• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

The New MDMA Replacements, and the legal implications

^ I'm not sure, but I think for legislation to be retroactive it has to be specifically mentioned in the act that it does apply to breaches that occurred before it was illegal.

Though I doubt they would bother to do that with this, there isn't a precedent for it I don't believe.
 
People should care less about the government reading BL, and care more about helping australian drug users stay safe.

Stay safe?

Stop trying these ridiculous crackpot research chemicals. Are people that drug addled that they need to fulfill their desire for MDMA by taking replacements that are becoming so chemically distant from actual MDMA that should the user have offspring, they'll end up with 3 fucking heads?

Have some willpower and wait until it returns, its really not that hard.

We all like to say we are intelligent, informed drug users. How on earth can we uphold our credibility when people are ingesting these ridiculous substitutes.

"Hey dude, lets smoke banana peels because LSD is too hard to find"

Pathetic.
 
^ What, why is it ridiculous to want to find something that can serve as a replacement? I agree that people are perhaps being a little over zealous given that there is little to no research into these substances, but people are going to take them and we need to deal with the harm reduction aspects of this, not label them 'ridiculous'. People are gonna do what they always do, after all.
 
Of course, and thats the problem.

I love MDMA, i researched it extensively and deemed the positives to outweigh the negatives, which in turn lead to many positive experiences.

Harm reduction should start by advising people NOT to take these substances. Im not saying 'dont take them' as the media or police would as a scare-mongering tactic, im saying it as a drug user who knows their shit about most commonplace substances. These drugs might as well have been discovered on the moon they are that unknown. Look at pharmaceuticals like HRT drugs and Vioxx, both have been found to potentially cause cancer and heart attacks respectively. These are drugs that have been clinically tested by trained professionals. Yet we have people on here consuming god knows what in an attempt to mimic an already so called 'neurotoxic' drug, MDMA.

If we want society's attitudes to change towards the drug using community, we need to start showing some initiative in responsible use, how on earth are we supposed to be taken seriously when a young kid dies from taking a drug with a name that is as hard to pronounce as it is to treat in an emergency.

Common sense really?
 
Harm reduction should start by advising people NOT to take these substances.

But that's not what harm reduction is about; HR is about dealing with the fact that people are going to use drugs, sometimes using drugs or using in ways that can be very harmful and we want to give them enough information to make an informed decision about it and to keep themselves as safe as possible.

It's always brought up that there is so little known about these substances, but people continue to use them anyway. We could tell them to not use sure, but I think it's more important to try and gather as much information as possible and alert people to possible side effects, how they can avoid them and of course let them know that the safest option is to not use at all.
 
Id say you grasping for dust there. If telling people not to take drugs ever worked then there would be no need for a war on drugs. The people who are finding these RCs tend to know already that they are gambleing a high price.

Id say your average street kid wont come accross these RCs until a fair whack of people have self tested and not had too many side effects. Just like 4-MMC
 
Harm reduction should start by advising people NOT to take these substances.

But that's not what harm reduction is about; HR is about dealing with the fact that people are going to use drugs, sometimes using drugs or using in ways that can be very harmful and we want to give them enough information to make an informed decision about it and to keep themselves as safe as possible.

It's always brought up that there is so little known about these substances, but people continue to use them anyway. We could tell them to not use sure, but I think it's more important to try and gather as much information as possible and alert people to possible side effects, how they can avoid them and of course let them know that the safest option is to not use at all.

Upon review, my comment didn't make much sense, forgive me sleep deprivation is a bitch.

However my main concern though is that despite members like yourself and a handful of others best efforts to warn people and ward off irresponsible drug use and behaviours, there is still the presence of those here who seem to hold no regard for their safety or the safety of others, spilling out useless and often dangerous advice. We are talking about drugs that are completely foreign to the world of pharmacology, drugs that emergency room doctors simply know nothing about, and as a resultl; can't treat.

I understand that a teenage kid in his bedroom with this 'new mdma like chemical' is hard to persuade, however i really think the message needs to be reinforced that these drugs are potentially life threatening.

There is no right or wrong here, i just shudder at the thought of what some of these chems are doing to the young up and coming drug users of today.

Id say you grasping for dust there. If telling people not to take drugs ever worked then there would be no need for a war on drugs. The people who are finding these RCs tend to know already that they are gambleing a high price.

Id say your average street kid wont come accross these RCs until a fair whack of people have self tested and not had too many side effects. Just like 4-MMC

I dont agree with your first point. The reason people ignore the authorities when they dissuade us from using drugs is because 99% of what they say is propaganda. Propaganda leads to distrust and in turn leads to rebellion from those who would most benefit from usesful information. And i don't think that the majority of these RC users know what they are dabbling in, the ignorance of many who haven't run into problems on drugs is that it 'wont happen to me'.

People testing with no ill effects really means nothing. What if the side effects of something like 4-MMC take years to manifest? This is my point, we do not know the long term side effects. Shit, we don't truly know the long term effects of MDMA and it has been around for 25 years.
 
