Drugs Debate

[henry hill]

I have no idea why I want to start this thread, but: How many people who use this forum actually dabbled in drugs in anyway (don't jump straight to the hardcore, think about all your intakes...)

Do you all really believe that drugs are bad end of story?

[Sir Toose]

What the hell... I love honesty. I have used some in my time. I won't get too specific but I can say I've never used the "heavies", no needles, no acid etc. Most of my experiences have involved the organically grown.

That being said, let me qualify your question. "Are all drugs bad, end of story?" For me(and only me) the answer is yes. I suffer from being overly compulsive, overly obssessive. I went through a bout with alcohol in my teen years and it was ugly. I was drinking scope for god's sake bc my folks threw out all the whiskey. I can drink now, but I have to buy a beer at a time. No cases in the garage or anything because I know myself far too well. As for anything stronger than alcohol? I stay away. All the way away because, again, I know myself too well.

For others? As long as they don't suffer from compulsiveness that I suffer from I don't think it's a great big deal. In fact, I wouldn't try to make that decision for others. Mind altering drugs have been around since time forgotten. Cultures have always used them. Ours is no different except that we no longer attach religion them.

I don't know man.. I look at it like all the hubbub about gun control. Some are convinced that if we pile up every one ever made and burn the manufacturers at the stake then people will cease to be evil. The guy that would have shot you the day before that will pick up a knife and cut you tp ribbons instead. Same deal with drugs. Some are escaping from something that they don't want to deal with (it's not the drugs fault that someone wants it), some are able to treat it lightly and have fun. Who am i to try to judge that... I have enough trouble figuring myself out.

[henry hill]

Thanks a lot for your reply Toose :) It's one's own perspective rather than regurgitated media that I was looking for :)

I barely drink, I don't like alcohol. But I have got a very experimental nature, I would try a lot of things (you never know when you're gonna die, why miss out - attitude!) but as with everyone draw the line at certain places. Needles.

[spudracer]

I've only had one beer my entire life, so far...:D

I feel about the same way Toose does on this.

[Sir Toose]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
Thanks a lot for your reply Toose :) It's one's own perspective rather than regurgitated media that I was looking for :)


You're welcome, mon frer. For me it's a damn fine line between experimenting and getting sucked in. I think addiction could happen to me at a much more accelerated rate than most. Just know yourself before you try anything is the sagest advice I can give (provided you were looking for any advice :) )

[henry hill]

I know, a fine line between drug abuse and drug use.

but to me, I've never taken anything where I've thought, this is the state of mind I always want to be in, and that's the danger with drugs, if for instance you take a substance which gives you confidence and makes you social whereas you would normally have been someone who prefers their own company yet wished to have been more outspoken you might then want to change yourself through the drugs.

That's where I have come across some people where it would be dangerous to glorify them to.

In London, especially round Universities, it's not looked upon (by people there) with any hint of negativity, as they're older they know who they are they know what drugs are and are well educated, yet do not differentiate between taking drugs that make you feel better which are illegal and drugs prescribed, views are who is a third party to judge what is right and wrong for your body (I think the term is arrogance - but sometimes it's well justified, if anyone requires examples I'll happily provide!). As well as all, I've come across people who use various substances for their own medicinal purposes. ie. must stay up all night for this essay, not enough time in the day etc.

(I've tried as not to mention any drug names just so no one thinks I'm trying to glorify them - If you need an offputter -requiem for a dream)

[Yoda]

I've never done drugs...never been offered them, and I don't think I've ever even seen them. If I did, I'd refuse them. I have little to no interest in drugs. My only potential reason for ever trying them was simply to have a little more "life experience," basically...to make absolutely sure I wasn't missing out on anything. There's little to no chance of me ever using them, though.

Should they be illegal? Yeah, I think so. Should they be a huge deal? I don't know. I really don't. I think they're almost universally bad (exceptions always exist), but I don't know how far we should go fighting them. If we're gonna declare war on anything, I say we start with permissive parenting (I can't believe what some kids get away with these days), and hard drugs. Marijuana is second priority, man. Ya know what happens to potheads. They just sort of sit around. They're not usually (again, exceptions exist) as dangerous as people on the rougher stuff. Get those fools off the streets right away, and then we can talk about marijuana.

And no, I don't look down on people who've taken drugs at some point...at least not more than a tiny bit. I realize it's very, very common. I'd say, though, goodf3lla, that, yes, barring medicinal purposes, or something like that, they are bad, period.

[henry hill]

I think the more you preach about how bad drugs are the more people are going to want to try them. Especially during their rebellious age. Chris, at 16 I hadn't done anything but pot, and that was only because I smoke :D At that stage the thought of anything else would have been completely laughable, only 3 years down looking back I keep thinking, what, I did that? It's strange where sometimes opportunity and spontaneous decision making can lead you...

some drugs take you to places you can never go to on your own, and only through personal experience would that statement make sense, they help you tap into higher states of consciousness which cannot be explained, but the problems are obvious: you never know how your body will react to them.

Through some experimentation I found a certain substance, for me and me only made my glands swell up (glandular fever) and I was stupid enough to do it a day before I went off to visit Morocco, ruined a good few weeks of holiday. Would I therefore say that drug is bad? no I would just say I wouldn't do it, it's not for me, and I would still not tell others not to do it. If someone wants to do something there's no way you're going to be able to stop them.

It says something about the state of society that people feel the necessity to do it though, but my opinion is if someone wants to do it then you stand back and say "fck it" let 'em be. That's the only way, the more of an issue you make of it the more important it becomes to the person in question...

What I don't understand is how can we have this technology, satellites that are so powerful they can read what brand of ciggies you're smoking, but somehow they can't see large shipments of heroin coming into the country... (slight exaggeration used in the text above - but I hope the general drift of my message comes through)

[Yoda]

Chris, at 16 I hadn't done anything but pot, and that was only because I smoke
I dunno if you meant that in regards to your age, or if you think I'm 16.

some drugs take you to places you can never go to on your own, and only through personal experience would that statement make sense, they help you tap into higher states of consciousness which cannot be explained, but the problems are obvious: you never know how your body will react to them.
I don't speak from experience, but honestly, I've GOT to believe that it's all an illusion. I find it hard to believe that messing with your head like that gives you any REAL insight. Perceived insight, maybe.

If someone wants to do something there's no way you're going to be able to stop them.
Well, that's not really the issue. If I want to walk outside and murder someone, I probably could. We don't make laws based on what people can get away with for the most part.

