Let's talk about drugs!

Gorak

Page- wrote: »

But I do believe that even pot has eventual debilitating affects on a person. They may not be apparent for many years, especially in a casual user, but I think they're they're.

Why do you believe that? They're so non-apparent that you haven't seen them and yet for some reason you still think they are there?

And besides that, every pot smoker I know is really, really fucking annoying when they're high.

I know it's a bit flippant, but have you considered that you might be really, really fucking annoying to them when they're high?

MikeMan

Anyone's really annoying when high/otherwise intoxicated.

It's kinda like how people are annoyingly not inclined to converse when they are asleep. Altered states and all that.

Fandyien

I can't even tell if most of the pot smokers I know are high. It doesn't significantly alter them; in fact, most of my friends say they function at "optimum" capacity after a few bowls. Outside of whatever intrinsically irritating qualities they have, highness never bothers me if I even notice.

Also, an anecdote as to why I'm wary about certain drugs, especially prescription ones. My friend knows a girl who went on a xanex binge for a few weeks, and ultimately bottomed out with no xanex and no money. She literally went outside, doused herself in fucking kerosene, and lit herself on fire. Last I heard, she's in the burn ward covered in third-degree burns.

Feral

Fandyien wrote: »

Also, an anecdote as to why I'm wary about certain drugs, especially prescription ones. My friend knows a girl who went on a xanex binge for a few weeks, and ultimately bottomed out with no xanex and no money. She literally went outside, doused herself in fucking kerosene, and lit herself on fire. Last I heard, she's in the burn ward covered in third-degree burns.

Xanax didn't cause that. It probably stopped her from doing it earlier.

Malkor

Feral wrote: »

Fandyien wrote: »

Also, an anecdote as to why I'm wary about certain drugs, especially prescription ones. My friend knows a girl who went on a xanex binge for a few weeks, and ultimately bottomed out with no xanex and no money. She literally went outside, doused herself in fucking kerosene, and lit herself on fire. Last I heard, she's in the burn ward covered in third-degree burns.

Xanax didn't cause that. It probably stopped her from doing it earlier.

Well if by binge he means she had no history of mental illness then started popping them like asprin, then yeah, I can see how taking them for awhile then stopping cold could put you in a bad place. Prescription drugs shouldn't be abused, especially the ones that act on your brain.

Feral

Malkor wrote: »

Feral wrote: »

Fandyien wrote: »

Also, an anecdote as to why I'm wary about certain drugs, especially prescription ones. My friend knows a girl who went on a xanex binge for a few weeks, and ultimately bottomed out with no xanex and no money. She literally went outside, doused herself in fucking kerosene, and lit herself on fire. Last I heard, she's in the burn ward covered in third-degree burns.

Xanax didn't cause that. It probably stopped her from doing it earlier.

Well if by binge he means she had no history of mental illness then started popping them like asprin, then yeah, I can see how taking them for awhile then stopping cold could put you in a bad place. Prescription drugs shouldn't be abused, especially the ones that act on your brain.

Eh, whenever I hear about somebody doing copious amounts of drugs, I wonder what behavioral/psychological bogeyman drove them to do that in the first place. Healthy people don't go on Xanax binges.

My guess? It's the same bogeyman that led her to light herself on fire.

Page-

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

Page- wrote: »

This has probably already been posted, but here goes. I think drugs are stupid, and don't use them because I've never once felt the need. There are other, more religious, reasons for my dislike of them, but whatever.

I think pop-music is stupid and I've never once felt the need to buy it. Yet I don't feel the need to ban it either. Odd, that. Also pretty much every organized religion is a terrible framework from which to build legislation, particularly in countries that don't have an official, national religion. What you did with this demi-paragraph is establish that you are prejudiced against the subject of discussion, which doesn't constitute a valid argument and won't really help you any.

