middle finger
Bluelighter
I don't think ecstasy should be legalised......
Obviously, there are valid points on both sides of the argument.8)
Obviously, there are valid points on both sides of the argument.8)
-
MDMA &
Empathogenic
Drugs
Welcome Guest! -
Do You Think Ecstasy Should Be Legalised???
- Thread starter silverfucked
- Start date
tathra
bluelighter
i feel that possession and manufacture of any substance should be legal, but sale should not (at least not to minors or something; just alter the laws enough to make loopholes allowing some form of legality).
i mean hell, if you're smart enough to make the stuff, you've obviously got enough intelligence to use it properly and not cause problems. if that was the case, there shouldnt be too much motivation to break the law by selling it, the attitude of most people would hopefully be, "i went through the trouble of making it, and it wasnt difficult; if you want some, you'll have to do the same!" (like with alcohol and tobacco... how many adults do you know that will buy liquor or smokes for minors?)
this would also allow for some form of regulation, and chemical companies would rake in $ from being able to sell all sorts of reagents (well, without customers going through loopholes heh heh), so they'd be all for it.
/ramble
i mean hell, if you're smart enough to make the stuff, you've obviously got enough intelligence to use it properly and not cause problems. if that was the case, there shouldnt be too much motivation to break the law by selling it, the attitude of most people would hopefully be, "i went through the trouble of making it, and it wasnt difficult; if you want some, you'll have to do the same!" (like with alcohol and tobacco... how many adults do you know that will buy liquor or smokes for minors?)
this would also allow for some form of regulation, and chemical companies would rake in $ from being able to sell all sorts of reagents (well, without customers going through loopholes heh heh), so they'd be all for it.
/ramble
Joel_uk
Bluelighter
To all those people who think it should stay illegal, yet they use it themselves, would you be pissed off if you were put in jail for possesion?
silverfucked said:
Just because you use MDMA does not mean you're a hypocrit and have to deem it legal. If anything, you have more scope than anyone else to consider it illegal.
It is worth noting that the law is not their too purposefully deny you of freedom, the law is in place to
protect individuals. The repercussions of introducing a class A drug for recreational use, in my opinion are just too harsh and problematic... i listed potential problems in my earlier post
silverfucked
Bluelighter
Tathra has a good point!
Morrison's Lament
Bluelighter
Tathra has an excellent point, as always, but there are some problems with these admirable ideas.
First of all, you don't have to be philosophically enlightened to know your way around chemicals, plenty of morally bankrupt individuals know how to make drugs and make a huge profit of it. The attitude of "learn to make it for yourself, dumbass, I did!" takes a backseat to the consideration: "I could make a million bucks in a year making this for other people".
There is no correlation between maturity (responsibility if you will) and education, education takes time while maturity never materializes for many people.
Secondly, I'm worried as to the public reaction to such an edict. I know a lot of idiots that consider themselves geniuses capable of anything.
They would not hesitate to set up a methlab if they could, a horrible explosion would be a foregone conclusion.
Like I said, it's an excellent point but it speaks more to what I wish the human race was than what it actually is....
That being said, I think all drugs should be legal. I would just prefer to get them from scientistis working in professional labs that cost millions of dollars, rather than having to make them in my kitchen sink, or buy them out of someone else's...
--- G.
First of all, you don't have to be philosophically enlightened to know your way around chemicals, plenty of morally bankrupt individuals know how to make drugs and make a huge profit of it. The attitude of "learn to make it for yourself, dumbass, I did!" takes a backseat to the consideration: "I could make a million bucks in a year making this for other people".
There is no correlation between maturity (responsibility if you will) and education, education takes time while maturity never materializes for many people.
Secondly, I'm worried as to the public reaction to such an edict. I know a lot of idiots that consider themselves geniuses capable of anything.
They would not hesitate to set up a methlab if they could, a horrible explosion would be a foregone conclusion.
Like I said, it's an excellent point but it speaks more to what I wish the human race was than what it actually is....
