Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Have you taken many?
What would you not be wiling to take?
What drugs do you think should be made legal?
that said, heroin almost wrecked my life. It's subtle and insiduous and before you know it, it's your new lifestyle, where your entire day revolves around it. For what it's worth, cocaine is even worse.
Drugs should be legal because people ought to have the right to destroy their lives any way they see fit.
But don't do it. If you can't drink and/or use in a responsible manner-- and I've never met someone who can shoot dope like a gentleman-- then don't do it.
Just say no.
...it's the Hammersmith hardmen.
I thought drugs were cool and would provide me with a steady clear future but the cast of Saved by the Bell convinced me otherwise.
Do TV shows still do things like that?
Not a problem anymore like, everyone listened to Saved by the Bell and Captain Planet everything is ok now.
was quite big news. Bono wore a white suit or something.
If tomorrow all drugs were made legal people would go try most within the week if it was relatively cheap, then habits would eventually form and we would have a less productive society economically but then again alot of people would be employed in the distribution and production of the drugs and competition would mean less dangerous drugs.
the shamen (not Mr C) came to live in my squat in islington.
so i had some with them
cos there had been a few 'banned' singles, and yet to see the bbc idiot dj's like mike reid being so 'not getting it' when everyone else did, was enormous fun
...it's not all bad.
I drink alcohol and caffiene. Took some prescribed sleeping pills for a little while.
I R naughty.
Actually I smoked a joint for the first time in MONTHS last night. Take THAT system.
heroin = pretty mellow; but pot would fuck me up! Waaayyy stronger...and less itchy. Plus you've got that whole glaucoma thing beat. Yes, that's my advice. Smoke a lot of weed, kids.
I smoke weed on occasion. Don't do anything else. Not even drinking.
a)Hardly any, really. Just hashcakes and mushroom tea (or was it yougurt? - urgh.). Hashcakes are sound enough. Mushrooms were interesting for about half an hour, but then it got tedious.
b) Willing? That's an odd word to use. Like it's a dare, or something. Legality isn't really my major concern above reliability of a 'pure' supply. Having said that, the only thing I was ever interested in (aside from the above) when I was younger was trips. My mates were pretty much trying anything going, but I was never interested inthe uppers or downers (boring. Lame side effects.). But the round-and-rounders intrigued me (no real side effects according to our school info. as long as you don't think you can fly and then throw yourself out of a window). In reality, I've always loved booze to much to be fussed about actually giving 'em a whirl.
c) Everything. With appropriate regulation. Blanket prohibition on apparently arbitrary lines is plain stupidity.
is love :'(
The punishment should be sending them back in time?
That'd show them.
...especially as everyone knows that John Lennon only invented drugs in 1966.
2) I wouldn't be willing to try any.
3) don't really care enough about drugs to have a strong opinion on whether they should be legal or not.
I don't have a problem with people who take drugs (each to their own, they can do whatever they like) but they're not for me and I wouldn't be friends with someone who forced them upon me. I think they're a waste of my time and money and I probably wouldn't like it anyway.
oi oi oi oi oi oi oi oi oi oi oi
You know how some people can take drugs, have a nice time and not freak out at all, and go to the pub and laugh about it the next day? I'm not one of those people.
b. See above - none of them.
c. All of them.
I'm unfortunate enough to know people who shouldn't take drugs and who aren't able to make the connection between their fucked up headstate and drama filled life with their continued use of various types of narcotic (legal and illegal, recreational and 'medicinal').
If only people weren't so fucking stupid, then we wouldn't have to have the nanny state looming over everyone going 'No, some fuckwit tried to fly out a window so we can't trust any of you with this stuff'
You only hear about these morons who go on stabbing sprees or who run around naked thinking they're on fire or some shite, you don't hear about the stories of habitual recreational drug users continuing to keep down a steady job and pay their bills, getting an honours or masters and achieving levels of respect and authority in their career or chosen vocation. No. You hear about the lazy bellends who drop out, the spazzy chancers who really didn't want to work anyway, the people who had a chemical imbalance ALREADY but who have had their mental illness attributed to some banned substance, the people who were too fucking dim to try to take off from the fucking ground the first time they tried to fly.
Bloody annoys me. Belms always, ALWAYS spoil the fun for everyone else.
Know your limits children. It's the best way to avoid fucking up too badly.
Anyone tried this before? I imagine it is a pretty good mix or is it?
Take the e first. Once you've levelled out on the e, take the acid.
Also, try to take another e as the acid is wearing off.
Try to spend some time during the acid bit outside, that's if you aren't able to do the whole thing outside. Open green spaces are best for tripping IMO. Someone's bedsit with twenty other punters, not always geared for the best response on the drugs.
if you feel the need to try flying,
start from the ground
not from the top of a tree or a building.
Imagine you are a duck or a swan instead of a pigeon.
It messes up your shatners bassoon
U HLFE LYFSTL MKN BRN NO WRK PRPLY?
You are not funny.
Sometimes you might have a legitimate reason to argue but you have to back down because of the circumstance.
Jerry Jackson talks about Drugs:
it could be that regulation could be enforced to inhibit smoking so that others do not have to inhale, because regulation should be able to intervene (in an overcrowded planet) to prevent peoples right to do anything if that then imppinges on others rights to not have someting they dont want, to happen to them.