What I was doing there was saying why I personally don't use them. It shouldn't be taken for granted that just because a person thinks something is stupid also means that they think that it should be completely done away with. I think baseball, basketball and curling are stupid, too, but I've got no problem with other people liking them. Yes, I think drugs are generally used as a quick-fix escape from a reality that a person doesn't want to face, for whatever reason, and that in the end it's not a very good reason; attacking the symptoms instead of the problem, that sort of thing. If drug use was out in the open, even moreso than it is now, then it would be much easier to help people fix their problems for real.

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

Page- wrote: »

The debate I have going with myself is this, though: should drugs, or at least common, less harmful ones like pot, be legalized? I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, I think legalization would be great just for crime, and getting people out in the open means that it would be easier to help them kick their habits. On the other hand, maybe any support of drugs is a bad thing in the long run, since in that same long run I believe they are an inevitable and maybe inexorable ruin for people who use them and those around them. I flip-flop back and forth once and a while, but usually I'm for legalization. It's probably the lesser of two evils at least.

What about people whose recreational drug-use is not habitual? Or do you deny the existence and/or possibility of such an animal?

I never would. But I think that those type of people are the minority and don't make a solid case for drugs in general.

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

Page- wrote: »

Also, if you're going to do drugs then please keep that shit to yourself. I barely even go to concerts any more because some asshole lights up a joint without fail and the smell of that stuff makes me queasy. And don't ask me to try shit. It's a good thing my Peer Pressure immunity is at 95%, because every time some donk has a few drugs they want me to get in on it. Do what you want, sure, but the line is drawn where it affects other people.

The smell of most perfumes makes me want to throw up (and I've heard the same about Axe and those other body-sprays from a number of people), yet I don't get to yell at people for wearing perfume because it's not a health-hazard. Other people smoking a bowl/joint at a party/concert are not affecting you anymore than perfume at a party/concert affects me. Yes, it's illegal, much like jaywalking and failing to feed the meter. That doesn't mean you should go around flipping out at people every time they park illegally to run in and grab a coffee. Also, my peer-pressure immunity is 100%, and yet I smoke. Huh. Maybe after a great deal of research I decided on my own to give it a try and decided on my own that I like it. Basically your entire argument is based solely upon personal prejudices, rather than on any factual information or logic.

I also have a problem with perfumes, but I don't usually go to places where I have to smell them. I don't flip-out on people who are smoking pot around me. If they're right next to me then I'll ask them if they can move back a little, or wait, and if they don't then I move instead. My argument may be based on personal prejudices, but those come from the "research" I've done in my life and the conclusions I've come to logically (I think) from that. By "research" I mean observing people around me and the effects that their drug use has had one them. I've seen absolute changes in some of these people, and never for the better.

In the end, I think drugs are bad, but I also think they aren't going away for a long while. Legalize, or at least decreminilize some of the more popular drugs and at least then you can work on fixing the problem in the open.

lunasea

Page- wrote: »

Uh, yeah. I realize that people are going to do stupid shit, regardless. How many people have told me that they can't stand the taste of beer, or alcohol in general, and only drink because they want to get drunk? Dozens. And I've seen them drink beer after awful beer, and then puke all over shit and walk around in a general daze for hours. Then the next weekend they want to do it again. It's idiotic, but they're going to do it. It's not quite the same way with pot; I think the reasons some people get into that drug are more complicated. But regardless of whatever happens people are going to do it. If it's out in the open then at least they can get help.

I actually resent you're attitude towards pot, and referring to it as if it were some demon weed. I personally quit weed for a extended amount of time and found none of my problems solved. Rather, I had to actively go out and resolve all of my issues. But now that I'm better, or at least relatively speaking, I smoke pot on a regular basis (once or twice a week). Pot has never, ever, ever, ever negatively impacted any aspect of my life. I was a straight A student throughout high school and am now about to attend a top-ranking university.