It says something about the state of society that people feel the necessity to do it though, but my opinion is if someone wants to do it then you stand back and say "fck it" let 'em be. That's the only way, the more of an issue you make of it the more important it becomes to the person in question...
I only partially agree. Sure, some kids will want to do it simply because they're not allowed, but I don't think most people are quite that immature...at least not to the degree in which they'd be MORE likely to do drugs just because people talk about how much they dislike them so much.

The problem with drugs is that they mess with you: you're not yourself when you're high. Alcohol, for example, is a bit different. Alcohol can be enjoyed without becoming intoxicated and acting like a person other than yourself. With drugs, getting f*cked up is the whole point. :) I don't think saying "let them do whatever they want" is the answer at all, personally.

[sadesdrk]

I heard a speech on the legalization of pot. The guy brought up some issues, I have always identified with. For one, I both drank and smoked weed, during my highschool days. I can tell you, the parties I went to where there was mostly alcohol...were obnoxious, dangerous, chaotic, and destructive. This one party I was at, this girl threw it at her mom and dad's, and boy was she sorry she did that. These jock-types were jumping up and down on the bed punching holes in the ceiling. People were using every possible flat surface for sex and the place was systematically, being destroyed. Not to mention all the girls that got taken advantage of and people driving away from the gig, under the influence. It changed my perspective on the kinds of parties I wanted to be a part of.
I started going to parties with fewer people and only weed and sometimes mushrooms.
Those parties were great. Everybody was calm, friendly, laid- back. No risk of danger; people were too lazy to go anywhere. No risk of sleeping with the wrong guy; kissing with," cotton mouth" isn't pleasent. Everybody just talked, ate and slept. Pretty tame and I got used to it.

I don't do much of anything now. Occasional beer or two or glass of wine at get togethers. I think drugs and abusing alchohol, you grow out of. I least, I did.
I forgot my point, if I was even making one.

[henry hill]

No, I was talking in regards to my age and changes I went through, I'm completely surprised at how much I've changed in the last 2 years alone...

I've GOT to believe that it's all an illusion <<< Well that's one comment that can be argued until you feel something you've never felt before and will never feel naturally. If you could have done everything naturally why would anyone want to do drugs!
In terms of perceived insight and real insight, what the hells the difference, sight is perception! Everything is based on perception. Emotion for instance, things you feel, people are merely seperate entities until they form perceptions of each other, then a relationship forms.

Pot isn't really all that bad, especially when you say alcohol is good.

Besides, think of how good some drugs can be for some people too, take a completely soulless person with limited human emotions, make em pop a pill, and hey presto osama pill laden would have never been a problem.

Law? oh yeah this stuff's illegal. Damn. I thought about it from a social and moral point of view.

They know at least half the people going to raves and clubs are going to be carrying drugs, why don't police stand at the doors confiscating all??

Everything is down to personality. I'm desperate to see an end to preaching of drugs are baaaad mmmkay!

[sadesdrk]

Originally posted by goodf3lla

Pot isn't really all that bad, especially when you say alcohol is good.

Oh yeah, there's my point.:D

[henry hill]

Sades I completely agree! You grow out of it!

Although I work with a strange lad here whose been doing pot for 10 years and smokes it as thought it was a pack of ciggies, he ran out for about 8 weeks (all dealers on holiday) and what a wanker he was without it!

But I see alcohol as being a far worse a drug than anything else, because it's legal and it's accessable, and what's even worse? It's a legal money maker so they'll encourage you to do it.

It all depends what you find to be socially acceptable, as I previously stated, in the groups I'm in, the people I know, everything is acceptable, someone might be one substance, and another completely clean, what differnece would it make? not much. There are so many media myths out there it's unbelievable, I saw this 1960's governmental campaign against pot which showed someone taking pot going mad and then topping themselves. What the hell is that all about? Now they've decided to reclassify the drug to class C, meaning being caught with it gets you a finger shaken at you, why? because now it's more socially acceptable as there is no addiction (apart from that from the tobacco you smoke with it) barely any side effects (might get stomache ache) and it doesn't turn anyone into an out of control murderer. You're unlikely to do anything stupid, you wouldn't be bothered to....

btw: If you're happy as you are I'm in no way saying try things, I'm against any form of preaching...everyone should be able to make their own decisions.

[Sir Toose]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
But I see alcohol as being a far worse a drug than anything else, because it's legal and it's accessable, and what's even worse? It's a legal money maker so they'll encourage you to do it.


Don't think, even for a minute, that there is no payoff in illegal drugs. There are drug kingpins who funnel money to the government in so many ways. Do you think these government officials are going to lock off the influx of cash? Never. To legalize it would be a scandal. To accept payments under the table is, I assure you, an everyday occurrence. You hinted at this earlier... I'm coming right out and saying it. One can always find causation if one follows the trail of the money.

[spudracer]

Personally, anything that can ...can't think of the word... which would put you or anyone else at risk can be considered harmful, even if you think it isn't.

Anyone else confused by that?

[henry hill]

But in this modern day an age everything is harmful, some in small doses, some hidden, some straight up in your face. Before you know it you'll find mobile phones have caused the next big wave of brain tumours, woo!

There are drug kingpins who funnel money to the government in so many ways

Tried to hint it through a couple of times :) aye! Everything is cost benefit analysis, would stress on our national health system be strained by drug abusers? if so does this cost outweigh that of money received? www.erowid.org is a very interesting read for all those who are, well, interested :D

[spudracer]

A few weeks back I read a story on how two guys had robbed a Taco Bell, I believe, went back to their place to celebrate. Meanwhile, they got high and whatnot, one of them accidentaly dialed 911 on their cell phone and the cops listened in on their conversation.

The two guys left, all the while had the cell phone still on, and the cops caught up with them in a matter of minutes.


Stuff like that is one reason why I will stay away from drugs. I mean I'm not saying they were high and that was their basis for robbing the Bell, but the fact that their own stupidity was the reason for their arrest, and they didn't even know about it.

[Yoda]

Well that's one comment that can be argued until you feel something you've never felt before and will never feel naturally. If you could have done everything naturally why would anyone want to do drugs!
In terms of perceived insight and real insight, what the hells the difference, sight is perception! Everything is based on perception. Emotion for instance, things you feel, people are merely seperate entities until they form perceptions of each other, then a relationship forms.
Perhaps I should clarify: to me, an insight is realizing or learning something that makes sense, and that you are glad to know from then on. It's a correction or clarification to you. If you're high, and everything seems amazing, even though it really isn't any new, useful way of thinking, or educational at all, then it's not really insightful...you're just messed up to think it's amazing and interesting temporarily. It's not permanent. After you're done, you think "why was that dog I saw so damn funny?" The answer is that it wasn't: you just became more susceptible to laughing at things. You wouldn't have laughed at it if not for the drugs.

