Drugs - can we have a grown up debate?

9 Oct 2012

Quote by Lizaleanrob
if you knew anything about it you would know there is no such thing as controlled LSD
you take it and for the next 13 or so hours you are a passenger with absolutely no control over what you do or see
so please do explain how you dispense a controlled amount !!
otherwise you can't be expected to be taken seriously in such a debate after making such comments

I had wrote a reply long enough to make Neilinleeds post look short, but it timed out and i lost it banghead

So i'll just do a short version that the bit above is on the edge of bollocks.
I was an acidhead in my youth, it is pretty easy to control the amount you take and the trip you go on- if the above is based on experience then you were doing it wrong, if its not then you're trotting out the same misinformation as the tabloids and government ministers :doh:

9 Oct 2012

"The Australian group agreed with the Global Commission that the international and Australian prohibition of the use of certain “illicit” drugs has failed comprehensively. By making the supply and use of certain drugs criminal acts, governments everywhere have driven their production and consumption underground and have fostered the development of a criminal industry that is corrupting civil society and governments and killing our children."

9 Oct 2012

Quote by meat2pleaseu

if you knew anything about it you would know there is no such thing as controlled LSD
you take it and for the next 13 or so hours you are a passenger with absolutely no control over what you do or see
so please do explain how you dispense a controlled amount !!
otherwise you can't be expected to be taken seriously in such a debate after making such comments

I had wrote a reply long enough to make Neilinleeds post look short, but it timed out and i lost it banghead

So i'll just do a short version that the bit above is on the edge of bollocks.
I was an acidhead in my youth, it is pretty easy to control the amount you take and the trip you go on- if the above is based on experience then you were doing it wrong, if its not then you're trotting out the same misinformation as the tabloids and government ministers :doh:
really!! most of the acid heads we knew and was involved with wanted to trip meaty, you know colours and stuff we never took a trip without a sitter and just how do you regulate things like microdots and tabs just how do you lower the dose or control something so small
so are you telling me you could control acid and stop yourself anytime you wanted mid trip ??

9 Oct 2012

Quote by flower411
The idea that legalising other drugs will make them glamorous is absurd ....

" other drugs " at the moment do not fall into the same category as cigarettes and alcohol, but they would do if they were legalised.
Many young kids get into alcohol and cigarettes BECAUSE they look glamorous to them. Having your first puff on a fag is frankly disgusting, and alcohol consumption for the first time is also awful, but they do it because they have a notion that it is glamorous.
The thought that kids do not look at those as glamorous in itself is hugely absurd, and then you wonder why successive Governments have not legalised them, and future Government never will either. :doh:

9 Oct 2012

Quote by meat2pleaseu

if you knew anything about it you would know there is no such thing as controlled LSD
you take it and for the next 13 or so hours you are a passenger with absolutely no control over what you do or see
so please do explain how you dispense a controlled amount !!
otherwise you can't be expected to be taken seriously in such a debate after making such comments

I had wrote a reply long enough to make Neilinleeds post look short, but it timed out and i lost it banghead

So i'll just do a short version that the bit above is on the edge of bollocks.
I was an acidhead in my youth, it is pretty easy to control the amount you take and the trip you go on- if the above is based on experience then you were doing it wrong, if its not then you're trotting out the same misinformation as the tabloids and government ministers :doh:
really!! most of the acid heads we knew and was involved with wanted to trip meaty, you know colours and stuff we never took a trip without a sitter and just how do you regulate things like microdots and tabs just how do you lower the dose or control something so small
so are you telling me you could control acid and stop yourself anytime you wanted mid trip ??
or never had a trip run away with you

9 Oct 2012

Quote by meat2pleaseu
I had wrote a reply long enough to make Neilinleeds post look short, but it timed out and i lost it So i'll just do a short version that the bit above is on the edge of bollocks.

When you have a little bit typed out, copy it so if you do get timed out you at least will have most of it saved. :notes:

Quote by meat2pleaseu
I was an acidhead in my youth, it is pretty easy to control the amount you take and the trip you go on-

Really? I always thought that drugs could be in different strengths, depending on the source? So unless you brought all your drugs from the same reliable source, how could you possibly know that that time would not be different to the last time?