I didn't seclude myself socially with my pothead friends, I have both pot smoking friends and non-pot smoking friends. Last year I volunteered to teach villagers in southeast Asia about STDs and AIDS for the World Health Organization. One of my pot smoking friends, in fact one of the heaviest pot smokers I know, went to Kentucky over spring break and built houses. I smoke because it's relaxing, it helps me think in a new light, and it helps me accept and understand things that I would never be able to do sober. I have a friend who had anger issues, and was even arrested last year for assaulting a student in school. Now that he smokes pot he's calmer by degrees and would never even think about doing the kind of shit he did last year.

I'm sick of being labeled as a degenerate and a misfit because I like to indulge in the recreational use of weed in my free time. I'm sick of every asshole cop I see waste taxpayer money trying to find creative ways to search me. I'm sick of seeing kids, fucking 13,14,15 year-olds, having to go through the system and actually serving time in juvy for having a negligible amount of a harmless substance. In fact, there's a plethora of medical studies proving that marijuana can be helpful and is at least not harmful.

Here's a study concluding that marijuana helps schizophrenic patients.

Here's one that shows marijuana slowing tumor growth.

Here's a preliminary study showing the benefits of marijuana on HIV patients.

Here's an article reporting on a study that marijuana slows lung cancer in mice. There's an actual study out there that shows that marijuana doesn't cause lung cancer, but I'm done searching.

Most of the weed on the east coast comes from criminal organizations. Unless you know the right people, the ones who grow in their backrooms or backyards, you're most likely getting it from one of the gangs or established criminal organizations. It's fucked up, all the shit that prohibition causes. Anything would be better than what we have right now. Would you rather have tobacco companies running a portion of the marijuana market or 14 year olds being arrested for growing pot in their computers?

lunasea

Fandyien wrote: »

I can't even tell if most of the pot smokers I know are high. It doesn't significantly alter them; in fact, most of my friends say they function at "optimum" capacity after a few bowls. Outside of whatever intrinsically irritating qualities they have, highness never bothers me if I even notice.

Also, an anecdote as to why I'm wary about certain drugs, especially prescription ones. My friend knows a girl who went on a xanex binge for a few weeks, and ultimately bottomed out with no xanex and no money. She literally went outside, doused herself in fucking kerosene, and lit herself on fire. Last I heard, she's in the burn ward covered in third-degree burns.

I feel ya, I don't trust most prescription drugs at all. I've seen too many people tweak out on adderall, oxycotin, and codeine.

Page-

I'm happy for you, and I'm fine with medicinal use of drugs is they actually help. But you are an exception to the rule and, like I said, the minority. Just as you don't consider yourself part of the regular stoner crowd, neither do I.

Azio

Page- wrote: »

But you are an exception to the rule and, like I said, the minority.

I think you better back this up, because the only people I know of who agree with you are the DEA and their various sycophantic propaganda organizations (DARE, FreeVibe, etc).

Shazkar Shadowstorm

Out of all the people that I know who smoke, only a small handful of them actually fit the stoner stereotype. It's likely that you don't notice the rest of them because they are all normal people. Truth.

And I'm saying this as a person who rarely smokes.

geckahn

Shazkar Shadowstorm wrote: »

Out of all the people that I know who smoke, only a small handful of them actually fit the stoner stereotype. It's likely that you don't notice the rest of them because they are all normal people. Truth.

And I'm saying this as a person who rarely smokes.

Of my good friends, the biggest stoner by far is a preppy clean cut kid whos an accountant.

lunasea

Page- wrote: »

I'm happy for you, and I'm fine with medicinal use of drugs is they actually help. But you are an exception to the rule and, like I said, the minority. Just as you don't consider yourself part of the regular stoner crowd, neither do I.

It's true that there are some people who fit the stoner stereotype, but there are so many others that don't. People who are normal, contributing members to society who just like to indulge every once in a while. Among the people that I know for a fact are smokers include an employee at Bloomberg, a consultant at Johnson and Johnson, and a Princeton professor.

Al_wat

Page- wrote: »

I'm happy for you, and I'm fine with medicinal use of drugs is they actually help. But you are an exception to the rule and, like I said, the minority. Just as you don't consider yourself part of the regular stoner crowd, neither do I.

