Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Let's talk about drugs!

1246717

Posts

  • GorakGorak Registered User
    You might have difficulty making mushrooms available on prescription when they're so easy to find wild. When I was at uni, we used to take a 15-20 minute bus ride out of the city, spend a couple of hours picking and come back with bags full of the stuff.

    I'm talking literally thousands of caps for the price of a bus ticket.

  • VBakesVBakes Registered User
    Spackle wrote: »
    Marijuana should be available in the same way as alcohol.
    LSD and Psilocybin mushrooms should be available by prescription. That way, a trained doctor can explain the drug and give advice as far as do's and don't's, as well as assess the user's mental state, history of psychosis, etc. that could carry a risk.

    I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Meth in the addiction debate. According to some shit I saw on TV, smoking meth releases an amount of dopamine in the brain that makes an orgasm look like a pleasant sneeze.

    Also, www.erowid.org is THE online drug reference.

    I'm curious as to how one would get prescribed psychedelics from a Doctor.


    Timothy Leary hada good system for this, and had he not been thrown in jail for his experiments it probably wouldve worked.

    Therman Murman?......Jesus.
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Physicians are not the right people to do that, if anybody is. Part of their job is to dissuade recreational drug use, and there would be a lot of liability for discussing the risks of psychedelic drug use in a professional capacity.

    Even when the persciption drugs they'll give you without even talking about side effects are more dangerous?


    This is a part of the prpble here. Legal presciption drugs are much more prone to abuse these days than illegal drugs. Nobody shoots up herion anymore they get a Viciodin persciption. Presciption drug abuse is more socially acceptable but lots of the drugs are pretty much the same thing(albiet safer due to more controlled dosages) as street drugs.

    So when I was in the PO's office talking to her, I decided to be perfectly honset with her about everything I used. At one point she asked if there was anything else and I told her, "Well I finished off my Hydrocodone that was given to me when I got my wisdom teeth pulled." And she said "Well that was a perscription right? Thats fine."

    So appearently she either misunderstood me perscription drugs are fine to abuse.

  • DefunkerDefunker Registered User
    Spackle wrote: »
    So you want to make psychedelics more like the purchase of alcohol, Vincent?

    I think my qualm with making substances like that extremely easy to acquire is the amount of irresponsible use of the substance. I mean we already have a world of irresponsible alcohol users, a world of irresponsible shroom users just makes me nervous.

    Edit: Clarity

    So should we ban the sale of anything that holds a potential for irresponsible use?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SpackleSpackle Registered User
    Defunker wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    So you want to make psychedelics more like the purchase of alcohol, Vincent?

    I think my qualm with making substances like that extremely easy to acquire is the amount of irresponsible use of the substance. I mean we already have a world of irresponsible alcohol users, a world of irresponsible shroom users just makes me nervous.

    Edit: Clarity

    So should we ban the sale of anything that holds a potential for irresponsible use?

    No.

    As pointed out before, Psychedelics are highly un-predictable, especially user to user. You really think they're safe to be put on a shelf with a warning sticker for anyone to purchase?

    Also said before, some sort of screening would be needed to make sure the user meets certain criteria before ingesting.

    Taco Bell does win the franchise war according to the tome of knowledge that is Demolition Man. However, I've watched Demolition Man more then a few times and never once did I see WoW. In conclusion Taco Bell has more lasting power then WoW.
    D&D Metal Thread: HERE
  • djklaydjklay Registered User
    Spackle wrote: »

    No.

    As pointed out before, Psychedelics are highly un-predictable, especially user to user. You really think they're safe to be put on a shelf with a warning sticker for anyone to purchase?

    Also said before, some sort of screening would be needed to make sure the user meets certain criteria before ingesting.

    So you admit they're unpredictable, yet you want to screen people. How can you screen for something if the result is unpredictable? The screen will let people take it that shouldn't, and make it harder for people that should not take it get some. This doesn't solve anything it just adds a bureaucratic process to taking the substance. Why can't people just take responsibility for their actions? Whether high or not, you're still responsible, deal with it.

