When you get to the bottom you go back to the top of the slide
Where you stop and you turn and you go for a ride
Till you get to the bottom and you see us again.[/quote]
First of all, this is the first song quote I’ve seen from Tigerman that isn’t from the Dead.
Second, Shenne Niao wrote ‘I don’t see any chromosome damage from millions of people taking millions of trips.’ (paraphrase). Just how are you able to “see” it, and how do you know there isn’t longterm damage that won’t express itself immediately at the cellular level. Not that I agree or disagree, but just curious how you see “chromosomal damage.” Is it like “I see dead people” kind of power?
There is no better tune to run against than The Chemical Brothers “Believe,” from Push the Button. Stick around for “Hold Tight London,” though: you’ll never regret it.
Second best is ACDC’s Back in Black. All choices, of course, are imo only and at top volume.
Both make it easy to kick in at about 7mph for at least 30 glorious, blurry, hallucinogenic, sweat-drenched, euphoric minutes each and every day.
er…
Thanks to a long-time, discreet, and shockingly whole-despite-his-degenerate-nature friend, I have been able to drop a tab or two at one weekend each and every spring for two and a half decades now.
There is no better tune to run against than The Chemical Brothers “Believe,” from Push the Button. Stick around for “Hold Tight London,” though: you’ll never regret it.
Second best is ACDC’s Back in Black. All choices, of course, are imo only and at top volume.
Both make it easy to kick in at about 7mph for at least 30 glorious, blurry, hallucinogenic, sweat-drenched, euphoric minutes each and every day.
er…
Thanks to a long-time, discreet, and shockingly whole-despite-his-degenerate-nature friend, I have been able to drop a tab or two at one weekend each and every spring for two and a half decades now.
Here’s to two and half more, plus, if I’m lucky. [/quote]
My friend told me that 2 or 3 grams of Turbo Blues ( those awesome mushrooms from Stanford), a quarter ounce of the cripple bud (and maybe just enough Gak to make some Coco Puffs), and a fridge full of Coronas sitting on a deck overlooking the Santa Barbara beach on a beautiful spring day is the culmination of life itself. It just doesn’t get any better than that.
No, but I think the country you were reffering to was Britain, so dont pull that one.
Or were you reffering to every country in the world, in which case, you’re still wrong.
No, but I think the country you were reffering to was Britain, so dont pull that one.[/quote]
You’ll notice that I was quoting Eric W. Lier who in turn quoted from the Taipei Times. So you thought wrong. You carry on pulling whatever it is you like to pull.
Unlike you who are never wrong…oops…see above.
On a more civilised note, I have been look for any info on the UK gov ‘giving’ testing kits, but came up with a blank. I know you can get them in the UK, but I didn’t know there were any government approved/backed ones. Any info into this would really be appreciated.
Most of the dangers of drugs stem from them being illegal.
To buy them you have to associate with criminals. You could be getting something horribly poisonous instead of a relatively safe drug. Dosage is hard to measure. There’s not a lot of reliable health information given out. Risks are exageratted and fabricated, leading people to ignore the real, lesser risks which they assume to also be false.
Personally, as some kind of libertarian, I think all drugs should be legal. It’s none of the government’s business.
Never said I was never wrong - I’ve just never got over you calling me a Daily Mail reader. :raspberry:
It’s sometimes incorporated into the confidential and free needle exchange scheme operated by certain pivately owned clinics and chemists.
The needle exchange scheme is sponsored by the government in the UK. I believe testing kits were also available (at a cost) through your GP but I can’t remember.
The legality issue is certainly one of the most contested questions about drug use and its associated dangers. Would drugs really be safer if they were legal?
If Beechams were able to produce drugs to sell on the High Street, at least you would know that the Heroin you are buying alongside your toothpaste and panadol is of safe quality.
However, what is to prevent cheaper drugs being produced underground? Surely underground competition would be more dangerous than it is now as costs would be severely cut in order to get the stuff out.
[quote]I think all drugs should be legal. It’s none of the government’s business.
[/quote]
I think if the government spend millions of pounds or dollars on research, law enforcement and health care for those who use drugs and get themselves fried by drugs to such an extent that they need hospitalisation; and for my local government to set up a dedicated needle collection service because the used needles abandoned in the park pose such a threat to local residents, then it’s the governments business.
Also, just like alcohol and tobacco - if the government of any country were to make drugs legal - it would still need to be regulated.
Because of current supply and demand, currently drugs are quite expensive. Just because a large multinational company produces and sells drugs legally to an open market doesn’t mean that the price would necessarily reduce. Given the current mentality of drug companies, price fixing would ensue and I’m certain that given half the chance, drugs would be nearly as expensive as they are now.
Of course this means that they are still not accessible to many people who use drugs so crime in the form of theft, burglary and robbery would still exist. A government should be able to place restrictions on price hiking and levvy an appropriate tax.