As others have said, when it comes to pot you are probably wrong. I would say that the majority of users are casual and not habitual, everyday smokers.

Feral

Page- wrote: »

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

What about people whose recreational drug-use is not habitual? Or do you deny the existence and/or possibility of such an animal?

I never would. But I think that those type of people are the minority and don't make a solid case for drugs in general.

Drug users are like Christians. Most of them are perfectly normal nice people, but there's an obnoxious minority that ruins things for everybody.

Gorak

So sigged.

Nissl

lunasea wrote:

It's true that there are some people who fit the stoner stereotype, but there are so many others that don't. People who are normal, contributing members to society who just like to indulge every once in a while. Among the people that I know for a fact are smokers include an employee at Bloomberg, a consultant at Johnson and Johnson, and a Princeton professor.

Piling on, I'll add a division manager at Microsoft who oversees hundreds of people (as well as many of his underlings), someone near the top of the class in Harvard Business School, someone who graduated summa cum laude from Harvard, and two people running a tech startup that's attracted millions in venture capital. Oh, and a professional poker player, a guy who took home almost $200,000 on Jeopardy, and two top-flight investment bankers (think they may have quit for drug testing though).

Azio

Al_wat wrote: »

Page- wrote: »

I'm happy for you, and I'm fine with medicinal use of drugs is they actually help. But you are an exception to the rule and, like I said, the minority. Just as you don't consider yourself part of the regular stoner crowd, neither do I.

As others have said, when it comes to pot you are probably wrong. I would say that the majority of users are casual and not habitual, everyday smokers.

Even regular pot smokers are still quite normal when they're not high. This whole idea that it invariably encroaches on your everyday life and turns you into a burned-out, perma-stoned zombie is idiotic.

I know a guy who smokes an ounce a week, and somehow manages straight A's in theoretical physics at UBC.

Gorak

Nissl wrote: »

lunasea wrote:

It's true that there are some people who fit the stoner stereotype, but there are so many others that don't. People who are normal, contributing members to society who just like to indulge every once in a while. Among the people that I know for a fact are smokers include an employee at Bloomberg, a consultant at Johnson and Johnson, and a Princeton professor.

Piling on, I'll add a division manager at Microsoft who oversees hundreds of people (as well as many of his underlings), someone near the top of the class in Harvard Business School, someone who graduated summa cum laude from Harvard, and two people running a tech startup that's attracted millions in venture capital. Oh, and a professional poker player, a guy who took home almost $200,000 on Jeopardy, and two top-flight investment bankers (think they may have quit for drug testing though).

I'll add a guy who created the most accurate electronic star map in the world (fully searchable by star type, luminosity, position) and now holds a PhD in astrophysics who funded his work by selling pot.

Also a dozen medical doctors and assorted other PhDs.

edit: almost all of them also do pills, coke, acid etc without any problems.

polarblue

lunasea wrote: »

I feel ya, I don't trust most prescription drugs at all. I've seen too many people tweak out on adderall, oxycotin, and codeine.

rx drugs are generally bad for most ppl who use them for recreation. but ive been using oxy for like years and only on the weekends and ive been doing fine. graduating college. ive got a job and im pretty nice to people (i get good customer service reviews) i can go for periods of months without doing it or just because i dont feel like it at the time.

so i mean its possible to use and not be a complete douche. but ive run into plenty RxDouchebags, so i understand your stance.

Feral

polarblue wrote: »

but ive run into plenty RxDouchebags, so i understand your stance.

I worry more about hypochondriacs who are over-reliant on prescription drugs obtained legitimately from doctors by complaining about exaggerated health conditions than I worry about people who take prescription drugs occasionally for recreational purposes.

Variable

geckahn wrote: »

Shazkar Shadowstorm wrote: »

Out of all the people that I know who smoke, only a small handful of them actually fit the stoner stereotype. It's likely that you don't notice the rest of them because they are all normal people. Truth.