Quote by meat2pleaseu
if the above is based on experience then you were doing it wrong, if its not then you're trotting out the same misinformation as the tabloids and government ministers :doh:

Did you get your drugs from the same source, and was it reliable? Only a past drug user could possibly make a misinformed comment like the one you have above. There have been many cases of a first time user dying from drug taking, be it an LSB tab or any other tab. I think some of the misinformation is not coming from tabloids or Government ministers, but people much closer than that.

9 Oct 2012

Quote by Lizaleanrob

if you knew anything about it you would know there is no such thing as controlled LSD
you take it and for the next 13 or so hours you are a passenger with absolutely no control over what you do or see
so please do explain how you dispense a controlled amount !!
otherwise you can't be expected to be taken seriously in such a debate after making such comments

I had wrote a reply long enough to make Neilinleeds post look short, but it timed out and i lost it banghead

So i'll just do a short version that the bit above is on the edge of bollocks.
I was an acidhead in my youth, it is pretty easy to control the amount you take and the trip you go on- if the above is based on experience then you were doing it wrong, if its not then you're trotting out the same misinformation as the tabloids and government ministers :doh:
really!! most of the acid heads we knew and was involved with wanted to trip meaty, you know colours and stuff we never took a trip without a sitter and just how do you regulate things like microdots and tabs just how do you lower the dose or control something so small
so are you telling me you could control acid and stop yourself anytime you wanted mid trip ??
Tabs were pretty much the same strength throughout for a standard blotter tab as the absorbency is quite uniform, what varied was the type of trip they gave you, so strawberrys were always giggly, penguins always guaranteed a night of adventure and exploration- if you wanted some real crazyness we hunted down the big tabs (postage stamps) or if they weren't available make sure we got the bottom strip (which is where more of the LSD ended up when they were hung up to dry). Microdots can be split and taken in halves so you can control the release time and have more ups and less downs over a longer time.
As acid is a psychoactive you can control your trip by controlling your environment and mentally preparing for the night, which is why house trips or camping was always best- sort the music, sort the other entertainment, trip with the right people. I only had one bad trip and that was down to visiting one of the hardest techno clubs in the country, so an environment i couldn't control.
I've helped quite a few people out of a bad trip- as a psychoactive its effects can be controlled just as psychologists, psychiatrists and hypnotherapists can influence peoples thoughts- if you understand its mechanics, which is why acid has been used by them previously and still interests them as a possible treatment now.
So, to say you have no control over the dose or that you can't control what happens to you when you do it is either lack of experience or lack of knowledge really dunno

9 Oct 2012

<<<< is wondering whether her previous post was too long for others to bother reading!! redface

9 Oct 2012

Quote by flower411
<<<< is wondering whether her previous post was too long for others to bother reading!!

Nah ....it was fine ....it`s a kinda initiation thing ......ignore the new guy every so often lol

See if they bite .....
I only bite on request... innocent

9 Oct 2012

Quote by flower411
Yeah well bite me :moon:

Sure... As long as you don't need your soul any longer... evil

:giggle:

9 Oct 2012

Why are we assuming legal drugs are socially acceptable? Maybe statistically. But smoke near me and you will discover that some of us find nicotine socially unacceptable. In someone else's house I would move away. In my house, the smoker would be leaving - promptly.

9 Oct 2012

Quote by starlightcouple

I had wrote a reply long enough to make Neilinleeds post look short, but it timed out and i lost it So i'll just do a short version that the bit above is on the edge of bollocks.

When you have a little bit typed out, copy it so if you do get timed out you at least will have most of it saved. :notes:
I typed most of it earlier but went out for the afternoon, forgot about the timeout :doh:

Quote by meat2pleaseu
I was an acidhead in my youth, it is pretty easy to control the amount you take and the trip you go on-

Really? I always thought that drugs could be in different strengths, depending on the source? So unless you brought all your drugs from the same reliable source, how could you possibly know that that time would not be different to the last time?
Most of them came from 2 well known and trusted sources, well connected to the manufacturer. Tabs are in the form of a blotting paper which soaks up a relatively similar amount each time. The formula and strength for LSD doesn't vary that much so you get a fairly consistent dose each time due to the blotter capacity, so apart from microdots, which we dose controlled by splitting and gauging the effect based on the effects of the first bit and experience, the only way to really have a much stronger trip was another tab or a bigger tab- proven with experience

Quote by meat2pleaseu
if the above is based on experience then you were doing it wrong, if its not then you're trotting out the same misinformation as the tabloids and government ministers :doh:

