction, drug addiction, porn addiction, gambling addiction and the rest of the examples you sited. They are all behavioral issues. Not diseases. This self soothing you mention is the root of the selfishness that non-cureable addicts have and was mentioned in previous posts. It effects people who are addicted to those behaviors beause they are unable to rise above their primal need for the self soothing. You left out the part where humans evolved to be the highest order species because we can reason. We can see that our lives are leading to a train wreck and, using our ability to reason, can understand what needs to be done and take appropriate action. Your comparison to the rat's behavior does not apply because a rat is incapable of reason. I don't know about you, but I hold my standards of behavior a little higher than those of a lab rat.
What

Worcester, MA

#172 Jan 21, 2011
townie wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no difference between a food addiction, drug addiction, porn addiction, gambling addiction and the rest of the examples you sited. They are all behavioral issues. Not diseases. This self soothing you mention is the root of the selfishness that non-cureable addicts have and was mentioned in previous posts. It effects people who are addicted to those behaviors beause they are unable to rise above their primal need for the self soothing. You left out the part where humans evolved to be the highest order species because we can reason. We can see that our lives are leading to a train wreck and, using our ability to reason, can understand what needs to be done and take appropriate action. Your comparison to the rat's behavior does not apply because a rat is incapable of reason. I don't know about you, but I hold my standards of behavior a little higher than those of a lab rat.
"We can see that our lives are leading to a train wreck and, using our ability to reason, can understand what needs to be done and take appropriate action."
If this were actually true, the world would be in a much better state than it is. While there are people who can do this, not everyone can or will. Babies sooth themselves, it's intrinsic from birth. Addiction is complicated and there are many questions but not enough answers. I do think there are people who just refuse to get help. However on the other hand, I've know people who have struggled and wanted to stop and failed many times before succeeding with the help of rehab. They were not going about life as one big party, they were truly miserable. What is it that makes someone hurt themselves and others over and over while getting no satisfaction from their drug of choice? This isn't rational. If it were pure selfishness it doesn't explain those who suffer great pain and no longer get the euphoric benefit of the drug or drink. My analogoy to the rat was regarding studies they have done to try to understand how addiction works. As much as you may think we have evolved from our reptilian brain, people all over the world are killing themselves slowly through drugs and alcohol. Not so different from the rat.
Elaine C

Johnston, RI

#173 Jan 28, 2011
Lou wrote:
<quoted text>You are right, I should join you in making things up and then i'd be so smart. The FACTS are that addiction to drugs and alcohol is a disease that some can get over and lead productive lives. When they do this, they then become tax paying citizens who no longer need to suck off of hard working, fact making up, nonsensical people like yourself.
Do some research, many professionals have done so and alcoholism is a disease. Yes, some alcoholics can get over alcoholism. but they have to work a very good program, of which I am involved and have seen the results. If you have not been there, do not make judgments. I do now lead a productive life. Read the history of AA and get your facts straight. You might learn something.
Elaine C

Johnston, RI

#174 Jan 28, 2011
That previous reply was in response to "townie". I just wanted to make that clear. Again, check your facts and do some research and find out the successfulness of the program and how it works. Some people can a drink and stop, alcoholics cannot do that without supportive help through a program that is free for all who are need serious help. It saved my life.

Again, do some more research and do not make judgments on people you do not know anything about.

Thank God!!!
Elaine C

Johnston, RI

#175 Jan 28, 2011
Sorry, make a typo - "some people can TAKE a drink..."

THANK GOD!!!
Po Boy

Merrimack, NH

#176 Jan 28, 2011
formerlythere wrote:
<quoted text>
First, there are two issues in play here- My initial reply to this thread was based on the issue of alcoholism as a disease, which I believe it is; as well as this being the only detox facility in the area. That has nothing to do with my politics... people have sense twisted this topic into their own agenda. Feel free to read over my past posts- And since you feel the need to drag my political beliefs into it... I do not support big government, but until an interim facility is in place, it is irresponsible to close the only center in the region. PERIOD
"I believe" "I believe" "I believe"

If you believe that you can flap your arms and fly, can you? Do you also believe that the Moon is made of cheese? If so, does that mean that it is?

OK then, "I BELIEVE" that being poor is a disease and although I contributed to myself being poor, "I BELIEVE" that it's a disease, so the taxpayers should help me out and pay my way from now on. Because, my DISEASE has the same characteristics of yours.

I can control my disease by modifying my behavior, all that I have to do is get a job.

You can control your disease by modifying your behavior, all that you have to do is stop drinking.

