No retreat in this fight: Anna Wood's parents want zero-tolerance

[mister]

Juvenile and myself are a testament to the fact that drugs dont kill, if you go by our joining dates
and I hate RnB

 

[spacejunk]

^ @juvenile - personally i doubt it. he doesn't seem to be too open to the message this site exists to spread - as well as the fact that the internet is rather immense, and he has what i'm sure is a very common name.

if he had spent any time looking around the web - enough to find a forum like bluelight - he might have a more open-minded attitude on the matter. he might have seen the good work done by all the people that work towards and within the principles of harm minimisation in a social and academic context. he might not say such embarrassing things if he was a bit more information savvy.

instead he parrots the media message.
you can hear this message across a lot of different platforms (online, radio, tv newspaper etc) and a lot of networks - and on a lot of issues, but it's usually very consistent. the message on drugs has never - until very recently - questioned (or even mentioned) drug prohibition and all 'illicit' drugs are bad/evil/dangerous/criminal in every instance. a thing to be stopped, like a disease or an invading army.
drug prohibition never used to be a topic of discussion in the mainstream press because we were presented with a worldview that said drugs are bad - so why would anyone even think twice about banning them? drugs being so taboo that any suggestion of trying a different approach would likely earn you a reputation as an extremist.

maybe the media is moving with the debate, but pooor tony wood is stuck in 1995 - a time which had a dramatically different drug scene in australia, almost unrecognisable in this age of crystal methamphetamine, research chemicals, online global drug markets and...a period of extended MDMA drought!

he seems more like a sad figure that the media can wring a few more sympathy ratings out of when the need arises - his role as a 'victim of drugs' serves as his credentials (tabloids always turn to an 'expert' to support their claims in lieu of evidence). he doesn't need to research the topic he speaks out about - his heartbreak and martyrdom serve as qualifications and substance to his claims.

unfortunately this is enough to win some people over - just read the comments on the web forums of any australian city's daily newspaper or tv news site. i don't know how representative those sorts of things are - probably not at all - but i see plenty of comments that are the complete opposite of 95% of the sentiments on bluelight, or amongst my peer group. people calling for drug dealers to be executed, floggings and mandatory imprisonment for users or addicts - nasty, brutal, fascist stuff. along the same lines as what tony wood is talking about, but he has the dubious honour of being a 'victim' of what most of us consider a 'victimless crime'; his kid taking a pill.

mr wood is connected to the sort of story crass journalists dream about - a tale of drugs, death and tragedy befalling an attractive young woman.
they're always happy to give the anna wood story another airing; for its apparent vindication as well as verbalisation of conservative attitudes towards drugs, and the sensationalism of the story even all these years on.
a cautionary tale of tragedy and wasted potential - of the horrors of illegal drugs - and the man that has been through it all says "lock em up and throw away the key - it would've saved my daughter's life" - and to top it all off, a pretty young innocent looking blond girl to put on the front page. tabloids exist for this kind of bullshit.

i'm sorry for being so cynical but i agree with everyone above - the media fucking sucks.
don't let it into your life - choose the content you want to consume. spot the propaganda and don't even listen to it. block it out.
that stuff's bad for your health.

 

[brainticket]

@spacejunk - you mention shame and that is exactly what the problem is. Here's my shame-based rant that I submitted to the recent Victorian open discussion -

