• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

NEWS: Age Blogs - The Daily Truth, drugs feature

hoptis

Bluelight Crew
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
11,083
They must be stoned
Jack Marx
June 28, 2006 11:00 AM

Having proved a complete failure at ever keeping peace where peace is needed to be kept, that benign confederacy of mumbling poobahs known as The United Nations is now having a go at whipping up panic in the minds of those who were already at peace: dope smokers:

Antonio Maria Costa, the head of the UN's Office on Drugs and Crime, said that countries got the "drug problem they deserved" if they maintained inadequate policies..."Policy reversals leave young people confused as to just how dangerous cannabis is," said Mr Costa, introducing the organisation's annual report. "With cannabis-related health damage increasing, it is fundamentally wrong...the cannabis pandemic...challenges to public health...something about consensus...as bad as heroin and cocaine...blah blah blah..."

Thought I'd best cut his grass before we all nodded off like junkies in church...

We've heard these sermons before, in hysterical films like Reefer Madness and falling from the mouths of those who are proud of their ignorance on matters of drugs - an ignorance matched only by their enthusiasm for loudly voicing it.

But hearing this come from the UN reminds me of how every giant, multi-tiered macro of global politics, churning as it may be with fine intentions and international wisdom, can be as thick as one man being told what to think.

As is the case with alcohol, cigarettes and McDonalds, cannabis, either abused or in large doses, can be dangerous - we know that.

But there is a colossus of evidence that says cannabis does not, by itself, pose a significant threat to anyone - a colossus that waits in vain for an opposition. I have searched and searched, and I cannot find one single Australian death in the last 12 months that can be attributed to the smoking of cannabis, marijuana, hashish or any of the other dungs these people smoke (I don't care for the stuff myself, and never have).

This is despite abundant examples of lives being ruined by the simple fact that cannabis, far from being dangerous, is simply, mindlessly illegal.

Look at this fact, from the National Health and Welfare Institute's Statistics on Drug use in Australia 2000:

"Nearly half of all Australians aged 14 years and over have used illicit substances at least once in their life, while 23% report having used an illicit drug in the preceding 12 months."

According to the laws, supposedly enacted for the the benefit of the population, nearly a quarter of the population of Australia are criminals.

Societies can survive with drugs.

The American Indians did pretty nicely on cannabis for thousands of years before the white fundamentalists shot the peace pipes from their mouths.

Our own Aborigines got stuck into corkwood and other natural intoxicants, seeing no need to excommunicate, enslave or otherwise vandalise the lives of individuals because of how much they consumed - that came later when we gave them our legal bottle to deal with.

And we, too, have our own cautious but altogether stable relationship with the drugs we deem not to be criminal - alcohol, cigarettes, a vast catalogue of tranquilisers, steroids and pills that mess with our bodies and brains.

It is when drugs are deemed illegal that they take on the bulk of their menace, those members of society with the least respect for the law being the only ones bold enough to build the black market, which the otherwise innocent drug smoker must then enter to make a purchase from some lousy backyard laboratory.

The war on drugs has succeeded only in making bad men rich, tempting police into the gutter and sending utterly decent people to jail. It's a disaster - a legal, moral and humanitarian hell worse than all the drugs and junkies in the history of the world could have engineered on their own.

As for that old chestnut about cannabis being "the gateway" to hard drugs, nobody, from Reefer Madness to the United nations, has ever made that stick. In fact, in Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, the Institute of Medicine in Washington found that:

"Patterns in progression of drug use from adolescence to adulthood are strikingly regular. Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug most people encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs have used marijuana first."

It's like accusing a baby's rattle of being the first shaky steps towards assault with a deadly weapon.

But that sort of logic seems to sit comfortably with most people, which is why we've got ourselves a war on drugs.

From Age Blogs: Daily Truth
 
One of the best articles I have head in a long time, apparently there are SOME journalists with brains.

The real gateway drugs are caffeine, nicotine and alcohol, they all come long before cannibis.
 
Amen brother! Too bad this kind of opinion rarely reaches open publication in todays reality of mass media conservatism..
 
The American Indians did pretty nicely on cannabis for thousands of years before the white fundamentalists shot the peace pipes from their mouths.

ah... what?
 
Jack is publishing a series of articles on drugs, thought I might repost them here for posterity as they become available.

