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

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

NPS Act V1. Blankets? Just Say No!

Um ..... Don't Canada have an NHS anyway?

And why would anyone even want to live in a country without one? I mean, free medical care for all citizens is just a fundamental duty of any government of any country that wants to be described as civilised, right there along with upholding the rule of law.
 
^^
Yup.

"Oh you got hit by a van? Here's a $200k hospital bill that your insurance company can slash to a tenth of that value if you follow a simple process that no one even knows exists and will never become public knowledge and you're being sued for the damage you did to the vehicle.

#Murica"
 
I can't wait for the day when some spivvy male lawyer in an ill-fitting polyester suit starts offering not only to seek compensation for your personal injury, but also to secure a patent on it; so the next time anyone else hurts themself the same way you did, you will receive even more money in the form of royalties. What's better than receiving money when you hurt yourself? Receiving money when someone else hurts themself!

You'll end up eventually needing more insurance against Intellectual Property claims in the event of you inadvertently violating a patent in the course of suffering an injury than against the injury itself.
 
T63146314 said:
Does anyone know if apvp. Or APHP have Ben banned.? I hope not :(
Click to expand...

Wiki claims they're both class B in the UK, but I can't see the exact references they are pulling that from. Regardless of current status, when the new law comes into effect they will be covered under it, and are likely to be actually treated as illegal by the plod.
 
SquidInSunglasses said:
Wiki claims they're both class B in the UK, but I can't see the exact references they are pulling that from. Regardless of current status, when the new law comes into effect they will be covered under it, and are likely to be actually treated as illegal by the plod.
Click to expand...

The pyrovalerones were all made class B in the UK some time ago. MDPV has now been banned throughout the EU, but i'm not sure about the others.
 
Yeh, but its a case of first come first served so I'd say most will be keeping their stockpiling plans to themselves. I myself got most of my mine back in sepetember. I just have a few more Clonazolams to get (I have 250 of the pink 0.5's but ive found some beautifully dosed 1mg pellets which Im not to proud to admit Im getting an extra 100 of, seeing as I missed out on all the Nitrazolam. I wouldn't mind a few of the 1P-ETH-LAD blotters either before they all go either, if they're half as good as the 1P -LSD then Im going pagan and moving into a wigwam)
 
BecomingJulie said:
I can't wait for the day when some spivvy male lawyer in an ill-fitting polyester suit starts offering not only to seek compensation for your personal injury, but also to secure a patent on it; so the next time anyone else hurts themself the same way you did, you will receive even more money in the form of royalties. What's better than receiving money when you hurt yourself? Receiving money when someone else hurts themself!

You'll end up eventually needing more insurance against Intellectual Property claims in the event of you inadvertently violating a patent in the course of suffering an injury than against the injury itself.
Click to expand...

The juxtaposition of this tickled me...

T63146314 said:
Does anyone know if apvp. Or APHP have Ben banned.? I hope not :(
Click to expand...
 
I wonder if any new drug will be 'classified' now? I suspect the govt might not bother, seeing this legislation as enough. Could this actually represent liberalisation in a way, in the sense that it will be illegal to sell any new drug but won't be illegal to possess?
 
JohnnyVodka said:
I wonder if any new drug will be 'classified' now? I suspect the govt might not bother, seeing this legislation as enough. Could this actually represent liberalisation in a way, in the sense that it will be illegal to sell any new drug but won't be illegal to possess?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they won't schedule or classify most things now so yes, looking at the bright side I'm hoping this opens the door for substances made "illegal" with this legislation to be the first in the queue for being unbanned.
 
I seriously doubt they are planning on unbanning anything in the future unless this insane legislation is repealed along with the Misuse of Drugs act by a future rational government.
 
I want to know what's happened to all the 'temporary' class orders that have been imposed over the last few years? Have any of them actually been officially made permanent or have they just been conveniently forgotten about? Will this NPS act reverse any that haven't been made permanent and effectively declassify them again?
 
All of the drugs subject to temporary class that have not been permenantly added to the MODA will revert back to legal on the 31st March,just in time to be fall under the PSA. Assessing their relative harms so that they can be added to the ABC class system sounds to much like actual research. The problem is that if any of these temporary class drugs turned out to be safe to use it would fuck the whole system up - you cant afford to look at the actual relative harms that different drugs cause as it would involve logic and would save lives - remember, its plainly obvious that the drug laws have nothing to do with the publics health and safety, its about setting moral examples as we should all conform to the most puritanical conservative life the UK has to offer. If the drug laws had ever been about keeping people safe they would have been repealed within 2 years of the MODA gaining royal ascent.
 
To my mind, the one real inadequacy in this ban is that it doesn't allow for 'vendors' to be retrospectively prosecuted. Unscrupulous businesspeople have been given carte blanche to cause untold misery, with the get out clause of a label reading 'not for human consumption', while they simultaneously promote their wares for consumption on 'research chemical' forums, including this one. I would like to see some examples made, especially given the fortunes some of these drug dealers have amassed in a very short time.
 
PioneerPin said:
To my mind, the one real inadequacy in this ban is that it doesn't allow for 'vendors' to be retrospectively prosecuted. Unscrupulous businesspeople have been given carte blanche to cause untold misery, with the get out clause of a label reading 'not for human consumption', while they simultaneously promote their wares for consumption on 'research chemical' forums, including this one. I would like to see some examples made, especially given the fortunes some of these drug dealers have amassed in a very short time.
Click to expand...

Ooh, make an example of them eh? Tell me, comrade, what sort of example would you like? Line em up in front of a firing squad? Bring back corporal punishment? Or would you prefer to break out the hoods and go for a nice traditional lynching?

You've got to wonder about why someone would feel the clearly implied contempt in their way of sneering "drug dealer" would resonate with a forum population containing primarily loyal customers of that species of businessman.

Probably the same person so monumentally devoid of meaning in life that they feel the need to constantly troll in such a pathetic manner.
 
SquidInSunglasses said:
Ooh, make an example of them eh? Tell me, comrade, what sort of example would you like? Line em up in front of a firing squad? Bring back corporal punishment? Or would you prefer to break out the hoods and go for a nice traditional lynching?
Click to expand...
I mentioned prosecution. Nothing else. Perhaps you missed this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top