A lot more people drink alcohol than take mushrooms.
If the same amount of people took mushrooms, we then might be able to make a comparison.
why are magic mushrooms illegal
- Thread starter RadoX
- Start date
A lot more people drink alcohol than take mushrooms.
If the same amount of people took mushrooms, we then might be able to make a comparison.
For me, acid is very much an 'in your face' drug. There's no getting away from it.
With mushrooms I could either engage people in these amazing, interesting, energetic conversations or I could be calm and quiet and just trip balls.
so isnt this just natural selection, theres also plenty of stupid people who will not look when they cross the road. After a few hours research on the internet you couldnt pick anything but magic mushrooms.
Last edited:
no there arn't iirc there's only 2 found in the uk which are toxic enough to do serious harm.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,315
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
They also have great benefits. It should be down to the individual to chose in all but the most extreme cases.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 4,681
- Location
- Bromley, Kent
@ RadoX - This isn't something you can put down to that, what a silly thought
@ Tefal - I think you're right there are only 2 types, however I've seen them often enough to know that they aren't hard to find
- GP
@ Tefal - I think you're right there are only 2 types, however I've seen them often enough to know that they aren't hard to find
- GP
cant exacly mistake them for lib caps can you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2007
- Posts
- 3,317
- Location
- Cognac, France
because they don't want you thinking there's anything more to life other than what they show you on the tv 
And I wonder why that is?
I'm not a mushroom expert but I'm guessing that some are stronger than others, and taking more of the mushroom (certain amounts) would strengthen the effects.
Just like the difference between vodka and beer, and how do we know that there is a difference? Because there is labels on the back telling us the alcoholic percentage.
Alcohol is moderated, and if mushrooms were moderated too people wouldn't go over the top like they do with Alcohol.
However I don't know how shrooms work and maybe a little bit is just as bad as a lot of mushrooms (don't see how that would work though.
So comparing those two is pointless and using that you know you're getting drunk is pointless too and a bad comparison.
Because you know how much you're consuming when taking alcohol because the government makes sure you KNOW how much you're taking.
--
Also people when taking drugs or shrooms usually take one hit and they're gone. However with alcohol it's different because you take smaller quantities of alcohol and progressively build up the drunkenness. If there was a universal shot that instantly got people to 'being drunk' then you would have lots of people who, get drunk, don't get drunk, and for some it would be too much just like with people taking a mushroom.
Fact is people saying if drugs were legal people would abuse it. Well people abuse everything and that's life. If the government moderates things and does as much public campaigning on drink safe etc as it would on other drugs then people (the majority of the time) would be safe on things like mushrooms.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2007
- Posts
- 3,317
- Location
- Cognac, France
Hallucinogens were traditionally used as a tool by shamans to see through the 'veil' - they really shouldn't be used by idiots as a social drug like ecstasy or alcohol.
Alcohol 40 million users 40,000 deaths a year
LSD 83,000 users 0 deaths a year
couldn't find detailed usage stats about mushrooms so i thought id use LSD instead as its equally as harmless.
source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/drugs/survey/
this is for people who wanted the stats comparing to the ammount of users to deaths.
LSD 83,000 users 0 deaths a year
couldn't find detailed usage stats about mushrooms so i thought id use LSD instead as its equally as harmless.
source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/drugs/survey/
this is for people who wanted the stats comparing to the ammount of users to deaths.
Last edited:
There really isn't any scientific evidence supporting the ban.
The question I always ask when these debates come up is what difference does it make? It's not exactly difficult getting hold of any narcotics you want in this country.
Making them legal would just allow the government to keep track of the people who take them and the price would go up no doubt as they would be massively taxed. Think yourslef lucky they're not legal.
All drugs do harm from alcholol to amphets the reason why booze and fags are not illegal is because use of them became normalised well before the Victorians and Edwardians started to legislate on all forms of human behaviour.
You guys who want them to be legal should be careful what you wish for as if you're paranoid now about the way the government works you'll be more paranoid if the gov legalises them and you have to sign a drug users register.
Making them legal would just allow the government to keep track of the people who take them and the price would go up no doubt as they would be massively taxed. Think yourslef lucky they're not legal.
All drugs do harm from alcholol to amphets the reason why booze and fags are not illegal is because use of them became normalised well before the Victorians and Edwardians started to legislate on all forms of human behaviour.
You guys who want them to be legal should be careful what you wish for as if you're paranoid now about the way the government works you'll be more paranoid if the gov legalises them and you have to sign a drug users register.
no one did. We wanted the risk assessment divided by users.