NightsEpiphany
Bluelighter
i'm not great at it tbh lol
-
🇬🇧 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
European & African
Drug Discussion
Welcome Guest!
Posting Rules Bluelight Rules -
EADD Moderators: Shambles
so our country is slowly banning everything.. what the hell we gonna do?
- Thread starter Bare_head
- Start date
The sudden appearance & popularity of Al-Lad, plus it's obvious relationship to LSD itself of course, coincided very unfortunately with a long planned ban on aMT. aMT had leaked out of the RC scene years ago, & into damned near every over-the-counter Legal High in the UK. It caused quite a few health crises & some fatalities before the media & then the system spotted it & started plans to ban it, along with 5-meo-dalt. The ban was all ready but was delayed so that further Tryptamines, the new Lysergamides, could be added.
I'd like to think/hope that the suprise apprearance of another Lysergamide might slip past them for awhile longer than Al-Lad did, but I wouldn't count on anything.
I don't personally feel the new compound poses any greater health risk than LSD itself, but it did produce more of a hangover than either Al-Lad or LSz had.
I'd like to think/hope that the suprise apprearance of another Lysergamide might slip past them for awhile longer than Al-Lad did, but I wouldn't count on anything.
I don't personally feel the new compound poses any greater health risk than LSD itself, but it did produce more of a hangover than either Al-Lad or LSz had.
You could but dialling 999 would probably be a better bet.
EDIT: Blimeyfuck. It appears so many people get confused by having seen too many American films that if you dial 911 in this country you now get put through directly to 999 Emergency Services.
Eveleivibe
Ex-Bluelighter
PTCH helped change my opinion on this subject. I think it was last June, please correct me if I'm wrong I'm too tired to trail through threads, when this discussion took place. At the time I was happy that various RCs were being banned n openly expressed this.
But PTCH made some good points.
If people continued to take a substance they loved that was banned, they'd be possibly be imprisoned or turned into criminals as the substance would be classified. That seems highly unfair when that person is not harming anyone. Why can't people be allowed to make choices for THEMSELVES? The gov don't ban smoking which has already been proven to cause cancer, as well as a lot pf other nasty lil' "perks." Alcohol can also cause issues----destroy a person's mental health, turn them violent, is addictive, can be damaging to organs such as the brain n liver n can destroy relationships due to the many misconneceptions when under the influence(how many times have I been infracted over alcohol-induced bollox? Lol)
The other thing is that banning is not going to stop people consuming substances n "researchers" will just mess around with them, changing stuff which may endanger many people who could be safe with the current substance(s) "better the devil you know," so to speak.
I feel that monitoring---as opposed to criminalising n clasification, would be the solution n much better HR.
That's all.
*quickly creeps outties*
Evey
But PTCH made some good points.
If people continued to take a substance they loved that was banned, they'd be possibly be imprisoned or turned into criminals as the substance would be classified. That seems highly unfair when that person is not harming anyone. Why can't people be allowed to make choices for THEMSELVES? The gov don't ban smoking which has already been proven to cause cancer, as well as a lot pf other nasty lil' "perks." Alcohol can also cause issues----destroy a person's mental health, turn them violent, is addictive, can be damaging to organs such as the brain n liver n can destroy relationships due to the many misconneceptions when under the influence(how many times have I been infracted over alcohol-induced bollox? Lol)
The other thing is that banning is not going to stop people consuming substances n "researchers" will just mess around with them, changing stuff which may endanger many people who could be safe with the current substance(s) "better the devil you know," so to speak.
I feel that monitoring---as opposed to criminalising n clasification, would be the solution n much better HR.
That's all.
*quickly creeps outties*
Evey
Good. Let us name no names, though. We're all grown-ups here and we all know how to search for things. And we know to take care.
Don't we?
Yes don't worry I understand the rules - just trying to make a point of it not being something to worry about drastically just yet for those who have taken a liking to regular usage per se
I can only ever hope that people know to take care, it's in the best of my interests to try and ensure that people do "take care" as you put it
Take care
"Blotsky"
The case worrying me mostly here is that some people may become too attatched to said legal substances at the time, and I know from past experience that when a legal turns illegal, it can be a bloody bastard to get hold of it again.
As for the banning tryptamines and lysergamides - tryptamines is partly understandable as they can be dangerous - but lysergamides? absolutely no fucking need.
It's all so that those silly governmental cunts can make themselves look like the good party by banning "Terrifying deadly drugs"
"Blotsky"
Eveleivibe
Ex-Bluelighter
Hang on, isn't DMT a tryptamine???? Isn't DMT the stuff concerned with sleep n could be found in grass???? This was what was in a youtube video that ColtDan showed me on Facebook. The blokes discussing it sounded quite intelligent. I mean I've never actually taken this stuff so im quite ignorant to it all, I'm
Learning n am interested in taking DMT. Why do you feel that tryps should be banned????
I think drugs should be legalised - n moderated. At least that way it cuts put the dodgy dealer who prays on people's vulnerability by cutting the drugs with goodness knows what. Isn't it decent harm reduction to legalise them, monitor it n try to ensure user's safety??????
Evey
Learning n am interested in taking DMT. Why do you feel that tryps should be banned????
I think drugs should be legalised - n moderated. At least that way it cuts put the dodgy dealer who prays on people's vulnerability by cutting the drugs with goodness knows what. Isn't it decent harm reduction to legalise them, monitor it n try to ensure user's safety??????
Evey
BigG
Ex-Bluelighter
As far as I'm aware rainbows, puppy dogs, sunshine and smiley faces are still legal.....aren't they? ��
DMT is dimethyltryptamine (that's a guess) and can be found in organic sources in small amounts - DMT containing plant matter is all entirely legal in the UK afaik; You'd have to eat a ton of it to get yourself anywhere and I can't imagine it being huge fun. Eating a fuckton of vegetation isn't my idea of a good start to anything.
Pure DMT is a classified drug I'm pretty sure of that though - I'm not sure what class but with many of the other trypts being class A that's my best guess.
I don't exactly feel they should be banned, but without the ban the level of misuse in the RC scene was increased - people without knowledge taking huge amounts, other RC's tainted with them; essentially I think it all comes down to safety. Not that it'll be any different safety wise with a ban - but I can see the sense and reasoning behind it.
Personally taking SSRI's; if someone cut my drugs with a tryptamine it could be potentially fatal.
That is decent harm reduction, but will it happen?
I doubt it.
Stay safe
"Blotsky"
hx_
Bluelighter
Personally taking SSRI's; if someone cut my drugs with a tryptamine it could be potentially fatal.
That is decent harm reduction, but will it happen?
I doubt it.
Stay safe
"Blotsky"
I think you're thinking of MAOIs and psychedelic amphetamines no?
IIRC tryptamines MOA is mainly emulating serotonin, they don't release it very much, if at all, except in the case of 'amphetaminated' ones, DOM, DOC etc
BigG
Ex-Bluelighter
Technically combining a SSRI or SNRI with amphetamines (or tramadol or pethadine foe that matter) could cause serotonin syndrome which could be fatal but the interactions with MAO inhibitors are certainly more pronounced and widespread.
I've always thought than MAOIs sounded so dangerous that Im baffled why they would even be used anymore especially with so many newer and safer compounds available. The number of drugs (and even foods) that are dangerously contraindicated with MAOIs is staggering.
I've always thought than MAOIs sounded so dangerous that Im baffled why they would even be used anymore especially with so many newer and safer compounds available. The number of drugs (and even foods) that are dangerously contraindicated with MAOIs is staggering.