• Welcome Guest

    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
    Fun 💃 Threads Overdosed? Click
    D R U G   C U L T U R E
  • DC Moderators: ghostfreak | VerbalTruist

RC's or street drugs?

Your dealer rips you off,you get a couple of buddies and a knife and you got your money back,if RC supplier screws you..youre screwed..

Plus,with popular drugs like H and coke etc you know more or less the effects(the cuts are a different story but still wont make you glow in the dark or something),with RCs you never know what they can actually cause,you might give birth to a 3 legged cyclop alien for all you know...
 
This is actually a profound and socially important choice for every drug user (not really as a question of "RCs vs. street drugs" as internet/mail-order vs. street drugs). The founder of the original Silk Road wrote about it, making a fairly convincing argument that his business model was doing substantial harm reduction work. By using quasi-legal "RCs" or the darknet to source illegal drugs you reduce your chance of arrest and death by minimizing your geographic, face-to-face, association with drug culture; you enable dealers to sell to you directly with an extremely reduced need for look-outs (often children), soldiers to protect and kill for territory, etc; you make police profiteering from the drug war substantially more difficult; you gain consumer power through forum discussion of particular vendor's products; and, your substances are more likely to be mostly what they're claimed to be, as quasi-legal drugs are typically of far higher purity than street drugs -- reducing the risk of fatal or injurious cuts in the product.
 
Depends on the type of drug, some of these rc's are pure fucking poison.There are cases where I'd rather the street drug and there are times where I'd rather the rc.For an example I'll take weed over noids any day! Now I use etizolam until I can get to the doc and get something that works better than this effexor bullshit, the etizolam also keeps the weed wd's away.I dose as little as I can and go as long as possible between doses.
 
This is actually a profound and socially important choice for every drug user (not really as a question of "RCs vs. street drugs" as internet/mail-order vs. street drugs). The founder of the original Silk Road wrote about it, making a fairly convincing argument that his business model was doing substantial harm reduction work. By using quasi-legal "RCs" or the darknet to source illegal drugs you reduce your chance of arrest and death by minimizing your geographic, face-to-face, association with drug culture; you enable dealers to sell to you directly with an extremely reduced need for look-outs (often children), soldiers to protect and kill for territory, etc; you make police profiteering from the drug war substantially more difficult; you gain consumer power through forum discussion of particular vendor's products; and, your substances are more likely to be mostly what they're claimed to be, as quasi-legal drugs are typically of far higher purity than street drugs -- reducing the risk of fatal or injurious cuts in the product.

very well said :)
 
I second that ^

At least with drugs on the street I would know the effects, and god forbid I had to go to the emergency room, or to a treatment facility, they would know exactly how to treat me. I don't really look at rcs as dark specters, though. Some street drugs and various important, beneficial pharmaceuticals started out as research chemicals. I'm also sure I ingest plenty of chemicals on the daily base that will have detrimental or unknown effects on my health. The human body is remarkably resilient, and I doubt sure trying mxe or 4-aco-dmt once or twice won't produce any noticeable difference, but it's certainly not something to abuse or look at as completely safe. Street drugs could be cut, or you could get mugged, killed, or arrested purchasing them, but you can end up getting a bad batch or fucked up order from a vendor and easily die, end up brain dead, crippled, etc in the short term, or develop some sort of weird disorder in the long term. Then again, Shulgin tried tons of new compounds and was in his late 80's when he passed. I believe that some of these compounds certainly have a lot of potential, and I would love to see clinical trials one day.

I like to research things almost obsessively before I try them, so I'd personally pick the classics.
 
Last edited:
i like warm fuzzy drugs, like opiates and MDMA type of stuff, so maybe something that offers any of those effects. i'm not sure of the names of many RC's just a couple. the most i've researched would be mxe, but a few people said it's not a very pleasant high. :\ so i'm not too sure. and no one messes with the opiate like RC's as far as I know?

what about you metal?

something speedy could be fun too lol
 
I was looking into an MDMA like one, too. The closest I know of is 5-MAPB. Maybe eventually something more psychedelic (fucking impossible to get around here) like 4-aco-dmt, which I hear is very shrooms like. Mxe sounds cool. If you want speedy I know Ethylphenidate is super close to Methylphenidate (Ritalin).

I know of a few fentanyl analogs, but I haven't really looked it in

It's bananas how many chemicals are out there now http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designer_drug#Opioids
 
MPTP is a toxic impurity of MPPP (a pethidine analog), it does indeed cause permanent parkinsons. Barry Kidston, a chemistry student, attempted to synth MPPP (which in itself is a typical opioid) and made a mistake during synthesis which led to the presence of MPTP in the batch. Some of this batch got out onto the streets and was sold as heroin and all users developed parkinsons, barry included. It litterally destroys your dopaminergic system beyond repair in a single use.

There's a documentary that follows the victims, it's called "the case of the frozen addicts" iirc. I reccomend watching it. It's worth mentioning however that MPTP was never sold to the public as a research chemical, though it's used as a drug to induce parkinsons disease in animals for educational purposes.
 
Top