Bluelight

Thread: Why is ecstasy illegal?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38
  1. Collapse Details
    Why is ecstasy illegal? 
    #1
    I dont understand it, I bet if Bush tried it he would make it legal
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #2
    it was made illegal in 1985 cuz it was getting too popular as a club drug under the reagan administration at the start of the "war on drugs." it got way too popular way too fast and the DEA decided it was bad before any studies were conducted.

    originally they made it illegal because not enough was known about the drug and it needed to be properly studied and made sure it was safe for the public to consume. after that a few BS studies came out, bad publicity due to its use at raves and clubs, and here we are. 20 years later and theres too much stigma and misinformation for it to be legalized right now.

    i will say this though, its use is rapidly growing and more and more information is available as time goes on. although i dont see it being decriminalized anytime soon i do believe it will eventually happen.
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #3
    Bluelighter l]evil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Canada Toronto
    Posts
    709
    why is marijuana illegal same shit
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #4
    Thumbs down
    it's called christianity
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #5
    Ex-Bluelighter ClubbinGuido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The Holy Lounge
    Posts
    22,234
    Cus governments suck. It pisses me off that they make rules on what I can and cannot put in me body.
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #6
    Bluelighter Endless Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    new england
    Posts
    1,027
    cuz it puts holes in ya brain o.O
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #7
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,536
    Originally posted by questionmark
    originally they made it illegal because not enough was known about the drug and it needed to be properly studied and made sure it was safe for the public to consume. after that a few BS studies came out, bad publicity due to its use at raves and clubs, and here we are. 20 years later and theres too much stigma and misinformation for it to be legalized right now.
    The offical reason was that a related compound (possibly methamphetamine?) was known to cause neurotoxicity in rats and so they banned MDMA incase it caused similar damage.

    Since then the general concensus is that if it does cause neurotoxicity at moderate recreational levels, its so small that we can't find conclusive evidence for it.
    Originally posted by Shifty486
    I dont understand it, I bet if Bush tried it he would make it legal
    He's done cocaine, but that is still illegal
    Originally posted by rollthatrack
    it's called christianity
    Apart from a few very localised religions (Celtic Druids or North American Indians) all religions deplore the use of mind altering substances so please don't go putting the blame squarely on the shoulders of Christianity. Islam prohibits the consumption of alcohol.

    Though I do agree with your general point, religion now has a lot of negative points to it given its influence on modern culture with rules or dogma enormously out of date. IIRC the Catholic Church didn't retract its "The Sun goes around the Earth" view offically till something like 1910 But thats a rant for Thoughts and Awareness.
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #8
    Oh I forgot, he did blow... O well
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #9
    bush on coke... HA! Thats something i'd like to see very much! As an Australian, can I ask that the American public boycot bush until he does a couple of lines again. LOL... just kiddin hehehe
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Re: Why is ecstasy illegal? 
    #10
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    31
    Originally posted by Shifty486
    I bet if Bush tried it he would make it legal
    He probably has tried it...
     

  11. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Dundee
    Posts
    2
    Originally posted by AlphaNumeric

    Apart from a few very localised religions (Celtic Druids or North American Indians) all religions deplore the use of mind altering substances so please don't go putting the blame squarely on the shoulders of Christianity. Islam prohibits the consumption of alcohol.
    They don't want you getting your religious/spiritual experiences anywhere else.
     

  12. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Perhaps it was a result of the profiteering of the original dealers in Texas.

    And if so, perhaps history repeats itself as demostrated in the past few years with RC's.
     

  13. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Bluelighter J.T.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    145
    Its the psychoactive quality of it all, they just don't think people are responsible enough to deal with it.

    They'd rather produce gangs of murdering gun toting, drug slinging scumbags whose product might actually be poison.

    Call it hypocracy, I could go on and on here about what a waste it is to spend trillons in the drug war, when users will always find a way.

    stupid.
     

  14. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    Bluelighter drumnbass420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Philly area
    Posts
    1,090
    Thumbs up
    Originally posted by ClubbinGuido
    Cus governments suck. It pisses me off that they make rules on what I can and cannot put in me body.
    I'd have to agree
     

  15. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    There will always be a market for drugs regardless of whether they are legal or not. The fact that they ARE illegal means that the manufacturers and suppliers can charge more for them. This means that the drug cartels make more profits.