What on earth is he doing?
Jack Marx
July 11, 2006 10:23 AM

I had planned to deliver the Daily Truth's 'real deal' anti-drugs campaign bright and early this morning at 9am, but somebody's dragging the chain. Out of the handful of one-time drug enthusiasts I gathered to assist me in compiling the information, can you guess which one's running late? Not the amphetamines guy, or the acid casualty, or the ecstasy dude - they were here before I even woke up - but the junkie. Who'd have thought it? He's normally very reliable. Anyhow, once he get's himself cleaned up and organised, we'll be right with you - check back around midday.

Age Blogs

The truth of the matter
Jack Marx
July 11, 2006 03:39 PM

My apologies for being so unaccountable today, and for shifting blame onto a junkie earlier. While the former heroin enthusiast was indeed late, the fact is that I've been struck down by some horrible germ over the last 24 hours or so, one that makes my head feel it's full of ants shouting into oil drums. I tried to carry on earlier but the urge to lie down and close my eyes just kept getting the better of me. The promised post about drugs will have to wait until tomorrow. I'm going back to bed.

From Age Blogs
 
Last edited:
Dope
Jack Marx
July 12, 2006 10:18 AM

Each year millions of dollars are squandered by the government on anti-drugs propaganda campaigns with the same fatal flaw: they try to scare kids, primarily with visions of death and ill health. Anyone who was young and can remember will recall that health is of the most distant concern, while death is just something that happens to the very old or the very unfortunate, neither of which are applicable titles for our immortal youth. Whether we like it or not, drugs are a part of our social experience and our children will probably take them, especially since so many 'squares' keep telling them not to, using powderpuff words like "death" and "health". The reality is there are only three things that really scare the shingles off young people: having your fun checked, being busted by authority and looking like a dork. As it turns out, drugs can deliver excruciating boredom, nightly embarrassment and a jolly good spanking more swiftly and repeatedly than any of the known elements, but there are no statistics that speak of such stuff. Only experience - or, at least, the 'experienced' - can tell you how boring and silly the world of illegal drugs can be. Here, then, is Part One of the The Daily Truth's three-part 'Real Deal' Anti-Drugs Campaign. Today: marijuana.

POT

The obvious drawback of pot is that it stinks. The most indiscrete of all illicit drugs, pot is immediately recognizable at 100 paces by all but the clueless (or, ironically, those who've destroyed their noses with amphetamines). If engaged in a 'night out', one generally has to 'go outside' to indulge the drug of choice, into laneways and car parks where trouble tends to lurk. To thugs in search of a victim who won't squawk for the cops, the unmistakable waft of pot through the night air is as blood to the Great White, just as it is to police in search of a lazy collar (the advent of the 'sniffer dog' makes even the mere courier of a single marijuana cigarette a fugitive with nowhere to hide).

If you smoke or even carry pot anywhere but in the confines of your own home, there is a reasonable chance you will be busted over time (according to Statistics on Drug Use in Australia 2002, "In 2001 marijuana/cannabis accounted for 69% of illicit drug arrests"), and the days of cops turning a 'blind eye' to a lone 'jazz cigarette' appear to have vanished in the face of corruption paranoia and good-old post-9/11 fundamentalism.

But the dull ache of a prison term might be a comfortably familiar concept to a regular pot smoker, for what comes with a marijuana habit is a colossal amount of wasted time, quite apart from the 'thoughtful' hours spent in front of the cartoons (in doper folklore, Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon and The Wizard of Oz are spookily in sync when played together, provided there's a big bong handy). It has been widely observed that preparation for even the simplest of scoobs is routinely preceded by a withering sequence of fiddly and frustrating activities, maddening expeditions in search of certain apparatus and entirely predictable but somehow unavoidable discussions about the very process that is supposed to help everyone calm down and shut up. Though intimate details vary, the basic template appears to be this:

A bowl is procured and designated as 'mull bowl', at which point the lady of the house will protest the choice of bowl on duel sentimental and hygienic grounds, fetching a replacement and returning the original bowl to the cupboard, from whence it will be procured again next time. Scissors are hunted - "not the big pair, hon, those little ones" - for the cutting up of troublesome foliage within the stash. Tally Ho papers (or the little pieces that inexplicably 'screw on' to the bong) are searched for and not found, after which even confirmed non-smokers will be asked if they happen to be carrying cigarette papers "by any chance", until a second, only marginally more desperate search discovers the papers in much the same place they were found last time. As the joint/bong maker snips the leaf in the bowl with the care of Joh Bailey, he will once again put assembled 'non-smokers' to the test by asking whether any of them happens to be packing a cigarette, for the purposes of mixing tobacco with the pot. At this juncture, somebody will reveal their preference for no tobacco at all with their pot, to which someone else will respond that it scarcely matters, as marijuana is probably no better for you than tobacco, in small doses. The 'lively' debate that ensues, bejeweled with handy 'air stats' and the obligatory percentile band of "99.95", will see the smoking of the marijuana through to its conclusion.