That being said, I think all drugs should be legal. I would just prefer to get them from scientistis working in professional labs that cost millions of dollars, rather than having to make them in my kitchen sink, or buy them out of someone else's...
--- G.
Last edited:
Roman Holiday
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 683
Exactly...and it would be much harder to get ripped off...like I just did
Petey_pumpkin
Bluelighter
I don't think the voting poll is fair. It should have the option of:
"I think ecstasy should be decriminalised"
There is a difference. Legalisation would probably mean the state tax the drug, and corporations produce it. Where as decriminalisation would mean it's tax free, and anybody can produce it/possess it etc.
Sure, decriminalisation would mean anybody could produce MD**(which could have some implications) but companys/scientists could also produce it, not that i'd neccessarily trust drug-corporations more than the current 'blackmarket' drug suppliers. Take tobacco companys for example. They cram thousands of additives into their 'products', they don't give a shit about the 'consumers' well-being. They just want to make as much money as possible, and if that means adding thousands of very harmful poisons to their product, they'll do it. Same sort of thing goes for the greedy blackmarket drug dealers. Some will add DXM, PCP etc. etc. to 'ecstasy tablets'... Another example- The quality of cannibas resin is quite appalling in this country, they cut it with all sorts of stuff...Same goes for the quality of most drugs, they are all cut with all sorts of stuff.
It all boils down to money. If there was no money involved in the drugs trade, I think decriminalisation would work. But in our current capitalist society, it's just not going to work as well as it should.
I still believe that I should, and everyone else, should be allowed to take whatever chemical/plant/substance they want. I just don't see it working very well in capitalist societies. I don't think much would change in terms of quality of the drug. However, in terms of the millions of drug-users that are needlessly imprisoned/persecuted/marginilised becoming subsequently free, I agree with it, so i'm still all for decriminalisation of all currently illegal drugs because it's going to reduce harm to some extent. Such as: The end of drug-related crime. More open discussion(without the element of fear)/ education on drugs (harm reduction?). Less young peoples entire futures being messed up due to having been thrown in prison with nasty people who want to ass fuck them simply bcos they had some substances for a party or whatever.
PMK
"I think ecstasy should be decriminalised"
There is a difference. Legalisation would probably mean the state tax the drug, and corporations produce it. Where as decriminalisation would mean it's tax free, and anybody can produce it/possess it etc.
Sure, decriminalisation would mean anybody could produce MD**(which could have some implications) but companys/scientists could also produce it, not that i'd neccessarily trust drug-corporations more than the current 'blackmarket' drug suppliers. Take tobacco companys for example. They cram thousands of additives into their 'products', they don't give a shit about the 'consumers' well-being. They just want to make as much money as possible, and if that means adding thousands of very harmful poisons to their product, they'll do it. Same sort of thing goes for the greedy blackmarket drug dealers. Some will add DXM, PCP etc. etc. to 'ecstasy tablets'... Another example- The quality of cannibas resin is quite appalling in this country, they cut it with all sorts of stuff...Same goes for the quality of most drugs, they are all cut with all sorts of stuff.
It all boils down to money. If there was no money involved in the drugs trade, I think decriminalisation would work. But in our current capitalist society, it's just not going to work as well as it should.
I still believe that I should, and everyone else, should be allowed to take whatever chemical/plant/substance they want. I just don't see it working very well in capitalist societies. I don't think much would change in terms of quality of the drug. However, in terms of the millions of drug-users that are needlessly imprisoned/persecuted/marginilised becoming subsequently free, I agree with it, so i'm still all for decriminalisation of all currently illegal drugs because it's going to reduce harm to some extent. Such as: The end of drug-related crime. More open discussion(without the element of fear)/ education on drugs (harm reduction?). Less young peoples entire futures being messed up due to having been thrown in prison with nasty people who want to ass fuck them simply bcos they had some substances for a party or whatever.