Did you get your drugs from the same source, and was it reliable? Only a past drug user could possibly make a misinformed comment like the one you have above. There have been many cases of a first time user dying from drug taking, be it an LSB tab or any other tab. I think some of the misinformation is not coming from tabloids or Government ministers, but people much closer than that.
As someone who used it and on a regular basis over several years, i'm way more informed that the majority of people who haven't. Many of the people who have a problem with LSD, E's, Speed, Coke or anything else usually have one thing in common- they didn't educate themselves about their drug of choice or they didn't care and by education i don't mean the daily mail- newspapers only report the bad and sensational, as for the government, they appointed a world expert on drugs and then discredited him and sacked him when he didn't fall in line with their pre-conceived ideas.
As far as i know, nobody has ever died from taking LSD, there has been the odd fuckwitt who tried to fly off a tall building, but to quote Bill Hicks Today a young man on acid … thought he could fly … jumped out of a building … what a tragedy!" What a dick. He's an idiot. If he thought he could fly, why didn't he take off from the ground first? Check it out? You don't see geese lined up to catch elevators to fly south; they fly from the fucking ground. He's an idiot. He's dead. Good! We lost a moron? Fucking celebrate. There's one less moron in the world.

9 Oct 2012

Quote by meat2pleaseu
As far as i know, nobody has ever died from taking LSD, there has been the odd fuckwitt who tried to fly off a tall building, but to quote Bill Hicks Today a young man on acid … thought he could fly … jumped out of a building … what a tragedy!" What a dick. He's an idiot. If he thought he could fly, why didn't he take off from the ground first? Check it out? You don't see geese lined up to catch elevators to fly south; they fly from the fucking ground. He's an idiot. He's dead. Good! We lost a moron? Fucking celebrate. There's one less moron in the world.

If ever there was a reason never to legalise drugs, your comment above is a good as any enough reason.
Some people may not have had a bad trip, but it is obvious some people have suffered mentally from years of drug use as I mentioned earlier in this thread as a cause of long standing drug use.
A few points about LSD but am sure you know these already, but just for others benefit.
The most common danger lies in what is known as behavioral toxicity – uncharacteristic or abnormal behaviors brought about by drug use. These may be perceived as negative, such as suicidal tendencies, or positive, such as feeling superhuman - but both can be equally as dangerous and lead users to behave in a dangerous, irrational and sometimes fatal manner.
LSD is not considered an addictive drug since it does not produce compulsive drug-seeking behavior as do cocaine, amphetamine, heroin, alcohol, and nicotine. However, like many of the addictive drugs, LSD produces tolerance, so some users who take the drug repeatedly must take progressively higher doses to achieve the state of intoxication that they had previously achieved. This is an extremely dangerous practice, given the unpredictability of the drug.
In answer to your question about not knowing if anyone has died from taking LSD...
" So – do people die from taking LSD? The answer, as with most, if not all illegal drugs is yes. However, this is not usually a result of an overdose. As a result of its large index of toxicity, a huge concentration of LSD is required before death results by overdose. In the case of a massive overdose, coma, bleeding disorders and respiratory arrest may occur. It should also be noted that pregnant women should never ever take LSD as it causes uterine contractions which could result in premature delivery and loss of their baby ".
So there you have it.

9 Oct 2012

Quote by starlightcouple

As far as i know, nobody has ever died from taking LSD, there has been the odd fuckwitt who tried to fly off a tall building, but to quote Bill Hicks Today a young man on acid … thought he could fly … jumped out of a building … what a tragedy!" What a dick. He's an idiot. If he thought he could fly, why didn't he take off from the ground first? Check it out? You don't see geese lined up to catch elevators to fly south; they fly from the fucking ground. He's an idiot. He's dead. Good! We lost a moron? Fucking celebrate. There's one less moron in the world.