However, I digress:

I never would have had my disease if I would have just worked in the first place.

You never would have had your disease if you just wouldn't have started drinking in the first place.

But wait! I have another disease, it's Cancer! No wait, it's muscular dystrophy! No wait, it's cystic fibrosis. No wait, it's Parkinsons.

Let me see..... What could I have done to prevent this hereditary DISEASE? What can I do to control it? Let me see...... Hmmmm...... Maybe the taxpayers should figure this out for me!

After all, isn't it irresponsible for them not to?

I mean, they are taxed with "Curing" alcoholics and drug addicts of their "DISEASE."

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#177 Jan 28, 2011
Po Boy wrote:
<quoted text>
"I believe" "I believe" "I believe"
If you believe that you can flap your arms and fly, can you? Do you also believe that the Moon is made of cheese? If so, does that mean that it is?
OK then, "I BELIEVE" that being poor is a disease and although I contributed to myself being poor, "I BELIEVE" that it's a disease, so the taxpayers should help me out and pay my way from now on. Because, my DISEASE has the same characteristics of yours.
I can control my disease by modifying my behavior, all that I have to do is get a job.
You can control your disease by modifying your behavior, all that you have to do is stop drinking.
However, I digress:
I never would have had my disease if I would have just worked in the first place.
You never would have had your disease if you just wouldn't have started drinking in the first place.
But wait! I have another disease, it's Cancer! No wait, it's muscular dystrophy! No wait, it's cystic fibrosis. No wait, it's Parkinsons.
Let me see..... What could I have done to prevent this hereditary DISEASE? What can I do to control it? Let me see...... Hmmmm...... Maybe the taxpayers should figure this out for me!
After all, isn't it irresponsible for them not to?
I mean, they are taxed with "Curing" alcoholics and drug addicts of their "DISEASE."
Blah blah taxpayers, blah blah poor people...
Way to miss the entire point my posts PO. Go through and re-read, comprehension is obviously not your strong point.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#178 Jan 28, 2011
Here PO, I helped you out- now catch up...

Formerly wrote:
I agree; I also know that most insurance will help cover treatment costs- Closing this facility penalizes people who desire help and have the means to pay for it.

Formerly wrote:
I work hard and pay a decent sum in premiums- how dare you suggest what I can or cannot do with it. What are you a commie- Detox is a start; outpatient is better... Most insurance companies have a wellness/behavioral health options- I choose to use mine. My God, in a country where you have breast augmentation and rinoplasty deemed "necessary" and picked up by insurance... Give me a break. Also, my employer is self insured- get off your high horse.

Formerly wrote:
Anyway, I think you were getting off subject; it is obvious how you feel about the less fortunate, but you still have not addressed how the closing of these types of facilities affect those who have the means to pay for the services. Oh that's right- you don't think people should have the right to choose for themselves.

Formerly wrote:
Here you are again, ignoring the fact that people with health insurance have the RIGHT to these facilities- not everyone goes to rehab on your buck... Get a clue.
Po Boy

Merrimack, NH

#179 Jan 28, 2011
Elaine C wrote:
<quoted text>
Do some research, many professionals have done so and alcoholism is a disease. Yes, some alcoholics can get over alcoholism. but they have to work a very good program, of which I am involved and have seen the results. If you have not been there, do not make judgments. I do now lead a productive life. Read the history of AA and get your facts straight. You might learn something.
AA is a great group. Why? AA groups are self-supporting, relying on voluntary donations from members to cover expenses. They don't rely on taxpayer's money and they do help people that have made wrong choices.

"Some alcoholics can get over alcoholism"
and
"Some people can take a drink."

Those are interesting statements that you've made. They simply mean that some alcoholics are psychologically stronger than others. The ones that can't get over it are simply weak individuals as are teh ones that can't take a drink. I mean, you can't control your behavior? Why is it that they can control their behavior when it doesn't come to alcohol? Either you have control of your faculties or you don't.

Get a real disease like Huntingtons Disease or Parkinsons Disease or any number of Cancers. Then go to a support group and change your behavior to cure it. In fact, do anything to cure it. Then, we'll talk DISEASES.

I agree with Townie, just because a few PHd's get together and call something a disease, doesn't mean that it's a "Disease." After all, they said the same thing about Homosexuality at one point. The DSM-II classified homosexuality as a Mental Disorder and it was removed from the DSM-III in 1973. And that's just 1 example.