PMK
no, because then there would be lots of dickheads running around off their faces, but they are not cool, they will only piss eveyone off. i think that the laws on them should be lowered, but not completly legal, thats just silly.
WhatAnOddGuy
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2003
- Messages
- 171
CuPillar said:
They're already alot of dickheads running around off their faces, and do you really want the state telling you what you can and cant do because someone find it annoying? It's certainly possible to avoid people who you dont like on ecstacy just as people are free to look away if they don't like how you dress or are free to not losten if they dont like your ideas. Further I find it very insulting that you dismiss legalization as "just silly", I, myself feel that cognitive liberty is one of the most pressing issues of our time whenever possible take a strong dedicated stand. To be brushed aside as irrelivant like that is really quite patronizing.
Petey_pumpkin
Bluelighter
"They're already alot of dickheads running around off their faces, and do you really want the state telling you what you can and cant do because someone find it annoying?"
Exactly.
Exactly.
Miss_bhavior
Bluelighter
I was going to bring this up (I actually wrote a term paper that revolved around this), and the Big Brother mentality that not just the US but the entire world seems to be adjusting to and accepting is the basis for my opinions on drug legislation. Exactly when and how did it become acceptable for the government to place restrictions on what adults do with their own bodies and money? Slap age restrictions on everything, that's fine; make it illegal to operate heavy machinery while rolling, that's okay. Just like with alcohol, people should still be held responsible for their actions while under the influence of anything, but how dare they tell me what I can and cannot put into my own body? The line between government control and personal freedom has become blurred, and, color me pessimistic, but that doesn't strike me as a good thing (unless, of course, you like fascism. Then, hey, bully for you. No, I'm kidding.)
Indeed, but, while the masses are undeniably stupid, they're consistently stupid. As soon as we are allowed to have something, our desire for it decreases dramatically, and this is why legalization would not lead to the downfall of society, or whatever the hell everyone is so concerned about. You're absolutely right that those who try it once would probably try it twice, but the bulk of the allure surrounding the drug would have been lost, and that alone would keep it in check.
vegtable
Bluelighter
I'm getting into this discussion late, but I want to pipe in with my views. I am for the complete and total legalization of MDMA. I believe that no one has the right to dictate what to me what I can and can put in my body. In essence, this is where my argument begins and ends; I cannot see any reason why any behavior that I engage in that does not harm other people should be made illegal. What more, I don’t see where the irresponsibility of others should limit me. My choices are my own to make, regardless of their consequences to me; so fuck anyone and everyone who would stand in my way.
A common pro-prohibition argument in this thread seems to be to compare MDMA with alcohol and suggest that if MDMA were legalized society would have the same problems with it that it currently has with Alcohol. I won’t argue with this statement, as it is both a good point and irrelevant. Instead I will argue that the criminal problems created by prohibition are far worse that the health problems that would be created by legalization. Anyone who paid attention in their U.S. history class (sorry to all you non-Americans out there, but this is my frame of reference) will know that the prohibition of alcohol created enormous problems. The prohibition of alcohol was almost entirely responsible for the rise of organized crime in America. It also created many health problems as drinkers moved from beer to hard alcohol. This situation is paralleled in modern prohibition. America’s legal system is overburdened by the strain of arresting, prosecuting, and imprisoning drug dealers. Finally, if one is to argue that MDMA should not be legalized because of the problems alcohol’s legality is causing society one is essentially arguing that alcohol should be made illegal again. Since prohibiting alcohol has clearly not worked in the past, why would anyone assume that prohibiting MDMA now is working?
Another pro-prohibition argument that I would like to respond to is basically this: MDMA should be kept illegal because more people would do it irresponsibly. My retort to this would be: who cares? People have the right to put whatever they want into their body, but they also have to responsibility to do it wisely. If someone neglects this responsibility, it is his or her problem, not societies. Other people’s inability to behave responsibility should not infringe on my ability to pursue happiness. Should driving be outlawed because a lot of people behave irresponsibly? Should junk food be outlawed because many people are killing themselves with it? Should pornography be outlawed because some people cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality? Just because some people might use MDMA irresponsibly, does that mean I should not legally be allowed to use it? Personally, I believe that if some people wind up killing themselves due to MDMA becoming legal then the gene pool is better off for it.
