Do you think drugs should be legal?

People should be allowed to put into their bodies what they want... the law doesn't really stop this as people that want to, will - legal or not

Certain drugs should be legalised, or at least re-categorised

Instead of selling in supermarkets or wherever they should be regulated some how and people educated about effects and not mixing things etc

Its a bad idea to sell in super markets as people will buy them thinking 'they are safe because they are legal' and then go and smoke 10 grams of super skunk and get mega paranoid or eat a gram of pure MDMA after having a few pints (and possibly die)

Some system needs to be put in place that shows you can take x drug without any consequences to yourself or others

example - I am bad on hallucinogens so should be restricted or educated more, however an 80mg dose of pure mdma would be perfect. It would be a tax field day for the government if they did become legal
 
Shayper said:
However Brown MDMA seems to be the most impure, with Purple being the strongest form.
Click to expand...



Like pretty much all organic compounds, pure MDMA is white. I've seen brown stuff that was near pure (better than 99%). I don't think I've seen purple, although I've seen purple amphet. I've also seen yellow MDMA.


M
 
Meridian said:
Like pretty much all organic compounds, pure MDMA is white. I've seen brown stuff that was near pure (better than 99%). I don't think I've seen purple, although I've seen purple amphet. I've also seen yellow MDMA.


M
Click to expand...

Yellow is pretty much standard.

Unless you synthesize it yourself, I doubt you would get pure MDMA anyway :)
 
Shayper said:
Yellow is pretty much standard.

Unless you synthesize it yourself, I doubt you would get pure MDMA anyway :)
Click to expand...



I've also never seen crystal MDMA cut: the colours are not cutting agents, but synthesis impurities, and their interaction with washing chemicals.


M
 
SWIM obtained nr. 1 ounce of pure crystal MDMA in final term of university. Strongest stuff experienced in 3-4 years of frequent use. Was a strong pink colour. SWIM thinks colours are normally pretty irrelevant and down to irregularities in each individual batch; there is no 'hierarchy' of good->bad colour impurities. It's either pure/uncut or its mixed and dodgy.

As for the drug debate... I'm all for libertarian principles, every man's right to do what he wishes with his body in the privacy of his own home, etc. but there are clear and perfectly rational reasons why drugs are not and probably should not ever be legal. It just isn't in the interests of the common good. Having everyone popping pills and railing lines all the time does not create a particularly productive society through its permissiveness. It's not in any establishment figure's interests (be it your boss, your local politician, or any other authority figures) to allow people to take drugs. Furthermore there is a certain extent to which law and regulation tries to enforce a basic sort of morality, which is clearly how drugs are classified... as is oft-complained about, there is no scientific or medical basis for the classifications at all. Acid is a Class A because it is considered (or was during its worldwide ban back in the hippie era) to be a menace to society. Whilst I respectfully disagree, you'd have to be stupid to not understand why the status quo is the way it is.
 
God, the last place I want to read that "SWIM" nonsense is on the OCUK forums, the idea it offers some kind of legal protection is absurd.
 
It was a tangential comment. I don't really know why people want to so ostentatiously talk about all the drugs they've done on a computer gaming Forum, either. But there you have it - 4 pages of weak debate and a bunch of people trying to exhibit all the excellent drugs they have done.
 
Energize said:
God, the last place I want to read that "SWIM" nonsense is on the OCUK forums, the idea it offers some kind of legal protection is absurd.
Click to expand...



I assume he quoted directly from one of the various forums which use that silly (and legally useless) expression, rather than putting it in himself. The quote also points out the most annoying factor of the drugs debate: the fact that people who take them think that this makes them an expert on all aspects of the stuff. It's like saying that because you drive a car you are all-knowing about engine thermodynamics and suspension design (although Motors does seem to be full of people who fit that idea as well). I'll admit that person who makes their own drugs knows a little more than the ordinary user, but this is not saying much. Given that a couple of drugs are pretty easy to make, but hard to make well, I'll still file that anecdote under, well, anecdote.
 
