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

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

The Psychoactive Substances Act - Update: Illegals R Us

and i mostly just regurgitated everything i just said, including all the false statements you guys pointed out from this.
yes it is Vice, yes they like to chat a lot of shit, but some parts of this were quite interesting...
[video]https://youtu.be/CGjOiUoSGt8?t=11m55s[/video]
 
Speaking of MXE, we've now got news stories of psychiatrists in america using ketamine IV infusions to treat acute suicidial/depressive patients, while the drug companies are twiddling their thumbs trying to invent NDMA receptor antagonists that don't have 'side effects'.

Personally I find most of the 'sideeffects' of 3-meo-pcp or MXE disappear after a few days leaving just a useful mood boost. Like any other medicine, if you take huge doses of course its going to fuck you up, make you feel weird.

I find it hugely frustrating, the glacial pace that the 'legit' drug industry moves at, milking their patents for every penny while people suffer on shitty, ineffective drugs, while real, effective drug therapies are out there in the grey market.
 
Well, this was what we asked for when we allowed patents on drugs. We ended up with companies making money out of patents, as opposed to saving lives because it's the right thing to do. That's what happens when you let capitalists run the show; they run it for their benefit. And the sad fact is, there is more money to be made out of selling stiffy pills to vain men than actually curing cancer, AIDS or the common cold; so the big companies expend far too much effort dodging each other's patents.
 
There are some questions which I have sent a FOI request for, although I am unsure it will fall under FOI legislation. But many minds are better than one so here are my thoughts and research and reviews...

European Convention on Human Rights

Artical 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights that "No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence under national or international law at the time when it was committed".

It is not a crime under the act for a substance to be supplied unless it has been tested to be "psychoactive" which can be applied retrospectively. However, if the seller does not know and the government does not know, at the time of sale, if the substance was "psychoactive" at the time it was supplied and this would constitute an offence imposed by the home office, this would be contrary to the Human Rights of citizens who are under the protection of the European Convention on Human Rights. Reason being that there is an omission as to what tests will be used to conduct what is a psychoactive substance (at the moment).

Therefore, I feel this law is to be challenged repeatedly and we will see case law over time, especially within the ECHR. Also I have asked for clarification on what a supplier of nitrous oxide would need in order to prove it was not for human consumption to get high, I willl not get an answer to this im sure but than I will go to the AG and then for a JR if necessary. I really don't think this law is enforceable.
 
It sounds like a stupidly thought out law to me. I wonder why they didn't look at copying the Australian analogue laws which have basically been very effective in outlawing everything. There was a brief moment when legal highs were available in shops but the laws were then tweaked and that has largely stopped. You are probably lucky they have chosen to go the bizarre route they have...at least possession is not going to be a crime. So fill your freezer with legal lysergamides and trip legaly forever.
 
I remember mentioning this to my microbiology teacher who takes a heap of different nootropics and had been advocating them to students (but with a 'consult your doctor first' put in there so he doesn't get sued in this broken society where 'someone suggested something so I did it' can actually make a viable lawsuit) and he wasn't too happy, he said that ginko biloba should still be legal as it's just a vasodilator; when I informed him that poppers are also just (more potent) vasodilators and may well be coming under the ban (the date's still set for may 6th, right?) he looked rightly pissed off and commented on the fact that it would be impossible to regulate.

Personally I see most people's attitude towards drugs as absolutely idiotic and I'm trying to find someone to do a social experiment with me, I'll have them wear a clip on microphone and film them with a tripod and telephoto lens as they sit down on one of the benches in front of the city hall and start to cook up completely inert powder with some brown food colouring added to it, suck it up into a syringe and start digging around for a vein and see how long it takes for some tard to start shouting at them with an argument based around "the children", naturally once the police turn up I'll explain it's a social experiment and that people are perfectly okay with smoking and drinking alcohol in public around 'the children'; what makes sticking a needle into yourself so much different.
As the people to bash drugs and addicts the most tend to be heavy smokers and drink quite a bit too, but when you bring it up "that's different, this is legal", "What if they're using a legal opiate or benzo" "well they're just getting around the law then". I'd love to see tobacco banned and see how quickly the goalposts move.

I remember being on community service for the posession of 4 clonazepam pills and the alleged distribution of one (Once I get the money I'm taking it to the court of appeals as I wasn't compos mentis during the interview and my public defender did nothing to help; they were even paged to see me before I got called up before the magistrate and didn't bother to show up; if I win the appeal chances are they'll have to pay me (minimum wage) for the community service. However one of the community service 'team leaders' (slave drivers) said something along the lines of "all smackheads should be shot"; when they tried to group me in with him the next time I said he said something that I really should be making a complaint about but if you put me within five feet of him I'll be doing more hours for beating him senseless.

Personally I think it's the gross public stupidity ("leave it to parlaiment, they definitely know what they're doing"), the fact that life now is just a rat race (Got that promotion so you can rent something larger than a jail cell? Jokes on you, inflation has pushed the rent up above your limit again and it will happen over and over and over) that is driving the whole post apocalyptic movie and TV industry. The walking dead would have failed in the eighties or early ninties, now people are so sick of the way things are; it's in the back of their minds (probably even if they don't know it) that it would be better to hit the 'reset switch' since there's nothing to work towards and one person can no longer make any tangible change.
It's the same with the whole survivalism boom; people want to actually achieve something rather than work, go home, watch TV, eat your plastic packaged meat; I occasionally trap rabbits and most people wouldn't touch the meat after they see me pull the guts out while they're still warm, cut through the diaphragm and rip out their heart and lungs; naturally after I've quickly and humanely broken their neck. People think meat comes from a factory, most people don't even know that cows are still alive (they're usually rendered vegatative or brain dead with a captive bolt gun, though I doubt it works perfectly 100% of the time, giving rise to super tough prime steak) when they're skinned and gutted on the killing floor of an abbatoir, or that chickens are hung upside down on a convener and a circular saw lops off their head as they move along the processing line.
My great grandfather (who died in his mid ninties and I met when he was 92 (and a few other times) and still using chainsaws to trim the trees in his garden) literally built his own house from the ground up, was the sole survivor of a shipwreck and was put in a camp in WWII for being a saboteur (he still had a luger that he 'obtained' from a German soldier); he achieved things. Nowadays achievement is landing a job or getting into uni; we're a species who went to space then to the moon, just to have the 'been there done that' award but this generation is so watered down and decadent that they can be placated by their iShite 5S and the idea that life will be better... somehow.
We're essentially the same as the 1930s depression era people, except you can't even live as a hobo now. They've stopped the whole freeganism movement at all major supermarkets by puncturing the packaging then pouring on bitrex filled dye so that one day passed sell by can of beans, which is absolutely fine is impossible to fish out and eat if you're struggling to manage rent and food.


People in the UK need to stop with the stiff upper lip bullshit and stand up to authority because this is how much authority respects you.
 
Last edited:
Excellent post Brioprate - I have to assume that you live in America as despite the fact that all benzodiazpines licensed for medical use in the UK - all of them are all illegal to posses without a valid prescription. But our law that covers the control of illegal drugs (The Misuse Of Drugs Act 1971) which groups controlled drugs into 3 groups (A,B +C) which were supposed to be based on their potential for harm. However, aside from Midlazolam and Temazepam being subject to secure storage conditions, all benzodiazpines in medical use are in the lowest class (c) which carries the least penalties as they are believed (wrongly in my opinion) that they are the among the least harmful controlled drugs, and when it comes the polices attitude towards them, they are extremely lenient - they are extremely unlikely to prosecute you for being in possession of small or moderate quantities of them, or even for supplying them (As long as the 'supply' is similar to what you got into trouble for - they wouldn't make an issue of one giving a tablet or 2 to someone for no profit). The most likely course of action is that would confiscate them, and the only time people tend to get prosecuted for their possession is if the offence was aggravated i.e if they found you with other controlled drugs of a higher class of the MODA1971, or if you had hundreds and hundreds of them that would suggest that you may be supplying them for profit. When I was arrested for possession of heroin, they had the the right to search my home but this is down to discretion of the arresting officer. The way they played it with me was that the told my my house would be searched so I might as well admit to them now what I had at home as it my honesty may about what I had and where it was would ensure that they would be able to spend as little time as possible disrupting my home, and any further drugs found may mitigate how they would dispose of the heroin offence if the found nothing more then I expected to.

Once under arrest, I never lie to the police as in my experience as long as you co-operate, the will be as lenient as the law allows them to, and its easy to get avoid grassing up people as alot of drug dealers in inner city UK use pseudonyms or single letters to identify themselves, so when the inevitable 'where did you buy the heroin from' question comes up in interview they tend to believe you when you tell give them as general as description of someone and say that although you have may have bought drugs from them before, you only know the as 'T', 'D' or 'Ali' and you dont actually know where they live as 95% of the time when it comes to dealing heroin and crack cocaine at street level, its actually the truth.