It is not that the pro-prohibitionists points are not valid, there would be many problems if MDMA was ever legalized. However, I cannot accept that society should have baby-sit itself at the expense of the rights of responsible drug users such as myself and probably most of you.
A common pro-prohibition argument in this thread seems to be to compare MDMA with alcohol and suggest that if MDMA were legalized society would have the same problems with it that it currently has with Alcohol. I won’t argue with this statement, as it is both a good point and irrelevant. Instead I will argue that the criminal problems created by prohibition are far worse that the health problems that would be created by legalization. Anyone who paid attention in their U.S. history class (sorry to all you non-Americans out there, but this is my frame of reference) will know that the prohibition of alcohol created enormous problems. The prohibition of alcohol was almost entirely responsible for the rise of organized crime in America. It also created many health problems as drinkers moved from beer to hard alcohol. This situation is paralleled in modern prohibition. America’s legal system is overburdened by the strain of arresting, prosecuting, and imprisoning drug dealers. Finally, if one is to argue that MDMA should not be legalized because of the problems alcohol’s legality is causing society one is essentially arguing that alcohol should be made illegal again. Since prohibiting alcohol has clearly not worked in the past, why would anyone assume that prohibiting MDMA now is working?
Another pro-prohibition argument that I would like to respond to is basically this: MDMA should be kept illegal because more people would do it irresponsibly. My retort to this would be: who cares? People have the right to put whatever they want into their body, but they also have to responsibility to do it wisely. If someone neglects this responsibility, it is his or her problem, not societies. Other people’s inability to behave responsibility should not infringe on my ability to pursue happiness. Should driving be outlawed because a lot of people behave irresponsibly? Should junk food be outlawed because many people are killing themselves with it? Should pornography be outlawed because some people cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality? Just because some people might use MDMA irresponsibly, does that mean I should not legally be allowed to use it? Personally, I believe that if some people wind up killing themselves due to MDMA becoming legal then the gene pool is better off for it.
It is not that the pro-prohibitionists points are not valid, there would be many problems if MDMA was ever legalized. However, I cannot accept that society should have baby-sit itself at the expense of the rights of responsible drug users such as myself and probably most of you.
im still no one
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2003
- Messages
- 21
Everythings cool until it becomes mainstream.
So keep it illegal, cos it makes me feel special.
So keep it illegal, cos it makes me feel special.
Im surprised by the responses... even tho I voted to keep it illegal, it would most probably be better shit as it would be pure and made in regulated labs. But to be honest u dont wanna go to your local shops and see 15 year olds hugging each other...
abuse is a bad thing
abuse is a bad thing
chillpill28 said: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.
so you think they should make it legal to huff spray paint??? just cuz its fun doesnt mean it should be legal!
people like you piss me off!
Fuck government censorship of my body!
Basically, I voted legalise...but with caveats. I am of the opinion that mentally functioning adults should be free to do anything they want to themselves.
Some people like to write newspaper articles criticising the government. In my country this is not only accepted, it is expected. In other countries people will be imprisoned or worse.
Some people like to put on a gimp mask at the weekend and have the wife strafe them with a cat o'nine tails. None but the most censorious bishop would have an issue with that in my country - in others people will be imprisoned or worse.
Some people like to read pornographic mags / watch porn films. This is a step up the ladder for the bishop, but your average punter probably doesn't have an issue in my country - in others people will be imprisoned or worse.
My mate Terry likes to smoke the odd reefer at the weekend. If he got caught in my country he'd get a slap on the wrist if he didn't have 2 months supply in his flat. If he did have a lot on him, he might get a fine and a police caution. If he had a big bag(all for personal use mind!) he would be extremely lucky to get away without a custodial sentence and a criminal record. In other countries he would certainly be imprisoned or worse.