Therefore if there is any prohibition then there should be a clearly stated reasoning for it, this reasoning should be good, and as such should be open to challenges and debate and review, the reasoning should not be based on ill founded suspicions but on facts and reason, and should also be able to be challenged using uneveness of laws (i.e. the gov gets revenue from fags and booze and can therefore be seen as part of this industry, in effect they are inplicit in these drugs trade, any argument against other drugs should also be applied to the gov....i.e. if it is illegal to knowingly allow illegal druks to be imbibed on your premises (which it is) because they might argue that these druks are harmful to health, then the root of this illegality would then also apply to the government, i.e. they know full well that booze and fags are sold and consumed on their turf.....in fact they charge people for this........imagine the equivalent, charging people to buy and sell and consume illegal druks on their premises.......the authorities would do them and condemn them)
It is unfortunate that two of the most harmful drugs, physically, psychologically and socially are the most easily available.
My usual pro-drugs statements follow;
Prohibition doesn't work. Drug use has increased in the years which the 'WAR ON DRUGS' has occurred, this is a clear and unarguable FACT.
Decriminalisation and legalisation of currently illegal narcotics could lead to the following;
Decrease in criminal activity (on a number of levels, from petty to international crime (ie smuggling)) which would free up resources which are currently being drained from the public coffers in terms of prisons and policing.
Increased tax revenue
Greater scope for quality control
Greater scope for improving public education on drugs issues
Greater scope for research into long term drug use as the stigma attached to such studies would be removed
Removal of a 'social bogeyman' which would result in politicians maybe having to do some actual work to improve society rather than just going 'DEM BAD JUNKIES WILL STEAL AND RAPE YOUR BABIES FOR TEH HEROINS' in order to scare ignorant people into voting for them.
Often overlooked. People have a pretty good idea of the risks of drinking and smoking, and (especially in the latter case) plenty of people stay away as a result. By contrast there's very little knowledge of the risks of controlled drugs. Another reason to think legalisation wouldn't (over time) be as much of a disaster as people think.
I know CG is obviously trolling above, but it illustrates the problem neatly: people's attitudes towards drugs are dictated by their attitudes to drug users and drug culture. That's not right: the latter is more a symptom of prohibition than a cause.
Like oR says, there is some value in giving people a choice whether to risk the side-effects. There's also value in the good effects of using drugs, much as some people might not want to admit it. Legalisation also has collateral benefits: it gives us a chance to regulate, and to tax people as a way of fairly pricing the remaining risks associated with use.
The counter-argument is probably strongest for a drug like heroin. Maybe we could expect things to go substantially worse in some respects if it were legal, given its potentially ruinous effects. (The potential consequences of misinformation in people's choices are too high to risk.) But even in this case I don't think that's clear. Tally up the costs of heroin-related gang violence and I wouldn't be surprised if this offset any alleged gains of criminalisation.
how would that actually happen? Like, where would the state or whoever get the drugs from? Surely it wouldn't come from the existing routes, because that would be fucking ridiculous..? All i can see would happen is that they would have to legalise production in Britain. But this would be very expensive i imagine for various reasons, and if you add tax on to that then market price is gonna be pretty high. Given how sort of institutionalised the pre-existing black market is in society, surely people will just continue to use that for cheaper prices?
I don't know much about all this but yeah just wondered.
of something like weed at least. Sure it needs special equipment and stuff, but not a lot more than most standard crops I'm guessing.
This is based off a BBC3 documentary though, so make of it what you will
its a plant, people grow plants, the UK is actually rather good at gardening
like there is in bootleg fags and booze now. I agree it might maketeh product a bit pricier, but the increase in quality would make it worthwhile for me. I would love to be able to have a line of coke and not realise too late that it's bene cut with K, and oh fuck my arms have gone superlong and bendy again, and THIS IS NOT COOL because I am in BAR, NOT ON A BEANBAG. case in point being Methadrone- personally I'm not a fan of the stuff, but I do know people who still take it, and they say quality has bombed terribly since you stopped being able to buy it form 'smoking shops' and the like. Just, for goodness sake, allow peoplel. to self-medicate with a little bit of reliability. It's quite clear that making it illegal doens't stip people fom doing it, so just let them do it safely? (or as safe as it is possible to be, given the fact you're ingesting toxins.)
AND I'M NOT EVEN ON DRUGZ.
everything else was background noise.
But yeah, it'd be nice to just pop into (say) a newsagent and be able tog et some weed, rather than through a-friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend and blah. Also the fact that the only plausible reason they're currently illegal is because they've been that way for ages, there's nothing that actually makes most of the prohibited drugs any worse than alcohol or cigarettes. Or at least not bad enough to take the choice out of our hands.
Damn, now you've made me sound like a libertarian ...
This will ensure a high quality product. It would be sold with a high tax and still be cheaper than the black market as the costs are low because unemployed people can be used to water the plants.
this would cost nothing, people dont need money for it, no opportunity for crime here
not in i want a bigger hit way, just in im bored of it now.
Was doing some Ketamine sporadically for a few months, pretty good drug imho in the right atmosphere. Got bored of it now really though. Had the same thing with weed a year back and now kinda bored. Had some good coke the other day though.