Add to this the fact that, due to some weird social canon that nobody can remember the meaning of, a visit to the home of a dope dealer must be accompanied by an interminable period of just sitting there 'socializing', much moreso than is expected during the procuring of other drugs, where brevity seems to be the order of the day. This is monotonous and apparently unwanted by both parties, but is oddly unavoidable, a few hours a week wasted in a smelly house watching television, appreciating music and generally shooting the breeze with a drip who doesn't like you much either. Why this tedious tradition is not abolished by way of mutual agreement between dealers and customers is one of the many 'marijuana mysteries' discussed by smokers everywhere but the one place it should be: the dealer's house.

There can be no doubt that pot affects people in different ways, but the most common negative response, especially with non-seasoned smokers, is the ebb and flow of general confusion that enters thought and speech, sentences that at first appeared to be going somewhere sensible collapsing in a blush of apologies as utterers bail out of their own utterances in panic.

Some, having learned to embrace all aspects of the weed and its moods, claim to be able to combat the whirlwind of rogue thought and lurking paranoia to the point of routing it, but just because the lunatic reckons he's comfortable in the asylum doesn't make it sane to those looking in. For the unluckily 'straight', conversing with someone who is stoned will always be somewhat like talking to the Seven Dwarves, the conversation cratered with tardy remarks that would have been entirely appropriate and rational had they been delivered some 15 minutes earlier, when the corresponding topics were actually being discussed.

After nearly 50 years of visibility in social culture, pot, it seems, is altogether incapable of escaping the ghoulish talons of the 'hippie' culture that first turned us onto it. Though it's probable more death metal enthusiasts smoke pot these days than the entire history of Peter Tosh's fan base, reggae, the soundtrack for nothin' much doin', remains very much marijuana's overture in the mind of the wider world. And while other drugs have enjoyed occasional 'hip' status, pot is still the dag's drug of choice. There has been nothing sexy about pot since old Cheech and Chong movies and, to those with a keen eye for symbolism, the sight of a bong on a loungeroom coffee table says: "This is not a house of achievement"

Ironically, it is pot's accessibility and apparent 'harmlessness' that can become the drug’s most negative aspect, the user/dealer cycle creeping up on the smoker once a habit has been formed. One-time marijuana enthusiast, Peter Cain, writes:

"I have been bashed in a home invasion, had a sawn off .22 rifle stuck in my face on a separate occasion (I found out later that it was actually loaded), been charged and convicted for possession and supply (both as a result of the bashing after reporting it to police, overturned on appeal), would have seriously risked my job at that time in the public service if the conviction had stood, had several thousand dollars worth of stash stolen by a single person in three break-ins over a period of a fortnight (which I had to pay for out of my wages and further dealing), had my front door kicked in and my indoor garden raided...man, I could go on and on. And all involved pot.

"I hardly smoke at all these days (don't know a single person that sells it anymore, a few friends will shout me a smoke on occasion), but I used to smoke a lot and was a small time dealer for many years as a means of supporting what could only be described as a habit. Not being a violent or physically threatening type, I was an easy touch for thugs and too trusting for the thieves. The most disappointing aspect of that above is that I knew the people involved in each instance. Not friends (obviously), but acquaintances in the drug scene that I had known for many years, brothers of friends, friends of partners, etc, etc.

"In my younger days I dabbled in other drugs including LSD and various other "tripping" drugs masquerading as acid, speed, smack, and hallucinogenic mushrooms (the worst of them all for your mental health). I overdid the mushies a bit over an 18 month period as a late teenager (combined with my heavy pot smoking over many years it is, I'm certain, the root cause of my ongoing depression) but have never had a habit with, nor abused, the others.

"Clearly, I have a lot of experience in the drug "scene", and not all of it pleasant. I've seen it all and heard it all. I would definitely counsel people, especially the young, to avoid drugs and that includes alcohol (the one drug I have had a life-time struggle with - I am an alcoholic). However, I would never tell anyone that they can't take drugs because nobody has that right, in my opinion."

Tomorrow, pills and amphetamines; Friday, smack, crack and bubble wrap.