If ever there was a reason never to legalise drugs, your comment above is a good as any enough reason.
Ahh, i forgot you were born without a sense of humour :doh:
" So – do people die from taking LSD? The answer, as with most, if not all illegal drugs is yes. However, this is not usually a result of an overdose. As a result of its large index of toxicity, a huge concentration of LSD is required before death results by overdose. In the case of a massive overdose, coma, bleeding disorders and respiratory arrest may occur. It should also be noted that pregnant women should never ever take LSD as it causes uterine contractions which could result in premature delivery and loss of their baby ".
So there you have it.
Anyone who either takes a massive amount of drugs or takes them while pregnant really isn't the sharpest tool in the box- an argument for Darwinism :rolleyes:
Maybe you should try acid- might help with the blinkers you've worn in every thread i've ever seen you post on :huh:

9 Oct 2012

Quote by meat2pleaseu
Ahh, i forgot you were born without a sense of humour :doh:

Ah sorry I thought we was having a serious debate about the dangers of drug taking and the possible effects of legalising hard drugs, I obviously did not see your humour regarding the death of a user who jumped off a building. Sorry my mistake. smackbottom

Quote by meat2pleaseu
Maybe you should try acid- might help with the blinkers you've worn in every thread i've ever seen you post on :huh:

Is that code for shit I have made myself look a bit of a fool, and so will try the reverse psychology method ? innocent

You see my comments came from a leading author on the subject of LSD and it's effects, and yours came from a very blinkered view from a past drug taker, who believes you can control what happens when you are heavily into a trip. I know which one I would take as a logical and reasoned argument.

9 Oct 2012

Star and Meat - do I have to come and smack your bottoms to get you to stop squabbling...??? smackbottom

9 Oct 2012

Don't smack their arses FFS Lilith, you'll just encourage them! :P

Quote by Lilith
<<<< is wondering whether her previous post was too long for others to bother reading!!

Not at all. I felt like I disagreed with only some small bits of it, but I'm struggling to come up with a properly articulated reason why that makes sense. I'm aware that hands are tied by things like the 1961 Single Covention on Narcotics et al but I'm not convinced local decriminalisation is much more than a stop gap, or a finger in the proverbial dam. The background to the treaty(s) seems somewhat shady as far as US influence to protect their pharmaceutical industries goes, dumping most of the responsibilities on third world producers of raw organic materials for one, and two I'd need to do a lot more reading as to whether it's still fit for purpose given the explosion in synthetic psychoactives available more recently. These are the so-called research chemicals I referred to in the first post I made, largely building on work by Alexander Shulgin, David Nichols, underground chemists, etc that are now coming out of China's chemical industry by the tonne. This is a problem beyond containment by the kind of blanket bans provided for in the treaties I think because of the almost infinite number of possible psychoactives available for manufacture by these producers.
We've come a long way since 1961 as far as synthetics go, the trade there is perfectly legal in the main and is likely to be able to jump through whatever hoops the UN and nation states try to put in its way. The ongoing damage the so-called drugs war in countries like Mexico is doing is also another reason why these treaties need looking at again, in the hope that a more effective and sensible way of dealing with the more traditional drugs of abuse and the newer psychoactives can be found, whether on a global scale or nationally, leaving nation states free to respond to their particular local drug problems as they see fit, and is most effective, even if that means full legalisation across the board, unlikely as that is. Decriminalisation on a national level is a sticking plaster at best I think that doesn't get to the root of things at all.
This is probably very confused and needs a lot more work on the argument and some evidence to support it but that's kinda the gist anyways.

10 Oct 2012

Quote by Lilith
<<<< is wondering whether her previous post was too long for others to bother reading!!

It needs to be in 'Sun-ease' for most people here wink

10 Oct 2012

Quote by meat2pleaseu

if you knew anything about it you would know there is no such thing as controlled LSD
you take it and for the next 13 or so hours you are a passenger with absolutely no control over what you do or see
so please do explain how you dispense a controlled amount !!
otherwise you can't be expected to be taken seriously in such a debate after making such comments

I had wrote a reply long enough to make Neilinleeds post look short, but it timed out and i lost it banghead

So i'll just do a short version that the bit above is on the edge of bollocks.
I was an acidhead in my youth, it is pretty easy to control the amount you take and the trip you go on- if the above is based on experience then you were doing it wrong, if its not then you're trotting out the same misinformation as the tabloids and government ministers :doh:
really!! most of the acid heads we knew and was involved with wanted to trip meaty, you know colours and stuff we never took a trip without a sitter and just how do you regulate things like microdots and tabs just how do you lower the dose or control something so small
so are you telling me you could control acid and stop yourself anytime you wanted mid trip ??
Tabs were pretty much the same strength throughout for a standard blotter tab as the absorbency is quite uniform, what varied was the type of trip they gave you, so strawberrys were always giggly, penguins always guaranteed a night of adventure and exploration- if you wanted some real crazyness we hunted down the big tabs (postage stamps) or if they weren't available make sure we got the bottom strip (which is where more of the LSD ended up when they were hung up to dry). Microdots can be split and taken in halves so you can control the release time and have more ups and less downs over a longer time.
As acid is a psychoactive you can control your trip by controlling your environment and mentally preparing for the night, which is why house trips or camping was always best- sort the music, sort the other entertainment, trip with the right people. I only had one bad trip and that was down to visiting one of the hardest techno clubs in the country, so an environment i couldn't control.
I've helped quite a few people out of a bad trip- as a psychoactive its effects can be controlled just as psychologists, psychiatrists and hypnotherapists can influence peoples thoughts- if you understand its mechanics, which is why acid has been used by them previously and still interests them as a possible treatment now.
So, to say you have no control over the dose or that you can't control what happens to you when you do it is either lack of experience or lack of knowledge really dunno

