Ever taken drugs?
- Thread starter Onions
- Start date
- Status
mchammer75040
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 4,008
- Reaction score
- 1
Yea I forgot to mention that, it also cures appetite disorders.f|uke said:
Ennui
The Freeman
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2003
- Messages
- 22,714
- Reaction score
- 119
I think that it's an absolute impossibility for people who have never gotten truely stoned to judge those who have.
I spent about 4 hours today and yesterday in a pure out of body euphoric daze, and I thought about a lot of things - it's just not possible for them to understand what it's like.
I only smoke once or twice a month, because I feel that what you see and feel while you're high shouldn't be ruined by tolerance or by becoming jaded from constant use. I like to have the full experience and I like to keep my brain from getting too messed up at the same time.
Those of you that haven't done it, don't categorize all people who do it as "junkies" or bad people in general - it can open your mind if used in the right moderation.
Then again there are the idiots (no offense) who smoke pot every day, which is a waste, and who do harder drugs, which is pretty much playing roulette.
I spent about 4 hours today and yesterday in a pure out of body euphoric daze, and I thought about a lot of things - it's just not possible for them to understand what it's like.
I only smoke once or twice a month, because I feel that what you see and feel while you're high shouldn't be ruined by tolerance or by becoming jaded from constant use. I like to have the full experience and I like to keep my brain from getting too messed up at the same time.
Those of you that haven't done it, don't categorize all people who do it as "junkies" or bad people in general - it can open your mind if used in the right moderation.
Then again there are the idiots (no offense) who smoke pot every day, which is a waste, and who do harder drugs, which is pretty much playing roulette.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
With regards harder drugs, I would never take many of them, acid/ heroin, and am unlikely to try cocaine again, although I may try pills.
But after reading what has been said with regards many of the dangerous drugs being dangerous simply because of adding stuff to them, which wouldn't happen if they were legal, I now think all drugs should be made legal. It's been proven the number of users go down.
Hear that? Number of users go down when it's legalised
This should make everyone want all drugs legalised, especially if they thought it was bad for the body/ and or society.
Legalisation drops the number of users; generally only leaving behind those who do it seriously enough to want to go to a cafe to get high.
Legalisation takes the buisness from gangs who do cause harm to a community, through violence etc. Without drug money many larger gangs would fade away.
Legalisation means the government supplies the drugs, therefore it will not be cut with anything we don't know about - well, no more than other products nowadays are.
Legalisation would free up many millions of dollars wasted each year to put 'offenders' in jail. 70% of all people in US jail are in as a result of cannabis. I'm betting a large percentage of them have done nothing more than get caught smoking some/ having some in their possesion. Jail also creates and worsens criminals, so when they come up because they cannot get a job (crim record) they resort to theft. Bingo - crime figures up, public spending wasted. Legalisation = crime figures down, freed up police time, more money to be spent on other things.... and up to 70% of space freed up in jail.
Do the math guys.
But after reading what has been said with regards many of the dangerous drugs being dangerous simply because of adding stuff to them, which wouldn't happen if they were legal, I now think all drugs should be made legal. It's been proven the number of users go down.
Hear that? Number of users go down when it's legalised
This should make everyone want all drugs legalised, especially if they thought it was bad for the body/ and or society.
Legalisation drops the number of users; generally only leaving behind those who do it seriously enough to want to go to a cafe to get high.
Legalisation takes the buisness from gangs who do cause harm to a community, through violence etc. Without drug money many larger gangs would fade away.
Legalisation means the government supplies the drugs, therefore it will not be cut with anything we don't know about - well, no more than other products nowadays are.
Legalisation would free up many millions of dollars wasted each year to put 'offenders' in jail. 70% of all people in US jail are in as a result of cannabis. I'm betting a large percentage of them have done nothing more than get caught smoking some/ having some in their possesion. Jail also creates and worsens criminals, so when they come up because they cannot get a job (crim record) they resort to theft. Bingo - crime figures up, public spending wasted. Legalisation = crime figures down, freed up police time, more money to be spent on other things.... and up to 70% of space freed up in jail.
Do the math guys.
Hundreds of billions actually. http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/fed-data/costs/real-costs.htmburner69 said:
burner69 said:
Actually, legalization would cause an increase. If you were to make alcohol illegal, many people would avoid it from fear of the law and acquiring it would be much more difficult. Legalizing something only encourages the use of it and that's exactly what the government, people and myself do not want. Of course, though, neither of could possibly determine whether or not legalization would increase or decrease usage. It's one of those 'wait and see' things; only way to determine is if it's actually done on a broad and massive-scale to acquire quality feedback.
