Crankinit
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,175
Since we're all doing it:
alcohol > tobacco > MDMA > Marijuana > Methamphetamine > LSD > Valium/Xanax > Ketamine > Codeine > Fentanyl > Oxycodone > Bupe > GHB
I'm sure I'm missing some there.
Fairly standard I guess. Started out with drinking and smoking, still drink frequantly, but not outside the norm for a 20 year old guy, smoke with other drugs but otherwise avoid it. Dropped a pill and loved it, smoked weed because it was always on offer but never really grew on me and I actively avoid it now, developed a taste for amphetamines which persists to this day, though I'm all too aware of the potential harm, which helps me moderate myself.
Dabbled with hullucinogens, gave up on acid after 5 or 6 times and deciding it wasn't my thing, will grab K whenever it's on offer but don't really miss it, save the benzo's for the comedowns. First tried codeine and didn't really care for it, but it grew on me purely because it was the only drug I had available for a while, actively sought out stronger opiates out of curiosity and Oxy was love from the first blue pill. Currently use it once or twice a month when it's available, careful to avoid a dependancy. Didn't care for the GHB though I'm glad I tried it to see what the fuss is about.
Anyway onto the topic at hand, I think complete unregulation when it comes to chemicals would be a disaster. In particular, stimulants and opiates are just far too addictive and have far too many serious consequances, your average citizen just isn't mature enough to handle these chemicals without doing themselves harm.
But that said, the current policy of stigmatization and criminalization has failed as well. The threat of punishment is not an effective deterrant, all it does is turn drug users into criminals.
What we need is a shift in approach towards harm reduction and supply reduction, with slow and very careful consideration of loosening the restrictions on certain chemicals. Cannabis, for one, probably wouldn't make a huge difference if it was suddenly legalized. Methamphetamine or Heroin most certainly would.
What we need to do is is slowly consider which chemicals should fall where on the spectrum, using science and reason instead of fear and propaganda. Approach substance abuse as a medical problem, not a criminal one, treating not just symptomatically but also taking a multifacetted approach to look at why people abuse drugs to the point of self harm in the first place, and how we can help prevent them developing an addiction, or manage their use. Funding should be diverted into harm reduction (including extensive education) and supply reduction, criminalizing end users has NEVER been an effective approach.
alcohol > tobacco > MDMA > Marijuana > Methamphetamine > LSD > Valium/Xanax > Ketamine > Codeine > Fentanyl > Oxycodone > Bupe > GHB
I'm sure I'm missing some there.
Fairly standard I guess. Started out with drinking and smoking, still drink frequantly, but not outside the norm for a 20 year old guy, smoke with other drugs but otherwise avoid it. Dropped a pill and loved it, smoked weed because it was always on offer but never really grew on me and I actively avoid it now, developed a taste for amphetamines which persists to this day, though I'm all too aware of the potential harm, which helps me moderate myself.
Dabbled with hullucinogens, gave up on acid after 5 or 6 times and deciding it wasn't my thing, will grab K whenever it's on offer but don't really miss it, save the benzo's for the comedowns. First tried codeine and didn't really care for it, but it grew on me purely because it was the only drug I had available for a while, actively sought out stronger opiates out of curiosity and Oxy was love from the first blue pill. Currently use it once or twice a month when it's available, careful to avoid a dependancy. Didn't care for the GHB though I'm glad I tried it to see what the fuss is about.
Anyway onto the topic at hand, I think complete unregulation when it comes to chemicals would be a disaster. In particular, stimulants and opiates are just far too addictive and have far too many serious consequances, your average citizen just isn't mature enough to handle these chemicals without doing themselves harm.
But that said, the current policy of stigmatization and criminalization has failed as well. The threat of punishment is not an effective deterrant, all it does is turn drug users into criminals.
What we need is a shift in approach towards harm reduction and supply reduction, with slow and very careful consideration of loosening the restrictions on certain chemicals. Cannabis, for one, probably wouldn't make a huge difference if it was suddenly legalized. Methamphetamine or Heroin most certainly would.
What we need to do is is slowly consider which chemicals should fall where on the spectrum, using science and reason instead of fear and propaganda. Approach substance abuse as a medical problem, not a criminal one, treating not just symptomatically but also taking a multifacetted approach to look at why people abuse drugs to the point of self harm in the first place, and how we can help prevent them developing an addiction, or manage their use. Funding should be diverted into harm reduction (including extensive education) and supply reduction, criminalizing end users has NEVER been an effective approach.
but when the mood is right then it's great to have real life ears to talk off as well