Do You Think Ecstasy Should Be Legalised???

[Raas]

Raas, so you PERSONALLY think it's ok for YOU to use MDMA, but not for other people?

I want you to think about the double standard you are creating. Don't you think EVERYONE thinks 'oh, well I'M responsible enough to use MDMA, but OTHERS aren't' ? Btw, Raas, MDMA does not 'kick the shit out of' alcohol (whatever THAT means)...if you think it does, I suggest you look at some medical research. Weed is definitely safer than both, I agree with you there.

Again, you are being completely illogical by saying that legalizing MDMA 'would create a plethora of problems' -- you have not given ANY evidence of even any LOGICAL SUPPORT of WHY you this would be so.

fucksake, calm down

In answer to your questions...

Yes I am way better than other people, but i never said it in my post. You put words into my mouth... for your information, i DON'T use MDMA myself anymore. I experimented with a white euro (labtested 90mgMDMA) 3 weeks ago, and it still created too many side-effects (panic attack, anxiety..cant be good).

As for "kicking the shit" out of alcohol and weed, i meant it was a lot better than the other two, and potentially more popular. Nothing beats that rush where you're saying to yourself "oh god..oh god.. i fucking love pills".

As for the plethora of problems...

1. Alcohol been tested for centuries by millions and we're well aware of what it does. MDMA however, has only really became popular in the last 15 years. (although the first recreational sale was apparantly 25 years) As DTmark said, It has not been proven to be safe.

2. MDMA side-effects can last upto 3 weeks later. We'll just say a lot of people will be missing sunday morning church because of psychological problems.

3. Then there is abuse of the substance. How old were you when u first got pissed? I was 13 (obviously illegally). Imagine 13 year old kids getting hold of pills for a laugh... lads would hit them back every weekend and end up cursing the day they ever took a pill.

4. A gateway to harder drugs - drugs are good, but lead to many problems. Once someone knows how good MDMA is... i'd imagine them likely to want to experience other harder drugs (i know i did)

5. The theory that everyone would be happy and non-violent is a myth. If you're violent and get a kick out of causing trouble, you can still do it on pills - I have seen it happen. A lot of people also tend to mix alcohol with pills as well. MDMA use wouldn't rule out alcohols trouble.

6. Legalizing MDMA would then have thousands of people arguing legalization of other drugs. Think about it, speed, ketamin and others all available over the counter. The nation would probably become obsessed in drugs... not a good thing.

 

[Negro-kitty]

no flames or personal attacks, please :D - i-kat

 

[ibizakat]

Wow, this discussion is going nowhere. I'm going to go ahead and close it, so we can stop flaming each other... please, respect each other's opinions. If you have a problem with my closing it, send me a PM...

 

[ibizakat]

As requested, I'm going to reopen this one for discussion. Please, though, NO name calling or flaming. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and calling people names does nothing for the flow of information and opinions.

 

[shortie]

i understand the points made here but if we were allowed to roll whenever wherever, i dont see that being a good thing, course if i wouldnt complain. i cant roll all the time anyway, it takes a toll on my body. i think about usually early in the morning still up (not on e) wondering how many others are in the same boat driving even. its crazy to think how many of the people i know that do drugs and are out and about and to have it legal... wow

 

[dovesmajik]

To answer your question quite bluntly. NO I dont think it should be legalized, Just as I think weed shouldnt be either. *shrug*

 

[Child_Inside]

Ibizakat : thank you for reopening this thread. The legalisation issue is one of the most important things in the drug scene today, and I think it is important to support and encourage people to state their opinions, and listen to other arguments.

Personally, I am all in favor of legalising all drugs, but in a controlled manner. The idea with having to pass a test before being allowed to buy drugs has been mentioned, and I think it is the best suggestion I've heard yet(in fact, I came up with this idea myself a few years back, nice to see that other people can think similar thoughts). I support the idea of freedom to make informed choices, this should also include drugs. In fact, I don't see why anyone else should decide what I'm going to do with my body and mind, that is completely my own business.