  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    djklay wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »

    No.

    As pointed out before, Psychedelics are highly un-predictable, especially user to user. You really think they're safe to be put on a shelf with a warning sticker for anyone to purchase?

    Also said before, some sort of screening would be needed to make sure the user meets certain criteria before ingesting.

    So you admit they're unpredictable, yet you want to screen people. How can you screen for something if the result is unpredictable? The screen will let people take it that shouldn't, and make it harder for people that should not take it get some. This doesn't solve anything it just adds a bureaucratic process to taking the substance. Why can't people just take responsibility for their actions? Whether high or not, you're still responsible, deal with it.
    We can fairly accurately predict the effects of a given psychedelic on an average, healthy person. We would be screening for people who are predisposed to mental illness such as schizophrenia, because that's where you typically run into problems.

  • SpackleSpackle Registered User
    I agree, Azio.

    djklay, I believe Azio said what I'm failing to say, screening so you at least know if the person is mentally stable or not. It wouldn't eliminate usage to the 'incorrect' parties as you've pointed out, however.

    Taco Bell does win the franchise war according to the tome of knowledge that is Demolition Man. However, I've watched Demolition Man more then a few times and never once did I see WoW. In conclusion Taco Bell has more lasting power then WoW.
    D&D Metal Thread: HERE
  • redxredx Dublin, CARegistered User regular
    are you talking about recreational use?

    Wouldn't that be a, legally, rather dangerous position? Like, places that serve alcohol and such have a certain degree of liability attached, in what you describe, that would like be a bit greater, and of course you would be wrong in your judgment frequently.

    Kinda from the point of view of the real world, the idea seems kinda foolhardy.

    RedX is taking a stab a moving out west, and will be near San Francisco from May 14 till June 29.
    Click here for a horrible H/A thread with details.
  • djklaydjklay Registered User
    Spackle wrote: »
    I agree, Azio.

    djklay, I believe Azio said what I'm failing to say, screening so you at least know if the person is mentally stable or not. It wouldn't eliminate usage to the 'incorrect' parties as you've pointed out, however.

    We agree it doesn't eliminate it I guess it comes down to how much it would actually help in the end. If it was legalized there would be more information readily available on the substances. Right now the internet is great for finding information but to the people that pick up pamphlets from health centres and such the information is fairly sparse. We have propaganda programs like DARE that equate marijuana with crack. I remember watching an informational video about how much LSD messed with your brain and it could turn you into a complete vegetable for the rest of your life. What I'm getting to is that if the factual information is easier to come by and more readily given then something like a screening may be redundant as people should be able to decide for themselves.

  • VBakesVBakes Registered User
    Spackle wrote: »
    Defunker wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    So you want to make psychedelics more like the purchase of alcohol, Vincent?

    I think my qualm with making substances like that extremely easy to acquire is the amount of irresponsible use of the substance. I mean we already have a world of irresponsible alcohol users, a world of irresponsible shroom users just makes me nervous.

    Edit: Clarity

    Psychedelics are highly un-predictable

    Yea, cause booze isnt.

    Therman Murman?......Jesus.
  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    VBakes wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    Defunker wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    So you want to make psychedelics more like the purchase of alcohol, Vincent?

    I think my qualm with making substances like that extremely easy to acquire is the amount of irresponsible use of the substance. I mean we already have a world of irresponsible alcohol users, a world of irresponsible shroom users just makes me nervous.

    Edit: Clarity

    Psychedelics are highly un-predictable

    Yea, cause booze isnt.

    Maybe, but a handle of Jim Beam won't drive you literally insane for twelve hours. You might get wasted and pass out or crash a car, but there really is no ground for comparisons between drugs like LSD and Mescaline and alchohol and marijuana, particularly from a legal standpoint.

    reposig.jpg
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/07/13/pot-toronto.html?ref=rss
    The CBC wrote:
    A Toronto judge has ruled that Canada's pot possession laws are unconstitutional after a man argued the country's medicinal marijuana regulations are flawed.

    The 29-year-old Toronto resident had been charged with possession of about 3.5 grams or roughly $45 dollars worth of marijuana.

