-
🇬🇧 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
European & African
Drug Discussion
Welcome Guest!
Posting Rules Bluelight Rules -
EADD Moderators: Shambles
Rumoured UK blanket RC ban
- Thread starter Kota
- Start date
GarageFlower
Bluelighter
Vendors won't ship it if they ban it.
We've already seen it happen with mephedrone, MXE etc...
We've already seen it happen with mephedrone, MXE etc...
Sammy G
Ex-Bluelighter
Not heard anything about it, but wouldn't be surprised after the talk of the Home Office's plans back in winter to draft such a ban. Based on the existing law in Ireland.
No idea how quickly it could be implemented, but it is coming. Unsurprisingly.
No idea how quickly it could be implemented, but it is coming. Unsurprisingly.
Apparently the current govt have legislation 'ready to go' once the election is over. I don't think any new laws can be passed between now and the election.
If there's a change in government then that could lead to a delay I suppose. But if lawyers and civil servants have gone to the bother of drafting this legislation then I guess most parties will probably want to pass it.
Agree wholeheartedly with this. Obviously I have an ethical problem with anyone being criminalised simply for engaging in behaviour which doesn't hurt anyone else, but in this imperfect world a US-style analogue law would actually, in my view, have a positive impact on the drug market. No more idiots boshing mephedrone and the like and thinking it's all fine and dandy "because it's legal" (although, honestly, anyone this thick should probably be removed from the gene pool in any case).
Also, I'd like to imagine the lack of legal analogues might lead to fewer adulterants in illegal drugs. Think about all the piperizines which ruined pills back in '09-ish, or MXE's legality leading to more cut ketamine about the place. Those drugs were eventually added to the MODA and, lo-and-behold, we have good pills and (overpriced mind) ket again.
No chance. There's no realistic way to write legislation to achieve that goal without fucking with stuff they actually want left unfucked with (like legitimate medical research which is a big industry in the UK). If it were at all feasible we would not get legislation in dribs and drabs - nor get engaged in interminable EU debates in which "we" (UK government) are arguing against blanket ban-type approaches to such legistalton for precisely that reason. We have far too many vested interests to go messing with 'em for the sake of a few kiddies ODing on shonky powders.
Just another baseless rumour that's been circulating for donkey's years but has never been based on anything beyond paranoia - can't imagine how such things could ever coincide
Just another baseless rumour that's been circulating for donkey's years but has never been based on anything beyond paranoia - can't imagine how such things could ever coincide
Shambles, I'm sure you're right given your experience in these matters, but surely they could pass an act similar to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Analog_Act , which is highly subjective but pretty much allows people to be prosecuted for possession or supply of any substance deemed by the authorities to resemble a controlled substance in either effects ir chemical structure. Have I misunderstood the subject completely?
They could have done so at any point over decades yet have always chosen not to. Why copy legistlation which is notoriously terrible when you can write far more effective legislation that avoids all the problems of the US system?
BecomingJulie
Bluelight Crew
If the supply of RC benzodiazepines / thiophenodiazepines (sp?) is cut off suddenly, it can only go one way: Very Badly Indeed™.
An etizolam or diclazepam habit is no less serious than a diazepam habit. Coming off benzos can cause potentially fatal seizures.
There is a very real chance that a lot of people are going to end up getting seriously hurt, maybe even killed, by a ban. Tories, Labour, UKIP, BNP won't give a damn -- they have all more or less openly stated that they'd rather see you die than get high. I don't think even a petition signed by every doctor and nurse in the NHS would stop them. Only the Green Party, Pirate Party or just maybe the Lib Dems offer anything like any hope, and none of them are especially likely to score a majority.
A very select few people may be supremely lucky enough to find their GP sympathetic. Everyone else, I'm afraid, is looking at a severe shortage, as private doctors vacuum up all the available stocks of benzos.
If you are using the equivalent of more than 10 mg. diazepam every 48 hours, this means you've got a habit, so own it. You need to be prepared; forewarned is forearmed. Read The Ashton Method Manual if you haven't already. If you've got a sufficient stash in, plan a taper now -- and if you've got more than enough to get yourself down to nothing in six weeks, look after your neighbour. (Just please, not via Bluelight, not even by PM. It's not fair on the staff, who are all volunteers.)
And please, please, please don't be the next RIP thread on the front page of EADD .....
An etizolam or diclazepam habit is no less serious than a diazepam habit. Coming off benzos can cause potentially fatal seizures.
There is a very real chance that a lot of people are going to end up getting seriously hurt, maybe even killed, by a ban. Tories, Labour, UKIP, BNP won't give a damn -- they have all more or less openly stated that they'd rather see you die than get high. I don't think even a petition signed by every doctor and nurse in the NHS would stop them. Only the Green Party, Pirate Party or just maybe the Lib Dems offer anything like any hope, and none of them are especially likely to score a majority.
A very select few people may be supremely lucky enough to find their GP sympathetic. Everyone else, I'm afraid, is looking at a severe shortage, as private doctors vacuum up all the available stocks of benzos.
If you are using the equivalent of more than 10 mg. diazepam every 48 hours, this means you've got a habit, so own it. You need to be prepared; forewarned is forearmed. Read The Ashton Method Manual if you haven't already. If you've got a sufficient stash in, plan a taper now -- and if you've got more than enough to get yourself down to nothing in six weeks, look after your neighbour. (Just please, not via Bluelight, not even by PM. It's not fair on the staff, who are all volunteers.)