Age Blogs (you can also add your own comments about pot/the article/drugs)
 
Club drugs
Jack Marx
July 13, 2006 10:10 AM

Drugs are fun. They are certainly other things, too, like deadly, illegal and inconveniently priced, but that so many people tend to go back for more would seem to betray an association between drugs and amusement. This inconvenient fact is left out of the anti-drug scriptures, and when a young man discovers it independently, feeling excellent as opposed to miserable and sick and in a hospital or a gutter covered in bruises and vomit, he tends to dismiss all previous warnings as the products of minds who didn't know what they were talking about (I know at least one such case, intimately). Which is why we're not addressing health issues here - they are well known and come slowly but surely, finding the rapacious drug user as surely as poverty finds the gambler - but rather the tedious, embarrassing and downright revolting aspects of recreational drugs use. Such things matter to some people, particularly those without a care in he world. Yesterday it was pot, the homebody's drug, and tomorrow it's heroin, the dead body's drug. Today, it's the 'club drugs', a term resented by people who take drugs in clubs, as it presumes people who take drugs go to clubs and vice versa.


IMPORTANT NOTE: Those who complained yesterday about the lack of statistical evidence to 'back up' this exercise should be aware that statistics on boredom, humiliation and revulsion are currently, as always, out of print. Also, all persons quoted are genuine (it has not been difficult finding folk willing to talk on this issue) and if names have been changed it will be obvious.

SPEED

Speed keeps you awake and makes you excited, even if there isn't much worth staying awake for and little to get excited about. On any reasonable amount of speed, sleep can only be achieved in the short term by loading up on tranquilisers, which is a dodgy practice and arguably defeating of the original purpose. The most common negatives of speed are the products of resulting sleep deprivation rather than the constituents of the drug itself - inability to concentrate on anything complex or worthwhile, unfortunately coupled with an obsessive determination to do just that. The result is that one spends inordinate amounts of time concentrating on laughably trivial pursuits.

In 1993, Stevie Wright told me of a time when he injected speed instead of his drug of choice, heroin, by mistake, and spent the next day cutting the lawn in the front garden, a job he'd been avoiding for months on account of having no lawnmower. By the end of the day, he had completed the task with the aid of a pair of scissors.
Freelance music writer Scott Duggan has a similarly tawdry and heartbreakingly familiar recollection.

"Speed makes you horny but no more attractive to the opposite sex. So my way of dealing with this was always to dive into pornography. I used to just use magazines and, because of the mildly hallucinogenic properties of methamphetamine, I could make eye contact with the 'girls' and could completely fall into the world on the page. I spent whole days in there without a break and, as I was masturbating, I often did myself a bit of short-term damage to the outer layers of skin, which of course I wouldn't realise until a day or two later. I also noticed - although usually only because someone else would point it out to me - that this created it's own BO smell that was hard to get rid of or cover up for a day or two."

The advent of the Internet, a pornographic 'horn of plenty' for those with the patience to "search", has presented new opportunites for similarly-minded individuals.

Perhaps the greatest untold story about amphetamines is their ability to convince the user that it's all a well-kept secret - that nobody knows the user is using but the user. Like some pre-school kid's 'invisibility cloak', amphetamines, in fact, play the loneliest joke on the user himself, convincing him that the grinding of teeth, fidgeting, sweating, licking of lips and boundless enthusiasm for the otherwise insignificant goes unnoticed by those in front of him. Folks won't call you on it at the time - people are basically courteous and discreet when it comes to such matters, and usually too embarrassed - but the fact you are broadcasting your drug of choice at all times is one you can depend upon, and the true extent of your own self-betrayal, if it ever reveals itself to you, will come years after the damage to your reputation has been done.

COCAINE

The old saying goes that "coke is God's way of telling you that you earn too much money". Coke's idiotically expensive for what it does and is the only drug whose market price seems to follow the CPI with any accuracy (these days a gram will cost you anything from $250 to $350). It would be worth it, of course, if the drug was reasonably pure, but by the time it gets from the 'plantation' to you - a trip that sees it sifted through a hundred taxing hands - the difference between cocaine and garden-variety speed is marginal.

Nevertheless, it tends to work, in that it keeps you up all night and in a bad mood the next day. Cocaine can make the user feel very talkative, interested and interesting, no matter what is being discussed or by whom. The net effect of this is that one is always in grave danger of becoming extremely boring, the inner 'good vibes' reporting to the user that the exact opposite is taking place.

Cocaine turns most men into lecherous sleazebags, once again painting a mental self-portrait imbued with the sophistication of Connery's James Bond. Should a female acquiesce to the coke user's bug-eyed, leering advances, for some reason (probably cocaine, too, as it tends to make females a little friskier than normal), it won't take long before she discovers she's backed the wrong horse.

I know a few who have claimed that both coke and speed assist them physically as well as jacking up the libido, but they would say that. I find the majority more believable and in keeping with my own agonising recollections.

"I don't think I ever got a proper erection on amphetamines," says Scott Duggan. "But I don't think I've ever wanted to have sex so badly as when I was on cocaine either. I don't know anybody who claims differently and if they do they're full of shit. There was about a year there where I was actually going home alone every night on purpose ...I actually blew girls off because I knew what was going to happen and I couldn't handle the embarrassment. So, instead, I'd opt for my stash of pornography..."

Because of the money to be made, cocaine attracts a more serious criminal element than pot or speed - a world the casual user can easily blunder into.

"People don't realise either how easily you become a dealer without realising it," says Beltheduz, a one-time dealer of cocaine, speed and pills. "You start getting stuff from your own dealer and then people you know start asking if you can get it for them. So you get sick of paying for the cabs just to get everyone else what they want, so you start charging them for your time, which is reasonable anyway. Then you start asking people if they want some because you're going to get some for yourself, so in a sense you become a pusher. Then you figure you might as well get your own huge supply, cut down the cab trips and tax people for your trouble. Bingo, you're a dealer, when all you really started out doing is favours for your friends.

"I was a dealer for about a year until things got really heavy. After doing a deal for a shitload of cocaine in the toilets of a pub I accidentally dropped almost a whole pound into a toilet bowl. I was holding this brick in my hand one second and the next it just crumbled and melted through my fingers. I owed thousands of dollars to some really heavy dudes, and there were guns flying around and everything. I actually had to move cities and I cleaned up not long after that."

ECSTASY

It's a wonder the term 'ecstasy' is still tolerated by users of 'ecstasy', for today's 'Gary Ablett' (if I may use a most appropriate piece of Cockney rhyming slang) can be any combination of MDMA, ketamine, methamphetamine, caffeine, psuedoephedrine, assorted 'research chemicals' and neutral binders, the latter probably taking up the bulk.

When I first took ecstasy in 1988, I thought I'd discovered the world's most spectacular drug, and for a few years it appeared I might have. It was years ago, after about the 10th successive tablet that didn't work at all, that I gave up the dreadful, night-wrecking pursuit of that which appeared to no longer exist, and thus ecstasy is the first drug that literally bored my own enthusiasm out of me. I had a theory at the time - born, no doubt, from a certain degree of poly-drug psychosis - that the police had flooded the market with harmless pills to thwart the dealers and consumers at once. But they needn't have bothered - in the case of ecstasy, both dealer and consumer have combined to create the world's most effective 'placebo effect'.

Ecstasy folklore is awash with theories that seek to excuse the drug for being useless. One shouldn't drink orange juice if one intends to take ecstasy, as vitamin C "blocks the receptors"; several years of even casual ecstasy intake leads to almost complete tolerance; the first pill usually doesn't work, but the rush will be stronger on the 'third or fourth" - all bunk, authored by either the dealers or those who suffer 'downer denial', a delusion peculiar to clubbers who can't cope with the idea of a night going south for anyone in the group. An excellent explanation for how MDMA works, and why such legends are nonsense, can be found here (courtesy of Emanuel Sferios and DanceSafe).

The price of ecstasy alone tells you a lot - selling for between $50 and $80 in the late 80's, 'ecstasy' is now considered excessive if it markets for anything approaching the lower of those extremes, most pills going for around $30 today, while the cost of the chemical manufacturing of MDMA couldn't conceivably have plummeted accordingly. A casual glance at Pillreports.com (Australia region) would seem to suggest most pills at least check out, but a closer look at the comments posted over recent months suggests a growing concern in the community as to the veracity of many of the 'reviews', the implication being that dealers are using such well-meaning forums as publicity for lousy product. In any case, what seems to pass as a "medium" rating routinely carries comments like that posted by "addzup" on May 18, 2006:

"think these are the best going round at the moment droped 7 last sat and had a mad nite out."

Call me old-fashioned, but if you need seven of them what you have there is a rip off.

The fact is, with so many 'brands' of unquantifiable ecstasy, the temptation for dealers short on cash and chemicals to wheel out a batch on the lonely pill press must be too great to bear. A one-time ecstasy and amphetamines dealer (who naturally doesn't wish to be named) tells of easier grafts in this gullible market.