Seems like all of the "Special Interest" groups cling to Liberals so that they can fight to get the taxpayer to foot the bill for their particular vice. If you want to drink or get high, have at it, it's your CHOICE. But, stay away from my wallet. Don't take teh taxes that I paid to try to undo your CHOICE. Just because you CHOSE to start drinking and/or getting high, that doesn't entitle you to the money that I worked for - PERIOD!!!
Po Boy

Merrimack, NH

#180 Jan 28, 2011
formerlythere wrote:
Here PO, I helped you out- now catch up...
Formerly wrote:
I agree; I also know that most insurance will help cover treatment costs- Closing this facility penalizes people who desire help and have the means to pay for it.
Formerly wrote:
I work hard and pay a decent sum in premiums- how dare you suggest what I can or cannot do with it. What are you a commie- Detox is a start; outpatient is better... Most insurance companies have a wellness/behavioral health options- I choose to use mine. My God, in a country where you have breast augmentation and rinoplasty deemed "necessary" and picked up by insurance... Give me a break. Also, my employer is self insured- get off your high horse.
Formerly wrote:
Anyway, I think you were getting off subject; it is obvious how you feel about the less fortunate, but you still have not addressed how the closing of these types of facilities affect those who have the means to pay for the services. Oh that's right- you don't think people should have the right to choose for themselves.
Formerly wrote:
Here you are again, ignoring the fact that people with health insurance have the RIGHT to these facilities- not everyone goes to rehab on your buck... Get a clue.
ROFLMAO!!! Smoke another one!
formerlythere wrote:
Here PO, I helped you out- now catch up...
Formerly wrote:
I agree; I also know that most insurance will help cover treatment costs- Closing this facility penalizes people who desire help and have the means to pay for it.
Yes, Insurance will pay. But, if you have Private Insurance, the you wouldn't go to a Detox facility like this one, you would go to a private detox where you would receive better care.
formerlythere wrote:
Formerly wrote:
I work hard and pay a decent sum in premiums- how dare you suggest what I can or cannot do with it. What are you a commie- Detox is a start; outpatient is better... Most insurance companies have a wellness/behavioral health options- I choose to use mine. My God, in a country where you have breast augmentation and rinoplasty deemed "necessary" and picked up by insurance... Give me a break. Also, my employer is self insured- get off your high horse.
See my previous statement. If you have private insurance and choose to go to a detox like this, then yyou probably aren't that motivated in the first place.

Also, how dare you suggest that MY tax dollars be spent on undoing someone else's poor decision in their own life.
formerlythere wrote:
Formerly wrote:
Anyway, I think you were getting off subject; it is obvious how you feel about the less fortunate, but you still have not addressed how the closing of these types of facilities affect those who have the means to pay for the services. Oh that's right- you don't think people should have the right to choose for themselves.
Apparently, you're making foolish assumptions. Less fortunate? Why are they less fortunate? Because they chose to drink and/or get high? I assume that you meant "those that DON'T have the means to pay? Well, if they didn't start drinking and drugging, they would probably be able to hold a job that has these types of benefits. There are consequences for YOUR actions and you aren't entitled to the money that others earned just because you are less fortunate. Otherwise, I want my taxpayer funded money to cure my didsease of "Being Poor."
formerlythere wrote:
Formerly wrote:
Here you are again, ignoring the fact that people with health insurance have the RIGHT to these facilities- not everyone goes to rehab on your buck... Get a clue.
The ones with Private Insurance wouldn't choose to go to a rehab like the one in Tewksbury. Almost every person in that facility was on Medicaid or Medicare. How do I know? I used to work there! Most of the people that were there were Court ordered and had no insurance.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#181 Jan 28, 2011
Po Boy wrote:
<quoted text>
ROFLMAO!!! Smoke another one!
<quoted text>
Yes, Insurance will pay. But, if you have Private Insurance, the you wouldn't go to a Detox facility like this one, you would go to a private detox where you would receive better care.
<quoted text>
See my previous statement. If you have private insurance and choose to go to a detox like this, then yyou probably aren't that motivated in the first place.
Also, how dare you suggest that MY tax dollars be spent on undoing someone else's poor decision in their own life.
<quoted text>
Apparently, you're making foolish assumptions. Less fortunate? Why are they less fortunate? Because they chose to drink and/or get high? I assume that you meant "those that DON'T have the means to pay? Well, if they didn't start drinking and drugging, they would probably be able to hold a job that has these types of benefits. There are consequences for YOUR actions and you aren't entitled to the money that others earned just because you are less fortunate. Otherwise, I want my taxpayer funded money to cure my didsease of "Being Poor."
<quoted text>
The ones with Private Insurance wouldn't choose to go to a rehab like the one in Tewksbury. Almost every person in that facility was on Medicaid or Medicare. How do I know? I used to work there! Most of the people that were there were Court ordered and had no insurance.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
"Most of the people"-
Po Boy

Merrimack, NH

#182 Jan 31, 2011
formerlythere wrote:
<quoted text>
"Most of the people"-
Again, "if you have Private Insurance, the you wouldn't go to a Detox facility like this one, you would go to a private detox where you would receive better care."