And please, please, please don't be the next RIP thread on the front page of EADD .....
Sammy G
Ex-Bluelighter
As previously stated, the Irish model (which leaves leeway for 'legit' research, though mostly as a concession to big pharma) has been mentioned several times as a template for the proposed Home Office bill.
Shambles, both May and Cameron have expressed a commitment to this. The perennial bullshit it would not seem to be.
Whether it ever gets enforced is another matter, but it's not a groundless scare story. Unless November and December never happened.
Sammy G
Ex-Bluelighter
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/no-let-up-in-drive-to-combat-legal-highs
NPS = 'New Psychoactive Substances'.
Post #5 is spot on.
Crime Prevention Minister said:
NPS = 'New Psychoactive Substances'.
Post #5 is spot on.
That ^ does not look like paranoia to me Shambs...
Never say never! It could happen, but like you, I don't see it. Such legislation would render most food supplements illegal overnight & close every Holland & Barrett & other health food store just as quickly. If you assume that any psychoactive compound not tea, coffee, alcohol or tobacco would be banned, it's byebye St Johns Wort, byebye 5-htp, byebye damned near everything that isn't over-the-counter or prescription only. The logistical & bureaurcratic requirements simply to stop High Street head-shops from vending RC's is so problematic alone, that it has not been implemented despite years & years of bad publicity.
Rather than a blanket ban, I think the single thing most likely to reduce the availability of & harm by RCs would be to stop them being sold anywhere except the internet. Having dangerously powerful, ill-researched cannabinoiids available to punters on the day, on the High Street is a recipe for disaster. I would be the last to complain if I saw a High Street ban of Legal Highs & RCs.
Just another baseless rumour that's been circulating for donkey's years but has never been based on anything beyond paranoia - can't imagine how such things could ever coincide
Never say never! It could happen, but like you, I don't see it. Such legislation would render most food supplements illegal overnight & close every Holland & Barrett & other health food store just as quickly. If you assume that any psychoactive compound not tea, coffee, alcohol or tobacco would be banned, it's byebye St Johns Wort, byebye 5-htp, byebye damned near everything that isn't over-the-counter or prescription only. The logistical & bureaurcratic requirements simply to stop High Street head-shops from vending RC's is so problematic alone, that it has not been implemented despite years & years of bad publicity.
Rather than a blanket ban, I think the single thing most likely to reduce the availability of & harm by RCs would be to stop them being sold anywhere except the internet. Having dangerously powerful, ill-researched cannabinoiids available to punters on the day, on the High Street is a recipe for disaster. I would be the last to complain if I saw a High Street ban of Legal Highs & RCs.
Last edited:
Sammy G
Ex-Bluelighter
Have you read the Home Office document, Si? EDIT: I see you have.
I'd imagine that 'NPS' would be quite clearly defined in order to exclude supplements and the like. Them not being new, or particuarly psychoactive.
The ban would be quite workable were it to come into effect.
I'd imagine that 'NPS' would be quite clearly defined in order to exclude supplements and the like. Them not being new, or particuarly psychoactive.
The ban would be quite workable were it to come into effect.
Sammy G
Ex-Bluelighter
They can't pass a law until the next Parliament. Which is conveniently not until after the GE.
I'm sure the tax revenues help, but it's not about that. It's about the machinery (and the machinations) of British democracy.
I'm sure the tax revenues help, but it's not about that. It's about the machinery (and the machinations) of British democracy.
Cobblers!
Headshops have been flogging dodgy cannabinoid RCs on the High Street for years & years. These things have been making the news constantly, generating the sort of debate we're having right now all over the country regularly. Yet five years into this parliament still nothing has been done.
It might be affectting the process of legislation at this very moment, but it wasn't the election that has delayed moves to blanket ban RCs up til now... so what has?
Headshops have been flogging dodgy cannabinoid RCs on the High Street for years & years. These things have been making the news constantly, generating the sort of debate we're having right now all over the country regularly. Yet five years into this parliament still nothing has been done.
It might be affectting the process of legislation at this very moment, but it wasn't the election that has delayed moves to blanket ban RCs up til now... so what has?
Sammy G
Ex-Bluelighter
The fact that up until about five years ago, only desperate teenagers with no weed dealer had ever heard of 'legal highs' perhaps?
And were some of these 'dodgy cannabinoids' not summarily banned? Along with mephedrone, 6-APB, etc.?
Yes, but the reason the Home Office is even looking at new legislation is because vendors are immediately able to offer alternatives to anything banned. So I fail to see the relevency to hte current topic.
Spice was circulating & banned before even meph came along, if my memory serves me.
The point is, the Home Office has dragged their feet despite it being perfectly clear that banning individual compounds or even small groups of compounds does not harm the market. This potential new legislation is not anywhere near as simple as the Home Office make out in the link you provide & I've seen nothing to counter my assumption that the complicated nature of any new legislation is what's probably delaying it.
It's relatively quick & easy to ban new compounds under the governments Temporary Control Orders that's why the Temporary Control Order legislation was introduced, because goverment needed a quick & easy way to target potentially dangerous new drugs. If it was "quick & easy" to introduce some sort of analogue act for the UK, they would have done it rather than introduce the TCDO.