Pot isn't really all that bad, especially when you say alcohol is good.
Didn't say it was good...said it was different. Said it's legal, and for a good reason.

Besides, think of how good some drugs can be for some people too, take a completely soulless person with limited human emotions, make em pop a pill, and hey presto osama pill laden would have never been a problem.
I honestly have no idea what you mean by that. :laugh:

Law? oh yeah this stuff's illegal. Damn. I thought about it from a social and moral point of view.
Ditto. Sounds like sarcasm, though.

They know at least half the people going to raves and clubs are going to be carrying drugs, why don't police stand at the doors confiscating all??
Because there are bigger fish to fry than a few people smoking pot.

Everything is down to personality. I'm desperate to see an end to preaching of drugs are baaaad mmmkay!
I'm desperate to see people take that advice to heart. Sure, some people can use drugs and not mess up their lives...some people can get smashed in the head with a hammer and live through it, too. I think they're a hinderance.

because now it's more socially acceptable as there is no addiction (apart from that from the tobacco you smoke with it) barely any side effects (might get stomache ache) and it doesn't turn anyone into an out of control murderer. You're unlikely to do anything stupid, you wouldn't be bothered to....
No addiction? I dunno about that. The way it's been described to me is not highly addictive, but easily termed as "habit forming." IE: fatty food, as opposed to cigarettes, or something like that. Side effects? It's mind-altering, man. You talk in one post about the things it does to your head, that you seem to think are good, and then you say there are no side effects.

I agree, I don't think someone who's high on pot is going to start much crap. The hard drugs are the only ones that have any potential to keep me up at night, figuratively speaking. I obviously happens, though. People also talk about "gateway" drugs. I don't know how many people move on to rougher stuff, but it creates a greater potential...no denying that.

btw: If you're happy as you are I'm in no way saying try things, I'm against any form of preaching...everyone should be able to make their own decisions.
Well, if by preaching you mean screaming your guts out and never being open to even talking about it, then yes, it's bad. If it's just advice, and firm opposition, though, I'm all for preaching. And no, not everyone should be able to make their own decisions. I realize you didn't mean that 100% literally (at least, I think you didn't)...but I feel obligated to point it out anyway. Laws ARE needed...and yes, I do suppose as little regulation as possible. We have too many laws right now...too many restrictions, but IMO, the ban on drugs is not something we should be getting rid of.

But in this modern day an age everything is harmful, some in small doses, some hidden, some straight up in your face. Before you know it you'll find mobile phones have caused the next big wave of brain tumours, woo!
Ah, but there's a difference between things we know to be harmful, and things we think may be harmful. Just because we're using things that MAY be harmful, it's no justification for things we basically KNOW to be harmful.

[patti]

i'm pretty much on the same track as sades, and i agree with toose, that certain personality types are more in danger of drug abuse and should steer clear- and know their nature.

for some people, they are fine with a little experimentation, and drugs are no problem and don't create any craving- UNTIL they come across that one drug that DOES IT FOR THEM. that's where a drug becomes dangerous and destructive.

i've never liked alcohol........smoked tiny hits of pot for a couple years in college but never did the smoke all day and never leave the house lifestyle.
i tried ecstasy once and knew immediately i should steer clear of that one-because i loved it! plus it is more dangerous than originally thought (damages memory and saps serotonin).

Trouble came to me when i was given pain pills (vicodin- narcotics) for tons of dental work i was having. I liked that feeling so much i started seeking more pills- took them for the feeling, not EVER for the legitimate purpose of pain relief. Pain pills are really just synthetic heroin.

when a drug is a problem the AA slogan is so true- "one is too many and a thousand not enough".

i worry about young people having access to drugs- kids are more vulnerable than they realize.

[Sir Toose]

Originally posted by TWTCommish

Laws ARE needed...and yes, I do suppose as little regulation as possible. We have too many laws right now...too many restrictions, but IMO, the ban on drugs is not something we should be getting rid of.

I agree. The laws look pretty on the books. I still maintain that as long as there is so much profit to be made though, the problem will be ongoing. Think in terms of outside the US. Mexico has a hidden GDP of billions due to the drug trade. Afghanistan is also a major producer of illegal drugs... those oh so holy evil fighters! They are probably really mad because the drugs in america are bought primarily south of the US border versus the middle east. Bet they'd have no problems with us if we bought our "pops" from them.

Sorry to be so sardonic here, but reliance on illegal drugs is promoted by those who claim to fight against it. The laws are no hindrance whatsoever. I would go so far as to ask what happens to all that stuff you see being confiscated on television? It gives you a sense that our government is "doing" something but, what?, is there some huge secret warehouse (like in Raiders of the Lost Ark) where all this crap goes? I don't think so. I think it finds it's way back out on the street again. In fact, I have cop friends who point out to me that some on the force drive Lexuses.

Same crap different day.

[sadesdrk]

Check this out:

at 16, you can drive a car.

at 18, you are responsible for your own actions; can fight for your country; can buy a pack of cigs; and some porn. However, you can't buy alcohol, for another three years.

at 21, you can now buy alcohol.

This seems so @ss-backwards to me. You can fight for your country and go to jail, but you can't drink; you can be tried as an adult and convicted of DUI, though...:laugh:

[henry hill]

Because there are bigger fish to fry than a few people smoking pot

There were 40,000 people at the ministry of sound's new year's ever party at the millenium dome, there wasn't a single person there who wasn't on one substance or another. Hell there were dealers to make sure there was no shortage of supply. Are you trying to tell me that the police in Britain had no idea that there would be so many drugs? yet they thought of bringing ambulances, just in case? uhm!

If theres no demand, then you get a shortage of suppliers. I smell fish.

Anyway, drug users are a benefit to society, headlines help sell papers, more police required helps keep public spending to a healthy level, keep employment up, and for the moral people of today to set an example.

TWT, it's hard to argue, it's like trying to describe whats good about a film to someone who has no interest in it. But the more important point is, there is no point, this is going to be ongoing for long period of times and no debate will settle it ( you're much more likely to see peace in the middle east !)