"We have been altering our conciousness for tens of thousands of years by ingesting plants and their derivatives. Making one or a class of these compounds the 'forbidden fruit' fails to reduce usage, and merely turns the act into a shameful act. Prohibition does not work - even The Bible makes this startlingly clear at the start. And it is this making shameful of the act that causes the most harm in so many ways.
I'm a father of three and I realise that based on statistics two out of three will partake in altering their consciousness by using what are currently outlawed substances at some point in their life. Most certainly all three of them will do the same by using the endorsed alternatives coffee, alcohol, chocolate, etc. It is a concern that because of the stigma and shame involved there cannot be open and frank discussion and education about how to safely procure and use mind altering substances. Government says 'talk to your children about drugs', but the real message is 'talk to your children about drugs, and as soon as they open up and say that they are interested in doing them, shut them down and send them running to someone else who will support their interest, ie the unregulated black market'. For the same reason (shame) I cannot provide a safe haven for my children and any friends they may hang around with where the emotional and physical risks can be minimised. Instead they will be forced to hide their interests/habits from parents/law enforcement, and they will wander the streets, and be reluctant to call for help in the case of physical or emotional crisis. This scares me about their safety so much. Young people will do drugs - FOR GOD'S SAKE PLEASE ALLOW THEM TO BE ABLE TO IN A SAFE MANNER AND IN A SAFE PLACE.
Prohibition makes people criminals and locks them up for doing something they are going to do regardless of policy. This is a MASSIVE harm and cost to the individuals, their families and the community. Please divert the effort and money into making drug use an education and health (and revenue??) issue, not a criminal one."

Shame shame shame.

 

[Juvenile]

Oh don't worry, I know there is no way he would stick around this site if he found it, I was more imagining him googling his name smugly to see what media articles he has been able to spread his rubbish in, then being outraged finding a forum or two that discredits everything he said.

But then again, he can probably ignore what a forum on some corner of the internet said, knowing his message gets out to more people via mass media. I still like the thought of him reading this thread though.

There's a few here a lot older than I am mister. (late 20's) But yes 10 years of occasional MDMA/meth/pot/LSD/etc use and I'm still alive and doing well.

 

[TangerinO]

^ See that's pretty much it right there. It's all down to the user and personal responsibility.

My drug of choice has always been hallucinogens, and I've never had a disastrously bad time with them because I exercise caution, respect and intelligence when I go about taking them.

Perfect example, someone I know was at a festival and had never used acid before, so instead of testing the waters he immediately proceeds to drop 400mics worth of quality board. Lo and behold, he spent his first acid trip in the back of a police wagon, unaware that he had just been headbutting his girlfriend and all his friends in the face.

Now question: Do you blame the drug the kid ingested, or do you blame the kid for being stupid enough to ingest that much? Or do you take it further and blame the institution for failing to properly educate him? I'd say a combination of the latter two.

I mean when someone dies from alcohol poisoning, society blames the idiot stupid enough to drink himself to death, not the alcohol itself. Oooh but if it's any kind of illegal drug, it's a whole different story.

I'm so sick of this crap, being part of small, select part of society that seem to just be jumping up and down, waving their hands, doing anything we can to draw attention to the fact that this whole system is totally, jaw droppingly backwards. It seriously drives me absolutely insane, just trying to comprehend how people could possibly believe that the current system is working,

Not to mention this typical fucking attitude of so many parents, acting like their kids would never be involved in something as horrid as drugs... Man I could go on for hours but I actually feel like my brain is going to explode, it's just so unbelievable.

Sometimes I swear I'm not reading the news, and I'm actually reading Mr. Topsy Turvy from the Mr. Men series.
Although that being said, the mass-media doesn't quite match the literary value of the Mr. Men books, but none the less.

 

[CrayZ]

...

Now question: Do you blame the drug the kid ingested, or do you blame the kid for being stupid enough to ingest that much? Or do you take it further and blame the institution for failing to properly educate him? I'd say a combination of the latter two.

...

I blame the kid entirely. It is his job to educate himself and to also accept total responsibility for his actions. Some crafty lawyer will argue otherwise which is most likely where a lot of the problem lies.

 

[TangerinO]

^ Yeah it's a tough one. I dunno though, I would blame the kid entirely if we actually had an accurate and functional harm minimization and education system for drugs. I still think the approach to drugs is half the problem.

The point remains though. The last thing you blame is the drug. I mean you can say whatever you want about ecstasy, but until YOU decide to put it in your body, it's just a pill.
It can't hurt anyone, it'll most likely just sit there acting like a pill, you know all still and harmless.

 

[Crankinit]

Yeah it never ceases to amaze me how much cognitive dissonance goes into societies attitude towards drugs.

If somebody dies from some drugs, you blame the drug or the drug supplier (illegal drugs), but if they die from other drugs (legal drugs) you blame the individual.

The fact that people can't see the level of base hypocrisy in spending their day shouting for drug dealers/users to be locked up then going down to the pub to grab a beer from their friendly barman astounds me.

It just makes no sense until you consider that most of society has been pumped full of propaganda about drugs since they were little children. Just like it was once accepted without question that some races were inherently superior to others or that some sexual practices were inherently evil, we live in a society where people have it drilled into them from an early age that there are good drugs (which aren't really 'drugs' at all) and bad drugs, and that society will tell you which is which. Just like an old bigot who can't get his head around the fact that skin color just doesn't matter, a certain segment of society will never be able to see past the indoctrination about drugs that they've been exposed to. We just have to hope that, with time and effort, the others can be educated and that a new generation can be brought around to see sense.

 

[Mr Blonde]

I blame the kid entirely. It is his job to educate himself and to also accept total responsibility for his actions. Some crafty lawyer will argue otherwise which is most likely where a lot of the problem lies.

We can't completely blame the kid though given the state of the drug 'education' that they receive. If the majority of drug users were aware of sites like Bluelight then maybe that argument could hold a bit more water but we all know what it's really like out there.

 

[spacejunk]

blaming individual casualties seems a little cold to me - in the culture of silence and taboo that we are operating in anyway.
people that preach against harm minimisation are effectively saying that drug users deserve to die. in states in america that do not have needle exchange programs, and require prescriptions for fits, this is the reality.
higher incidence of HIV and hep C as well as other harms.
to me this is the irony of mr wood's position - but i don't blame him. he doesn't know any better.

tangerinO - i like your last post on the previous page. you raise an interesting point about how to read the absurdity that is our modern media and the modern approach to drug use.
i would suggest that one way to look at it is this; drug prohibition is not there to protect us from harm or from ourselves.
the whole purpose of banning certain drugs, and the campaign to demonise them through propaganda in the media is to keep certain people down.
whether they be poor people, rebellious people or certain ethnic groups (dependant on the country) drugs deemed 'bad' and 'illegal' are not those that are the most dangerous, but those that are not accepted by the current global power base.
with the current anglo-american dominance in world affairs (which seems to be changing?) has forcefully exported american drug laws to the rest of the world. the initial drugs that were prohibited were cannabis (which were associated with mexicans) and opium (which was associated with chinese migrants). then as the various social changes of the 1960s occurred, the favoured drugs of the counterculture (namely psychedelics and amphetamines) were first demonised in the media, then made illegal.
now, you could say that this is related to the dangers of the use of these drugs becoming normalised - but i think it has much more to do with the fact that the state wanted to control these people by force.
what force? the police force and the judicial system.
now the USA has the biggest prison population of any nation in history - and guess what? not only are the prisoniers are a slave labour force, but there are less 'rebels', less 'agitators' on the streets. whole communities in poor neighbourhoods now grow up with incarceration being a fact of life - brothers, uncles, cousins, sisters, mothers, fathers are absent from kids' lives because they are behind bars, if they grew up in the wrong part of town, the wrong culture.
it wouldn't come as a shock to many that a lot of these people are from ethnic minorities.

the civil rights era in the US may seem like a distant memory from history, but it is the same people being oppressed by the 'war on drugs' as those that were oppressed by segregation - and it is the same the world over. wealthy folks in mercedes don't get stopped by police and searched for drugs, but poor folks on the street certainly do.
it is about the wealthy maintaining their positions of power in society, masked in an emotive pseudo-moral issue. moral issues are something everybody wants to get behind, from politicians to schools to religious leaders.

but it doesn't make any sense? of course not! it's a fucking sham. a red herring. a load of fucking bollocks.
finally it seems like some of the people that realise this are starting to speak out. it only took 80 years

 

[thestudent14]

I blame the kid entirely. It is his job to educate himself and to also accept total responsibility for his actions. Some crafty lawyer will argue otherwise which is most likely where a lot of the problem lies.

Disagree, how many people do you think researched weed before they first smoked it? Or alcohol before they first drank it?
As an adult we're much aware of risks involved with each substance we take, but at 15 years old and you tried some Ecstasy which all their friends had told them was safe.

Besides I thought it was a parents responsibilty to educate their children until they're an adult to make their own decisions. Although I don't blame the parents for this either, how many would expect their children to be trying drugs at 15 if they had no inclinations.

It's not some crafty lawyer making the problem worse, it's a much more indepth problem then to pass it off like that.

 

[CrayZ]

OK, maybe I was a little harsh. You could just as easily blame his friends for letting him drop that much acid - but I know how 'impractical' this would be. It's pretty likely that he would have taken this much acid regardless of the amount of 'research' he'd done - some people just have no commonsense and can only learn the hard way.

I guess what i'm trying to say is that we must all accept responsibilty for what we do. If there was more of this, then society would be a better place.

 

[Busty St Clare]

Why blame anyone? Shit happens. A sad number of people, old and young, die everyday from doing things that while carrying an element of risk, don't kill often enough for people to want to avoid them outright. You can die skydiving but most people are happy to roll the dice and take that risk. If ecstasy was so dangerous that it was a toss of the coin whether you lived or died then most intelligent teenagers would not want to try it. Reality is the chance of you not having a good time is so low that we all choose to do it.

I'm sure Mr Wood blames himself and if he feels the only way to redeem his life is to become an anti drug crusader then there is nothing you or I can say to change his mind. You have the right to pick and choose your experts. I don't take advice from my mum on who should be selected in the All Blacks, (she'd probably pick all the hunks and ignore the hard working toilers with a face like a busted arse) and I sure as hell don't give two shits about hard core anti drugs ideals. Abstinence might keep you safe when it comes to sex and drugs but life is too short not to experience some of life's riskier pursuits just so you can live a couple years longer with a colostomy bag strapped to your rectum.

 

[ayjay]

Why blame anyone? Shit happens. A sad number of people, old and young, die everyday from doing things that while carrying an element of risk, don't kill often enough for people to want to avoid them outright. You can die skydiving but most people are happy to roll the dice and take that risk. If ecstasy was so dangerous that it was a toss of the coin whether you lived or died then most intelligent teenagers would not want to try it. Reality is the chance of you not having a good time is so low that we all choose to do it.

Absolutely - nothing is risk free; when you take risks, sometimes shit goes wrong. Welcome to life.

Abstinence might keep you safe when it comes to sex and drugs but life is too short not to experience some of life's riskier pursuits just so you can live a couple years longer with a colostomy bag strapped to your rectum

Fuckin' A Busty!!

 

[CrayZ]

Whilst I agree with what you've said Busty you're totally out of context in this instance.

Consider: Dude drops shitload of acid, freaks out, headbutts girlfriends and friends, comes down and says: "don't blame me, shit happens". And you accept this? I think we've got sidetracked and right off topic...

 

[poledriver]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ONHPybwD8s

Nasenbluten - Fuck Anna Wood

 

[Mr Blonde]

^ From the summary below the video:

Anna's Story is a non-sensationalised account of teenage drug usage, and strips away the transparent glamour of rave/ecstasy parties.

I'm pretty sure that's the book I read... and sensationalized is in fact just the word I'd use to describe it.

 

[Busty St Clare]

Whilst I agree with what you've said Busty you're totally out of context in this instance.

Consider: Dude drops shitload of acid, freaks out, headbutts girlfriends and friends, comes down and says: "don't blame me, shit happens". And you accept this? I think we've got sidetracked and right off topic...