There are also the "what does most damage" argument. I am absolutely convinced that prohibition makes a lot more damage to the society as a whole, and to the users in particular, than the drugs themselves would ever do. The examples are many. I don't see why people have to go to jail for drug possession. I don't see why we have to pay 10 times as much for the drugs, because of the illegal status. I don't see why we have to buy streetdrugs of unknown quality. I don't see why governments worldwide have to spend billions of dollars every year on fighting drugs, when the same money could be spent more efficiently on harm reduction. I don't see why we keep supporting organised criminals, when our governments could be making lots of money by supplying/taxing legally sold drugs. Feel free to make more sentences...

This is all for now... I might come up with more, but I think that the above states my position pretty clear. Comments are welcome!

 

[Morrison's Lament]

I don't take any MDxx drug any more, though I have in the past. I have seen friends spiral downwards into suicidal depression after prolonged use, and frankly I have yet to be convinced that it is even remotely safe to use except in extreme moderation.

Yet I voted 'Yes' for full legalization, mostly because of my political beliefs, let me try and explain.

I have no interest in regulating what other people can and cannot do to their own bodies, and I believe government should never step into that territory. If you take away a person's ability to exercise free will over his own body you rob him of the most fundamental posession anyone has, his own BODY.

In most countries, suicide (including euthenasia) is actually illegal, in theory you are not allowed to choose whether you continue to live or not, that is up to the government. Basically this is the philosophical starting point for all "big brother" type laws, like anti-drug legislation, the government has the legal right to protect you from your own actions. You may disagree, but to me that is fundamentally 'wrong', for lack of a better term.

The way I see it we should all be responsible for our own bodies and our own lives. The longer we leave it to the government to decide how we live and when we die, the less capable we will be of shouldering that responsibility for ourselves.

If unbiased information was widely available (or perhaps a mandatory course before you could purchase any given chemical for the first time), the responsibility would be solely with the individual. After all, the choice is informed, much unlike the situation with most drug users today. Not only would they have all the information needed to make the experience minimally dangerous, but the drugs would be unadulterated and thus safer.

Information, yes, regulation, yes. Prohibition? Not for me.

--- G.

 

[Harlequin]

No, I don't think we as a society are anywhere near ready for MDMA legalization.

"People are stupid" would be one way to put it, but to elaborate I'd say that we (Americans at least) are already too wedded to the antidrug BS and scare tactics that we've been fed over the last few decades.

There have been too many people I've known who came to me for advice on how to take MDMA in as safe a manner as possible, and after they've done their research on Erowid or BL or wherever, spent a few weeks telling their friends that they're getting a testing kit so they're all sorts of responsible or something, they still end up popping multiple pills every weekend right off the bat...and then they blame the drug for getting them "addicted" and ruining their life, when the fact of the matter is they just didn't want to take responsibility for what they'd put into their bodies.

Much as I'd like to believe that this is the exception rather than the rule, experience has shown me otherwise. All the education in the world at this point doesn't seem to do much to reverse the idea in the American head that all drugs are poison and only to be used by excessive risk-takers (woo! I do drugs! I'm a warrior!)and those seeking to self-destruct (no one likes me, I may as well take drugs). It's this mindset that prevents people from realizing that you can be a normal person with a normal life and still get a drama-free kick out of MDMA. And if you don't believe that, then why are you going to bother actually being responsible about the drugs you take?

I also believe that MDMA is not a good candidate for legalization because it is so incredibly different from alcohol (and weed, which I do believe could be legalized in time without too much brouhaha). Alcohol is easy to dose in small or large amounts, its effects are more or less instantaneous so people have a lot of control over their dosage, and can supplement their dosage at any time during the experience. With MDMA you can't really do that--assuming you have several small (say, 50mg) doses available to you, there will still be a point relatively early in the evening where even if you take more, you won't get high and you're quite likely to feel a lot worse. With alcohol and nicotine this is much less true--so we already have a society full of people who are used to being able to take more of a substance indefinitely with few immediate ill effects. And even if they puke their guts out from too much beer, they'll still be all right the next day to repeat the process. Imagine what happens when we tell this sort of mentality that they can only have this much MDMA...and then they should wait a month before doing it again?! How many of *us* still have problems waiting? And what's all this about drinking water but not too much? That's a pretty tall order for the average lump who can't be arsed to hydrate after drinking alcohol to avoid hangovers. It's too much to remember, too many rules that most people happily ignore. And that's how people get in trouble.