And I'm saying this as a person who rarely smokes.

Of my good friends, the biggest stoner by far is a preppy clean cut kid whos an accountant.

same. exactly the same, in fact.

JohnnyCache

Fandyien wrote: »

I can't even tell if most of the pot smokers I know are high. It doesn't significantly alter them; in fact, most of my friends say they function at "optimum" capacity after a few bowls. Outside of whatever intrinsically irritating qualities they have, highness never bothers me if I even notice.

Also, an anecdote as to why I'm wary about certain drugs, especially prescription ones. My friend knows a girl who went on a xanex binge for a few weeks, and ultimately bottomed out with no xanex and no money. She literally went outside, doused herself in fucking kerosene, and lit herself on fire. Last I heard, she's in the burn ward covered in third-degree burns.

hey did you hear that guy that thinks he's a glass of orange juice?

Seriously, even if this friend of a friend story is true, it's widely believed by psychologists that self immolations, when not political, are a deeply, deeply psychotic act. If Xanax was involved, it was probably what you're friend's friend's family blamed.

real_pochacco

You know, I got very intensely high the other day (first time smoking in a month or more), and thinking back on that today I wondered about people that smoke everyday, multiple times a day, people that are stoned all the time. And honestly it seems to be just be a lifestyle choice, a way someone could alter their brain chemistry to change themselves, just like people do with prescription drugs. I know that some people approach pot this way, and I can't help but think that for these people it no longer really becomes something *fun* to do, like it is for me. It's more of a decision to approach life differently.

For example, I was talking to a friend of mine on the phone, and it was amazing how much more I could notice changes in her tone of voice and how much better I could tell what she was thinking as she said things. Now I bet the experience would not be as pronounced for someone who smoked all the time, but I could definitely see benefits of being in that mode all the time. I guess what I'm trying to say is, in the past I thought smoking every day was pretty pointless -- after all, at the point where you are always stoned, does it really make any difference? But I think it can make a difference, just like someone who constantly thought the best of a situation would act differently than someone who constantly thought the worst of a situation, or any other cognitive change you could think of.

ViolentChemistry

Page- wrote: »

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

Page- wrote: »

This has probably already been posted, but here goes. I think drugs are stupid, and don't use them because I've never once felt the need. There are other, more religious, reasons for my dislike of them, but whatever.

I think pop-music is stupid and I've never once felt the need to buy it. Yet I don't feel the need to ban it either. Odd, that. Also pretty much every organized religion is a terrible framework from which to build legislation, particularly in countries that don't have an official, national religion. What you did with this demi-paragraph is establish that you are prejudiced against the subject of discussion, which doesn't constitute a valid argument and won't really help you any.

What I was doing there was saying why I personally don't use them. It shouldn't be taken for granted that just because a person thinks something is stupid also means that they think that it should be completely done away with. I think baseball, basketball and curling are stupid, too, but I've got no problem with other people liking them. Yes, I think drugs are generally used as a quick-fix escape from a reality that a person doesn't want to face, for whatever reason, and that in the end it's not a very good reason; attacking the symptoms instead of the problem, that sort of thing. If drug use was out in the open, even moreso than it is now, then it would be much easier to help people fix their problems for real.

Actually what you're doing there is trying to open up by placing yourself above people who choose to partake of mind-altering substances. If you were just saying that you don't personally use them and not making a value-judgement, you would not use a perjorative.

Page- wrote: »

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

Page- wrote: »

The debate I have going with myself is this, though: should drugs, or at least common, less harmful ones like pot, be legalized? I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, I think legalization would be great just for crime, and getting people out in the open means that it would be easier to help them kick their habits. On the other hand, maybe any support of drugs is a bad thing in the long run, since in that same long run I believe they are an inevitable and maybe inexorable ruin for people who use them and those around them. I flip-flop back and forth once and a while, but usually I'm for legalization. It's probably the lesser of two evils at least.