[Yoda]

There were 40,000 people at the ministry of sound's new year's ever party at the millenium dome, there wasn't a single person there who wasn't on one substance or another. Hell there were dealers to make sure there was no shortage of supply. Are you trying to tell me that the police in Britain had no idea that there would be so many drugs? yet they thought of bringing ambulances, just in case? uhm!
I think you're misunderstanding me: the have bigger fish to fry. That doesn't mean they don't know about it, it means that they have bigger things to worry about than a few people smoking pot.

If theres no demand, then you get a shortage of suppliers. I smell fish.
I don't see what the argument here is. Yes, there is a demand for it. That goes without saying.

Anyway, drug users are a benefit to society, headlines help sell papers, more police required helps keep public spending to a healthy level, keep employment up, and for the moral people of today to set an example.
Public spending should be lower, not higher...and any person that becomes a police officer does not become something else. No employment is "kept up" by needing more police offers. I assume that you were joking, though.

TWT, it's hard to argue, it's like trying to describe whats good about a film to someone who has no interest in it. But the more important point is, there is no point, this is going to be ongoing for long period of times and no debate will settle it ( you're much more likely to see peace in the middle east !)
No offense, but judging by your last post, you've got to be high. :) I didn't understand half of what you said. :laugh:

[henry hill]

Public spending should be lower, not higher...and any person that becomes a police officer does not become something else. No employment is "kept up" by needing more police offers. I assume that you were joking, though.

This is what I mean: Health, School, Emergency services etc. it's all public spending, now if the economy is going into recession, what does the government do? encourage investment to keep up employment, ie. here we dig up roads for no reason and then patch them up again, it all has to be kept at an equilibrium otherwise companies will have to cut costs to keep the same amount of profit and damnit i really cannot be ****ed with an economics lesson.

Let's try again:

TWT, it's hard to argue, it's like trying to describe whats good about a film to someone who has no interest in it.

But the more important point is, there is no point, this [debate] is going to be ongoing for long period of times and no debate will settle it ( you're much more likely to see peace in the middle east !) - ie. drugs aren't going anywhere.

[Yoda]

I'm sorry, I still don't understand what point you're trying to make about public spending. I really don't. I understand what you mean about describing the supposed benefit of doing drugs to someone who hasn't, though. That just doesn't convince me, that's all. Hey, YOU started this thread; surely you expected a little bit of back-and-forth?

[sadesdrk]

Originally posted by goodf3lla


But the more important point is, there is no point, this [debate] is going to be ongoing for long period of times and no debate will settle it I made a point. Nobody seems to care about MY point.:bawling:

[henry hill]

Actually I expected no one to agree with me at all :D

It would help if you had done business studies / economics at some stage :D

Hold on - you're in a different country...

/me goes off to practise rolling...

[Yoda]

Uh, I think I understand enough about economics for you explain things to stupid old me. I think you're just sort of stumbling and thinking out loud here. :) I feel like I'm getting half-formed thoughts and sentences, and I'm sorry if that sounds rude.

Simple economic principle: taking money via taxes and using it to hire more police officers does not create any new jobs at all.

[henry hill]

Hey I think everything in society is screwed up :D But I don't have a clue about what would be a better option!

I think most of our police should be concentrating on muggers on the street - national news : a 19 year old girl got shot for her mobile phone! Jesus! we don't have guns here! this is the start of a crimewave!

We live in strange times, I may make less sense progressively as the night goes on.

Simple economic principle: taking money via taxes and using it to hire more police officers does not create any new jobs at all.

what planet you from? yes it does. it generates new employment. What the **** man!

[Sir Toose]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
Actually I expected no one to agree with me at all :D

It would help if you had done business studies / economics at some stage :D

Look man, I like you, I really do, but this kind of thing goes nowhere with me. Chris has proven to be vastly intelligent in the ways of economics and politics and frankly you've got no leg to stand on with a BS statement like that. :mad:

On your other point... taking tax dollars generated from the collection of money from the public is not job "creation." It's the spending of public assets.

Job creation is a title more fitting for the private sector, for private business. As a rule governments don't "create" jobs, they fill perceived needs.

[henry hill]

Yeah but when they work then they stop taking unemployment benefits which is public asset and give more back in the form of tax, even workers of the government pay tax on their income!

my bad: different countries different ways of operation

/me goes back to the drugs...

[Yoda]

Sound economic policy applies to ALL countries with a central government like this. I'm sorry, but no economy stimulation takes place there: why would you assume that they're going to hire someone who is unemployed as a police officer? What you're doing then is forcing the public to put people to work.

Don't forget this: the amount of money in circulation is fixed. If it goes on place, there is always a place it WOULD have gone instead, because no one hides large sums of money in the ground anymore. Hiring more policer officers does not help the economy...it helps fight crime (hopefully). Anyway, all of that is irrelevant, because drug users don't benefit society: they don't create headlines (honestly, how many headlines do you see about drug busts? They're usually focused on bigger events where I come from), and, more importantly, if they "create jobs," is crime a good thing, seeing as how it forces us to hire more policemen?

[henry hill]

Woo thank god you reminded me of the original point:

Right ok, Drug busts do not create headlines unless big, but people dying from drugs, opinion polls on drugs, drug user experiences, drugs used to damage status they're everywhere all the time!

Look the point is increase in public spending at this time (going into recession) is good. That's what this educational system has taught me, I even looked it up in last years economics text book just to confirm I wasn't talking crap myself :D

after our nice debates I think the only conclusion I can come to is that drugs have always been round and always will be some people will like it others not.

drug use here is on the increase.

[Sir Toose]

Originally posted by TWTCommish
(honestly, how many headlines do you see about drug busts? They're usually focused on bigger events where I come from),

In Pennsylvania probably true. In Houston VASTLY different story. We have the Gulf of Mexico right here which feeds into the port of Houston and we (Texas) border Mexico. Big headlines on a daily basis. I've got a buddy that flies a blackhawk helicopter out of Hooks airport in Tomball. He does nothing but track illegal planes running drugs and forces them out of the sky. We've got gangs running the stuff all over...it's a very big deal here.

[The Silver Bullet]

That's pretty amazing. I mean you see films [like Traffic, shutup! Just saying, you do] and you see it and you almost refuse to believe, especially down here in Mount Gambier where there's no real drug lords or anything, no cartels, and you wonder if things like that even ever happen.

And you hear things like that and you realise that they do. At the same time, Mount Gambier is nicknamed "White City". So that's saying something.

I have never been offered anything more than marijuana but I have no desire to do the stuff and so I choose not to. I drink, but not to the point of making myself throw up or something.