Hence, my point. Stay out of my wallet! I am sick of paying for other's poor choices.
Old but Young at Heart

AOL

#183 Feb 2, 2011
Cosmic Ray wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.yourdictionary.com/junkie
A slang term for heroin is "junk", I thought this was common knowledge to those who know a thing or two about drugs and addiction. Thus the term "junkies" became a popular way to describe heroin addicts. Aptly named for Chinese ships where the heroin would be shipped from. Over the years, people have used the term to describe an addiction to just about anything. However when calling an addict a "junkie" it conjures the picture of a person whose drug of choice is heroin, not an alcoholic.
As far as free drug rehab, unless you're referring specifically to masshealth picking up the tab for rehab, private insurance pays for rehab. Why is it okay for insurance to pay for a smoker to get a new lung but not pay for rehab for someone who is trying to better themselves? Why is it okay to pay for gastric bypass surgery? Should doctors just tell these people to stop eating so much and learn some self control? Anything can be an addiction. Many ailments are the result of poor choices. Millions of Americans have type II diabetes due to poor diet and unhealthy choices. People get cancer from smoking, tanning, eating too much red meat and the list goes on. should those people be denied insurance coverage for those ailments because they did it to themselves? Why should addiction be treated any different from any other medical condition brought on by poor choices?
Also are you really suggesting that every single known drug should be legally sold here in the USA? Do you realize what the US would be opening itself up to? Consider Meth for example. It is made with household cleaners such as Draino. Do you really believe its the governments place to be selling toxic poisons to its citizens? Is this the USA you see for our future? You'd rather live in a country where every drug is legal and readily available regardless of how lethal rather than simply rehabilitating people? That some real backwards thinking.
Well said. Thank You.
Old but Young at Heart

AOL

#184 Feb 2, 2011
What wrote:
<quoted text>
So what would be the difference between a food addiction that causes someone to eat themselves into an early grave, versus an addiction to a substance? What about gambling, cigarettes, sex, video games and the list goes on? All can be serious addictions that impact a person's quality of life. Doesn't matter what the addiction is to, it's a human response, a self soothing that man has been engaging in since he evolved. You can't grasp that addiction itself regardless of what it's to, is a serious human condition that is not yet fully understood and affects people from all socio-economic and cultural divides all over the globe? In studies, rats in a cage will repeatedly hit the button for more drugs until they die. Obviously all a person has to do to stop is put down the drug or drink but if it were really as simple as that various addictions would not be so rampant. So because you're but one example of a person who is able to do it that way the rest of the world should conform to your view?
Well said also, Thank You and God Bless
Old but Young at Heart

AOL

#185 Feb 2, 2011
Townie sounds like a wacko that needs a fix real bad..go for it. Would you like a bear or a hit?
Old but Young at Heart

AOL

#186 Feb 2, 2011
addict-To cause to become physiologically or psychologically dependent on a habit-forming substance.

addiction-1.a. Compulsive physiological and psychological need for a habit-forming substance: a drug used in the treatment of heroin addiction.
b. An instance of this: a person with multiple chemical addictions.
2.a. The condition of being habitually or compulsively occupied with or or involved in something.

Junkie-1.a narcotics addict, esp. one addicted to heroin
2.a person who is addicted to a specified interest, activity, food, etc

Idiot-1.Obsolete a retarded person mentally equal or inferior to a child two years old
2.a very foolish or stupid person

that is todays lesson for you townie and po boy
now study hard to get smarter thank you

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Dracut Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Do you remember???? (Jun '08) Mon jay murphy 18,330
Low Frequency Hum - Industrial Noise? (Mar '10) Aug 15 hilda33 58
Section 8 Fraud (Sep '08) Aug 13 Redhead 348
charley lister (Oct '15) Aug 7 oceanbreeze 2
News Kung found guilty of murder (Apr '10) Aug 4 Lil SteemeR 15
News Arrest made in double murder (Dec '09) Aug 4 Copwatcher 47
Robbery. Millpond road Aug 4 hammerhead 2

Dracut Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Dracut Mortgages