But as soon as they had convinced me that my house was to searched while I waited in a cell for 4 hours I was of course totally honest about what was in my house. I told them that I no heroin (why else would I be out buying it) but I could not guarantee that that they would find of piece of tinfoil or 2 with trace amounts of the drug on them. They told me that wasn't a problem and irrelevant as far as they were concerned, what they wanted to know was if I had any amount of unused controlled drugs at home. I then told them that the only item I had wich would be of interest to them was a bottle containing about 72 Roche Rivotril (Klonopin US) 2mg Clonazepam tablets that I had bought over the counter at a foreign pharmacy where they couldn't care less whether of not you a had a prescription. They asked me if there was anything else, and after reassuring them that that would be the most they would find they the informed me they were confident that I was being honest with them, and that as a result they couldn't care less if I had a couple of months supply of a prescription only medicine and that it would be of no benefit to my family or my their time by conducting a search. We have some bastard coppers in this country, but the majority I have come across as an offender have been professional, fair and proportionate. I may be totally wrong about your location, but If you were prosecuted in the UK for having 4 clonazepam tablets, one of which you gave away, I would not believe you despite the fact that you would be probably telling the truth, as even if the coppers wanted to force the issue the Crown Prosecution Service or CPS (the UK equivalent of what would be a District Attorney's office in the US) would not under any circumstances sanction an expensive prosecution for 4 prescription tablets as it is clearly not in the public's interest. Only an American Policeman would make such a fuass over something so trivial.

The Uk's Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 which this thread discusses, despite now being law, was due to be brought into force on the 6th April but has been delayed indefinitely thanks to none other than the police!!!!!, who have refused to enforce it in its current form as they cannot see how they could present the CPS with enough evidence to even give them half a chance of bringing a successful prosecution. They still intend to have it in force by the end of 'spring' (which in UK parliamentary terms means late July / early August) but with the planned date of inception now 24 days behind us with no further date planned as yet, they are obligated to give the public 21 days notice before they can start to enforce the act, as Its is such a landmark change in current domestic drug policy that they have to give people a reasonable amount of time to change their current practices so that they will be able to comply with the Act by the time the police start to enforce it. So as things currently stand, it is always at least 21 days away, so even if it wasn't a bank holiday in the UK and the House Of Commons was in sitting on a Saturday (which would never happen unless we were subjected to a crises on the same level as the 9/11 atrocities) the earliest the Act the Act could be enforced would be the 21st of May. As parliament won't be back in session until Tuesday at the earliest, this means that in real terms the earliest they could enforce it would be May 24th. If there is no announcement on Tuesday then the that would be pushed back again until the 25th, and so on and so forth until the Police are in a position where they and CPS can act. As the act its self is possibly the most badly thought out piece of legislation in UK history (even the original MODA was written with the best of intentions, and only under duress from the UN Convention of Psychotropic Substances 1971 (or the Nixon Administration if we are to be totally honest was behind the whole thing) the only way a law like this could ever be enforced is if some top scientist had an instant eureka moment and could develop a 100% reliable way of proving that a substance would have a psychoactive effect on over 99.9% of the population, which would net them the Nobel Prize without fail. The only other genuine chance they have of ever making this work would be to tear up the Act and start composing a new Bill from square one.
 
Ah, but, Stee, there's a difference between town cops (who have got real criminals to catch, and really don't want to be bothered with obviously-personal quantities) and country cops (for whom taking an aspirin when you haven't got that bad a headache is a Big Deal).

Also, it wouldn't be the first time the police had exaggerated the scale of what might be likely to happen to a suspect in order to scare them into "co-operating" (read: self-incrimination). That's why it's important to know your rights. Like, for instance, you can't be convicted solely on the evidence of a co-accused (emphasis because it's very easy to forget this in the heat of the moment). And you are almost always better off saying nothing than saying the wrong thing (and there are always more wrong things than right things that you could say).
 
Ok,as I have only ever been in serious trouble with the West Midlands Police i have always found most of them generally reasonable and proportionate as long as you don't fuck them about. As I have never committed what I would consider a serious offense, and on the occasions they have had me its because I have had drugs on me. In my book thats bang to rights, so I never even think about self incrimination as they always have more on me than I could give them. I have been arrested twice for drug possession, (the first time being for cannabis when they were less lenient) but even after being caught with 4 bags of gear I have avoided prosecution and have managed to leave custody twice with a caution, which is good going considering it was technically a repeat offense. Even though I now live in rural area, I have yet to fall foul of the local force and since I had to surrender my driving license when I was first prescribed methadone, I am alot less likely to come into contact with them than a driver would, so I appreciate the inconsistencies you have highlighted depending on the level of crime and policing priorities between urban areas and the stix.