I wouldn't blame the lsd that's for sure. If I was to blame anyone it would be who ever gave the dude with the mother and anger issues acid.

.....and strips away the transparent glamour of rave/ecstasy parties.

You only have to score drugs in a nightclub toilet cubicle to achieve this.

 

[spacejunk]

Consider: Dude drops shitload of acid, freaks out, headbutts girlfriends and friends, comes down and says: "don't blame me, shit happens". And you accept this? I think we've got sidetracked and right off topic...

in this instance, the drugs didn't make him act violently - it is still his decision to do something like that, no matter how under the influence he is.
LSD doesn't take away your free will - just ask the CIA; try as they might, they never could work out how to use it to control people.

taking too much of a substance and dropping/dying is not the same as taking too much of something and being a fuckhead.
some people are just fuckheads, drugs or not.
the difference is that you cannot really know what path a psychedelic (or other) drug will take you down, whereas if you are informed about what you are taking (safe dosage, safe use, amount of said drug in pill etc) you know how far you are pushing it and how likely you are to encounter problems such as overdose or over/under hydration.

bringing it back to the topic at hand, i think it is fair to say that the risks involved in the latter case are greatly reduced by liberalising our attitude and legal treatment of various 'recreational' drugs.
sensible education and better regulation of drugs (ie not blanket prohibition which leads to a huge black market) would probably stop kids having such easy access to drugs. i first took mdma at 15, and i think it is way too young (now). in theory, adults make more informed decisions and are not messing so much with their developing bodies and minds.

if anna wood had taken a known dosage of MDMA ('one pill' or 'two pills' does not constitute a known dosage!) and been educated about the risks of taking e (in her case, knowledge of safe hydration) she might still be with us today.

the "drug information" offered by the government in 'drug aware' or similar schemes does not represent non-judgemental, mature education material; it emphasises the risks of drug taking without offering pragmatic advice. if people are going to take drugs, they're going to take drugs - regardless.

it is time the powers that be stopped treating us like naughty children. ironic, really, considering that alcohol overconsumption turns people into exactly that - but that drug is a-ok.

 

[Christ!]

Her dads views (on drugs and drug use) have always seemed so backwards to me.

Yeah but we haven't lost a daughter to a bad reaction to drugs/drinking too much water.

Losing a child is hard, I think with all those intense feelings many of the parents are unable to open their minds to anything other than - 'drug kill daughter/son' - 'drug is bad' - 'must stop drugs!' Ignorance and placing the blame on one simple thing makes them feel somewhat better - no questioning their parenting, what they could have done differently etc. It's a really human thing to do (unfortunately)

Or maybe he's just an idiot and would think the same way regardless of Anna dying. Plenty of straight up idiots out there.

A similar thing in the US - http://www.tothemaximus.org/

Mother campaigning her arse off to put forward some catch-all banning of synthetic cannabis, because her son crashed his car into a tree after smoking some.

The facts -
Fake High, Real Danger!

Potpourri - K2 - Spice - Incense

Max Dobner, who was not a drug user, died after smoking fake pot. He reported experiencing panic attacks and rapid heart rate. Soon after, it is believed that his symptoms escalated to paranoid delusions and/or hallucinations. He drove at nearly 100 miles an hour into a house and died on impact. The To the Maximus Foundation was founded in his honor and is dedicated to education and information about fake pot to save lives. It only takes once!

I don't think there's any talking sense to them...I saw people try and engage her in open-minded discussions on facebook but she was just completely closed to the whole idea. I guess if some perceive something as killing a family member - then that thing gets 'bad' attached to it, and there's not a whole lot of rational thinking around it. (although I'm sure most of us wouldn't think this way)

Distraught parents are kind of heartbreaking also...I'd never want to argue against them while they're in that state, they're also hard for general public to ignore and can shape peoples opinions. They make good TV and newspaper articles