Let me debunk your 'legalization = less crime' theory. Keep in mind I'm not including marijuana; this is regarding the 'hard schtuff'.
Lets say drugs were legalized and prison population decreased. Okay, so what? What about the financial effort of maintaining the laws and regulations for sustaining the legal status of the substance? What about the accidental deaths related (think alcohol)? What about the people who lose touch with reality because they have access to an abundant source for their addiction and slowly sink (sometimes tearing their own families apart). The list goes on. Another thing, if there are people in jail for abusing heroin, ecstasy, etc., chances are very high that a portion of those people are literally fawk ups and can't cope with the rest of the world.
Jail worsens some criminals and helps some criminals. My uncle used to get drunk and get into fights a lot. After a couple jail sessions, he's much more tamed and civil about how he carries himself and he is a lot more cautious about his drinking. For a lot of people, jail time offers them time to re-think things or grasp a bearing for themselves. Point: It depends on the person and the circumstances why they're in jail; you can't just say, "Jail worsens and creates criminals".
I don't get it. What's the difference? Users have to find a nice cut, home or chill-spot to use theie substance. Just replace cut, chill-spot, or whatever with cafe. Besides, who said everyone would always go to a cafe? You're not suppose to drink and drive, but people do it anyway.
A. Some would go rogue and possibly remain just as violent. Drugs aren't always the cause of anger and violence in people.
B. They'd find another source of income. Theft can be a fairly lucrative source of income. I'd rather let gang members shoot each other over drug wars than steal my car or rob stores. They chose their lifestyle, so be it. That's just one of many things they can resort to.
C. Why must only gangs be relevant to drugs?
This I agree to -- to an extent. Yeah, drugs would likely be safer and not contain lethal ingrediants. One thing I worry about is if people were to buy from the government or store, modify the substance and re-sell it. I'd have to give it more thought though, so meh.
Even if legalization did decrease financial strains, life is more valuable than money. I'd rather keep the current stautus of no hard drugs than encourage death and the many other ramifications that would proceed their legalization. Illegalization tries to do the opposite -- albeit it's not 100% successful.
Again, I'm not referring to marijuana.
The Terminator
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 1,861
- Reaction score
- 0
**** man Im 18 and ive smoked dope and hash since I was 15. I go to college and am becoming a programmer. I get high marks 85+ and my IQ is above 130. Dont stereotype people who smoke pot. Its fun, liek drinking alcohol. Whatever and people who say they are pressured into or whatever, thats bull. You can do whatever you want, no puts a gun to your head. Whatever, weed is nothing, just try it.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
"Actually, legalization would cause an increase. If you were to make alcohol illegal, many people would avoid it from fear of the law and acquiring it would be much more difficult. Legalizing something only encourages the use of it and that's exactly what the government, people and myself do not want. Of course, though, neither of could possibly determine whether or not legalization would increase or decrease usage. It's one of those 'wait and see' things; only way to determine is if it's actually done on a broad and massive-scale to acquire quality feedback." Please look at the links earlier provided. Read them then come back and tell me the same thing.
" Let me debunk your 'legalization = less crime' theory. Keep in mind I'm not including marijuana; this is regarding the 'hard schtuff'.
Lets say drugs were legalized and prison population decreased. Okay, so what? What about the financial effort of maintaining the laws and regulations for sustaining the legal status of the substance? What about the accidental deaths related (think alcohol)? What about the people who lose touch with reality because they have access to an abundant source for their addiction and slowly sink (sometimes tearing their own families apart). The list goes on. Another thing, if there are people in jail for abusing heroin, ecstasy, etc., chances are very high that a portion of those people are literally fawk ups and can't cope with the rest of the world. "
The financial costs for keeping these laws and regulations would be far smaller than keeping so many people in jail. And remember, numbers go down when legalised, so it would take MUCH less money to look after less legilslations on a smaller number of people
"Jail worsens some criminals and helps some criminals. My uncle used to get drunk and get into fights a lot. After a couple jail sessions, he's much more tamed and civil about how he carries himself and he is a lot more cautious about his drinking. For a lot of people, jail time offers them time to re-think things or grasp a bearing for themselves. Point: It depends on the person and the circumstances why they're in jail; you can't just say, "Jail worsens and creates criminals".