Loss of work for companies when employees take 5 day trips, flashback or become otherwise incapable of working is also a point which has to be considered. Are they a danger to other people? How much are companies responsible for their employees? What are the rules and regulations involving dismissing members of a company or orgnisation for being “high” all the time?
How many millions of man hours will be lost every year due to drug (mis)use?
It’s not just a case of the government sticking their nose in.
[quote]If Beechams were able to produce drugs to sell on the High Street, at least you would know that the Heroin you are buying alongside your toothpaste and panadol is of safe quality.
However, what is to prevent cheaper drugs being produced underground? Surely underground competition would be more dangerous than it is now as costs would be severely cut in order to get the stuff out.
[/quote]
Tobacco and alcohol are taxed to hell, but very few people make and sell cheap unsafe homemade versions.
Dangermouse, you make valid points about the problems with legalising all drugs. They would need to be regulated and taxed. (Taxation could cover the cost to society). To me it’s more of an idealistic stance, than a practical option in today’s world. Maybe if you were somehow starting a scoiety from scratch or could go back 100 years and change the way the world dealt with drugs.
getting high has never interested me. i am however intrgued by the thought that blocked nueral pathways may be opened by chemicals. if so, then perhaps these drugs IF PERFECTED could be used for advanced problem solving in astrophysics and such.
[quote=“Bu Lai En”]Most of the dangers of drugs stem from them being illegal.
To buy them you have to associate with criminals. You could be getting something horribly poisonous instead of a relatively safe drug. Dosage is hard to measure. There’s not a lot of reliable health information given out. Risks are exageratted and fabricated, leading people to ignore the real, lesser risks which they assume to also be false.
Personally, as some kind of libertarian, I think all drugs should be legal. It’s none of the government’s business.
Brian[/quote]
I’d say “a lot” of the dangers associated with drug use come from their being illegal. They are plenty dangerous enough in and of themselves too however. Consider this though, the worst culprit is the one that is legal, alcohol. And that is not just my opinion. A few years ago the American Medical Establishment issued a statement to the effect that from their point of view, gained mostly from emergency room experience, alcohol causes more damage than all the other drugs “combined.” Violence, suicide, addiction, over dose (called alcohol poisoning) that kind of thing.
Alcohol is a particularly bad drug because of the effect it has on people’s personalities, because it is so insidiously addictive and because if you drink too much at one time it will kill you. If cocaine and heroin were made legal the problems that we see associated with these drugs would be exacerbated because a lot more people would use them. If you keep them illegal though their distribution remains under the control of criminals. The only way to avoid the evils of both situation is to have their distribution tightly controlled by the government. Educate people about drugs and make them available to people in limited quantities provided that they show an understanding of the dangers involved. The money raised in this way could be funneled back into the problem to run treatment centers for addicts. A portion of the money raised from alcohol should be used for the same purpose. With halucinagenic drugs their is not much potential for addiction but their is enormous potential for damage particularly with people who possess a predisposition for psychosis. People who have a predisposition to being narrow minded, depressive lump heads could probably benefit from them. Why not help people to understand these things and use drugs in an enlightened productive mannner. It has to be better than what is happening now with criminals selling drugs to the uninformed who then often go and mix these drugs with alcohol in chaotic settings. I guess I agree with bu ai lan in the sense that drugs should be legal. I do however think that they should be tightly controlled.
[quote=“Satellite TV”]
Still I’d rather my kids don’t mess with drugs.[/quote]
Yes, and I’d rather my kids didn’t have sex, either, but you can’t change basic human nature. As a parent, sometimes you just have to close your eyes and ignore it. As a son, I didn’t like to think about my parents have sex (and together!..where’s the vomit emoticon?), or getting drunk or smoking weed, even though I knew that they did all those things before.
Excuse me? If my kid ever touch drugs, I won’t close my eyes and ignore it, what kind of parent will ever do that?
Drugs are bad and hurt your body. Period countless research and scientist have proven that. They shouldn’t be legalized at all. No success as ever come from drug use. there has never been a shining success because of drug use.
Something like, "Well, look at me people, I have succeeded in my life, I have a wonderful business, a great family, I have raised 2 wonderful kids and I would like to thank MJ or Cocaine, Crack or whatever you like.
No success has ever come from drugs.
They harm your body and mind, now you can ignore that, don’t believe it or “know better” it ain’t changing the facts.
[quote=“igorveni”]No success as ever come from drug use. there has never been a shining success because of drug use.
Something like, "Well, look at me people, I have succeeded in my life, I have a wonderful business, a great family, I have raised 2 wonderful kids and I would like to thank MJ or Cocaine, Crack or whatever you like.
No success has ever come from drugs.[/quote]
Jack Kerouac, Hunter S Thompson, Bill Hicks, Robin Williams, every single person who’s ever made a success out of techno… Shakespeare was a crackhead too, if I remember right.