If my mate Terry got caught with a bag of pills (say 8 - which are actually all for him over the next 2 months as well), in my country he'd probably get a fine and a criminal record, in some US states he would be incarcerated with sex offenders and murderers, in some countries he might suffer a worse fate.
To the point: Essentially, none of these people is doing anything to harm anybody (other than possibly themselves)...and yet owing to various laws in various countries they could all suffer severe consequences. SURELY THIS IS WRONG??! Go back through each one and ask yourself why an intelligent, responsible adult should be told that they can or cannot do any of these things by their government.
What I'm trying to say is, if it ain't harming anybody else, what's the bloody problem. How many more problems are caused by making these activities illegal (blackmarket supply, criminal involvement, exploitation are all trademarks of illegality - think seedy sex shops, child pornography, buying stuff from people involved in organised crime, tainted supply, poor quality stuff etc. etc.) Legalise and these problems disappear.
Now for the caveats:
Not for children. Not for mentally impaired. Not for anybody incapable of making an informed decision for themselves. Not taxed to the point that the black market continues to be a more attractive prospect. Education for all.
I've probably missed loads of stuff that I originally meant to say, but this is way long enough already
Basically, I voted legalise...but with caveats. I am of the opinion that mentally functioning adults should be free to do anything they want to themselves.
Some people like to write newspaper articles criticising the government. In my country this is not only accepted, it is expected. In other countries people will be imprisoned or worse.
Some people like to put on a gimp mask at the weekend and have the wife strafe them with a cat o'nine tails. None but the most censorious bishop would have an issue with that in my country - in others people will be imprisoned or worse.
Some people like to read pornographic mags / watch porn films. This is a step up the ladder for the bishop, but your average punter probably doesn't have an issue in my country - in others people will be imprisoned or worse.
My mate Terry likes to smoke the odd reefer at the weekend. If he got caught in my country he'd get a slap on the wrist if he didn't have 2 months supply in his flat. If he did have a lot on him, he might get a fine and a police caution. If he had a big bag(all for personal use mind!) he would be extremely lucky to get away without a custodial sentence and a criminal record. In other countries he would certainly be imprisoned or worse.
If my mate Terry got caught with a bag of pills (say 8 - which are actually all for him over the next 2 months as well), in my country he'd probably get a fine and a criminal record, in some US states he would be incarcerated with sex offenders and murderers, in some countries he might suffer a worse fate.
To the point: Essentially, none of these people is doing anything to harm anybody (other than possibly themselves)...and yet owing to various laws in various countries they could all suffer severe consequences. SURELY THIS IS WRONG??! Go back through each one and ask yourself why an intelligent, responsible adult should be told that they can or cannot do any of these things by their government.
What I'm trying to say is, if it ain't harming anybody else, what's the bloody problem. How many more problems are caused by making these activities illegal (blackmarket supply, criminal involvement, exploitation are all trademarks of illegality - think seedy sex shops, child pornography, buying stuff from people involved in organised crime, tainted supply, poor quality stuff etc. etc.) Legalise and these problems disappear.
Now for the caveats:
Not for children. Not for mentally impaired. Not for anybody incapable of making an informed decision for themselves. Not taxed to the point that the black market continues to be a more attractive prospect. Education for all.
I've probably missed loads of stuff that I originally meant to say, but this is way long enough already
I doubt it.Prinsesse said:
E is so cheap in the UK and places like Holland that when legalised the tax levey would be so high it would probably cost more.
The same way black market ciggerets are much cheaper than legal taxed ciggs.
Also corparations are unlikely to charge less then what people are prepaired to pay.
If people are prepaired to pay $10 dollars or more at the moment then that is going to be the price of pharmasutical pills.
they will say the extra money goes on QA (quality assurance)