    The man has no medical issues and doesn't want a medical exemption to smoke marijuana. In 2001, Health Canada implemented the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, which allow access to marijuana to people who are suffering from grave and debilitating illnesses.

    In court, the man argued that the federal government only made it policy to provide marijuana to those who need it, but never made it an actual law. Because of that, he argued, all possession laws, whether medicinal or not, should be quashed.

    The judge agreed and dismissed the charges.

    "The government told the public not to worry about access to marijuana," said Judge Howard Borenstein. "They have a policy but not law.… In my view that is unconstitutional."

    Defence lawyer Brian McAllister, who represented the man, said the ramifications of the ruling have potential to be "pretty big."

    "Obviously, there's thousands of people that get charged with this offence every year," he said.

    McAllister said Ontario residents charged with possessing marijuana now have a new defence.

    "That's probably why the government will likely appeal the decision," he said.

    Borenstein has given prosecutors two weeks before he makes his ruling official. Prosecutors told CBC News they want a speedy appeal to overturn the decision.

    "For the time being, nothing changes," Toronto police spokesman Mark Pugash said about how the force deals with marijuana possession. "We have to wait and see what happens with the process through the courts."

  • CodeCode Registered User
    Fandyien wrote: »
    VBakes wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    Defunker wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    So you want to make psychedelics more like the purchase of alcohol, Vincent?

    I think my qualm with making substances like that extremely easy to acquire is the amount of irresponsible use of the substance. I mean we already have a world of irresponsible alcohol users, a world of irresponsible shroom users just makes me nervous.

    Edit: Clarity

    Psychedelics are highly un-predictable

    Yea, cause booze isnt.

    Maybe, but a handle of Jim Beam won't drive you literally insane for twelve hours. You might get wasted and pass out or crash a car, but there really is no ground for comparisons between drugs like LSD and Mescaline and alchohol and marijuana, particularly from a legal standpoint.
    Unless you are thinking of some other drug that I am not aware of, neither do any of the psychadelics that I have had any experience with. This is a big problem in the US, the incredible amount of misinformation, and outright lies that the DARE program, among others have spread. Ignorance annoys me, even more so when it is ignorance that is supported and encouraged by an established educational system.

  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    Fandyien wrote: »
    Maybe, but a handle of Jim Beam won't drive you literally insane for twelve hours. You might get wasted and pass out or crash a car, but there really is no ground for comparisons between drugs like LSD and Mescaline and alchohol and marijuana, particularly from a legal standpoint.

    I think it's funny that this reads like you consider crashing a car to be a minor side-effect as compared to being loopy for half a day.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    Azio wrote: »
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/07/13/pot-toronto.html?ref=rss
    The CBC wrote:

    The 29-year-old Toronto resident had been charged with possession of about 3.5 grams or roughly $45 dollars worth of marijuana.

    Man that guy is getting fucken ripped. Thats like double the regular Toronto price.

    /nothing real to contribute...

  • GorakGorak Registered User
    Al_wat wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/07/13/pot-toronto.html?ref=rss
    The CBC wrote:

    The 29-year-old Toronto resident had been charged with possession of about 3.5 grams or roughly $45 dollars worth of marijuana.

    Man that guy is getting fucken ripped. Thats like double the regular Toronto price.

    /nothing real to contribute...

    Drug values are always inflated in the media. Partly because they use a hypothetical "street value" when referring to drug busts and partly because media types get over charged.

  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    Gorak wrote: »
    Al_wat wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/07/13/pot-toronto.html?ref=rss
    The CBC wrote:

    The 29-year-old Toronto resident had been charged with possession of about 3.5 grams or roughly $45 dollars worth of marijuana.

    Man that guy is getting fucken ripped. Thats like double the regular Toronto price.

    /nothing real to contribute...

    Drug values are always inflated in the media. Partly because they use a hypothetical "street value" when referring to drug busts and partly because media types get over charged.
    It's the cops, too. They pretty much flat-out lie about the value of a bust so that everyone will think they're doing their jobs. And, of course, busting a guy for an eighth is all kinds of bullshit. Hopefully the ruling will be upheld, that ought to teach the assholes a lesson.