I can just see the DEA reading a forum thread, getting heated, 'we got him now guys, he's given up the whole caper, get ready for the bust, he's hook, line and .........oh wait, he said SWIM.' Never mind fellas, this Heisenberg is one smart cookie.
 
Meridian said:
I assume he quoted directly from one of the various forums which use that silly (and legally useless) expression, rather than putting it in himself. The quote also points out the most annoying factor of the drugs debate: the fact that people who take them think that this makes them an expert on all aspects of the stuff. It's like saying that because you drive a car you are all-knowing about engine thermodynamics and suspension design (although Motors does seem to be full of people who fit that idea as well). I'll admit that person who makes their own drugs knows a little more than the ordinary user, but this is not saying much. Given that a couple of drugs are pretty easy to make, but hard to make well, I'll still file that anecdote under, well, anecdote.
Click to expand...

SWIM is just an ironic, knowing term to use whenever you discuss drugs. It's part of the inclusive-super-cool drug culture and its own little subcultural patois. I don't think anyone seriously thinks that changing the first-person pronoun in your drug-speeches is going to avail you of all legal culpability. It's just part of the jargon, really. I was using it tongue-in-cheek because this thread has essentially tailed off into 4 pages of veiled drug-anecdotes and 'look at me! I've done it!' experiences.

And where was anyone saying they think they're a chemist because of some anecdotal evidence about MDMA colouration? Anecdotally, SWIM/your humble correspondent/him/she/it/I have taken a lot of the stuff over the years, and find colour doesn't have any correlation with strength. It's how cut the actual crystal/powder is with other stuff that determines how good it is. It doesn't exactly have the cocaine 'fish-scale' equivalent as some visual hallmark of immediate quality (which is problematic enough in-itself). Nowhere was [pronoun here] implying that they are familiar with chemical manufacturing (or even wish to be involved in any highly illegal activities such as that). Methinks this is just science-types being overly precious when lay-people discuss their textbook specialties.
 
at the end of the day it basically screws with people. Mentally and physically so why would you want to make it legal. People will think it issafe just because it is legal and this could cause major issues with society.

Drugs(i) are not really to be messed with know matter how much you think it will be OK or how much you know about them as they cause major problems.

I bet drugs(i)/(L) are todays cause of the state of depression.

A fools game really.
 
I don't think I'm an expert meridian if you are referring to me :p

I'm just going from experience. I made sure I knew what was in what I was taking when I took it. I don't take it any more. However, from mine and other experiences, MDMA is much nicer than alcohol.

That is, if you know limits and stick to them. A friend of mine took it for a week straight, and the comedown was so bad he tried to kill himself by crashing his car.

Moderation is key.
 
InKursion said:
SWIM is just an ironic, knowing term to use whenever you discuss drugs. It's part of the inclusive-super-cool drug culture and its own little subcultural patois. I don't think anyone seriously thinks that changing the first-person pronoun in your drug-speeches is going to avail you of all legal culpability.
Click to expand...

Some forums require you use it from what I've seen, so there is a widespread misbelief.

Meanwhile we have another thread on the forum glorifying drug use, ironic really.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18407759
 
well i think that they should make cannabis legal, and alcohol illegal

as alcohol causes more trouble that cannabis
 
FRAGMAYO said:
well i think that they should make cannabis legal, and alcohol illegal

as alcohol causes more trouble that cannabis
Click to expand...

Cool post bro would read again and rate 5 stars if I could. You have added so much more depth to this discussion.
 
FRAGMAYO said:
well i think that they should make cannabis legal, and alcohol illegal

as alcohol causes more trouble that cannabis
Click to expand...

The problem is that, sociologically speaking, alcohol is a depressant that lets oppressed and hopeless people vent their frustrations and angst every weekend, without ever really challenging their general gestalt or shaking up their priorities. It's not socially or societally disruptive to have loads of people binge-drinking every weekend (on an institutional level, I mean; no one can deny that a city centre on a Saturday night is an ugly place indeed).

If you had everyone smoking pot and getting lost in labyrinths of interior introspection and all that, they'd probably dwell a little longer on just how unfair/pointless their lives are :p.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom