• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

New Scientist on Psychoactive Substances Ban

Ceres said:
Of course corruption is rife, there are bigger geostrategic games being played, look at the CIA and its history in south america for example.

But acting outside of the law with no accountability makes you a common criminal, regardless of how you frame your motives in moral terms.
Click to expand...
Community justice merchants are not immune from corruption, either, the local CJ mob here were so enraged there was no product to eradicate when they called one night for a post pub eradication session, they kilt one of his dogs and left the other one limping
 
not even the most militant political vision can justify the wanton killing of civilians simply for the sake of spectacle and show of power. Most moral ideas almost anywhere, religious or non-religious, can be pushed to levels of blind fanaticism that discredit the original moral concept. Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, yes, all do it.

And take socialism — the vision of an economically just society. In the Soviet Union under Stalin and in China under Mao abstract socialist principles ended up justifying the deaths of more than 40 million people
Click to expand...

If you want an insight into just how wrong vigilantism disguised as 'community justice' can end up, watch this film http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4126304/
 
If you want an insight into how drugs can destroy individuals and communities, just visit any inner city, any day of the week.
 
After that, visit an inner-city area where drugs are legal and compare.

Any damage done by drugs is aggravated by prohibition -- whether it's lack of quality control from dealers, users avoiding seeking help with problematic use until it is too late for fear of being treated as a criminal or users deciding that as they've already committed one crime, they may as well commit another. That is an undeniable fact.
 
gannetsarewe said:
Community justice merchants are not immune from corruption, either, the local CJ mob here were so enraged there was no product to eradicate when they called one night for a post pub eradication session, they kilt one of his dogs and left the other one limping
Click to expand...

Jesus facking christ - what's wrong with these macho violent thugs thinking they can beat their community into their own image and then pretend it's justice? Smells like fascism to me. Give me the worst of the worst drug dealers in my community selling drugs to my son rather than this nascent brownshirt bullshit - in the long term that's much more scary to me than the worst crack dealer. I don't like the drug laws, but i'd much rather the rule of law than 'i am the law', might-is-right vigilantism.
 
Vurtual said:
Jesus facking christ - what's wrong with these macho violent thugs thinking they can beat their community into their own image and then pretend it's justice? Smells like fascism to me. Give me the worst of the worst drug dealers in my community selling drugs to my son rather than this nascent brownshirt bullshit - in the long term that's much more scary to me than the worst crack dealer. I don't like the drug laws, but i'd much rather the rule of law than 'i am the law', might-is-right vigilantism.
Click to expand...

Mate, they're just pissed off because they are no longer in control of the drug supply. They want it all their own way.
 
BecomingJulie said:
One time, I tried to buy oestrogen from a dodgy online pharmacy.

They tried to offer me free Viagra with that. Yes. Really.

Serious lack of joined-up thinking going on there, methinks .....
Click to expand...

I can see /a/ justification for that, it's not a good one, but it does exist. Really though, you've got to find the nice legitimate online pharmacies that take your payment in USD through shady banks in foreign countries.
 
Vurtual said:
what's wrong with these macho violent thugs thinking they can beat their community into their own image and then pretend it's justice? Smells like fascism to me. Give me the worst of the worst drug dealers in my community selling drugs to my son rather than this nascent brownshirt bullshit - in the long term that's much more scary to me than the worst crack dealer. I don't like the drug laws, but i'd much rather the rule of law than 'i am the law', might-is-right vigilantism.
Click to expand...

Also agreed.
Happily have not had to deal with any death squads in my days, but I have had to deal with a bunch of straight-edge skins. They are dangerous in packs - and can never seem to see the corruption of their leaders. They tended to go after the weak and the harmless rather than the scary drug pushers and pimps their always prattling on about.
Pretty nice guys too if they don't identify you as a target at night. . .but then shit starts without any real reason all the goddamned time and everyone else just gets on with life around the problem elements.
Everyone's a sinner, the self-righteous just have a real hard time seeing theirs and adjusting their behavior accordingly.

Besides I like the services of the couple vendors I've found that run a tight ship with consistent properly labeled product, and decent customer service.

We're humans.
 
Do you actually have anything truly pertinent to add? Or is it just going to be primary school sophistry?
 
Jesus christ that article makes my eyes bleed. Apparently, valium is an antidepressant, marketing bullshit ("up to ten times") is an acceptable substitute for actual information, and not naming the substance helps warn people about risks? Sucks that a guy died because we can't distribute actual safety information with products, but that's the grey market for you.
 
Superdollar said:
Do you actually have anything truly pertinent to add? Or is it just going to be primary school sophistry?
Click to expand...

A little ironic to comment on maturity, don't you think?
By the way: we call it independent data and evidence and it tends to be a little more valid than rhetoric.
:)
 
Don't get ahead of yourself, buddy. All you've done is say "cigs are bad, people die". Can you really not manage any better? Something which addresses the horrific death rate of novel benzos, for example?
 
When the precedent is set at 7 alts saying "drugs iz bad, we're exploited by that fancy word from GCSE Sociology" with no supporting evidence there isn't much need for better. :)
 
Superdollar said:
How many more deaths will it take to convince the apologists that legal highs are a menace? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...t-to-calm-nerves-before-final-year-exams.html
Click to expand...

What an awful article. Not only does it fail to name the drug, but it identifies it as an 'antidepressant' despite describing what obviously sounds like a benzodiazepine, due to their being no antidepressant type NPS products available and its comparison to diazepam. Not only does the article confuse what are essentially 2 completely different types of drugs, each of which have their own specific and very different spectrum of effects, but it encourages the reader to follow an internal link to an article discussing the risks associated with antidepressant use, using the alterations made to the prescribing guidelines of citalopram as the basis for the discussion.

I do not have any strong feelings about the Telegraph one way or the other, but this lazy, sensational, unhelpful and medically inaccurate just feels typical to me about how the 'outside world' views on drug use. My faith in the human race has taken a real knock following Crispin Blunts plea to plea to keep Poppers exempted from the new bill. This could not be considered under any circumstances, as since 1993, Poppers have been implicated in the deaths of nearly 20 people. With 'evidence' this trivial driving the ins and outs of this bill while the government continue to sell as much state sanctioned poisons as is possible (minimum alcohol pricing? why restrict peoples access to drink - yes it is possibly the most toxic drug of abuse in use today but the government don't see it as their place to restrict the amount of ethanol an average idiot gets through in the pace of seven days). I find in difficult to discuss drug policy at the best of times due to its idiocy but I am beginning to become openly incensed about this retarded document which, despite its ridiculous scope, still full of 100 year old puritanical ideology, will unbelievably be an act of parliament come April.

I cant do anything about it, but I cant just sit here either.
 
It really was a terrible article. You often see people confuse benzodiazepines with anti-depressants. On the right hand side there's a little snippet about anti-depressants and it's obviously talking about SSRIs/SNRIs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top