The Top 10 Things I Know About Drugs

this article is bullshit, everything it says is either obvious or untrue. for example:


" Using marijuana is better than using heroin. "

this isn't necessarily true. when appropriate safety measures are taken, opiates are among the safest drugs one can put in their body. someone who smokes a lot of pot is doing far more damage to their body (lungs) than a careful opiate user.

another example:

" Many well-intentioned people think drugs are terrible and abstinence is always the answer. I believe that progress can be made, even if someone continues to use drugs"

this is idiotic. the idea of harm reduction has been around for more than a decade. everyone with half a brain knows that shooting heroin 10 times a day is worse than shooting heroin 5 times a day.
 
from alternet.org - whoa a bubbling centre for mainstream society...

the drug legalisation debate is not about the facts, it never was because if it was drugs would of been legalised decades ago.

It's about the people - its the human factor.

Why is Creationism winning over evolution (despite the obviously lapses in logic and fact)? Because the people who push creationism are friendly folk. They're down to earth, they don't committ crimes, they do the right thing. They're not elistist, they don't use big words and certainly don't come across as superior. Like minded people (the vast silent majority) see it thus why the US is going, educationally backwards

It's about communicating the sincerity of the truth in which your belief is centred on (if it wasn't true how could you give it your entire soul) - the gays did it because they showed that it was more then just fucking in toliets - they got up and walked down a road yelling to the world they were gay and it didn't matter how many cops came down with they're battons they were going to do it until the world acknowledge them.

You have to respect that - the human right moments of the 50s, samething, people got up and showed that they were more then just generalisations.

The problem with drugs, and i guess with most moments, is that we're from a wide background.

Some bluelighters are in law enforcement, others in medicine, some are unemployed. Others are in companys from mining to hot air balloning. Others are criminals, professional thiefs, to large scale drug trafficking.

Some vote conserative, others liberal/demo/labour. Some are racists others complete hippies.

Some think smack is the worst drug others think its the best - you could go on about the differences - Even some bluelighters disagree with harm miminisation.

So if a place like BL can't even agree on a course of action, and then call to arms all people who use drugs then why should the rest of the world give a fuck about what we want
 
Last edited:
The author makes good points but he doesn't establish himself as a credible source. If anti-drug activists are going to read this, the only chance of them agreeing with the author is if he has experience on both sides of the drug war. Perhaps that's why most articles such as this one never accomplish anything, they're usually biased.
 
this article owns.. it speaks the truth wether people want to believe it or not.
 
Example: I know of a place does counciling with little kids, most of whom are victims of abuse and are basically criminals waiting to happen (extreme anti-social behavior etc.). The center has a fantastic record moving these kids to safe homes and counseling them to address their multitude of problems (by phsychiatrist, psychologists etc.). They recently lost $90,000 in medicade contracts because of cuts. While this isn't much to the military or the drug war, it could be the difference for the salary of two full time professionals. Each of whom would take on many cases per year.

According to the article, an average of million $800 was spent on the drug war per state. If this was spent on programs addressing social issues, it could end the cycles of abuse, neglect, and crime in an uncountable amount of families.
 
I think part of the problem with the article is that people who really hate drugs do not take a rational stance. I don't think it has much to do with facts. It has to do with the inner world of thought which you cannot transform without the person wanting to or unless they are forced to confront the issue head-on with no alternative but death. I really don't think articles like this really help as a singular entity. Rational drug articles as a unit though do help because it brings about familiarity which in this case does not breed contempt. In this case it helps destroy fear and the resulting irrationality. Or it destroys irrationality and the resulting fear. It's a chicken and egg scenario here… so take your pick.

I think it is rational to say that anti-drug advocates use a lot of false information and their position relies on their faith in their rigtheousness. "The Devil is God as he is misunderstood by the wicked." Or the afraid, stupid, Republican, etc.

The fact that people have irrational strongly held beliefs in the first doesn't mean they cannot or do not want to change. But repeating the same montras over and over again does not help. I mean people still talk about Iraq like it ever had anything to do with "The Terrorists", people hate gays, people like Björk, I mean all these highly terrible, irrational ideas appeal to these irrational people in some way. And what is it? I'd say Fear (no Björk; that was a joke). We need to make our society not so afraid, less animalistic/survivalistic-selfish-arrogant, and truly use what distinguishes humans, at least in a way humans seem to like. We need to think and not be afraid and as that happens society will change for the better. People are afraid of the unknown and for a lot "Drugs!" are an unknown… or at least they think they are.

Peace,
PL
 
In theory, of course there is argument over the point. Empirically, heroin is more dangerous than marijuarna, even taking into account potential psychological illness. That is barely even debateable.
 
Crazeee said:
I wonder what grade you got on the paper ?
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting to get it back. I had to write arguments for two different positions on the topic of drug policy, totalling about 80 pages in length. I would post it on here for anyone interested but it's too large to attach and I have no place to host it. :(
 
" Using marijuana is better than using heroin. "

this isn't necessarily true. when appropriate safety measures are taken, opiates are among the safest drugs one can put in their body. someone who smokes a lot of pot is doing far more damage to their body (lungs) than a careful opiate user.
Click to expand...

Uhhhm....people can change the way they use cannabis too. Cannabis can be injested orally, bypassing all of the presumed lung damage. One could also use a clean THC inhaler, if it were legal to do so.
 
Last edited:
a few points are a bit over simplified, but its a good read none-the-less and it does make a lot of sense
 
It's reading things like this that make me wonder just how far different the US is from Europe when it comes to drugs. While Europe has drug laws, some countries have actually gone as far as decriminalizing all drugs when it's only for personal use (Portugal) and some that still adhere to a lot of the 60s/70s approach to drugs. In the US though, it appears that the approach to drugs is still stuck somewhere between the 30s & the 50s.

As an example, about 18 months ago I was found in possession of 2C-I (80mg), amphetamine (~10g) & cannabis (~14g) all as a result of operation Ismene - the British end of op WebTryp, which was possesion of a Class A, B & C repectively. Now I ended up with an official caution for this, but I've got a suspicion that had that happened in the US, I'd most probably still be looking forward to my release date date from prison.

Sadly the US really does seem to treat it's citizens as irresponsible children when it comes to what you do to your own body; as a country that started off with such high ideals & well intentioned laws for it's citizens (ironically to eascape British oppression) it seems that the government oppresses it's citizens way more than the UK would ever consider doing
 
most people (parents, general society) hate drugs becasue of the fact that it is against the law. dosent matter if drugs help you or not we live in society and we if noone respected the law then there would be alot more robbery and crime. even these people that hate drugs are probly on prescrepted medicine of some kind and they have no problem with that because it isnt against the law.
 
fastandbulbous said:
…high ideals & well intentioned laws for it's citizens (ironically to eascape British oppression) it seems that the government oppresses it's citizens way more than the UK would ever consider doing
Click to expand...

Well… don't forget the crux of the revolution was money. Has less to do with freedom and more with comfort and that is the US in a nutshell.

Peace,
PL
 
fastandbulbous said:
As an example, about 18 months ago I was found in possession of 2C-I (80mg), amphetamine (~10g) & cannabis (~14g) all as a result of operation Ismene - the British end of op WebTryp, which was possesion of a Class A, B & C repectively. Now I ended up with an official caution for this, but I've got a suspicion that had that happened in the US, I'd most probably still be looking forward to my release date date from prison.

Sadly the US really does seem to treat it's citizens as irresponsible children when it comes to what you do to your own body; as a country that started off with such high ideals & well intentioned laws for it's citizens (ironically to eascape British oppression) it seems that the government oppresses it's citizens way more than the UK would ever consider doing
Click to expand...

That's one way of looking at it. The other way is that the US didn't even bother tracking down individual users for possession of research chemicals. Only the UK were draconian enough to do that.
 
Is heroin safe?

ksi said:
sugar a drug? :(
and i thought heroin was so safe when it's pure, atleast it doesnt give you lung cancer.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is the rumor that heroin is not harmful to the body when it is pure, but that doesn't mean it won't give you abcesses* or other nasties, and don't forget when it's pure, it's very easy to overdose, which is probably slightly more severe than sugar... From what I've seen and experienced, yes, pure heroin can keep you looking young and beautiful, and it also keeps colds and many illnesses at bay - providing you take it every day and vary the dose enough so that it is always effective. If you just do enough to get well, then all it has done is make it extremely expensive to act like a normal person. If you do too much, your state becomes very obvious and that can compromise the charade, if you do too little, well, you don't feel so good. The ideal dose is just enough to get high without being plastered, and every third day you have to do just enough to get barely well so that the following day you can return to dose that gets you high again. If you don't do the dance like that (that's based on the fact that you want to take it everyday), then your tolerance rises exponentially, resulting in situations where you are taking enough heroin to kill a dozen people and all it does it get you barely well. All the preceding has to have several things in place if it is to happen, i.e., you have to have a connection that is reliable and consistently selling pure heroin, your connection is discrete and scoring doesn't put you into dangerous neighborhoods or attract police attention, you have access to either legal funds or funds that don't get you into trouble through their acquisition to support your habit, you have veins that are capable of surviving the constant onslaught of syringes being poked in them and can deliver an excellent register without clogging, you can exist in the real world without getting noticed either by your tracks or because you are nodding out, the people who do know you are using are comfortable with you using or at least won't entertain the idea of intervention to "help" you, you yourself are comfortable with the fact that you are a heroin addict; the list goes on.

So, while technically pure heroin doesn't harm your body, that idea has been taken completely out of context when placed in the light of reality.

* Abcesses are caused when during the process of shooting up, once the blood has mixed with the stuff in the syringe, if you miss the vein then you will have a really nasty abcess form, irrespective of how pure the heroin is.
 
Yes, there is the rumor that heroin is not harmful to the body when it is pure

It's more than a rumour. It's well established medical fact. Pure heroin is one of the most incredibly safe, non-toxic drugs in existence.

but that doesn't mean it won't give you abcesses* or other nasties

Heroin doesn't give you abcesses. You get them from sloppy unhygenic injection techniques. Sure - if you don't know how to inject yourself then expect abcesses. Just like if you're a diabetic and you don't take care injecting yourself with insulin you'll get abcesses too.

it's very easy to overdose, which is probably slightly more severe than sugar

Nah, that's garbage.

The surprising truth is that, in order to use opiates to suppress breathing to the point of death, you have to exceed the normal dose to an extreme degree. Heroin is unusually safe, because the gap between a therapeutic dose and a fatal dose is unusually wide.

Listen, for example, to Dr Teresa Tate, who has prescribed heroin and morphine for 25 years, first as a cancer doctor and now as medical adviser to Marie Curie Cancer Care. We asked her to compare heroin with paracetamol, legally available without prescription. She told us: "I think that most doctors would tell you that paracetamol is actually quite a dangerous drug when used in overdose; it has a fixed upper limit for its total dose in 24 hours and if you exceed that, perhaps doubling it, you can certainly put yourself at great risk of liver failure and of death, whereas with diamorphine, should you double the dose that you normally were taking, I think the consequence would be to be sleepy for a while and quite possibly not much more than that and certainly no permanent damage as a result." Contrary to the loudly expressed view of so many politicians, this specialist of 25 years' experience told us that when heroin is properly used by doctors, it is "a very safe drug".

http://cannabisnews.com/news/10/thread10053.shtml

All the preceding has to have several things in place if it is to happen, i.e., you have to have a connection that is reliable and consistently selling pure heroin

Yeah but all you're describing is the problems the black market causes - don't blame that on heroin. If you were getting pure heroin legally it would be incredibly benign and non-harmful to the body. The only problem with it is it can be addictive for some people who use it irresponsibly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top