whilst i agree with most of what you have written
i feel your ego has clouded your view ,by your own admission you had a real bad trip when out of your normal comfort lost control its very simple you was now passenger
having control of something means you can stop it when you like. you cannot stop acid it has to run its course and if your not on top of your game then get a bad trip !!
as for limiting we tried half a trip with Xmas trees and supermen(fucking dutch sense of humour). the tripy bit was not as long but the overall process, right up to being Mr yellow in the morning was still the same
like you we used to take half then the other half as the trip was turning on, but its not limiting the dose! like you say it brings you up again that's all
and do tell knowing what you do about acid would you administer it on the high street then just let the person walk out the door
i know from my experence i would feel less than confortable doing it

10 Oct 2012

So we have the "odd" suicidal flier, a couple of water intoxicated E users - anything more?
Meanwhile, in our local town this week-end, one man was killed and another has life changing injuries are a result of two separate violent incidents in the early hours of Sunday morning. The deceased was assualted outside a nightclub and the injured man was beaten in a pub. Alcohol is directly and indirectly complacent in the death and serious injury of tens of thousands of people around this country every year.

10 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
So we have the "odd" suicidal flier, a couple of water intoxicated E users - anything more?
Meanwhile, in our local town this week-end, one man was killed and another has life changing injuries are a result of two separate violent incidents in the early hours of Sunday morning. The deceased was assualted outside a nightclub and the injured man was beaten in a pub. Alcohol is directly and indirectly complacent in the death and serious injury of tens of thousands of people around this country every year.

then mabe start a thread about alcohol instead then dunno

10 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
So we have the "odd" suicidal flier, a couple of water intoxicated E users - anything more?
Meanwhile, in our local town this week-end, one man was killed and another has life changing injuries are a result of two separate violent incidents in the early hours of Sunday morning. The deceased was assualted outside a nightclub and the injured man was beaten in a pub. Alcohol is directly and indirectly complacent in the death and serious injury of tens of thousands of people around this country every year.

That is not an argument for legalising drugs; if anything, it is an argument that we shouldn't be making more substances legally available...

10 Oct 2012

Quote by Lizaleanrob
So we have the "odd" suicidal flier, a couple of water intoxicated E users - anything more?
Meanwhile, in our local town this week-end, one man was killed and another has life changing injuries are a result of two separate violent incidents in the early hours of Sunday morning. The deceased was assualted outside a nightclub and the injured man was beaten in a pub. Alcohol is directly and indirectly complacent in the death and serious injury of tens of thousands of people around this country every year.

then mabe start a thread about alcohol instead then dunno

My thoughts exactly.
We talk about drugs and the cost and effects of them, well I would say more people drink, more people use the NHS because of drink, and drink kills more people yet, it is socially acceptable to drink. Drink causes more of a drain on our resources, so yes a thread on the effects and damage of alcohol seems a very good idea. But a different thread to this, as this is an interesting insight into others views on illegal substances. :thumbup:

10 Oct 2012

I do not believe a policy of "we can't stop it so let's legalise it" is a good policy, we have never stopped any crime, murder, , robbery still occur.
People will still steal to get drug money because the use of the drugs in anything but moderation is and always will be expensive and the taking of them to the extent that addicts do will prevent them earning enough money to buy them.
Dealers will still exist, they will come up with new drug connocotions, designer drugs and such to nurture a market, they will come up with cheaper drug options than the local chemist sells by using dangerous or cheaper ingredients.
The factories and farms will still exist to supply other markets around the world where drugs are not legal.
More people will die as they become more easy to get hold of, more people will become addicted, like binge drinking access to cheaper products will make more people do it.
I don't know what might work but I don't think giving up is the answer.
Personally I have never needed large amounts of alcohol or any amount of drugs to make me have a good time.

10 Oct 2012

Personally I have never needed large amounts of alcohol or any amount of drugs to make me have a good time.

You often hear statements like this from people Mids who don't quite get that for many the motivations behind their drug use are way more complex than just wanting to have a good time. With psychedelics for instance then sure, some people will take acid / mushrooms / whatever just to get wasted and piss themselves laffin' at all the pretty shapes and colours, but there are others, who you might call the genuine psychonauts out there who take these drugs to explore the inner recesses of their own minds, playing around with the quite extraordinarily novel things they find it can do with itself with a little gentle persuasion.
There's an enormous difference between these two camps I think, the shallow eye-candy, shits and giggles crew in the first, and those who experience something really quite profound that changes them forever in the second. Me, I belong squarely in the second camp. I learned more about genuine empathy and compassion for my fellow man from E and acid then I ever learned at Catholic school, let's put it that way, and quite a bit about my sexuality though I could not accept that till a long time later. The danger here of course is that for some so profound a revelation will be more than they are able or willing to properly assimilate, and it is their fear of what they find there and difficulty acknowledging what lurks beneath the thin veneer of ego that leads to their distress. It is these people legislation is most intended to protect I believe. I though believe my consciousness is mine and mine alone, to manipulate as I see fit, as should be my right. Whether I do that with meditation, breath control, other magickal practices or psychedelic drugs is noone's business but mine. I do not see that as a responsible adult I should be prevented from doing so by others, but as a responsible adult I'm not daft enough any more to risk being nicked with Class As. It does quite piss me off I must admit.

11 Oct 2012

Quote by neilinleeds
I learned more about genuine empathy and compassion for my fellow man from E and acid then I ever learned at Catholic school,

From what I have heard about Catholic School and teachings generally it is noithing about empathy and compassion and entirely about toeing a very narrow line and behavioural control based on guilt. And not even sensible 'I did that' kind of guilt - the general mysoginistic, woman-hating 'you are bad because you came out of a vagina' guilt.
I would imagine ANY positive emotional experience would be better than that.

11 Oct 2012

Quote by foxylady2209
I learned more about genuine empathy and compassion for my fellow man from E and acid then I ever learned at Catholic school,

From what I have heard about Catholic School and teachings generally it is noithing about empathy and compassion and entirely about toeing a very narrow line and behavioural control based on guilt. And not even sensible 'I did that' kind of guilt - the general mysoginistic, woman-hating 'you are bad because you came out of a vagina' guilt.
I would imagine ANY positive emotional experience would be better than that.
:thumbup:

11 Oct 2012

Quote by foxylady2209
I learned more about genuine empathy and compassion for my fellow man from E and acid then I ever learned at Catholic school,

From what I have heard about Catholic School and teachings generally it is noithing about empathy and compassion and entirely about toeing a very narrow line and behavioural control based on guilt. And not even sensible 'I did that' kind of guilt - the general mysoginistic, woman-hating 'you are bad because you came out of a vagina' guilt.
I would imagine ANY positive emotional experience would be better than that.
Hmmmmmmm. Well yes, on reflection you may have a point there Foxy, you may well have a point. Possibly a bad example there as far as making all that much of a point at all goes now I think on it? Damn! lol

Realised earlier that we already have a model of sorts for decriminalisation in force at this very moment that had somehow prevously escaped me: the Temporary Class Drug Order I referred to on page one re: MXE / Methoxetamine. These orders have nothing whatsoever to say about simple posession. It remains entirely legal to posess a Temp Class Drug which is otherwise deemed to be a Class B controlled substance under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act, so long as for personal use only. It's concerned only with the supply side. A temporary measure only ( the clue is maybe in the name! :lol: ) prior to what is likely to be proper criminalisation under the MoDA once the 12 month temp ban is up so it's not intended as decriminalisation as such of course, it's obviously going in the other direction altogether but as a half-way house I see no reason why something similar shouldn't work equally well the other way? Probably completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand but struck me as something worth commenting on anyways, so I did, as you can see, obviously!

15 Oct 2012

Quote by neilinleeds
Personally I have never needed large amounts of alcohol or any amount of drugs to make me have a good time.