"There are lots of tricks dealers use. I tried to never be an arsehole but sometimes things were just a bit tight and the people buying were just too stupid to let get away. I used to drive around and meet people at their place or at the pub or whatever, because it was safer for me, but also so I could pull the old swifty if I had to. If someone rang at three in the morning as they often did, out of it, and asked for, say, six pills, I'd turn up with two and a gram of heavily-diluted cocaine, saying I was sorry but that's all I had, offering it to them for a 'bargain' price. They'd say, 'OK', because at that point they'll take whatever they can get. Too easy.

"Some people I know once made a killing selling some actual pharmaceutical pills as 'ecstasy'. The tablets had three threes imprinted on them ("333"), so they told these suckers that they were "demi-devils", which sounded pretty convincingly sexy. In fact, this was some sort of tablet that makes you sick if you drink on it (probably disulfiram), so all these people paid for ecstasy and got agony instead. Months later, one of the guys who sold them actually had some idiot come up and ask if he was getting 'any more of those half-devils'. He nearly laughed his guts up on the spot."

Tomorrow: heroin, and I'll include meth, as it seems to share alarming similarities with smack.

From Age Blogs (with comments section)
 
obviously this is part of The Age website, are these articles also published in the hard copy of The Age? Sorry if it sounds like a dumb question but I'm not one much for reading the papers these days due to the general quality of journalism these days.
Seems these articles are quite interesting, nice to see something written from a different perspective.
 
Unfortunately these aren't published in the hard copy paper.
 
SMH Blogs: The Daily Truth/Club Drugs 13/7/06

[EDIT: Threads merged and article repost removed. hoptis :)]

Pretty good read. Though there are a few points I dont like. A few 'experiences' that sound an awful lot like dick measuring on the part of the 'witness'

"I was a dealer for about a year until things got really heavy. After doing a deal for a shitload of cocaine in the toilets of a pub I accidentally dropped almost a whole pound into a toilet bowl. I was holding this brick in my hand one second and the next it just crumbled and melted through my fingers. I owed thousands of dollars to some really heavy dudes, and there were guns flying around and everything. I actually had to move cities and I cleaned up not long after that."

Such as that.



Overall, pretty good read for the masses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
these days a gram will cost you anything from $250 to $350

wtf? $250-$350 for a gram? This guy is talking about rip-off's, well THAT's a rip-off. I never have and never will pay that much for a GRAM.


The price of ecstasy alone tells you a lot - selling for between $50 and $80 in the late 80's, 'ecstasy' is now considered excessive if it markets for anything approaching the lower of those extremes, most pills going for around $30 today, while the cost of the chemical manufacturing of MDMA couldn't conceivably have plummeted accordingly.

And this just doesn't make sense to me, is he saying a pill went for $50-$80? No way in hell they pay that much for pills in the late 80's.
 
realm said:
wtf? $250-$350 for a gram? This guy is talking about rip-off's, well THAT's a rip-off. I never have and never will pay that much for a GRAM.


Well everyone else does :\

Just look in the price thread on Other Drugs.

EDIT: Wait. I see. Your from America. Your ignorance is forgiven ;)
 
Well he WAS using american dollar signs bro, so i asssumed he meant America lol.
 
Last edited:
Well he WAS using american dollar signs bro, so i asssumed he meant America lol.

Umm, Australian dollars use the $ame $ymbol as American dollars, probly the cause of the confusion ;-)
 
wait wait... speed makes you horny???? that's all i've read so far. oh boy, sex is just behind eating on my list of things i would definately NOT want to do after getting on. does anyone else feel this way?!? i'll probably make another post once i'm done reading the article:D

[EDIT] dollar $ign$.. that made me roofletrain all over the room!!
 
Agreed Psybeebee,

Apart from the physical "results" of takin a few lines of whipper, sex is also the last thing on my mind. Having a few Red Bulls and vodka however.......

S.
 
Yes Ecstasy can be upto $50 a pill(in a club). I have heard of Occasions people getting $80 for a pill... This is however in a Club and in a Town that does not have *organised crime* syndicates pressing in the backyard.

As for speed and sex- Last thing on my mind also and I'm a guy I mean WTF! ROFL.

SpecTBK=D
 
No price discussion guys, check the guidelines. I know its in the article but any further discussion thats not directly related to the articles will be removed.
 
Top