Perhaps this could be a little more feasible if MDMA were kept to the hands of psychiatric professionals, but honestly I don't think MDMA is a very good candidate for a therapeutic drug either. Not because it wouldn't work, but because it works too well. In a medical setting where a patient might only need to take MDMA once or twice in their lifetime, it's really not a profitable substance to sell once you take it off of the black market where people are willing to pay top dollar for a recreational experience. That's not likely to happen anytime soon either.

 

[Morrison's Lament]

Fair enough, and I actually think society might very well not properly handle the legalization of just MDMA.

My overall belief, however, is that people are ultimately responsible for their own actions, and thus absolutely any chemical should be legal to put into your body, frum cyanide to aspirin.

--- G.

 

[Raas]

This is fuckin stupid, i can't say anything without getting flamed for it.

Respect to I/kat for setting the topic back on track.

thus absolutely any chemical should be legal to put into your body frum cyanide to aspirin.

Yes but everyone at some point makes wrong, uninformed choices. If cyanide was legal i'd have probably used it by now; but i'm as glad as fuck i haven't.

 

[Morrison's Lament]

That's certainly a valid argument, but I would counter by saying that I'm not really talking about throwing caution to the wind and selling these things at the supermarket.

Basically, I think suicide should (by cyanide or other means) should be legal after mandatory counseling sessions.

But like I said, this is really theoretical and has more to do with my somewhat fluid political stance as a socio-anarchist. It's really impossible to foresee how a massive change in the way the state interacts with it's citizens would impact the social fabric.

No doubt it would also vary considerably from country to country, so sociologically speaking it's impossible to say "legalization decreases usage" or "legalization increases usage". Simply speaking, there are too many variables to speak about this in general terms, one would have to specify a country and the exact terms of the change-over to make even an educated guess as to what the result would be.

Anyway, as heated as things got, I'm greatly enjoying the debate in this thread, as the legality of our actions is certainly a very fundamental issue in the Bluelight community.

--- G.

 

[silverfucked]

1. My personal belief is that it is somewhat unethical to tell people what they can and cannot put in their body.. I guess you could call me a hypocrite for supporting these limitations while at the same time rebelling against them with my own personal drug use. Still, as a nation, we function as a community.. If everyone practiced isolationism, then we would not have functioning countries at all. Therefore, to say that one person's action's does not have an impact is not true, and certainly a large group of peoples actions can cause a major impact.

People's decsion's to take MDMA ignorantly easily affects more than themselves in an negative way.. Youve got family, friends, people who "were just around" when something bad happens, taxpayers etc. Now if you have a massive group taking MDMA irresponsibly, the negative impact on responsible people's lives is gonna multiply greatly.

So you have to define when allowing someone to do something to their own body, is just that, and not influencing and affecting other people.. You see it all the time with alcohol.. This persons destroying their brain and liver, but its there right.. What about the people who are killed in the accident.. What about the taxpayers who have to pay for public damages, and uninsured people's medical bills, and the police who have to keep all this under control... You can see that allowing someone to do something to there body may or may not affect other people.. But the more people you allow to do it, the higher the chances are that the public will be affected, and the effect is linear. I do not believe that people should be able smoke in public, and I think drunk dirvers should go to jail. People always question what about the smoker's rights or the drinker's rights... They have a choice to smoke or drink.. Unfortunatly most of us, cannot be sheltered inside and have to go out in public, IMO makin our "rights" more important as they are a necessity to function in life.. RIght now i think alcohol is enough, that we dont need another substance, such as MDMA, to cause more trouble.