    Now what do the drug cartels spend their money on? Arms.

    If you look at a map of illicit drug manufacturing and distribution, you will see that most drug production occurs in volatile regions. I am thinking of Afghanistan, India, Columbia.

    Countries are kept in perpetual states of war to keep the arms industry buoyant. The US along with the UK are the largest manufacturers and exporters of arms in the world. They therefore have a vested interest in keeping the price of drugs artificially high because it keeps the economy strong.

    The War On Drugs is a lie. The intelligence agencies know where the production takes place and if there was a real compunction to wipe the labs out, it could be done in a few hours across the globe.

    The truth is that without the drugs industry, the world economy would collapse. Governments are happy to keep the status quo because politically it looks good to take a tough stance on drugs.
     

  16. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Bluelighter Morrison's Lament's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    8,823
    Financeman: While I think your argument relies on a few things we just can't know for sure and thus sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory, I'm inclined to agree.

    The 'black economy' is huge across the world, and where there are trillions of dollars flowing through people in the underworld their interests become powerful, whether or not they themselves have any direct say in policy the sheer scope of their contribution becomes a 'fact on the ground', around which a path must be negotiated with utmost care.

    Not so much a case of them WANTING it this way, more a case of really being able to do fuck all about it.

    --- G.
     

  17. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Originally posted by Morrison's Lament

    Not so much a case of them WANTING it this way, more a case of really being able to do fuck all about it.

    --- G.
    That is a valid point of view but I cannot agree. With satellite technology, international intelligence agencies and historical knowledge of where drugs such as herorin are produced, taking these manufacturing plants would be child's play for the US.

    I try not to sound like a Conspiracy Theorist but all my points are researched and logical. The problem with topics such as these are that they are circular. ie I cannot categorically prove the government has a vested interest in the drugs trade and nobody can categorically prove they do not.

    The anti-government/anti-mainstream/anti-media point of view is always labelled the Conspiracy Theory by politicians and the media.

    I always find it interesting to read the alternative press such as Aljazeera.com

    Noam Chomsky is also a good writer on the subject of media and the way it is used to control public opinion.

    A few years ago, the argument that there were not WMD in Iraq was a conspiracy theory.
     

  18. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Bluelighter Morrison's Lament's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    8,823
    Originally posted by financeman
    That is a valid point of view but I cannot agree. With satellite technology, international intelligence agencies and historical knowledge of where drugs such as herorin are produced, taking these manufacturing plants would be child's play for the US.


    I'm not disagreeing there, not at all. I'm not saying they can't do it, I'm saying they can't do it without fucking themselves and the world over worse than it already is. That is to say, they'd rather not have the drug situation, since it's a headache. However, they can't get rid of it without chopping off their own head.

    I try not to sound like a Conspiracy Theorist but all my points are researched and logical. The problem with topics such as these are that they are circular. ie I cannot categorically prove the government has a vested interest in the drugs trade and nobody can categorically prove they do not.
    You can't prove a negative, period. However, I see your point.

    The anti-government/anti-mainstream/anti-media point of view is always labelled the Conspiracy Theory by politicians and the media.
    True, but there are a lot of crazy conspirady theories out on the net, and this raises ones guard.

    I always find it interesting to read the alternative press such as Aljazeera.com

    Noam Chomsky is also a good writer on the subject of media and the way it is used to control public opinion.
    Agreed on both counts.

    A few years ago, the argument that there were not WMD in Iraq was a conspiracy theory.
    Eh, no, it wasn't. I've actually spoken to Hans Blix about this issue as well as attended a lecture he held ,and it was very much the mainstream view outside the Whitehouse.

    --- G.
     

  19. Collapse Details
    Re: Why is ecstasy illegal? 
    #19
    Bluelighter bfisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ehaa
    Posts
    1,529
    Originally posted by Shifty486
    I dont understand it, I bet if Bush tried it he would make it legal
    its illegal because its a DRUG That causes DAMAGE to your body, and is potentially FATAL if used by an idiot that is uneducated.
     