You often hear statements like this from people Mids who don't quite get that for many the motivations behind their drug use are way more complex than just wanting to have a good time. With psychedelics for instance then sure, some people will take acid / mushrooms / whatever just to get wasted and piss themselves laffin' at all the pretty shapes and colours, but there are others, who you might call the genuine psychonauts out there who take these drugs to explore the inner recesses of their own minds, playing around with the quite extraordinarily novel things they find it can do with itself with a little gentle persuasion.
There's an enormous difference between these two camps I think, the shallow eye-candy, shits and giggles crew in the first, and those who experience something really quite profound that changes them forever in the second. Me, I belong squarely in the second camp. I learned more about genuine empathy and compassion for my fellow man from E and acid then I ever learned at Catholic school, let's put it that way, and quite a bit about my sexuality though I could not accept that till a long time later. The danger here of course is that for some so profound a revelation will be more than they are able or willing to properly assimilate, and it is their fear of what they find there and difficulty acknowledging what lurks beneath the thin veneer of ego that leads to their distress. It is these people legislation is most intended to protect I believe. I though believe my consciousness is mine and mine alone, to manipulate as I see fit, as should be my right. Whether I do that with meditation, breath control, other magickal practices or psychedelic drugs is noone's business but mine. I do not see that as a responsible adult I should be prevented from doing so by others, but as a responsible adult I'm not daft enough any more to risk being nicked with Class As. It does quite piss me off I must admit.
You did, great, I believe as you do that I have learned empathy and compassion for my fellow man, I just didn't need to take drugs to learn it. I didn't go to Catholic School either, I did it by travelling to Africa and seeing real poverty, to areas of the world high in racism and conflict, helping those that could not help themselves, I don't need drugs to learn about my sexuality, I understand what I like sexually.
Your claim to freedom to control your own destiny is fine, but it doesn't work like that, most drugs come from drug dealers and a black market that does affect me, a responsible adult would not be putting me in a position that the illegal drugs trade does put me in. The drugs trade is killing British Soldiers in Afghanistan, it is costing a fortune to British taxpayers, it is putting our Naval personnel around the world in danger, it is the cause of much of the petty crime (petty to those in authority not to victims) around the Country, responsible adult, no selfish attitude is my opinion. To me your just another addict that fuels the flames of the problem. Why you do it is only something you could know, but attempting to justify breaking the law with morals is not going to work with me because morals are also about not breaking the law.

15 Oct 2012

The drugs trade is killing British Soldiers in Afghanistan, it is costing a fortune to British taxpayers, it is putting our Naval personnel around the world in danger, it is the cause of much of the petty crime (petty to those in authority not to victims) around the Country, responsible adult, no selfish attitude is my opinion.

Ummmmm, I think I did touch on this right back on page 1 with my first post on this very thread Jed, when I said "financing gangsters and putting guns on the street in this country, even more guns on the streets in the countries that produce them" and again on page 3 when I said "The ongoing damage the so-called drugs war in countries like Mexico is doing is also another reason why these treaties need looking at again". I'd argue prohibition is the cause of violence of this sort at home and abroad, not the drugs themselves, which has been my point throughout the thread. If the manufacture and sale of drugs were legal you'd remove it from the hands of criminal enterprises who use such violence to further their aim and protect their interests, wouldn't you?

To me your just another addict that fuels the flames of the problem.

Perhaps you missed one of the closing lines of the latest post where I said "as a responsible adult I'm not daft enough any more to risk being nicked with Class As". I suppose I should appreciate your forthrightness there, except that I can't possibly be an 'addict' ( a term which would be meaningless as far as the use of psychedelics referred to above goes anyway, psychedelics having no addictive potential ) because I don't use illegal drugs Jed, partly cos of the risk to myself as far as arrest goes, and partly cos I cannot in good conscience party away on Cocaine ( a shitty drug anyways ) or whatever knowing the damage done to other human beings in the countries that produce it just so I can 'enjoy' the privelege. Again though, this would not be an issue if the trade were legal. Consequence of prohibition again.

but attempting to justify breaking the law with morals is not going to work with me because morals are also about not breaking the law.

Ah, now that's a more interesting question. Is that always the case? If the law is unjust, do not citizens of good conscience have a duty to see that it is repealed, sometimes even by breaking the law to highlight its absurdity? I could cite Rosa Parks here perhaps. I'm not going to suggest the right to take drugs is a civil rights issue of that kind so noone need take me to task for doing so, but things are not always as black and white as you've made out, are they?