What about people whose recreational drug-use is not habitual? Or do you deny the existence and/or possibility of such an animal?

I never would. But I think that those type of people are the minority and don't make a solid case for drugs in general.

You don't believe that I should be allowed to do something for fun that doesn't hurt anyone if the potential exists for other people to use the same activity to cause harm to innocent/nonconsenting parties? Freedom-hater.

Page- wrote: »

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

Page- wrote: »

Also, if you're going to do drugs then please keep that shit to yourself. I barely even go to concerts any more because some asshole lights up a joint without fail and the smell of that stuff makes me queasy. And don't ask me to try shit. It's a good thing my Peer Pressure immunity is at 95%, because every time some donk has a few drugs they want me to get in on it. Do what you want, sure, but the line is drawn where it affects other people.

The smell of most perfumes makes me want to throw up (and I've heard the same about Axe and those other body-sprays from a number of people), yet I don't get to yell at people for wearing perfume because it's not a health-hazard. Other people smoking a bowl/joint at a party/concert are not affecting you anymore than perfume at a party/concert affects me. Yes, it's illegal, much like jaywalking and failing to feed the meter. That doesn't mean you should go around flipping out at people every time they park illegally to run in and grab a coffee. Also, my peer-pressure immunity is 100%, and yet I smoke. Huh. Maybe after a great deal of research I decided on my own to give it a try and decided on my own that I like it. Basically your entire argument is based solely upon personal prejudices, rather than on any factual information or logic.

I also have a problem with perfumes, but I don't usually go to places where I have to smell them. I don't flip-out on people who are smoking pot around me. If they're right next to me then I'll ask them if they can move back a little, or wait, and if they don't then I move instead. My argument may be based on personal prejudices, but those come from the "research" I've done in my life and the conclusions I've come to logically (I think) from that. By "research" I mean observing people around me and the effects that their drug use has had one them. I've seen absolute changes in some of these people, and never for the better.

Anecdotal evidence is not research, cap'n. And what about the people around you who use drugs and won't ever tell you about it because they know of your warped perspective on the matter and aren't interested in a sermon? Many people who associate with me on a regular basis and many people who have known me for years have no idea that I smoke pot, and never will until I decide I just never want them to talk to me again.

Page- wrote: »

In the end, I think drugs are bad, but I also think they aren't going away for a long while. Legalize, or at least decreminilize some of the more popular drugs and at least then you can work on fixing the problem in the open.

I can say I think the ozone layer is bad all day long but if I can't back it up with anything I'll just look like a colossal douche. Also, what problem? The problem that some people enjoy something you don't, or the problem that smokin' the reefer makes black men go crazy and rape white women?

Variable wrote: »

geckahn wrote: »

Shazkar Shadowstorm wrote: »

Out of all the people that I know who smoke, only a small handful of them actually fit the stoner stereotype. It's likely that you don't notice the rest of them because they are all normal people. Truth.

And I'm saying this as a person who rarely smokes.

Of my good friends, the biggest stoner by far is a preppy clean cut kid whos an accountant.

same. exactly the same, in fact.

Most of my friends who smoke smoke a lot more than I do, several are engineers, one has a well-paying government job, one's an insurance actuary (whose company finds no statistical reason to alter premiums dependent upon marijuana use), several of my professors over the years smoke, basically none of them are stoner-dropout cliches who sit on the couch eating cheetos all day. In fact none of my friends sit on the couch eating cheetos all day. Maybe the telling thing here isn't use or disuse of marijuana so much as whether or not you make friends with interesting people in the first place.

real_pochacco wrote: »

You know, I got very intensely high the other day (first time smoking in a month or more), and thinking back on that today I wondered about people that smoke everyday, multiple times a day, people that are stoned all the time. And honestly it seems to be just be a lifestyle choice, a way someone could alter their brain chemistry to change themselves, just like people do with prescription drugs. I know that some people approach pot this way, and I can't help but think that for these people it no longer really becomes something *fun* to do, like it is for me. It's more of a decision to approach life differently.