It has been proven to do so. Your uncle is luckily one of the percentage who this does not happen to. I wish him good luck with things.
" I don't get it. What's the difference? Users have to find a nice cut, home or chill-spot to use theie substance. Just replace cut, chill-spot, or whatever with cafe. Besides, who said everyone would always go to a cafe? You're not suppose to drink and drive, but people do it anyway."
So what harm do they do smoking it at home anyway? AND some people may feel shy to smoke it in a cafe, they don't want people to see them because they have been led to believe it is somehow "wrong" to smoke cannabis. In a cafe there is a limit how much a person is served, to stop people going OTT. Of course they could go to other cafe's but that would be their own problem, and would cause no harm to anyone else, and unless they did it a lot, very little harm to them. You have to go to cafe's, they're the only places that would sell them, special cafe's. You could go to your old dealer, but his weed is not as good quality as the stuff in the cafe. It would be a waste of money.
"A. Some would go rogue and possibly remain just as violent. Drugs aren't always the cause of anger and violence in people.
B. They'd find another source of income. Theft can be a fairly lucrative source of income. I'd rather let gang members shoot each other over drug wars than steal my car or rob stores. They chose their lifestyle, so be it. That's just one of many things they can resort to."
With the extra money caused by not looking after cannabis-"offenders" they could invest it on catching these criminals and putting away the people who cause the real damage to society.
"C. Why must only gangs be relevant to drugs?"
I was using an example to show how legalising it would reduce income, and therefore weaken, large gangs. What point are you trying to make there?
" This I agree to -- to an extent. Yeah, drugs would likely be safer and not contain lethal ingrediants. One thing I worry about is if people were to buy from the government or store, modify the substance and re-sell it. I'd have to give it more thought though, so meh." The stuff given by the government would be the best. If you went to the cafe you'd kow what you're getting is the best and safest type. You wouldn't waste you money on dealers drugs that are poorer quality and might be played with.
"Even if legalization did decrease financial strains, life is more valuable than money. I'd rather keep the current stautus of no hard drugs than encourage death and the many other ramifications that would proceed their legalization. Illegalization tries to do the opposite -- albeit it's not 100% successful."
Please read the links provided about drugs harm to the body. If you still believe that keeping drugs illegal will help prevent or lessen the problems relating to drugs (there are a lot less than you think - read this thread before you ask LIKE WHAT? We have answered this question many times.
Read this thread. Then come back.
" Let me debunk your 'legalization = less crime' theory. Keep in mind I'm not including marijuana; this is regarding the 'hard schtuff'.
Lets say drugs were legalized and prison population decreased. Okay, so what? What about the financial effort of maintaining the laws and regulations for sustaining the legal status of the substance? What about the accidental deaths related (think alcohol)? What about the people who lose touch with reality because they have access to an abundant source for their addiction and slowly sink (sometimes tearing their own families apart). The list goes on. Another thing, if there are people in jail for abusing heroin, ecstasy, etc., chances are very high that a portion of those people are literally fawk ups and can't cope with the rest of the world. "
The financial costs for keeping these laws and regulations would be far smaller than keeping so many people in jail. And remember, numbers go down when legalised, so it would take MUCH less money to look after less legilslations on a smaller number of people
"Jail worsens some criminals and helps some criminals. My uncle used to get drunk and get into fights a lot. After a couple jail sessions, he's much more tamed and civil about how he carries himself and he is a lot more cautious about his drinking. For a lot of people, jail time offers them time to re-think things or grasp a bearing for themselves. Point: It depends on the person and the circumstances why they're in jail; you can't just say, "Jail worsens and creates criminals".
It has been proven to do so. Your uncle is luckily one of the percentage who this does not happen to. I wish him good luck with things.
" I don't get it. What's the difference? Users have to find a nice cut, home or chill-spot to use theie substance. Just replace cut, chill-spot, or whatever with cafe. Besides, who said everyone would always go to a cafe? You're not suppose to drink and drive, but people do it anyway."
So what harm do they do smoking it at home anyway? AND some people may feel shy to smoke it in a cafe, they don't want people to see them because they have been led to believe it is somehow "wrong" to smoke cannabis. In a cafe there is a limit how much a person is served, to stop people going OTT. Of course they could go to other cafe's but that would be their own problem, and would cause no harm to anyone else, and unless they did it a lot, very little harm to them. You have to go to cafe's, they're the only places that would sell them, special cafe's. You could go to your old dealer, but his weed is not as good quality as the stuff in the cafe. It would be a waste of money.