  • GorakGorak Registered User
    Azio wrote: »
    And, of course, busting a guy for an eighth is all kinds of bullshit.

    It also skews the enforcement towards the young and poor who are more likely to buy on the street. If I buy an eighth, it's a friend who comes round and drops it off then stays for a cup of tea and a chat or I'm going to a friends house and say, "if you're picking up, grab an eighth for me and I'll pick up some beers."

  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User
    I'm against drug laws for some drugs as much as the rest of you, but a basic understanding of the brain and the way drugs affect it should be enough to convince you that some are way too fucking powerful for the human brain to handle.

    People who do coke for years are still completely fucking destroyed the first time they do crack. Things like crack and meth are so potent that I really don't see why they should be lumped in with other drugs, like psychadelics or powder cocaine. They're on a different order. They should be treated differently.

    HOW DO YOU FUCK UP BAGELS. YOU BOIL THE WATER. PUT IN THE NOODLES
  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    Code wrote: »
    Fandyien wrote: »
    VBakes wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    Defunker wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    So you want to make psychedelics more like the purchase of alcohol, Vincent?

    I think my qualm with making substances like that extremely easy to acquire is the amount of irresponsible use of the substance. I mean we already have a world of irresponsible alcohol users, a world of irresponsible shroom users just makes me nervous.

    Edit: Clarity

    Psychedelics are highly un-predictable

    Yea, cause booze isnt.

    Maybe, but a handle of Jim Beam won't drive you literally insane for twelve hours. You might get wasted and pass out or crash a car, but there really is no ground for comparisons between drugs like LSD and Mescaline and alchohol and marijuana, particularly from a legal standpoint.
    Unless you are thinking of some other drug that I am not aware of, neither do any of the psychadelics that I have had any experience with. This is a big problem in the US, the incredible amount of misinformation, and outright lies that the DARE program, among others have spread. Ignorance annoys me, even more so when it is ignorance that is supported and encouraged by an established educational system.

    Actually, I've done LSD a number of times, as well as quite a few other psychadelics. And, quite frankly, a large dose of concentrated LSD will drive you to a point of near-insanity. It's incredibly fun and can be quite eye opening; however, you shouldn't be so willing to attribute negative points about psychadelic use to 'ignorance'.

    And I'm not saying being "loopy for half the day" is, in any sense of the word, worse than crashing a car. If someone can responsibly use a psychadelic drug in the same fashion as a more benign chemical, then more power to them; I'm simply pointing out the general trend towards irresponsibility and the proportionate danger of widespread usage of a very, very powerful drug.

    I fucking hate DARE and TRUTH and all of those other fearmongering programs. I respect and understand the power of most drugs, and my understanding of them leads me to feel a certain wariness about total legalization.

    [edit] I'm also not saying I'm totally against legalization of psychadelics, but simply that it bothers me when people compare marijuana/alchohol to LSD and strong psychadelics, because the duration and nature of the intoxication is so wildly different. It's an entirely different realm of debate, in my opinion, as to whether people should be free to use psychadelic drugs. I personally beleive they should, but I've seen people take trips they simply weren't mentally prepared for, and the consequences can be disastrous.

    A bong hit or a few beers can't result in lasting psychosis. That doesn't mean the social value of such drugs is nil, but these things should still be considered.

    reposig.jpg
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User
    Fandyien wrote: »
    snip

    Also, what he said.

    HOW DO YOU FUCK UP BAGELS. YOU BOIL THE WATER. PUT IN THE NOODLES
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    Spackle wrote: »
    As pointed out before, Psychedelics are highly un-predictable, especially user to user. You really think they're safe to be put on a shelf with a warning sticker for anyone to purchase?