For example, I was talking to a friend of mine on the phone, and it was amazing how much more I could notice changes in her tone of voice and how much better I could tell what she was thinking as she said things. Now I bet the experience would not be as pronounced for someone who smoked all the time, but I could definitely see benefits of being in that mode all the time. I guess what I'm trying to say is, in the past I thought smoking every day was pretty pointless -- after all, at the point where you are always stoned, does it really make any difference? But I think it can make a difference, just like someone who constantly thought the best of a situation would act differently than someone who constantly thought the worst of a situation, or any other cognitive change you could think of.

Speaking of engineers, most engineers I've ever met are fans of one drug or another. Some I know from school smoke pot, my dad prefers bourbon, and I'm sure there are others to. Part of the reason is that when you run into a problem that you can't figure out a solution to for the life of you, after trying for hours, sometimes all it takes is to look at the problem from a different point of view. A different perspective, as it were. A state of altered perception, mayhaps. This is, however, only useful if there are two states to switch between, which precludes being high or drunk all the time.

Gorak

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

This is, however, only useful if there are two states to switch between, which precludes being high or drunk all the time.

That's why I try to alternate between being drunk and high.

Cadderly

TLDR; Drugs are always bad and slowly destroying mankind and no one has the right to use any of them, as they are all equally bad and inherently worthless? Or perhaps our good friend here is grossly misinformed and refuses to put any effort into understanding even his own position?

Why bother arguing with him? He resorts to name-calling and has the self-righteousness of a Texas-justice cop. Speaking of which, IS he a cop?

Gnome-Interruptus

real_pochacco wrote: »

I guess what I'm trying to say is, in the past I thought smoking every day was pretty pointless -- after all, at the point where you are always stoned, does it really make any difference? But I think it can make a difference, just like someone who constantly thought the best of a situation would act differently than someone who constantly thought the worst of a situation, or any other cognitive change you could think of.

I've always refused to take anything to alter my mood on a permanent basis or as a temporary solution to said mood. I'm all for getting high occassionaly, but becoming dependant on a drug to be / stay the person you want to be just seems wrong to me.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/09/07

Shazkar Shadowstorm

I'm with Gnome on this personally. That's my stance as well.

Merovingi

On a slightly related note to the topic (drugs).. the new Weeds season starts soon! I'm sure there's plenty of other fans of the show on here, right?

Variable

Merovingi wrote: »

On a slightly related note to the topic (drugs).. the new Weeds season starts soon! I'm sure there's plenty of other fans of the show on here, right?

yes.

the problem is I can't tell if it's a good show or if I just like the subject matter.

but Californication is also starting soon, and taht seems awesome. tyhough even if it sucks I'll watch it for the title and the david duchovny.

Fellhand

Once again the few irresponsible people ruin it for everyone....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070807/ap_on_re_eu/netherlands_magic_mushrooms

Yahoo! wrote:

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - The famously liberal Netherlands has been swinging toward the right, cracking down on immigration, religious freedoms and the freewheeling red light district. The next possible target? Magic mushrooms.

The death of a 17-year-old French girl, who jumped from a building after eating psychedelic mushrooms while on a school visit, has ignited a campaign to ban the fungi — sold legally at so-called "smartshops" as long as they're fresh.

Regulation of mushrooms is even less stringent than Holland's famously loose laws on marijuana, which is illegal but tolerated in "coffee shops" that are a major tourist attraction.

Gaelle Caroff's parents blamed their daughter's death in March on hallucinations brought on by the mushrooms, although the teenager had suffered from psychiatric problems in the past. Photographs of her beautiful, youthful face have been splashed across newspapers around the country.

In May, Health Minister Ab Klink ordered the national health institute to perform a new study on the risks of mushrooms. Depending on the conclusions, which are due next month, he said he would either recommend that mushroom sales be limited to those over 18 or impose a total ban.