Luude: I agree with a lot of what you say, and sympathise with the rest, but for the sake of playing devil's advocate for a minute, what was the cause of this:

Upon review, my comment didn't make much sense, forgive me sleep deprivation is a bitch.
 
Upon review, my comment didn't make much sense, forgive me sleep deprivation is a bitch.

Tell me about it brother, my brain has been put into overdrive and I'm getting by on just a couple of hours or so each night, I don't feel the tiredness but eventually things start to get a little... weird...

However my main concern though is that despite members like yourself and a handful of others best efforts to warn people and ward off irresponsible drug use and behaviours, there is still the presence of those here who seem to hold no regard for their safety or the safety of others, spilling out useless and often dangerous advice. We are talking about drugs that are completely foreign to the world of pharmacology, drugs that emergency room doctors simply know nothing about, and as a resultl; can't treat.

Yes, unfortunately there are always those who will do dangerous and risky things no matter how much is actually out there about a certain substance and how well educated most people should be about it; alcohol comes to mind.

And there are forums out there where there the standards are much lower and people are getting potentially wrong and potentially dangerous information from them. At least here on BL it's pretty tight in regards to people talking about dangerous usage, people will often mention when something is stupid and irresponsible. Still, you raise a valid point about the people out there in the world with little care for themselves and others who are a danger. The only thing, in my mind, is to try and educate as much as possible and right now drug education is in a very woeful state, something that doesn't really need stating.

I understand that a teenage kid in his bedroom with this 'new mdma like chemical' is hard to persuade, however i really think the message needs to be reinforced that these drugs are potentially life threatening.

There is no right or wrong here, i just shudder at the thought of what some of these chems are doing to the young up and coming drug users of today.

Of course, and no one is saying that they aren't life threatening. We just need to be able to discuss them and their usage, and the people who do use them need to be able to provide us with information on how these substances are affecting them. I hate to say it, but we really have no idea what the dangers are until someone runs head on into them, as has happened with every single substance in history.

I also wonder about the long term effects of some of these substances, even the short term effects of those we have little idea about. We are in a new age of an abundance of chemicals with little pharmacological information available about them, and we are in this age because of the current approach to drug enforcement taken by governments the world over. The search for ways to get around the law has led to this, the age of the 'research' chemical.

I dont agree with your first point. The reason people ignore the authorities when they dissuade us from using drugs is because 99% of what they say is propaganda. Propaganda leads to distrust and in turn leads to rebellion from those who would most benefit from usesful information. And i don't think that the majority of these RC users know what they are dabbling in, the ignorance of many who haven't run into problems on drugs is that it 'wont happen to me'.

People testing with no ill effects really means nothing. What if the side effects of something like 4-MMC take years to manifest? This is my point, we do not know the long term side effects. Shit, we don't truly know the long term effects of MDMA and it has been around for 25 years.

I can't speak for static_mind, but you are very right about the effect propaganda has had on people's trust.

As for side effects again, it is probably going to be a long time before we know what effect these substances can have on people. People have been using stupidly it seems, the best we can do now is learn and try and warn that if you are using a substance like 4-MMC with so little research around it, be careful and don't use it as if it's non-toxic play dough or something.
 
There is one comment i need to make here.

People have sought to get high since the dawn of time - what, be it cancer, death, fucking heart problems, vasoconstriction, is going to stop them from doing so now?

Arming ourselves with knowledge from as early back as possible is all we can do, asking the questions before we make any kind of decision about ingestion of these substances.
 
Due to 5-iai not being covered by anologue laws (yet) it is legal. If one were to import some 5-iai while it was still in its present legal status, would it be possible for that person to be charged AFTER legislation has come into affect making the substance illegal?
In my opinion, you could not be charged with the importation of a prohibited substance if it only became illegal after you imported it. Of course you could be charged with possession of an illegal drug the day it became illegal, if the substance is also illegal under the drug laws in the state that you live in. The inclusion of a substance in drug schedules would never be made retrospective.
 
are people 100% sure it is not physically analogous to any substances currently scheduled?

also I have read that pharmacological analogy is sufficient to render it scheduled in some states? any info
 
Someone said in my Analogue thread though that the Federal Analogue Act applies to substances listed as border controlled in the Commonwealth Criminal Code, I've got the Code here on my computer but I am waiting for some morphine before I start reading.

Also, the pharmacologically similar clause is what might get us on this one though I would LOVE to challenge that one in court. Oh... well maybe not me personally...
 
Mr blonde

Can you please provide a link for the pharmalogiccaly clause? Thanks
 
Pharmacologically similar? I know it's in the QLD Analogue Act, I have been told it's included in the Commonwealth Criminal Code as well, if you look in my thread on the Analogue Act then you will find a link that a nice person posted for us. :)
 
The fact of its pharmacological similarity would take some time to prove, as i'm sure first of all identifying the ACTUAL substance involved would need to take place, then all the red tape surrounding that - personal research into its subjective effects versus say MDMA. Would take them ages.

I'm sure the one paper written by Nichols is hardly enough to prosecute someone with - especially seeing as it is only a drug that has been tested on animals, and the human model is still unknown.
 
Top