"A. Some would go rogue and possibly remain just as violent. Drugs aren't always the cause of anger and violence in people.
B. They'd find another source of income. Theft can be a fairly lucrative source of income. I'd rather let gang members shoot each other over drug wars than steal my car or rob stores. They chose their lifestyle, so be it. That's just one of many things they can resort to."
With the extra money caused by not looking after cannabis-"offenders" they could invest it on catching these criminals and putting away the people who cause the real damage to society.
"C. Why must only gangs be relevant to drugs?"
I was using an example to show how legalising it would reduce income, and therefore weaken, large gangs. What point are you trying to make there?
" This I agree to -- to an extent. Yeah, drugs would likely be safer and not contain lethal ingrediants. One thing I worry about is if people were to buy from the government or store, modify the substance and re-sell it. I'd have to give it more thought though, so meh." The stuff given by the government would be the best. If you went to the cafe you'd kow what you're getting is the best and safest type. You wouldn't waste you money on dealers drugs that are poorer quality and might be played with.
"Even if legalization did decrease financial strains, life is more valuable than money. I'd rather keep the current stautus of no hard drugs than encourage death and the many other ramifications that would proceed their legalization. Illegalization tries to do the opposite -- albeit it's not 100% successful."
Please read the links provided about drugs harm to the body. If you still believe that keeping drugs illegal will help prevent or lessen the problems relating to drugs (there are a lot less than you think - read this thread before you ask LIKE WHAT? We have answered this question many times.
Read this thread. Then come back.
burner69 said:
No thanks. I prefer not to read pro-drug information composed by some who's pro-drugs or information selected by someone who is pro-drugs. I prefer common sense. Illegalization may not utterly prevent or lessen drug problems, but legalization sure as hell doesn't help it either.
Anyway, I enjoy debating with you, burner69 -- I honestly do, read your sharing love thread -- but we will never come to agreement it seems. I guess we're too arrogant and adamant to succumb to each other's views.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
Firstly that is a generalisation, although there may be some truth behind it.
People who smoke it to look cool are stupid. They should do something because they want to, not to look cool. It is the number of these people that would shoot down if cannabis was to be made legal.
If you are suggesting that clever people need to try and be cool, which I'm not sure if you are, you're wrong, and being bigotist. Most people who smoke dope with me, or as much as me, are very interesting, thoughtful, and what I would deem 'cool' and often more so than people who do not. However that is not fact, only my own findings.
People who smoke it to look cool are stupid. They should do something because they want to, not to look cool. It is the number of these people that would shoot down if cannabis was to be made legal.
If you are suggesting that clever people need to try and be cool, which I'm not sure if you are, you're wrong, and being bigotist. Most people who smoke dope with me, or as much as me, are very interesting, thoughtful, and what I would deem 'cool' and often more so than people who do not. However that is not fact, only my own findings.
disruptioN_
Newbie
- Joined
- May 21, 2004
- Messages
- 668
- Reaction score
- 0
No.
I've had a few friends that used to though.
I've had a few friends that used to though.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
MadHatter said:No thanks. I prefer not to read pro-drug information composed by some who's pro-drugs or information selected by someone who is pro-drugs. I prefer common sense. Illegalization may not utterly prevent or lessen drug problems, but legalization sure as hell doesn't help it either.
Anyway, I enjoy debating with you, burner69 -- I honestly do, read your sharing love thread -- but we will never come to agreement it seems. I guess we're too arrogant and adamant to succumb to each other's views.
Hey no worries man. It's been good talkin to you. By the way, since coming on tonight, prob for the last 3 hours debating, I have been completely stoned. Could you tell
If you'd prefer government findings use google, read the more recent studies, you will find pretty much what we've said to be there.
But really, thanks for not being utterly ignorant - some people will utterly talk shit, you made a good effort and did not offend me like others have. I thank you :cheers:
He is talking shit burner. Hes ignoring what he doesnt like and denying medical fact.burner69 said:Hey no worries man. It's been good talkin to you. By the way, since coming on tonight, prob for the last 3 hours debating, I have been completely stoned. Could you tell
If you'd prefer government findings use google, read the more recent studies, you will find pretty much what we've said to be there.