    They are unpredictable, but within certain parameters. I've never heard of LSD or shrooms stimulating violent behavior, unlike alcohol (or, say, meth or PCP). Rarely, if ever, do people on LSD or shrooms suddenly decide that they're okay to drive a car, unlike drunks. And rarely, if ever, do LSD or shrooms cause unpredictable physical effects like a heart attack (unlike meth or coke) or respiratory depression (unlike alcohol or heroin).

    That's why I say that they're unpredictable but not dangerous. There's a non-insignificant chance that somebody who is psychologically unprepared will have a bad trip and spend a few hours huddled in a corner. But part of turning a bad trip into a good trip is to realize that as fear, even crippling fear, doesn't actually hurt you. Not everybody groks that. In a world where physicians wrote 'prescriptions' for LSD or shrooms, I could see some idiot having a bad trip, then suing the doctor for pain and suffering due to his psychological trauma. I personally think that would be a really pathetic thing to do, but pathetic people find new ways to surprise me all the time.

    I am comforted by Richard Dawkins’ theory of memes. Those are mental units: thoughts, ideas, gestures, notions, songs, beliefs, rhymes, ideals, teachings, sayings, phrases, clichés that move from mind to mind as genes move from body to body. After a lifetime of writing, teaching, broadcasting and telling too many jokes, I will leave behind more memes than many. They will all also eventually die, but so it goes. - Roger Ebert, I Do Not Fear Death
  • FandyienFandyien But Otto, what about us? Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Spackle wrote: »
    As pointed out before, Psychedelics are highly un-predictable, especially user to user. You really think they're safe to be put on a shelf with a warning sticker for anyone to purchase?

    They are unpredictable, but within certain parameters. I've never heard of LSD or shrooms stimulating violent behavior, unlike alcohol (or, say, meth or PCP). Rarely, if ever, do people on LSD or shrooms suddenly decide that they're okay to drive a car, unlike drunks. And rarely, if ever, do LSD or shrooms cause unpredictable physical effects like a heart attack (unlike meth or coke) or respiratory depression (unlike alcohol or heroin).

    That's why I say that they're unpredictable but not dangerous. There's a non-insignificant chance that somebody who is psychologically unprepared will have a bad trip and spend a few hours huddled in a corner. But part of turning a bad trip into a good trip is to realize that as fear, even crippling fear, doesn't actually hurt you. Not everybody groks that. In a world where physicians wrote 'prescriptions' for LSD or shrooms, I could see some idiot having a bad trip, then suing the doctor for pain and suffering due to his psychological trauma. I personally think that would be a really pathetic thing to do, but pathetic people find new ways to surprise me all the time.


    You have to understand that the psychological effects of psychadelics isn't innately transient. Permanent harm can, in fact, be done; HPPD ranges from insignifcant to nearly crippling, and can certainly affect someones daily life. Additionally, the effects of HPPD are subjective, and you can succumb to a mild case of it from dropping acid once or twice. I know I've noticed certain changes in my vision and pattern recognition.

    But you're right in that, for the most part, a bad trip is just a few hours of severe anxiety. Despite that, you can't entirely discount the possibility of schizophrenia, HPPD, or permanent psychosis or activation of latent mental problems.

    reposig.jpg
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Registered User regular
    Again, anecdotal, but the only people I've ever met/known of who've had a significant problem with psychadelics either were already clearly unhinged (like a few people I know with bipolar disorder who tended to get fucking crazy when tripping), or combined drugs (like coke with their acid, which fucked this woman up for the rest of her life, most likely).

    Otherwise, in years of tripping a lot of people, the worst thing that has happened is some people have had a bad trip and decided not to do it again.

  • GorakGorak Registered User
    Most of the dangers of tripping ae nullified by taking them with someone whose done them before. I've often talked someone out of their paranoia or just distracted them until it's gone.

    That said, my circle of friends are as just as likely to be the cause of the paranoia.

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Registered User regular
    Gorak wrote: »
    Most of the dangers of tripping ae nullified by taking them with someone whose done them before. I've often talked someone out of their paranoia or just distracted them until it's gone.

    That said, my circle of friends are as just as likely to be the cause of the paranoia.