If people want to smoke dope or shoot up or snort coke, that's fine. If they want to take acid, good on them. I don't agree with it, but I won't tell them off for it. Mind you, it IS illegal and if they get caught then they SHOULD get in a sh!tload of trouble. But until then, if they want to risk it -- while I think it's stupid of them, to each his own.

Sorry if I missed most of the debate.





PS: TWT, I've been getting half thought out sentances in every debate I've had with Goodf3lla. Just joking GF, ya silly sod.

[Yoda]

Oh yeah, I agree. I don't think I'd turn a friend of mine in if I knew they smoked dope now and then or anything like that. That's their risk...but if they got caught, well, they've got no excuse. They took the chance, and I'd support the law's decision to nab 'em.

[The Silver Bullet]

However, I think if they were heavily into cocaine or heroin, I'd tell someone. I think you'd have to. For me, they'd be playing dice on too big a table for me not to tell someone.

[Yoda]

Yes, definitely, if it was extreme.

[The Silver Bullet]

Wow. We're seeing eye to eye. This seems.....weird.

:goof:

[henry hill]

Hey! Drugs are making headlines:

http://uk.fc.yahoo.com/r/royalwatch.html

Even our Monarchy are doing it!

"Prince Harry, seen in this file photo playing the Eton wall game, is being viewed as a "typical teenager" after it emerged that he had been drinking underage and had taken cannabis. The Queen has backed the way Prince Charles has handled the problems with his younger son. REUTERS "


What an advanced society!

[The Silver Bullet]

That photo makes him look like he's, um, reaching a, uh....climax.

I read the same thing today [granted, not it a English paper]. It makes me sick -- we're a nation of convicts founded by drug addicts.

[henry hill]

I think you're misunderstanding me: the have bigger fish to fry. That doesn't mean they don't know about it, it means that they have bigger things to worry about than a few people smoking pot

But dooooood, 40, 000 people, lets say 10,000 were carrying an 1/8th,at least, are you saying that's small?

Lets say it straight out then: The average clubber was carrying 4 ecstacy pills, it's a 14 hour event from 7pm - 9am and people needed to pace themselves so they could keep going all night, needless to say from 7-10 it's most likely they would just smoke their joints and hang around, but then there were the hardcore people who also had their cocaine and probably under 500 had acid. To make sure people were in enough supply there were dealers there exploiting the occassion charing roughly £20 a pill rather than the usual £5-£8, but what if there had been large drug busts? then that would mess the event up, people are going there because they want to do their drugs. however had the drugs been confiscated, don't you think the accumulative amount would have far exceeded that that would be defined as " a few people smoking pot" This is also ommiting the Ketamine groups, how many people took speed just to have the energy to stay through the night etc.

At last year's new years event the ministry of sound had a large pill that came down and exploded into fireworks. Let's see, that's not endorsing/exploiting/capitalizing on drug culture is it.

I read the same thing today [granted, not it a English paper]. It makes me sick -- we're a nation of convicts founded by drug addicts.

That's a good thing, be proud.

[Yoda]

But dooooood, 40, 000 people, lets say 10,000 were carrying an 1/8th,at least, are you saying that's small?
In terms of drugs? No. In terms of other crimes, such as murder and rape? Uh, yes.

At last year's new years event the ministry of sound had a large pill that came down and exploded into fireworks. Let's see, that's not endorsing/exploiting/capitalizing on drug culture is it.
I don't see your point: am I obligated to defend the actions of these people or something?

Look the point is increase in public spending at this time (going into recession) is good. That's what this educational system has taught me, I even looked it up in last years economics text book just to confirm I wasn't talking crap myself
No offense, but it's that kind of thinking that sends us into recessions in the first place. How do you think we GOT into this recession? Too much government spending, and not enough of the public putting its own money to use. The eductional system teaches a lot of things -- don't you have a problem called D.A.R.E. in your country that teaches you how bad drugs and cigarettes and alcohol are? We've got that out here.

Government is here to do what is necessary, and little to nothing else: military, basic road creation and maintenance, police and fireman, etc. Anything more is none of the government's d*mn business.

[henry hill]

I got a T-Shirt that says D.A.R.E - Drugs Are Really Excellent.

I now get that it's a pun. Hey it's quite funny. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

In terms of drugs? No. In terms of other crimes, such as murder and rape? Uh, yes

I have no idea what you mean by that, there was no rape or murder there!?!? There was a bad tube journey afterwards though! That's a crime initself!

I don't see your point: am I obligated to defend the actions of these people or something?


My point is nothing endorsing drugs or drug culture, I'm saying that it's not going to leave society cause it's a money maker as well as a life waster. I was hinting at Toose's earlier point, and he said it.

Britain had nothing to do with war on terrorism or afghanistan, we have had the IRA as a problem since oh so long ago, yet did we ever take serious action? no, but now we want to go to Afghanistan, we want America to at least let us use our troops and now leading the rebuilding of Afghanistan, why ? it's all public money? because we're going into recession and at this point investment is cheap, so lets invest in Afghanistan.

You know what, after typing all that I wish I didn't but as I have already done it I might as well post it.

[Sir Toose]

Originally posted by TWTCommish
Government is here to do what is necessary, and little to nothing else: military, basic road creation and maintenance, police and fireman, etc. Anything more is none of the government's d*mn business.

Hallelujah brother!

Stay the fark out of my life!

[henry hill]

Originally posted by Toose

Stay the fark out of my life!

Wishful thinking! They even give us incentives to stay married and tell us how to raise our kids!

Police officers come round every year to tell us we will go mad and be jailed for life if we take a tug on a joint and that we will day at the sight of a pill.

[Steve]

I've tried different drugs, but I don't use them too often and I definitely wouldn't want to make a habit of any of them. During the summer I was much more into them...I haven't used anything since around September except for cigarettes (which I go through daily like they're candy.)

I am for treating addiction, not punishing the addicts. I think it's wrong to throw someone in jail for being under the influence of drugs. I hate the idea that someone can get in trouble with the law for hurting only themselves. I think it's a violation of rights, among other things. I mean, if someone hurts somebody else, then yeah, punish them, but to lock somebody away just for taking drugs is wrong.

I agree with TWT about marijuana. Worry about treating addiction, and stopping the corruption, and other more dangerous substances, instead of "cracking down" on a bunch of potheads. I don't know where I stand on marijuana. I've tried it, it's fun and all, but I'm not all about smoking it every day like some people I know. It's a matter of individual choice.

I don't like beer or other hard liquor. Makes me sick.

