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

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

NPS Act V1. Blankets? Just Say No!

great idea to criminalise a huge swathe of the population or drive into the arms of criminal enterprise otherwise law abiding citizens, at a time when they are proposing even MORE cuts to the police.

not to mention the increased load on the NHS as above ^
 
I'm very glad I'm finally finishing my benzo taper. Though odds are I'd stock up on Diclazepam once the sales kick in.

I have this lovely image of an "RC Hunger Games" - the hundreds available will be whittled down to a few, which will then become as commonplace as Mephedrone is now. Hell, even EPD has managed to find a niche illicit market very quickly.
 
spudgun said:
Just hope they know the scale of the problem and the aftermath the ban is going to cause (I doubt they do)
Click to expand...

Not only do they not know, they do not fucking care. Not one bit. Remember that once the deaths start and you hear not one thing about them in the same media that printed every single hospitalization of some middle class Spice user.

They do not care for our health. They just don't want us to have fun.

Burn them down.
 
The tweaked out conspiracy theorist in me can't help but think there is some larger agenda here. As many have mentioned, if such a bill was passed and rigorously enforced, there would be swathes of GABA-ergic dependent people suddenly flung down the fecal creek with nary a stick to paddle with. Many of these will be admitted into the healthcare system for either evaluation for legitimate prescribing, Diazepam/Chlordiazepoxide tapers or in a more immediate and dangerous fashion resulting from seizures. It may be pertinent to consider that the NHS would struggle to handle such an influx, and as such, the privatisation of our healthcare system, that is already occurring quite rapidly, would become almost inevitable. There is a huge amount of money to be made from this legislation - but only for the politicians who enact it, the Health Insurance companies that would spring up like weeds and the Pharmaceutical conglomerates that make billions every year.

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...
 
the tories don't have enough insight to see that banning alll psychoative substances would have an immediate short term impact on NHS services, but they would welcome any additional nails in the NHS's coffin goes without saying.

the huge amount of money to be made from this legislation is money that will be made by the criminal black market. At least those nice folks at HSBC will be there to help launder all the cash.
 
StoneHappyMonday said:
Not only do they not know, they do not fucking care. Not one bit. Remember that once the deaths start and you hear not one thing about them in the same media that printed every single hospitalization of some middle class Spice user.

They do not care for our health. They just don't want us to have fun.

Burn them down.
Click to expand...
It's up to us to make as much noise as we can, anytime the law claims another victim. When the names of the Casualties of Prohibition are read out, somebody will have to listen .....
 
Action to protect young people from the dangers of so-called ‘legal highs’ and target those who profit from their trade was announced by the UK government today (Friday 29 May).

Home Office

The Psychoactive Substances Bill will prohibit and disrupt the production, distribution, sale and supply of new psychoactive substances (NPS) in the UK. They are often sold online or on the high street.

The ban will extend to the sale of nitrous oxide for human use, known as ‘laughing gas’ or ‘hippy crack’, although its legitimate sale will not be affected.

Minister of State for Policing, Crime, Criminal Justice and Victims, Mike Penning, said:

"Young people who take these substances are taking exceptional risks with their health and those who profit from their sale have a complete disregard for the potential consequences. That’s why we are targeting the suppliers.

"The landmark bill will fundamentally change the way we tackle new psychoactive substances - and put an end to the game of cat and mouse in which new drugs appear on the market more quickly than government can identify and ban them.

"The blanket ban will give police and other law enforcement agencies greater powers to tackle the reckless trade in psychoactive substances, instead of having to take a substance-by-substance approach."

The government has already taken a range of action against so-called ‘legal highs’, including banning more than 500 new drugs and creating the Forensic Early Warning System to detect substances not seen before in the UK. There is also ongoing work to enhance the response to prevention, treatment and information sharing.

Last year the government established an expert panel on New Psychoactive Substances to look at ways of further enhancing the enforcement response. Having carefully considered the evidence, ministers decided to act on the panel’s recommendation to explore the feasibility of a blanket ban and are now introducing this new legislation.

Under the Bill:

- it will be an offence to produce, supply, offer to supply, possess with intent to supply, import or export psychoactive substances; that is, any substance intended for human consumption that is capable of producing a psychoactive effect. The maximum sentence will be seven years’ imprisonment.

- all of the UK will be affected by the blanket ban and law enforcement powers would be extended to all NPS supply from UK websites, so they can be shut down.

- substances, such as alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, food and medical products, will be excluded from the scope of the offence, as will controlled drugs, which will continue to be regulated by the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.

- there will be powers to seize and destroy NPS and powers to search persons, premises and vehicles, as well as to enter and search premises by warrant if necessary.

- similar to the legislation introduced in Ireland, it will also capture substances that, although not new, are psychoactive, have been used as intoxicants for many years and are not harm free.
there will be provision for civil sanctions – prohibition notices and prohibition orders – to enable the police and local authorities to adopt a proportionate response to the supply of NPS in appropriate cases.

In 2013, there were 120 deaths involving NPS in England, Scotland and Wales.

National Police Chiefs’ Council Lead for New Psychoactive Substances, Commander Simon Bray said:

When people buy dangerous drugs they will generally have little idea how potent the drug is or what it may contain. Sadly we have seen too many people losing their lives or becoming seriously ill after taking so-called “legal highs” under the impression that they are safe.

A blanket ban on new psychoactive substances (NPS) will make it simpler for law enforcement to deal with those drugs which are potentially unsafe but which may not yet be controlled.

Founder of the Angelus Foundation, Maryon Stewart, said:

Angelus very much welcomes these important legal changes on restricting the supply of so called ‘legal highs’ or new psychoactive substances.

We expect the law to impact very significantly on the high street trade. The open sale of NPS has led to dangerous experimentation with many young people being badly affected by their unpredictable effects and some ending up in hospital.

Sadly, too many have paid the ultimate price from taking these risky substances and this change will go a long way to stop further deaths.

No law can offer the perfect solution to protect people from drugs; it is equally vital we all concentrate our efforts of making the public, young people in particular, more aware of the harms of these substances in schools, at university and during festivals."
Click to expand...

from - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/blanket-ban-to-clamp-down-on-legal-highs

What is that bolded bit about? How come it still says stuff that's intended for human consumption??? Simply importing an active substance to wash my clothes with should be fine, right? lol
 
Last edited:
Si Dread said:
from - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/blanket-ban-to-clamp-down-on-legal-highs

What is that bolded bit about? How come it still says stuff that's intended for human consumption??? Simply importing an active substance to wash my clothes with should be fine, right? lol
Click to expand...
Yea... this law changes pretty much nothing then, and just leaving the label "not for human consumption" will bypass this law, hopefully. But like I said previously, even if there was a serious blanket ban on phsychs, you could still make inactive drugs like Ketazolam or Gidazepam, that metabolize into active ones.
 
I noticed that it does not say you cant be in possession so you can prob get away with that if you can prove its not for supply nor consumption. I told my service worker they will be flooded with people with huge benzo habits whom will have lost the source, I doubt they will get any treatment unless the ones you are taking will show on a panel test. I don't think they have a clue what they have done and what they will be in for...
 
You really only have yourself to blame. Look around this site over the last 5 years and join the dots. How many have got themselves in trouble with prescribed benzos vs the cheap Chinese pellets? How many of you went off the rails on mushrooms or LSD compared to those of you left destitute and homeless or jobless when you started getting alphabet drugs delivered to your door? Do I have to dig up the chaos of the mdvp threads, the shrine of the dead, fools golds homeless demise?

If you were able to show the rest of society you had an ounce of self control to go with that gram of mystery powder, then just perhaps they would have turned a blind eye. You wanted freedom of choice, to be allowed to make choices about what you could prescribe yourself, and now you are complaining about deadly withdrawal?

You reap what you sow I'm afraid. Start your taper, develop a relationship with a trusted doctor who will tailor a medical regime that will be based on proper medical prorameters, not simply because you want to knock yourself out after an afternoon troll eyed on your sofa playing video games.

With any luck LSD or mushrooms will wash away the Chinese created crap and synthetic weed will be confined to fairy tales.
 
The doors are open to people educated in substances and online anonymity networks like tor. I see this as a final backlash which is pointless to be honest, because they r swimming against the tide.
 
Bob Funkhouse said:
You're right as usual OTW 8(

If you really believe what you have written above you really are ignorant and prone to lazy thinking.

The problems you mention above could (first paragraph) just as easily be 'caused' or said about alcohol/alcohol abuse or even mental health problems or even gambling ffs. Yet alcohol is still legal causing people to die, face health n addiction problems and probably involved in most (especially violent) crimes day in day out. The gov't and legislators seem to turn a "blind eye" to this and do not ban alcohol.
Click to expand...

So the point is now to ban alcohol?
I just don't see the strength of the argument that 'RCs should be legal and easily available to anyone because alcohol and tobacco are too, and look at how deadly THEY are!'

90% of the recent RCs are absolute garbage. Garbage that should have never ended up in 1 gram baggies for next day delivery. I absolutely think it's a good thing to slow down this stream of inane substances being scraped from the bottom-of-the-barrel. Is banning is the right way to do so? Probably not.. In any case, availability of 'classical' drugs online should not be a problem with the Tor markets out there.
 
Last edited:
You seem to think LSD + Mushrooms carry no risk, do you think that they haven't been abused to oblivion by some? You're basing your experience with drugs on what others will do. Some will smash the shit outta of drugs, it's just the way it is, it won't be stopped and it can't be helped..

Drugs aren't the problem, people are the problem - ban people? We can't really change folk, can we. Some will use responsibly, others won't. The legal status is completely irrelevant, as proven by the current system. Prohibition, criminalisation and banning everything has done nothing but cause more harm, handing the lives of the public over to criminal enterprises and some dangerous new chemicals that would never of been dreamt up had the more traditional and safer chems being left within the law.

My drug of choice has been illegal since 1924, that worked out well didn't it, if something doesn't change we'll be scratching our heads in 2095 wondering why banning any of the RC's didn't work and more and more people are dieing from impure, MXE, 3-PFM, MDPV or whatever...

So, yup.. ignorant
 
Apparanty they get to the legal high death figure by confusing the deaths from NPS (like PMA )and calling it a "legal high death".

So famous has the 97 figure become that it makes sense to fully explain it. It is a tally of deaths in which a substance in the NPS group was been found in post-mortem toxicology reports by coroners in 2012. The faux-ecstasy drugs PMA or PMMA were involved in 23 of the deaths: both have been illegal since the 70s. Mephedrone – and other cathinone derivatives like 4-Mec, Flephedrone, Methylone – are linked to 37 of the deaths: they have all been banned since 2010.

Those are the big killers – all illegal in the relevant year, and therefore irrelevant to an estimation of the dangers of legal highs.

The Ketamine-like mexxy (linked to six deaths) was banned from March 2012. The tranquilliser phenazepam, used medicinally abroad and linked to 14 of the deaths, was banned in mid-2012.

As far as I can see, the only actual legal highs on the list linked to more than a handful of deaths are the Benzofurans (known as "Benzo Fury"), like APB and 6-APBl, which were collectively linked to nine deaths and have since been banned.

So the figure pushed right to the centre of the national conversation by the CSJ think tank – the one used to show that legal highs are a major new killer and require a blanket ban – is, in fact, largely based on deaths linked to highs that weren't legal at all.

How many deaths does he think actually resulted from taking legal highs in 2012? "Less than ten. Maybe none."

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/joshi-herrmann-csj-legal-highs-ban-466
 
Last edited:
I can't recall the person who overdosed on mushrooms and watched their skin turn purple due to vasoconstriction.

Let's face it, you had your chance when mushrooms and mephadrone were legal and as per usual your British restraint fucked your own arses. You can't even enjoy a pint at the football so in a way they have already banned alcohol.

You are correct that people are the problem. Unfortunately the majority of the wrong type of drug user got too excited with home delivery and ruined it for you. It's the drug equivalent of being banned from Champions league for 7 years because of hooligans.
 
I think you're talking about the story of John Greig or something where it was claimed he died of a "synthetic psilocybin" overdose - it was an urban myth, I think the real story was lost in the mists of times, my own hunch if he did actually die of poisoning one of his gangster mates slipped himse something.

Let's face it, you had your chance when mushrooms and mephadrone were legal and as per usual your British restraint fucked your own arses.

Don't be daft. The papers and the political elite are determind to ban anyone enjoying drugs. Even if if everyone had only taken mushrooms once every 20 years they would still have banned it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top