    Hahaha...yeah. Last time my friends and I tripped, we had a sober friend around, because he's no longer a fan of the stuff, and he managed to convince my buddy's wife that one of her roommates had killed himself.

    Mean, sure, but it was pretty funny at the time.

  • GorakGorak Registered User
    Classy.

    One of my friends also has a habit of dosing up another of my friends for the fun of it. I remember staying up on ecstasy all night getting him progressively more fucked up and rounding it of with getting him to drop his last pill at about 10am before sending him off to lunch with his girlfriends parents.

    Somehow he's still with her.

  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Gorak wrote: »
    Classy.

    One of my friends also has a habit of dosing up another of my friends for the fun of it. I remember staying up on ecstasy all night getting him progressively more fucked up and rounding it of with getting him to drop his last pill at about 10am before sending him off to lunch with his girlfriends parents.

    Somehow he's still with her.

    That's hardly someone I'd like to call a friend.

    Unless I had a habit of beating freinds within an nch of thier lives with a crowbar.

    SC2 : nexuscrawler.381
  • TL DRTL DR Registered User regular
    Gorak wrote: »
    Classy.

    One of my friends also has a habit of dosing up another of my friends for the fun of it. I remember staying up on ecstasy all night getting him progressively more fucked up and rounding it of with getting him to drop his last pill at about 10am before sending him off to lunch with his girlfriends parents.

    Somehow he's still with her.

    That's hardly someone I'd like to call a friend.

    Unless I had a habit of beating freinds within an nch of thier lives with a crowbar.

    You might need to upgrade your monitor, because I'm liming this as hard as I possibly can.
    So lime.

    eokNV.jpg
  • AftyAfty Registered User regular
    Opinion !

    I don't have a problem with people using whatever they want to use so long as they aren't affecting me or anyone else who doesn't want to be affected by them.

    I do have a problem with the crime related to drug use however and imo that's not worth the high or whatever. If drug crime punishments (including possession) were more severe, the general populace would have less desire for it as it wouldn't be worth the risk.

    If there's less demand for something then there's less point in supplying it. Drug related crimes such a burglary would drop.

    I do find it sad however that if i neglect to drink on a night out with people i work with i get looks like im some sort of social retard.

    "Hey what do you want from the bar ?"
    "coke please"
    "you driving?"
    "no."
    "so why are you drinking coke?!?!?!?!11111"
    "....im .... thirsty"

    I find it very sad that people have to associate drinking/drug taking with having a good time. Doesn't say much about your character if you can't have a good time unless you're olol hammered.

  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    Afty wrote: »

    I find it very sad that people have to associate drinking/drug taking with having a good time. Doesn't say much about your character if you can't have a good time unless you're olol hammered.

    It's a completely different expirence. I can and do have plenty of good times without drugs, that doesn't mean, in any way, that I don't do drugs. There are certain drugs I will never try, even just to expirence them, because I know they would very easily destroy my life when I realised how much I liked them, but not wanting to expirence Marijuana/Alcohol is beyond me.

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Registered User regular
    Honestly, the "OLOL, if you can't have fun without drinking/drugs, you suck" thing is fucking retarded.

    No one I've ever met has suggested that you can't have a good time without being in an altered state.

    It's just that being in an altered state, at least, imo because it's not the state I spend 99% of my time in, is inherently more fun than not being in one. So, sure, I can and have had plenty of fun out with friends while totally sober. Most things are fun totally sober.

    But you know what? They're even more fun when I'm drunk or high.

  • IrohIroh Registered User
    At lot of pro-decriminalization arguments seem to me like they assume that the general population has enough personal responsibility to go about it safely. If alcohol can be considered an accurate benchmark for other substances, it doesn't make a strong case for legal drug use, at least in America.

    I guess as a point of discussion, what kinds of programs and/or restrictions do you think would be necessary to make decriminalization work?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Registered User regular
    Iroh wrote: »
    At lot of pro-decriminalization arguments seem to me like they assume that the general population has enough personal responsibility to go about it safely. If alcohol can be considered an accurate benchmark for other substances, it doesn't make a strong case for legal drug use, at least in America.