[Yoda]

I dunno, it depends on the circumstances under which they're using them. A drive driving drunk, even if he doesn't hit anyone, should definitely be punished, and not just treated, IMO. Not severely, but more than a slap on the wrist. If someone uses drugs in their own home, is caught for some reason, and wasn't even mildly putting anyone else in any form of danger, then yeah, I think treatment is the way to go. I think jail is more appropriate for, say, dealers...people who are making these things far too accessible. Not for 20 something potheads.

[Steve]

Originally posted by TWTCommish
I dunno, it depends on the circumstances under which they're using them. A drive driving drunk, even if he doesn't hit anyone, should definitely be punished, and not just treated, IMO. Not severely, but more than a slap on the wrist. If someone uses drugs in their own home, is caught for some reason, and wasn't even mildly putting anyone else in any form of danger, then yeah, I think treatment is the way to go. I think jail is more appropriate for, say, dealers...people who are making these things far too accessible. Not for 20 something potheads.

If someone drives drunk, yes, put them away. I'm 100% against putting others' lives in danger - that warrants punishment. But if someone is just using drugs, or is caught with drugs, and isn't doing any harm to anybody, it seems foolish (not to mention a violation of personal rights) to punish them.

Addicts need help. Drugs themselves don't create crime, addiction does. If an addict can't get drugs, he begins to resort to crime, and possibly violence to obtain the money to buy them. The entire system of punishing someone for their addiction is stupid, because it fuels the cycle. If you throw someone in jail instead of trying to help them, they'll feel even more dejected, which could be why they started using in the first place. The United States' drug laws are silly, I think - in Amsterdam, where most drugs are legal, drug-related crime is nonexistent (and since brothels are legal too, the number of rapes is nearly nonexistent as well)

[Yoda]

Damn, I nearly agreed with that post -- 'til the end. :) I don't think drugs should be legalized...but yes, treatment needs to be stepped up. I also wouldn't have a hissy fit if marijuana was legalized. As for prostitution: I honestly don't know what I think about that. Now, it will happen anyway, but that doesn't make it right. I guess I'd say that the benefits are "cleaning it up" a bit...being a legit business (in the eyes of the law, at least), prostitutes would likely get into less trouble...have less diseases, etc, than they do now.

From a secularl standpoint, it makes sense to legalize it. Morally and religiously, though, I think it's a very degrading thing that should be discouraged in most every way possible...so I'm a tad conflicted about it.

[patti]

do anti-drug laws stem from our system of morals?- don't kill, don't steal, don't self-destruct and take your family down with you because of a drug abuse problem?

it's definitely kinda crazy that we can be arrested for shmokin' a joint- yet alcohol is legal (for people who reach the magical age deemed "adult" enough to drink responsibly!)
i know a couple of people who have wreaked havoc on everyone around them because of raging alcoholism.

i think alcohol is much more dangerous than pot, but i wouldn't necessarily call for pot and other drugs to be made legal.
if drugs were all legal and sold like alcohol, what would the world be like?

[henry hill]

drugs and religion are the same thing.

can't seperate the two.

[Yoda]

Wha? :confused:

[henry hill]

"Religion is the opium for the masses"

one and the same
:D

(what does heaven promise you?)

[The Silver Bullet]

Bliss.


But at the same time, not a chemically heightened conscieness kind of Bliss.

You twat.
;D

[sadesdrk]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
"Religion is the opium for the masses"

one and the same
:D

(what does heaven promise you?) Oh...gee...where to start?

[henry hill]

How can you have the high without the crash?

How many people on the board believe in god? not debate, just general question to see if there's some kind of correlation, i believe religions teach a lot of healthy morals...

How can something always be good, you have to know what bad is to appreciate what good is, if heaven is eternal bliss then you need to experience hell too...

i can't make my point clearly, i'm on drugs HAHAHA (screaming out while pulling pants down exposing bare cheeks)

[sadesdrk]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
How many people on the board believe in god? not debate, just general question to see if there's some kind of correlation, i believe religions teach a lot of healthy morals...

Believing in God, and being "religious"...are two separate things, for me. I believe in God, I know T and Toose and Spud, do. Thmmie too. As for the rest, I don't know.

[The Silver Bullet]

There's a heap of Religion posts already.
Go have a look. It'll bring you up to scratch.

[henry hill]

nah my family are religious, i'm in no way going to get myself involved with any religious people religious arguments or anyone who disagrees with me about how the earth is a bubble in a can of coke being drunk by clock handles pointing to 7:27 pm, which is everyone, so I think I'm trying to say is i'm in no way going to get myself involved with any religious people religious arguments or anyone who disagrees with me about how the earth is a bubble in a can of coke being drunk by clock handles pointing to 7:27 pm, which is everyone.

Did I just say that twice? Blimey I think consistently.

[sadesdrk]

FREAK!:nope: :goof:

[henry hill]

such an understatement.

Eccentric

[Yoda]

Naw, someone who's weird and rich is eccentric. Someone who's weird and poor is crazy. Someone who's weird and in the middle, is just freaky. :)

[sadesdrk]

Nice distinctions, Spud. Bravo.:D

[Yoda]

I ain't Spud. :laugh: Those garbage fumes are getting to your head, I think.

[sadesdrk]

Oh, whoops...I was talking to him on yahoo...so, got Spud on the brain. I THOUGHT that was pretty clever...too clever for Spud...Just joking.:laugh:

[spudracer]

Hmmm,

Well we all know how you love managing a Victoria's Secret in California. :)

Anyways, since I wasn't really sure what was going on and just wanted to put in a rebuttle to Sadie's comments, I'll say farewell.

[henry hill]

huh? drugs?

[Sir Toose]

Just out of curiosity... what's everyones problem with legalizing drugs? They could be sold out of a controlled store. The people with problems could be identified. Vast amounts of tax dollars could be generated from the sale of it. The mystique would die. The crime associated with drugs would slowly die off. And on and on...



;D I don't believe a word of that crap... those are the arguments I hear though. Like legalizing drugs wouldn't create a black market as large as the current one. And government controlled stores? 1984 comes to life. sheesh.

So what do you think?

[spudracer]

I think that no matter what they do legalize em or keep them illegal, there's still going to be a way you can get them.

People will still die, there will still be debates, on and on, etc.,

So either way, nobody really comes out the winner.

[henry hill]

I think they should remain illegal because it narrows down the people who would try it down to the twats with the same mentality, creating a nice social sub-culture of people all with the same mentality cut out from the rest of the society. This is good because these tend to be the people that wouldn't be immersed into society in the first place.

"I believe that with the advent of acid we discovered a new way to think, and it has to do with piecing together new thoughts in your mind... What is it about it that scares people so deeply?
What is it? Because they're afraid that theres more to reality than they had confronted that there are doors...that they're afraid to go in...they don't want us to go in either because if we do we might learn something that they don't know, and if we do then we're out of their control."

Interesting!

Drugs are a natural way to progress your mind.

[The Silver Bullet]

There are MUCH more safe and natural ways to reach a higher level of being, mind progression etc.

Music is one of them. I can listen to music and reach a whole new level, especially [as some of you who read the Shoutbox would know] music like Ravel's Bolero. Film too, visual imamges.

Hell, sleeping for three hours in every seventy-two will take you to a whole new level. It did me. To a point where I thought my shoes were smiling at me.

Creating art, shooting film, writing music, painting, drawing, sculpting, photographing, it can all alter your state of mind. And a lot of it, without sleeping, or food, or drink, or anything else, it can all do it.

Sure it's not healthy, but it's more healthy than acid, or coke, or heroin...

[henry hill]

<holding back>

Look dood, seriously, you think, aww, ARGHHHH...

Yeah lack of sleep does do lots to **** up your mind! Major hallucagenic qualities, but it's not exactly the same.

</holding back>

TBH I'm not going to be patronized by someone who doesn't know what cannabis looks like trying to tell me what's healthy what's not.

Your movies could be psychologically disturbing you you woulnd't even know it, you'll just be more and more heavily influenced by what you watch calling yourself a film fanatic. Most fillm makers where under the influence in the first place. ie. apocalypse now.

You don't know the meaning of the word high! You don't know what your mind is capable of, YOU HAVE NO IDEA. You never will either.

You didn't even make that decision yourself, everyone else closed the doors for you and said bad bad bad bad, you didnt' try it and say noooo waaaay! Everyone said to you, this is bad this is bad, and without knowledge or what drugs are and what they do you're saying they're bad, they're addictive, they're this they're that.

Well dood, taking one drug one time does not make you an addict, you become an addict after repeated use ie. if you smoked 10 ciggies right now, you will not be addicted to ciggies, if you make habit, you will become...

If they're so bad why do so many people do them? because it's better than the reality that everyone else has created.

This site is amazing: http://www.erowid.org/index.shtml
nothing but fact all the way!

[Sir Toose]

So, goodf3lla... instead of beating around the bush just come right out and say it. Your opinion is not clear, at least to me. Too much backpedaling and forwardpedaling

You think drugs are ok? or not ok? Or are there some that are ok and others that are not ok? It's obviously a matter of opinion as it's proven that drugs are damaging to the body. It is your choice, though, to determine how much of that damage is acceptable to you. It's a trade off... you know smoking hash is going to make crud in your lungs. You also know it feels great. It's up to each individual to assess the trade off... it's really that simple, regardless of legality, morality etc it boils down to that, as drugs will always be available.

As I stated, drugs are bad for me. I won't even try to assess the risks for anyone else.

[Yoda]

If they're so bad why do so many people do them? because it's better than the reality that everyone else has created.
That's some pretty messed up logic. If murder is so bad, why does it happen every single day? If heroin is as bad as you say it is, why is it used as often as it is? Sorry, a lot of people doing something does not make it good. Not by a long shot.

You don't know the meaning of the word high! You don't know what your mind is capable of, YOU HAVE NO IDEA. You never will either.
I don't need to get high to realize that something that messes with your brain is completely fooling you. I'm sorry, but there's no freaking way you're receiving any insight. You only think it is. When you're done, it wears off. If this insight is temporary, and the things you "learn" while high are no longer amazing and fascinating after you're done, then it was all an illusion. It's that simple.

Well dood, taking one drug one time does not make you an addict, you become an addict after repeated use ie. if you smoked 10 ciggies right now, you will not be addicted to ciggies, if you make habit, you will become...
How convienent. If we're not addicted, we apparently don't know what we're talking about. We have to f*ck ourselves up to argue about this? No, I don't think so. You've never murdered someone, but you can speak out against it.

This site is amazing: http://www.erowid.org/index.shtml
nothing but fact all the way!
I think you've already posted that link. I see little to nothing special about it.

[henry hill]

I cracked my tooth my nerve was exposed went to hospital had a lot of morphine - it's my new fav....

I think drugs are absolutely fantastic for me. I love them. But i think it depends on personality. I also don't think anyone who hasn't tried any drugs should preach about them...

[Yoda]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
I think drugs are absolutely fantastic for me. I love them. But i think it depends on personality. I also don't think anyone who hasn't tried any drugs should preach about them...
How convienent. We have to know for sure that they mess us up before we can say so. Hey, I've never tried heroin -- would you fault me for preaching about it? I'm sorry, but I'm going on everything I've heard. I've heard from addicts who "preach" about their experiences, and it tells me to stay the hell away...it tells me that these things are baaaaad. That's the WHOLE reason they talk about their experiences in the first place: to warn others.

[Steve]

Originally posted by TWTCommish
I don't need to get high to realize that something that messes with your brain is completely fooling you. I'm sorry, but there's no freaking way you're receiving any insight. You only think it is. When you're done, it wears off. If this insight is temporary, and the things you "learn" while high are no longer amazing and fascinating after you're done, then it was all an illusion. It's that simple.

There are many things as illusory as drugs - I'll use movies as an example. First off, cinema is based on a deception of the human eye and the heightening of sounds. The movies are a mindf--k, pretty much - they work directly on the brain, much in the way drugs do, through a manipulation of the senses. Are movies no longer 'amazing and fascinating' after they're over? Can they not make you think about things in a different manner, or see them in a new light? If something works on your emotions and makes you feel differently about something, I don't think it's an illusion, by your definition of that word. Because, quite simply, movies mess with your brain as well.

I guess I'm saying that drugs can open your mind and free up your senses - but often there's baggage attached to them. I'm not sure if it's worth it or not. Movies differ in this way - there's emotional implications to them, but not nearly on the level of drugs.

[Yoda]

See, that's the thing, Steve: yeah, a lot of movies are still interesting later. I'm saying that if something is amazing and interesting while you're high, but less so when you're not, then is it really insight? If this insight only lasts as long as you're high, then it's not really inisight. It's not that you've learned something new, so much as changed yourself so that certain things seem new, or seem more interesting.