Yes I realise the effect it has on the public to keep it illegal.. The money it costs to keep it illegal.. Blame this on politicians and yourselves for not getting more favorable politicians in office(Nader anyone?)..

2. Legalising MDMA is a risk. Sure it may benefit everyone and have no negative consequences, but it may not. It's a risk.. Are the positive's really that great that we are willing to accept the negatives if they do happen? Remember, we are all effected by our communities choices..

Drugs are drugs are drugs.. In a way this is correct.. They are all chemicals that illicit some kind of response when put into the human body. However, to say "Alcohol worked, so MDMA will too" is not accurate IMO.. I know that Alcohol will and can fuck you up just as much if not more than MDMA.. However alcohol is a much more linear drug, than the exponential and suprising MDMA(thus alcohol is easier to control IMO).. Not to mention the fact that we have a pretty good idea of what alcohol does to the body in a long term sense. .MDMA, we have no clue..

So what if thousands or millions of people fuck themselves up due to their personal choices and ignorance of the chemical.. It was their choice right, they have to deal with the consequences.. Wrong. These are the people who are and will be running our country... In a nation we rely on almost everyone to do their integral part.. So allowing people to possibly fuck themselves up like this is self destructive, bringing the welfare of our country and in turn, ourselves down.

Like I said earlier... I believe MDMA should be kept illegal, but not erradicated from human existance.. I personally believe that MDMA's illegality is keeping it in small specialized groups, that we should analyze the effect on a few generations down the road, before realins it on the masses.

 

[silverfucked]

Let me sound like a hypocritical asshole for a moment.. I take MDMA. I thouroughly enjoy MDMA.I postload, and only take it 5 times a year. I think that one could be less resposible than me, yet still be a responsible user.
Yet I think it should stillbe kept illegal... (/being egocentrism) However, I personally think that I have achieved the responsiblity and knowledge to use this substance. In fact, I think most of the bluelight community has. Having said that, I think that some people have a false impression of the worlds drug users.. Bluelight can do that.. Bluelight is a collection of people who want to learn and use drugs at least semiresponsibly.. However, bluelight does not represent the majority of drug users out there.. Many do not give two shits. These are the people I am concerned about, escpecially their function in society.. ^^^^(last post)..

 

[chillpill28]

yes, i wish they would legalize e, as with every drug because i love doing them....but the only thing that would EVER happen which it prolly won't would be using e in a very intensively watched PTSD treatment. don't get your hopes up.

 

[NickName]

I for one feel that we should be able to choose what we can use be it weed, ecstasy, etc. It is our bodies we should be able to do whatever we please. Who are they to tell us not to. It only harms us no one else. You choose to use, you take the consequences. Easy as that.

 

[Morrison's Lament]

First of all this is not a flame, it's an honest question to those of you opposing legalization but still taking the drugs in question.

It's a bit out there, I know, but bare with me for a sec...

If you were hypothetically arrested with enough of said substance to cause some serious legal problems for you, would your stance be different? Let's say you're given the option of walking away scott free, but you have to accept that from now on so will anybody else, it's either legal for everyone or no-one.

If your future was actually on the line because of a law that dictates what you can and can't posess and put in your body of your own accord, would you accept the validity of your lengthy sentance and simply bear and grin it?
I think the reality of being locked up with a bunch of dangerous criminals because you had in your posession a chemical the government didn't like... Well, it might change some people's perspective on the effect the laws have on individual's lives.

Just something to think about

--- G.

 

[Harlequin]

Well, ML, it would depend on the stiffness of the penalty.

But that doesn't prove anything except the extent of my selfishness ;-)

 

[silverfucked]

I would be pissed off.. .Just because I believe Ecstasy should remain illegal does not mean I believe the laws around it are fair.. Personally, if Ecstasy were treated with the same laws as marijuana is now, and marijuana was treated with the same laws as alcohol, I would be a happy man!

 

[Morrison's Lament]

Ahh, of course, that was a stupid assumption! One doesn't need to favour full legalization to be against draconian penalties, very true

--- G.