Famous last words though and that.............
 
steewith2ees said:
Jesus Brioprate, you do appear to live in the UK so I apologise for boring you with such a long, boring and condescending post.

My profuse apologies

Stee
Click to expand...

No need to apologise mate, if the post was condescending it went way over my head.:) (I wish there was a hurr durr de derp derp smiley)
I'm from Belfast, I'm actually the one who snapped the photo of that dickhead of a cop. Funny thing is I wasn't even trying to photograph him, but the 'loyalist protest' (because parliament and England in general don't see NI as a huge thorn in their side at all) but he just couldn't help himself and walked right into the frame then put up the fingers. I'm trying to sell it to a local paper, if they don't bite; daily mail, if that doesn't work I'll social media it until the police ask (ie threaten me) to take it down, at which point I'll point out that it was in a public place and in no way in violation of their counter-terrorism laws, but I would however sell them the copyright to the image for a measly.... £300.
I don't know about your experiences with the cops, but over here I'd say a good 75% of them sign on just to be dicks. I heard the same story from different people whilst doing community service "yeah before they arrested me they got in the back of the van and gave me a pretty bad beating, when I spoke to the duty sergent about it I was told "do you want to get out today or do you want to be held here until your court date, which will be in about a month; now did you have a bad fall or were you beaten?"
They don't even do their job, I got assaulted by some drunken moron on the 17th and I went to the police no more than 40 yards away, pointed out the dick that attacked me and may have damaged a £900 camera/lens and they basically told me that they couldn't be bothered to deal with it and I should go on down to the station. After that I called 999, gave my location and told them the perpetrator was still sitting around; they said they'd "be right there" which I guess is carefully crafted code for "I'll phone you back in an hour and a half and ask if you're all right", complete and utter dereliction of duty. I contacted the ombudsman and quickly got a letter stating they would like to deal with it 'informally' (ie a slap on the wrist); since the police haven't identified the fucker despite three photos that I handed them on both analogue (prints that I paid £7 for 20 sheets of photo paper) and digital (written to a DVD), I'll push for it to be dealt with formally to the highest degree. As well as that I'll be putting the pictures up on facebook and if/when the person is identified (Belfast is very small) I'll put on a pair of sap gloves and ensure that the person responsible has a very nasty fall, that or just make sure it's him (compare him to a photo); rugby tackle him and ziptie him as a citizen's arrest, since the police are clearly incapable of doing their job, if he happens to trip up multiple times on the way to the station with his hands ziptied behind his back, oh well; maybe it'll give the cops incentive to do their fucking job.
If I get a hold on him I'll be making sure he is court ordered to pay for the camera to be checked for any faults and serviced, or if the legal system fails me I'll just wait a while and hypothetically take the law into my own hands hypothetically.

I take it this law is being passed in May then, yeah? Sick irony there, Miss May gets what she wants, on the 6th of may.
Oh well, at least we can call it the 6,6,16 law. Edit: There's for me being thick as pigshit 6/5/16 is the date, yeah?

I'll definitely have to make sure that everything I do is legal by calling crimestoppers when I want to go on a rollercoaster, if I'm buying whipped cream, if I'm having sex or jerking off, etc.
I'd urge you to do the same, as well as contacting your local MP. Mine ceased contact with me after I told him the law was akin to making a forced celibacy law before marriage to cut down on STD transmission.
 
Last edited:
Looks like the date is set for the 26/05/16

Personally I'm addicted to f-lam.
I don't intend to quit, I've enough to get me through my exams this month.
After that when I run out I'll go into hospital while still compos mentis and say I wish to be monitored and recieve fluids but want no other medical attention other than that. I might say they can intervene out and only if my life is in immediate danger.
I'll see if I can record the whole thing on a gopro just to show how ham fisted this legislation offs and how it does more harm than good.
There's a very good chance I may she or end up with brain damage of this happens there are other people on here who know me personally, if it comes to that they can post on my behalf.

I'm only one person, doing this could save the lives pod many more. Think of it like a hunger strike but with benzos that were legal.
 
What's the predictions for the future of these drugs about to be banned then?

I'm asking because I was browsing the deep web the other day. I had a look at the once legal mephedrone. Even on the DW it seems like it's all either another cathinone or it's nowhere near the purity it used to be.

I wonder is 3-FPM of interest to enough people it will continue in the same way? I'm asking because I genuinely have no idea. Unlike time during the mephedrone boom though where everyone was on it IRL I don't know anyone who's used it. So maybe not.
 
Yeah 26th May is now the date the largely unenforceable and backwards thinking, prohibitionist Psychoactive Substances act is now coming into force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top