  20. Collapse Details
    Re: Re: Why is ecstasy illegal? 
    #20
    Bluelighter Morrison's Lament's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    8,823
    Originally posted by bfisher
    its illegal because its a DRUG That causes DAMAGE to your body, and is potentially FATAL if used by an idiot that is uneducated.
    That's not why drugs were made illegal in the first place, it's a retcon. Like the Klingon thing on Enterprise, someone cooked it up later on to explain a weird discrepancy.

    --- G.
     

  21. Collapse Details
     
    #21
    Originally posted by Morrison's Lament

    Eh, no, it wasn't. I've actually spoken to Hans Blix about this issue as well as attended a lecture he held ,and it was very much the mainstream view outside the Whitehouse.

    --- G.
    That's interesting. Totally different story over here in the UK where Tony Blair used this argument backed up with secret service "evidence" to convice Parliament and the masses that war was the only answer.
     

  22. Collapse Details
     
    #22
    Bluelighter Morrison's Lament's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    8,823
    That was indeed one of the most interesting encounters of my life. The lecture was sublime, the Q&A afterwards was hillarious.

    Random person: "Mr. Blix, when did the surveillance of your activities by microphones and such stop?"

    Blix looked around.

    Blix: "Who says it stopped? We might all be on some machine in the CIA!"

    laughter erupted

    --- G.
     

  23. Collapse Details
     
    #23
    LOL

    click..

    what was that?
     

  24. Collapse Details
     
    #24
    Bluelighter Morrison's Lament's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    8,823
    BTW, I think a large point is how the media filters information. You can get the impression of any outlandish fantasy if it's propogated through enough media outlets, and the governments of the UK and USA effectively controlled the release of information and thus the terms of the debate over Iraq.

    Experts like Hans Blix were bound to confidentiality and could not speak while they were working, while the people foaming at the mouth for war were bound by no obligations, apparently not even the obligation to tell the truth.

    --- G.
     

  25. Collapse Details
     
    #25
    It is indeed a dangerous world we live in.

    http://politics.guardian.co.uk/kelly...378539,00.html


    Dr David Kelly is the first British citizen whose sudden, unexpected and violent death has been denied an inquest. Three weeks after Dr Kelly's body was found, Lord Falconer ordered that the inquest into his death be adjourned indefinitely and subsumed into a public inquiry by invoking section 17a of the Coroner's Act 1988.
    The section is designed to avoid duplication of inquiry in cases of multiple deaths where the cause of death can, to some extent, be assumed from the outset. But Dr Kelly's was a solitary death coming amid a political storm concerning doubts over the government's case for war with Iraq, and its cause required rigorous investigation. The Hutton inquiry had no power to call a jury, subpoena witnesses or cross-examine them under oath.

    Disquiet expressed recently by paramedics over finding very little blood at the scene of Dr Kelly's death gives credence to our view that it is highly improbable Dr Kelly died of haemorrhage from a transected ulnar artery. From such a wound he would have lost only about a pint of blood, and for death to occur he would need to have lost some five pints. And Co-Proxamol levels in his blood were one-third of what is normally regarded as a fatal dose.
    In his report, Lord Hutton confirmed that he had seen a photograph of Dr Kelly lying with his head against the base of a tree. Two volunteer searchers stated they found Dr Kelly's body slumped against a tree. Yet the paramedics who arrived later, and five other witnesses, including the forensic pathologist, reported that the body was flat on its back a foot from the tree. Police photographed the body in this position. Given that there is photographic evidence showing the body in two different positions, it must be determined who moved the body, and when and why.

    The law requires a verdict of suicide to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Why should Dr Kelly's death receive less scrutiny than any other sudden, unexpected and violent death? As things stand, suicide has not been proved, and we still do not know how he died.
    Dr Michael Powers QC
    Martin Birnstingl
    Specialist in vascular surgery
    Chris Burns-Cox
    Specialist in internal general medicine
    C Stephen Frost
    Specialist in diagnostic radiology
    David Halpin
    Specialist in orthopaedic and trauma surgery
    William McQuillan
    Specialist in orthopaedic and trauma surgery
    Andrew Rouse
    Consultant in public health
    John Henry Scurr
    Specialist in vascular surgery
    Searle Sennett
    Specialist in anaesthesiology
     

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •