Who should be allowed to use drugs?
- Thread starter Busty St Clare
- Start date
DeathDomokun
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,556
Finding weed in Australia is like finding a crab on the beach. I've been able to grow a beard since before I was 15 so I never had any trouble buying alcohol or cigarettes, but I think it's easier to find someone who's willing to sell you a bag than it is someone who's willing to go to the bottle-o.
It really wouldn't be difficult to book an appointment with the GP, you know they can do a check-up and see how you're going. That's not to say I think GP's should have the final say or veto or whatever, I think it should be personal discretion as some people are knowledgable enough to know whether a certain drug is apt for that time and place.
This is just too subjective and personal for the government to control really. I don't think the government has our best interests in mind, nor do I think they're capable of "looking after us" and I think those that are responsible enough to use drugs will use them, and those who get to the stage of abusing them will abuse them. It's how things go, irrespective of legality.
justsayknow
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2004
- Messages
- 1,270
Maybe the way they are dispensing marijuana in the US at the moment is a good place to start for cannabis but not the ultimate solution. I also like the sound of the way the Mullaway man was running his business: personalised service for each customer (although it was a medical program rather than recreational the same rules apply)
Also if you are going to start dispensing chemicals like mdma lsd etc though you would want someone with certified product- perhaps a gcms print out or the like and an independent body to regulate quality. As for who should buy them- any adult who doesnt have contraindications for using the substance. At the moment and in the recent past we have had retail stores selling strong herbal combos and fairly new synthetic compounds with varying degrees of knowledge and often little to no training. The one person I did know of who went to a lot of effort to inform himself about the substances ended up going out of business (I think)due to competition from a larger and possibly less scrupulous herb chain. I think this needs to be improved upon and would be a huge benefit of legalisation/regulation.
I was thinking today about how legalisation of drugs with greater addiction potential would work. I'm talking about Opiates, Benzo's and Amphetamines. Its a really tricky one because these are the sort of thing that you really should have some kind of medical supervision for but the current system does not recognise recreational use as a possibility. It would be great if harm reduction groups like the NSP's, WASUA etc and the medical proffessionals associated with them could be given a role as dispensaries but I doubt they would want that responsibility or at present would have the capacity to handle it. The groups that would be most likely to want responsibility for this are the ones that are possibly least trustworthy with the material- Pharmaceutical companies and Organised Crime.
I'm not that keen on the idea of registerd users either. I think that it is an invasion of privacy and unecessary labeling of individuals for their choice to use.
Also if you are going to start dispensing chemicals like mdma lsd etc though you would want someone with certified product- perhaps a gcms print out or the like and an independent body to regulate quality. As for who should buy them- any adult who doesnt have contraindications for using the substance. At the moment and in the recent past we have had retail stores selling strong herbal combos and fairly new synthetic compounds with varying degrees of knowledge and often little to no training. The one person I did know of who went to a lot of effort to inform himself about the substances ended up going out of business (I think)due to competition from a larger and possibly less scrupulous herb chain. I think this needs to be improved upon and would be a huge benefit of legalisation/regulation.
I was thinking today about how legalisation of drugs with greater addiction potential would work. I'm talking about Opiates, Benzo's and Amphetamines. Its a really tricky one because these are the sort of thing that you really should have some kind of medical supervision for but the current system does not recognise recreational use as a possibility. It would be great if harm reduction groups like the NSP's, WASUA etc and the medical proffessionals associated with them could be given a role as dispensaries but I doubt they would want that responsibility or at present would have the capacity to handle it. The groups that would be most likely to want responsibility for this are the ones that are possibly least trustworthy with the material- Pharmaceutical companies and Organised Crime.
I'm not that keen on the idea of registerd users either. I think that it is an invasion of privacy and unecessary labeling of individuals for their choice to use.
SexywithEcstacy
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 20
I am all for the decriminilization of Schedule 4, 8, and 9 drugs, but too make them legal would be problematic because everyone would be stoned or on meth every time, your corner drug store "Hmmmmmm I'll have an eight-ball of meth/some Rohypnol for the crash and a quarter ounce of kind-bud please". That the situation.
Busty St Clare
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2007
- Messages
- 12,667
You are forgetting the fact that opiates, benzos and amphetamines are legal. You can be prescribed them by a certified doctor. What you seem to be asking for is the permission to self diagnose and medicate.
justsayknow
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2004
- Messages
- 1,270
For sure they are legal. But the medical system in general doesnt approve of recreational use. So as a result diversion and self administration is rife. Obviously this would happen if recreational use was approved but perhaps patients would feel more comfortable discussing their use with a health care provider if they werent just there to try and wheedle a script out of them?
Yes I am asking permission for self medication, but the point is that self medication is a fact of life and perhaps a shift in perspective might open up more discussion about acceptable levels of use and healthy use? At the moment this isnt necesarily considered as something to discuss until it gets to the point of dependence/maintenance.
Sorry I shouldnt make generalisations. I realise that you are a medical proffessional and also a responsible drug user. How would you feel about being put in a position where someone came to you as an equal with the proposition " I want to get high and I want to do it responsibly"?
Yes I am asking permission for self medication, but the point is that self medication is a fact of life and perhaps a shift in perspective might open up more discussion about acceptable levels of use and healthy use? At the moment this isnt necesarily considered as something to discuss until it gets to the point of dependence/maintenance.
Sorry I shouldnt make generalisations. I realise that you are a medical proffessional and also a responsible drug user. How would you feel about being put in a position where someone came to you as an equal with the proposition " I want to get high and I want to do it responsibly"?
Last edited by a moderator:
Busty St Clare
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2007
- Messages
- 12,667
I agree that we all should have the choice, but I am also enough of a realist to know that a whole population of self mediators wouldn't be the most effective in terms of harm reduction. Even today it takes all manner of sanity to keep quacks and shaman from selling Joe Public any old holistic crap. And people will pay top dollar for it. Imagine if anyone could start dispensing other people drugs in an uneducated belief that "2 pills will cure your depression"?
Cannabis should be legalised. If the government doesn't want the moral pain of controlling it themselves then at least decriminalise 5 personal plants and let market forces dictate the supply and demand. I'd imagine Australia would go bat shit for 12months perhaps. Pubs and Hotels will go broke as smoking laws mean it will not be the most social of habits, but eventually society will accept its use. It's not like any of my mates will suddenly quit our jobs and pull cones in front of the Today show all of a sudden. Social pressure will mean the civilised stoner will become appreciated where as the slacker stoner will still be shunned. The same way you can have a quiet drink without having to end up pissing your pants in public. If you show up to work stoned you will get the sack. People will be prosecuted for drug driving just as they will if they bash their wife over a packet of tim tams, but life will go on. Those who find weed a crutch will avoid it, those who love it will thrive.
Anything else though is a step too far. MDMA is a wonderful drug but it's no different than antibiotics, you use it incorrectly and it won't do it's job anymore. I'd be happier if police prosecuted people who manufactured and sold bunk pills, turning a bling eye to the healthier stuff, after all if you are to believe the government hype the drug isn't the problem it is the adulteration.
Cannabis should be legalised. If the government doesn't want the moral pain of controlling it themselves then at least decriminalise 5 personal plants and let market forces dictate the supply and demand. I'd imagine Australia would go bat shit for 12months perhaps. Pubs and Hotels will go broke as smoking laws mean it will not be the most social of habits, but eventually society will accept its use. It's not like any of my mates will suddenly quit our jobs and pull cones in front of the Today show all of a sudden. Social pressure will mean the civilised stoner will become appreciated where as the slacker stoner will still be shunned. The same way you can have a quiet drink without having to end up pissing your pants in public. If you show up to work stoned you will get the sack. People will be prosecuted for drug driving just as they will if they bash their wife over a packet of tim tams, but life will go on. Those who find weed a crutch will avoid it, those who love it will thrive.
Anything else though is a step too far. MDMA is a wonderful drug but it's no different than antibiotics, you use it incorrectly and it won't do it's job anymore. I'd be happier if police prosecuted people who manufactured and sold bunk pills, turning a bling eye to the healthier stuff, after all if you are to believe the government hype the drug isn't the problem it is the adulteration.
justsayknow
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2004
- Messages
- 1,270
I agree that quacks and shamans probably shouldnt be the ones dispensing the drugs. I also believe that the bikies, mafia and other gangs probably shouldnt either (but I think they might disagree with me on this).
I suppose the idea that I was fantasising about was a kind of "Professional Euphoria Practitioner" accredited and medically trained. No government would ever touch that though and neither would the medical profession. But Hypothetically I reckon that would be the way to go.
In the end its always going to be the profit motivation that drives the supply of drugs and morals and health care are not always going to be involved - people that decide to fuck them selves up are going to continue to do so regardless of what I or any harm reduction or medical practioner would like them to do.
I suppose the idea that I was fantasising about was a kind of "Professional Euphoria Practitioner" accredited and medically trained. No government would ever touch that though and neither would the medical profession. But Hypothetically I reckon that would be the way to go.
In the end its always going to be the profit motivation that drives the supply of drugs and morals and health care are not always going to be involved - people that decide to fuck them selves up are going to continue to do so regardless of what I or any harm reduction or medical practioner would like them to do.
Paulymorphone
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2011
- Messages
- 190
I don't know about MDMA.....everytime you use it, you can never regain the amount of seratonin u once had...MDMA addiction can lead to severe depression due to lack of seratonin, and also some very crazy anxiety disorders....in people who have used it daily for a long period of time can have hallucinations, severe lockjaw, and complete loss of touch with reality...but doing it a couple times a year or so, I think is perfectly alright
justsayknow
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2004
- Messages
- 1,270
Probably a more realistic outcome than what I was proposing, and it would be a great start.
Pills are one thing but I would extend that to RC's and maybe even Heroin. Heroin is one thing that has been given a bit of a go by the medical profession already but still in more of a disease model than a personal choice model.
I supose when it comes down to it a doctors job is to heal (or help the body heal) rather than get people high. And my choice to get high on a saturday night is less important than someone needing surgery or treatment for a terminal illness which we already dont have the resources to do effectively.
Divine Moments
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,782
I'd love to see a source backing that up.
candyflip420
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2010
- Messages
- 74
Marijuana yes. MDMA couldn't just be openly available, they're are too many idiots. Dumb kids will just get ahold of them and it will be last one to have serotonin syndrome is a rotten egg. I think it should be available to people who can prove they can use it responsible. I don't know how this could be done, perhaps sit a test or something but then there is always people who will cheat their way through etc. it's not a simple thing but MDMA has intrigued me since the first time i tried it (17) the way it makes you feel is just something else, like all weight is off your shoulders, at peace with the world, all our problems can be shrugged away, the empathy and how 2 people can so easily open up to each other. It really is an amazing chemical that deserves more research and testing. It's disgusting that on the radio there's that add that goes "ecstasy, it contains drain cleaner, rat poison, bleach and made in toilets. do you want to put that in your body?" Like fair enough the government are using their bullshit scare tactics this is nothing new. but 1, why spread lies? and 2, if you're going to do so, why not do it about something that really can ruin your and change you forever like Meth or Heroin. They are 2 drugs that people should not touch, they have no beneficial value. Purely recreational and extremely addictive.
Paulymorphone
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2011
- Messages
- 190
Ask any psychiatrist . . . . .
As a child I had easy access to alcohol. When I was 13 growing up in New Zealand it was much easier to access marijuana then alcohol as the legal drinking age was 20. I had my first LSD at 14. Where there's a will there's a way. That's whether it's legal or not so I believe legalizing it and selling under strict laws would be a start, certainly I would love it, but it wouldn't change the usage, simply ensure we had a safer more quality product.
footscrazy
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2008
- Messages
- 4,476
candyflip420 said:
Methamphetamine (desoxyn) is used a prescription drug and heroin is very similar to morphine, which is extensively used in medicine. It's incorrect to say they have no beneficial value.
What's wrong with doing something purely for recreational value anyway? Euphoria is a beneficial value too.
DeathDomokun
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,556
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise a psychiatrist was a scientific study/research article..
Also, there's no causation between low serotonin and depression. The "chemical imbalance" and a lack of Serotonin was just a marketing tool, it's like saying headaches are caused by a deficiency of paracetamol.
If serotonin altering drugs were permanent... I'm not going to even humour the idea, it's just silly.
The thing about MDMA is that its unproven there's not enough evidence for or against.
Any responsible government would never allow wide spead use, let alone condone its use among the general population.
Imagine 20 years from now there's an epidemic of mental health problems that have been connected to MDMA use. Imagine the controversy of a previous government allowing this kind of thing to happen.
Think Tobacco,asbestos and lead.
I realise some peolple like to imagine themselves as downtrodden proletariats fighting the oppresive bourgeoisie for their right to altered Consciousness, but its not that simple.
Believe it or not its in the governments best interests to keep us healthy and productive.
Any responsible government would never allow wide spead use, let alone condone its use among the general population.
Imagine 20 years from now there's an epidemic of mental health problems that have been connected to MDMA use. Imagine the controversy of a previous government allowing this kind of thing to happen.
Think Tobacco,asbestos and lead.
I realise some peolple like to imagine themselves as downtrodden proletariats fighting the oppresive bourgeoisie for their right to altered Consciousness, but its not that simple.
Believe it or not its in the governments best interests to keep us healthy and productive.
DeathDomokun
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,556
I don't understand how it's irresponsible.
First off, in Australia most of our "MDXX" tablets aren't actually MDXX. If the people taking MDXX knew what they we're getting (assuming they want MDMA), would be given information on insufflation and oral as ROA's and doses, along with hydration and even supplements/vitamins/substances to take, and drug interactions like Serotonin Syndrome or dehydration with dancing and alcohol.
Completely irrespective of personal/recreation use, MDMA has great value in Psychiatry. I'm too lazy to link to sources as a simple Google search would bring up results.
First off, in Australia most of our "MDXX" tablets aren't actually MDXX. If the people taking MDXX knew what they we're getting (assuming they want MDMA), would be given information on insufflation and oral as ROA's and doses, along with hydration and even supplements/vitamins/substances to take, and drug interactions like Serotonin Syndrome or dehydration with dancing and alcohol.
Completely irrespective of personal/recreation use, MDMA has great value in Psychiatry. I'm too lazy to link to sources as a simple Google search would bring up results.
There isn't a suitable smiley, but that is very laughable. You misinformed ignorant person, you.
No need for name calling.
Hey im all for free accsess to pill testing, what I am against is legalising a drug for the general population when its long term effects are not yet known.
"MDMA has great value in psychotherapy" From what i understand its nowhere close to being fully understood in psychotherapy.
If enough research was conducted and it was shown to help I would be all for it.
Please explain to me why its laughable to think our health and productivity is in the governments best interests.
Hey im all for free accsess to pill testing, what I am against is legalising a drug for the general population when its long term effects are not yet known.
"MDMA has great value in psychotherapy" From what i understand its nowhere close to being fully understood in psychotherapy.
If enough research was conducted and it was shown to help I would be all for it.
Please explain to me why its laughable to think our health and productivity is in the governments best interests.
DeathDomokun
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,556
Who did I name call and how? Calling someone ignorant isn't exactly name calling in my opinion.
Why would we have free access to pill testing kits? We will still be putting money into the hands of criminals instead of back into the system, and the drugs will be the same quality, we'll lose the same amount of money and we'll just gain the assurance that the pill is indeed shit (something that's pretty easy to assume)
As far as long term effects go, the government won't fund any studies. How's that for safety? We have plenty of money, and we know plenty of people are taking this substance, but we'll just ignore it and let them face the repercussions blind! Sounds productive!
As far as it's values in psychotherapy:
http://mdma.net/therapy/method.html
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/bipolar-disorder/content/article/10168/1857028?pageNumber=1
http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/556382-PTSD-and-MDMA-Therapy-Medical-Uses-of-Ecstasy-Oprah
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110215081736.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101215082936.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100719082927.htm
In fact, just go here http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/mind_brain/ecstasy/
Plenty of studies about the harming and healing power of MDMA. I never said we were close to understand the way MDMA interacts with our brains. We know fuck all about the human brain, really. There's so much more to be discovered.
PTSD and a lack of empathy are big ones, but that's not all.
I might update the links with better ones later but I can't be fucked at the moment. The information is out there, and if you don't want to actively seek it out that's fine, but really it's not my responsibility to shovel information onto your screen.
Same goes for the government, I can't be fucked typing out my point of view at this point in time. If you think otherwise, that's fine, I mean everyone is entitled to their own informed opinion.
I don't think the government has my best interests in mind at all.
Why would we have free access to pill testing kits? We will still be putting money into the hands of criminals instead of back into the system, and the drugs will be the same quality, we'll lose the same amount of money and we'll just gain the assurance that the pill is indeed shit (something that's pretty easy to assume)
As far as long term effects go, the government won't fund any studies. How's that for safety? We have plenty of money, and we know plenty of people are taking this substance, but we'll just ignore it and let them face the repercussions blind! Sounds productive!
As far as it's values in psychotherapy:
http://mdma.net/therapy/method.html
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/bipolar-disorder/content/article/10168/1857028?pageNumber=1
http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/556382-PTSD-and-MDMA-Therapy-Medical-Uses-of-Ecstasy-Oprah
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110215081736.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101215082936.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100719082927.htm
In fact, just go here http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/mind_brain/ecstasy/
Plenty of studies about the harming and healing power of MDMA. I never said we were close to understand the way MDMA interacts with our brains. We know fuck all about the human brain, really. There's so much more to be discovered.
PTSD and a lack of empathy are big ones, but that's not all.
I might update the links with better ones later but I can't be fucked at the moment. The information is out there, and if you don't want to actively seek it out that's fine, but really it's not my responsibility to shovel information onto your screen.
Same goes for the government, I can't be fucked typing out my point of view at this point in time. If you think otherwise, that's fine, I mean everyone is entitled to their own informed opinion.
I don't think the government has my best interests in mind at all.