    I guess as a point of discussion, what kinds of programs and/or restrictions do you think would be necessary to make decriminalization work?

    I think the argument largely goes "We should be able to do what we want, within reasonable limits". The limits imposed on liquor make sense as far as a simple benchmark for the best place to start, imo.

    Most of the problem with alcohol comes from poor enforcement of the laws we have, which are largely reasonable.

  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    Afty wrote: »
    I do have a problem with the crime related to drug use however and imo that's not worth the high or whatever. If drug crime punishments (including possession) were more severe, the general populace would have less desire for it as it wouldn't be worth the risk.
    This is utterly retarded. Why do you think the war on drugs has been a complete failure?

  • AftyAfty Registered User regular
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    but not wanting to expirence Marijuana/Alcohol is beyond me.

    I drink on occasion and have experience Marijuana more than once, but it didnt do anything for me. why its beyond you is surprising though, not everyone wants the same experiences out of life, some people like basejumping - its not for me.

    Iroh wrote:
    At lot of pro-decriminalization arguments seem to me like they assume that the general population has enough personal responsibility to go about it safely. If alcohol can be considered an accurate benchmark for other substances, it doesn't make a strong case for legal drug use, at least in America.

    Same goes for england, walk down any high street in any city on a friday/saturday night. it's unpleasant to say the least.
    Honestly, the "OLOL, if you can't have fun without drinking/drugs, you suck" thing is fucking retarded.

    In the same way as my example of "why the hell don't you want a drink, its friday night!!"

    But you know what, i have more fun when i'm not drunk or high plus i haven't spent a load of money and i don't feel like shit the day after, i even remember everything that happened.

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Registered User regular
    Afty wrote: »
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    but not wanting to expirence Marijuana/Alcohol is beyond me.

    I drink on occasion and have experience Marijuana more than once, but it didnt do anything for me. why its beyond you is surprising though, not everyone wants the same experiences out of life, some people like basejumping - its not for me.

    Iroh wrote:
    At lot of pro-decriminalization arguments seem to me like they assume that the general population has enough personal responsibility to go about it safely. If alcohol can be considered an accurate benchmark for other substances, it doesn't make a strong case for legal drug use, at least in America.

    Same goes for england, walk down any high street in any city on a friday/saturday night. it's unpleasant to say the least.
    Honestly, the "OLOL, if you can't have fun without drinking/drugs, you suck" thing is fucking retarded.

    In the same way as my example of "why the hell don't you want a drink, its friday night!!"

    But you know what, i have more fun when i'm not drunk or high plus i haven't spent a load of money and i don't feel like shit the day after, i even remember everything that happened.

    See, I'm not sure why you're feeling the need to attack me, or my position (or rather, your flawed perception of my position).

    I too don't spend a load of money, nor do I forget the entertaining events of the night before. I was simply correcting the oft repeated, yet erronous belief that anyone is "needing" something to have fun...they're just having more fun with it.

    Maybe you don't, and that's fine. I never suggested otherwise. And while I don't think there's any reason to be upset at your friends offering you a drink, or perhaps inquiring as to why you're uninterested, if they persisted, I agree, that'd be obnoxious.

  • AftyAfty Registered User regular
    In no way were my comments meant as an attack on anyone in particular, but general observations from my own experience, my comments were leaning more towards alcohol than drugs, which maybe i should've made clearer.

    You said that my point of view was "fucking retarded" and maybe i was a tad sarcastic in my response, sorry.

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Registered User regular
    Afty wrote: »
    In no way were my comments meant as an attack on anyone in particular, but general observations from my own experience, my comments were leaning more towards alcohol than drugs, which maybe i should've made clearer.

    You said that my point of view was "fucking retarded" and maybe i was a tad sarcastic in my response, sorry.

    As I mentioned, that was only because your "point of view" was based on something very few people actually think (that they won't have fun if they don't get drunk).

    But yeah, I largely agree that getting yourself wasted to the point of forgetting what happened and/or blowing half your paycheck at the bar is stupid, and not particularly fun.

Sign In or Register to comment.