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

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

NPS Act V1. Blankets? Just Say No!

Ismene said:
Can't you trust darkweb benzos?
Click to expand...

Trust isn't the point.

Here's a benzo addict. Here's a benzo addict with a bulk supply of benzos.

What could possibly go wrong?

Well...apart from acquiring a bigger benzo addiction and getting into a spiral - benzos don't mix well with alcohol (a legal and widely available drug). Many benzo users might also have a disposition towards heroin, another CNS depressant.

The fact that those with a benzo addiction might be pushed towards buying in bulk is just one more thing that is so wrong with the NPS bill. It certainly isn't a solution to a benzo addiction. It will happen and it will cause bigger addictions and deaths.

I appreciate you never named a dark web vendor.
 
Hey OTW, how could a night out on alcohol possibly go wrong?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-32773331

A wine bar where an 18-year-old girl was seriously injured drinking a cocktail containing liquid nitrogen has admitted health and safety failings.

Gaby Scanlon, of Heysham, Lancashire, had to have her stomach removed after drinking the Nitro-Jagermeister shot.
Click to expand...

And if you say it's nothing to do with the alcohol, I punch your head in. Cool?
 
Ah I see - I thought they'd reach a stage where they knew what they took each day and stabilise.
 
Anyone got figures on how many people in the UK die from currently illegal drugs (coke, heroin et al) compared to the goverments statistic of 12 deaths for legal highs:?
 
http://www.drugscope.org.uk/resources/faqs/faqpages/how-many-people-die-from-drugs

Lists numbers of fatalities associated with various drugs groups including prescription drugs in 2009 & claim 1172 fatalIties through one or more drug with the majority lost through opiates, sedatives & cocaine.

COCAINE - 122
HEROIN - 355
OTHER OPIATES - 328
ANTIDEPRESSANTS - 287
ECSTASY - 20
AMPHETAMINES - 43
ALCOHOL+DRUGS - 325
CANNABIS - 23 (errrr is that right?)
METHADONE - 327
SEDATIVES/HYPNOTICS - 286

StoneHappyMonday said:
Hey OTW, how could a night out on alcohol possibly go wrong?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-32773331

And if you say it's nothing to do with the alcohol, I punch your head in. Cool?
Click to expand...

Jesus H Christos! Poor girl. What idiots.
 
Last edited:
Poor girl maybe, but what sort of idiot thinks that drinking liquid nitrogen is a good idea? Never mind what sort of idiot thinks its a good idea to serve it (Yes, I'm looking at you Chorleton Hestenbloomers or whatever your fuckin trendy celeb chef name is... Cunt!)
 
Si Dread said:
http://www.drugscope.org.uk/resources/faqs/faqpages/how-many-people-die-from-drugs

Lists numbers of fatalities associated with various drugs groups including prescription drugs in 2009 & claim 1172 fatalIties through one or more drug with the majority lost through opiates, sedatives & cocaine.

COCAINE - 122
HEROIN - 355
OTHER OPIATES - 328
ANTIDEPRESSANTS - 287
ECSTASY - 20
AMPHETAMINES - 43
ALCOHOL+DRUGS - 325
CANNABIS - 23 (errrr is that right?)
METHADONE - 327
SEDATIVES/HYPNOTICS - 286
Click to expand...


would be interesting to see cmpared to usaeg statistics of legal highs, compared to usage statistics of these MODA illegal drugs above ^. There are illegal AND posession is illegal - so that approach clearly works huh.....

making personal possession of soon tobe banned 'legal highs' legal, over 12 deaths involved in millions of doses for years, puts them on a par with cannabis and MDMA in terms of safetya ccording to those criteria.
 
You can carry LSD around with you from now on, provided you have your LSD laid onto blotters that have 1P-LSD written on them. Provided you only have a few doses the lab will destroy the sample in an effort to ID it.
 
SproutOnSmack said:
This would pave the way for the dismantling of the NHS and a U.S. style "pay up or die" system to replace it.
I do actually wonder if any of the larger Pharm. firms have made any donations to the cause...
Click to expand...

In the US I have no insurance.

Once, I woke up from a sleep walking episode and my mom was taking me to the hospital thinking I had a stroke. When I got the bill, I filled out some paperwork and the bill was written off.
I paid $0 even though I received excellent care and treatment.

Once, I punched a telephone pole and broke my pinky. I went to the hospital and got a cast. When I got the bill, I told them my income and asked for financial help. The bill was written off.
I paid $0 even though I received excellent care and treatment.

Once, I smoked JWH-018 and discovered "The Fear" and I thought I was having a heart attack. I went to the hospital and they took really good care of me and ran all sorts of tests and blood-work and they said that I did not have a heart attack and everything would be ok. When the bill came, I applied for "indigent care" and was approved. The bill was written off.
I paid $0 even though I received excellent care and treatment.

Since that time, I got a bachelors degree and a job with a decent salary and now I have to pay the bill if I go to the hospital. Why? Because I have the ability to pay now.

Really? "pay up or die" ??? Please can we just eliminate the hyperbole and exaggeration on both sides of the argument? Fear just gives more power to those in power.

-------- sorry back on the topic of the ban ------------


If you fear something then stay away. If you are scared of bears then stay out of the woods. But just because some person is scared of bears does not mean that we should ban bears. Even if people died from bears (which is rare) another person might enjoy studying bears, even on the same day. And if a zoologist who studies bears, gets eaten by a bear, then we should still not ban bears. In fact the dead researcher would probably still love the bears if he/she were still alive to give an opinion.

If you fear something then stay away. If you are scared of drugs then do not consume them. But just because some person is scared of drugs does not mean that we should ban drugs. Even if people died from drugs(which is a rare % in a world full of BILLIONS) another person might enjoy studying that drug, even on the same day. And if a human guinea pig who studies RC's, dies from the drug, then we should still not ban drugs. In fact the dead guinea pig would probably admit they still love the drugs if he/she were still alive to give an opinion.

It is not your job or the governments job to protect me from myself. Protect me from others who intend me harm. Let me take care of me and fuck off. If I need help then I will seek out help from family, doctors, friends, forums, or someone who I think may have my best interest at heart. I want to be able to choose who I get help from. You can be sure, though, that the LAST person/group I would trust to "help" me with a drug-related issue is the police or the government.

We cannot allow our fears to compel us to surrender our own right to choose a different path from our neighbor. How boring would the world be if we all had the same opinion. How great would it be to live in a country where it was illegal to disagree? You have the right to like whatever you like and hate whatever you hate without using the police power of government to force your likes/dislikes on others. (like me)

I may not agree with you but I will defend to the death your right to disagree with me. Will you defend my right to disagree with you? If not then you deserve a fate worse than death you profane tyrant.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. BF
 
im not trying to hate on the us or anything - it's cool that they allow people with no money to write off their bills - but don't cancer patients (for instance) get stuck with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of medical bills on occasions where their insurance won't cover their care? and sometimes have to make tough decisions on whether they bankrupt their families or have a potentially life saving operation?
sorry if i'm wrong, it is a sincere question.

anyway, back on topic...

i like the bear analogy btw, rwtrwt
 
Last edited:
One Thousand Words said:
I'm pretty sure it was the liquid nitrogen that destroyed her stomach, not the jagar
Click to expand...

I don't suppose SHM doubts it, but the fact remains that a young person has had her life destroyed at 20 because she went out for an innocent little drinky-poos. The kind of negligence on display at the bar this girl attended is simply a microcosm of an enormous industry profiting from the deadly fascination that Britains' young people have with alcohol.

It's often pointed out to those who wish to have drink more stringently controlled that only a small percentage of people who drink actually get into trouble with alcohol & that the vast majority enjoy alcohol responsibly. That may be the case, but what percentage is that? What percentage of alcohol drinkers have a problem with booze?

... in comparison, what percentage of drugs users are likely to end up with a problem of some sort because of their drugs use?

Let's assume that addiction is an indication that a particular substance is potentially harmful.

Drinkaware claims that just under 4% of women drinkers & just under 9% of men drinkers become addicted to alcohol. That's not to suggest that addiction is the only problem associated with alcohol, but for the sake of comparative argument, let's roll with that - http://www.drinkaware.co.uk/underst...ol-dependent?gclid=CM7ZjNCdjMYCFWXLtAodzzsAIQ

As addiction is rarely an issue for users of drugs such as LSD or MDMA, it's difficult to replicate the alcohol stats for general drugs use, so I've decided to focus on a drug with similar attributes to alcohol. Cocaine. I did not choose to compare alcohol to heroin because although heroin produces more fatalities than cocaine, it is not used in a social context the way both alcohol & cocaine are. It seems fairer to compare two highly addictive & harmful substances, one legal & one not, that are both used in similar contexts.

According to this Wiki page, around 5-6% of cocaine users become addicted to the drug. Cocaine is often described as being powerfully addictive, yet according to these statistics less users of cocaine become addicted to coke than alcohol drinkers to alcohol - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocaine_dependencehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocaine_dependence

If you were to look at MDMA instead of cocaine, I'd be surprised if you found that even a single percent of users became addicted or used the drug problematically. I wouldn't know what percentage of MDMA users die suddenly compared to the percentage of alcohol users who die suddenly but I'll try find out. With something like LSD you'd struggle to find anyone using the drug regularly enough to be problematic & the percentage of users who die from the drug compared to those who die using alcohol is not comparable, because LSD does not kill anyone. Cannabis might prove to be equally addictive as alcohol, but addiction to smoking cannabis is extremely unlikely, provided it is not smoked with tobacco, to cause the kinds of physical harms associated with long-term alcohol addiction.

Psychological risk of some sort is present with all drugs & alcohol is no different. I don't see any reason to argue this point.

So, finally, if we assume that the stats are accurate in those above links & that addiction to a particular substance is at least some indication of it's likelihood to cause harm, then with 9% of alcohol users becoming addicted & only 6% of (powerfully addictive) cocaine users becoming addicted, it looks as if alcohol is about twice as likely to be harmful as cocaine. Drugs use generally is not as harmful as cocaine use, so I would say that alcohol is probably at least twice as dangerous as using drugs like cocaine, & perhaps even 100's of times more dangerous in comparison to using drugs such as cannabis, MDMA or LSD.
 
One Thousand Words said:
I'm pretty sure it was the liquid nitrogen that destroyed her stomach, not the jagar
Click to expand...

And Im pretty sure the theatre and excitement that allegedly comes along with having a lethal non-psychoactive substance (LNPS?) in your drink is largely down to a culture of recklessness symptomatic of alcohol use in the first place.

Now excuse me while I go mix some cyanide in with my MDPV.
 
I'd have to disagree when you said that addiction to cannibals is highly unlikely. I know loads of people that go out there minds if they don't have a joint first thing in the morning. Yes it's not physically addictive but neither is cocaine. I used to be psychological addicted to cannabis for 6 years.

Or did you mean that it is not addictive in a way that is harmful like alcohol or cocaine?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top