A 1971 U.N. convention on psychotropic substances banned psilocybin, the main active ingredient in mushrooms, in its purified form. But the legal status of mushrooms themselves was long unclear. Over the last six years, they have been outlawed in Denmark, Japan, Britain and Ireland. It is also illegal to sell psilocybin-containing mushrooms in all U.S. states, but the status of spores, homegrown and wild species varies from state to state.

Peter Van Dijk, a researcher at the Netherlands' independent Trimbos Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, said in an interview last week that the mushrooms themselves are not a health threat because they are neither addictive nor toxic.

However, people who take them may hurt themselves or others, he said. The risks grow if mushrooms are combined with alcohol or cannabis, or if people already have psychiatric problems.

"They really shouldn't use mushrooms because that can trigger psychosis," he said.

A study published in January by Amsterdam's health services said the city's emergency services were summoned 148 times to deal with a negative reaction to mushrooms in 2004-2006. Of those, 134 were foreigners, with Britons forming the largest group.

Dutch government data suggest most mushrooms sold in smartshops are eaten by tourists. Since Caroff's death, other dramatic stories involving foreigners have been reported in the Dutch press:

• A 22-year-old British tourist ran amok in a hotel, breaking his window and slicing his hand.

• A 19-year-old Icelandic tourist thought he was being chased and jumped from a balcony, breaking both his legs.

• A 29-year-old Danish tourist drove his car wildly through a campground, narrowly missing people sleeping in their tents.

A majority of parties in parliament ranging from centrist to far right have demanded the hallucinogenic mushrooms be outlawed.

If the government does ban mushrooms, it will be in keeping with conservative trends that have been sweeping the country in recent years. Since 2001, Muslim immigrants have been under pressure to learn Dutch and integrate, and there have been calls by some to ban Islamic schools and radical mosques.

Last month, authorities announced a major crackdown on organized crime in Amsterdam's Red Light District. And the country's marijuana policies have also been under pressure, with authorities launching more aggressive prosecution of growers.

Brothers Murat and Ali Kucuksen, whose farm "Procare" supplies about half the psychedelic mushrooms on the Dutch market, say they are afraid their business will now be forced to close.

Their state-of-the-art system to grow and package fresh mushrooms is already operating at half capacity, in part because of the British ban and in part because of the recent bad press.

"The reputation of the product is down the drain," Ali Kucuksen said.

For many, however, it is still business as usual at Amsterdam's smartshops.

Chloe Collette, the owner of the Full Moon shop in Amsterdam, showed a group of British backpackers the various types of psychedelic mushrooms on sale Thursday.

"We have seven kinds on the menu, most of them are the softer kind," she told the group.

She said she doesn't sell to people under 18 and tries to screen out customers who appear unstable. But she acknowledged there is no way to be sure. She said she recommends people find a park or someplace outside where they can sit and talk with friends when they take them.

"People need to feel comfortable when they take it," she said. "It's something natural that makes you connected to yourself."

lunasea

Merovingi wrote: »

On a slightly related note to the topic (drugs).. the new Weeds season starts soon! I'm sure there's plenty of other fans of the show on here, right?

Eagerly awaiting the first episode. I picked up the second season on DVD. It's just like tomatoes!

Variable

all tourists who didn't think about the respect necessary to trip, especially in a foreign place.

Merovingi

lunasea wrote: »

Merovingi wrote: »

On a slightly related note to the topic (drugs).. the new Weeds season starts soon! I'm sure there's plenty of other fans of the show on here, right?

Eagerly awaiting the first episode. I picked up the second season on DVD. It's just like tomatoes!

My brother some how managed to snag the first four episodes of the new season. I mean to ask how he got a hold of them seeing as how the show isn't out yet (right?), but I wasn't going to complain. Still in love with the show.

I started watching the show at first because of the subject matter but my love for the show grew beyond that. Kevin Nealon and Justin Kirk (Andy) are funny as hell! It's not perfect and has faults, but it grabs my attention and maintains it till the very end which is more than I can say for most of what's on TV now a days.