But really, thanks for not being utterly ignorant - some people will utterly talk shit, you made a good effort and did not offend me like others have. I thank you :cheers:
burner69 said:Hey no worries man. It's been good talkin to you. By the way, since coming on tonight, prob for the last 3 hours debating, I have been completely stoned. Could you tell
If you'd prefer government findings use google, read the more recent studies, you will find pretty much what we've said to be there.
But really, thanks for not being utterly ignorant - some people will utterly talk shit, you made a good effort and did not offend me like others have. I thank you :cheers:
I was planning on reading into it more. I don't like not knowing things.
Yeah, a lot of my efforts are based on opinions and personal / externally related experiences. I'll simply never like drugs because of my past experiences. Maybe that's a large reason behind my opposition to drugs? Probably.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
But in no where near the manner or intensity as others have. He deserves credit for not laughing off the possibility of medical facts. Though I really would like him to research the matter from government papers.
Pleeeeease do it I'd really like to hear your views after reading them.
Pleeeeease do it
I'd really like to hear your views after reading them.Reaktor4 said:
I'm not ignoring anything. I'm disagreeing. I find ignorance dangerous.
Stop speaking for me, too. If you wish to hold grudges then go to the CS:S forums. I prefer to respect the people I debate with (albeit things sometimes get heated) and not hold grudges.
burner69 said:But in no where near the manner or intensity as others have. He deserves credit for not laughing off the possibility of medical facts. Though I really would like him to research the matter from government papers.
Pleeeeease do it
Don't worry, I will. I'll use a variety of sources.
Go and answer my post in the other thread then. It contains sourced facts.MadHatter said:
How can you disagree with a fact?
Then stop ignoring things or making comparisons between substances that you quite clearly have no idea about.
Stop being annoying then.
MadHatter said:
Also, if you noticed, I will change my mind. I stand differently on the marijuana issue than I previously did. I only require hard evidence and facts to budge. But, we'll see. Just as long as the schtuff (drugs) is kept away from me I'm not overly concerned. Despite I said I wouldn't read the articles, I'll give them a chance to speak for themselves.
burner69
Newbie
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
Seriously, PM me when it's done. I won't go answer you back saying you're wring or whatever - that's what this place is for. I'd just like to know a) what someone thinks when they see the evidence and b) what the hell these bad side effects of weed are (bearing in mind I smoke about 2 times a week average.)MadHatter said:
blahblahblah
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,036
- Reaction score
- 0
Reaktor4 said:
Glen, Chris, Shaun, Laura, Laura, Dusty, Chris
Those are the first names of people I have seen do drugs and become horrible people or have done horrible things (I've known many people with the same first names). Tell me how I can support drugs? Tell me.
They have all started with Marijuana. Show me all the damn statistics you want, past experiences don't lie to me.
burner69 said:
No, no, I'm not that concerned about marijuana. I'm interested about the other drugs like cocaine, ecstacy, etc. I already have a good understanding of weed (I used to smoke it lol). I'm more interested in the financial issues and ramifications of legalization of more potent schtuff other than marijuana.
Reaktor4 said:
I prefer to do my own research. I will use the sources you and burner provided, but I prefer to have more sources and to do my own research. Rather than being handed the information and answers, I like to find my own. It's a pride thing.
Didn't know I made that much of an impression and impact. Thank you.
Sigh.blahblahblah said:
First of you what youre saying here translates to "i have my anecdotal evidence and no matter what facts you show me i wont believe them".
What were the drugs?
Were the drugs clean?
Were they administered properly?
Are you trying to say that cannabis is a gateway drug? Hey i bet they all drank coffee first. Caffeine must be a gateway drug.
Were these people hanging around dealers/other 'underworld' figures who could have influenced them?
Have you ever seen anyone become a horrible person because of alcohol?
Whos asking you to support drugs?
Did these people educate themselves on how to properly use a drug and what its effects are before using them?
Did they mix drugs?
Is it possible that any of them had underlying mental conditions and quite possibly couldve turned out 'horrible' anyway?
bliink
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2004
- Messages
- 6,828
- Reaction score
- 1
Reaktor4 said:
caffeine is not illegal, it isn't part of learning how to obtain/use illegal drugs, it does not desensitse you to illegal drugs.
why wouldnt anyone see that? alcohol is a legal drug, 'course more people are gonna be affected by it, doesnt mean alcohol is ok..
what about sitting on the couch all day eating doritos? thats withdrawal...?
- Status
Similar threads