A good movie can have you talking about it 20 years later. When someone smokes pot, and they laugh uncontrollably, is it really because they saw something funny, or is it simply because their idea of what's funny has been temporarily altered? In short, I find it hard to believe that someone messing with their brain (literally, not figuratively, like watching a movie) is actually learning anything new. I think they're just messing themselves up enough to think that they are.

[Steve]

I know movies can still affect you later, I wouldn't dream of saying otherwise - I still get shivers when I think about the first time my dad showed me Goodfellas, for example. Or the second viewing of A.I.

Drugs can do the same thing. Jean Cocteau was an opium addict, Jack London wrote Call of the Wild so he could by more heroin, Scorsese was f--ked up on coke during the late 70's and early 80's. All I'm arguing is that drugs CAN offer insight. I'm not talking about a bunch of potheads laughing at a dog taking a crap on the carpet.

[Yoda]

What makes you think that they offer insight? Someone on crack doing amazing things may be doing them in spite of that. Do they offer insight? Depends on what you mean. If I got hit over the head with a hammer, and lived through it, I'd probably live life more fully, thankful for having survived the incident. Does that mean that one of the benefits of having your head smashed is enlightenment? Does it make it a good thing?

I'm just trying to say that I don't think drugs would teach me anything new, other than a little bit about the f*cked up perspective some people view the world from regularly.

[Steve]

Originally posted by TWTCommish
What makes you think that they offer insight? Someone on crack doing amazing things may be doing them in spite of that. Do they offer insight? Depends on what you mean. If I got hit over the head with a hammer, and lived through it, I'd probably live life more fully, thankful for having survived the incident. Does that mean that one of the benefits of having your head smashed is enlightenment? Does it make it a good thing?

I'm just trying to say that I don't think drugs would teach me anything new, other than a little bit about the f*cked up perspective some people view the world from regularly.

Well, I said I think drugs can offer insight into things and make someone see things in a new light. I don't mean coming through some kind of a bad experience with them will make someone grateful for living. I'm talking about a mind state that people reach that makes them see things as better than they are. Drugs can heighten your awareness of all of the things you love, and why you love them - and this works the other way, too.

I guess you'd have to had tried some drugs to understand what I'm talking about.

[Yoda]

That's the thing: it's a loop. Oh, I haven't tried drugs, so I can't know what I'm talking about. On the other hand, those who apparently do understand, have tried them, and are therefore, I'd say, a little tainted in their interpretations...after all, the whole argument here is that drugs mess you up, or at least can...so who's to say that the whole reason people think they give you insight isn't because they're fooling everyone? There's no way around it. Either you've taken drugs, and therefore we'll never know whether you were just being fooled, or if your statement is true, or you've never taken them, and therefore you apparently cannot judge their effects...at least not in this way.

If by heightening your awareness, you mean simply to make more alert (perhaps even paranoid), then yeah, I wouldn't argue with that. I don't think "insighftul" would be a very good synonym for that, though.

[Steve]

Originally posted by TWTCommish
That's the thing: it's a loop. Oh, I haven't tried drugs, so I can't know what I'm talking about. On the other hand, those who apparently do understand, have tried them, and are therefore, I'd say, a little tainted in their interpretations...after all, the whole argument here is that drugs mess you up, or at least can...so who's to say that the whole reason people think they give you insight isn't because they're fooling everyone? There's no way around it. Either you've taken drugs, and therefore we'll never know whether you were just being fooled, or if your statement is true, or you've never taken them, and therefore you apparently cannot judge their effects...at least not in this way.


Either you're really, really reaching, or I'm really confused. Maybe because I'm high.

:p just kidding

What exactly are you saying here? I don't understand.

[Yoda]

I'm saying that if my opinion is inevitably off-base becase I'm incapable of understanding drugs, having not tried them, then your opinion is just as questionable, seeing as how the whole argument is that the drugs make you think you're seeing something insightful, when you're not.

I don't claim to be an expert. I do NOT think drugs will ruin the lives of all who try them. I think they'll have a highly negative effect on anyone who uses them as a routine part of their life, though. Do I have firsthand experience? No. I don't claim to...and having not tried them, there are surely some things I'm ignorant of. I don't think I need to try them to understand some basic things about them, however. There's a lot of things many of us are convinced are bad, that we haven't tried.

In short, I don't at all believe that I'm talking out of my a** here, even though I haven't tried them. Part of it is simple logic: it ain't insight if it becomes uninteresting and uninsightful as soon as the drugs wear off. I'm sure it messes with your head enough to make things seem very strange, and perhaps very new, and interesting...I find it exceedingly hard to believe, though, that you're actually learning anything new. Seems to me like it's giving you a warped, distorted view of the things you say in your daily life...which appears new, but is really an illusion.

Do people really learn new things simply because they got high? Do they solve problems that have been bugging them for awhile? Do they develop theories because of the drugs they take? These are the things that, to me, are genuinely insightful. It's a partial list, but I think you know what I mean.

[The Silver Bullet]

I don't really see how that site could be helping your argument very much Goodf3lla. Reading everything on there all I can think about it not to touch drugs at all, and that includes alcohol, which is weird, 'cos I do drink -- but this site has put me right off.

[henry hill]

TSB I'm not arguing for anything I was expressing my opinion on drugs, and checking out other people...

and that site is purely factualy people take what thye want from it...before I try any drug I like to do my research on it, and you always know there's going to be a side effect on most drugs...but for instance if you look at the negative one for cannabis...

nausea
coughing, asthma, upper respiratory problems
difficulty with short term memory during effects and during periods of frequent use
racing heart, agitation,tenseness
mild to severe anxiety
panic attacks at very high doses (usually oral) or in sensitive users
headaches
dizziness, confusion
paranoid & anxious thoughts more frequent
possible psychological dependence on cannabis

they're all fun effects!! :D But seriously they're mostly for first time users because paranoia goes away once you know what to expect and you learn how to alter it's effects...but nothing that will harm you majorly "headaches" ffs! oh no! help! a+e! I feel dizzy!

how the whole argument is that the drugs make you think you're seeing something insightful, when you're not.

No it's not you made it into that.

Although factually one of the effects of acid are enlightening spiritual experiences which is why magic mushrooms was often associated with religion...

[The Silver Bullet]

Questions:

What was the first experience you had with drugs?
What drugs have you done?
Are you a regular drug user?
Why?

I just don't really understand it.

Oh, and have you written anything for the "experience" sections on that site, GF? Just wondering.

[henry hill]

Questions & Answers

What was the first experience you had with drugs?

Temazepam - I suffer sleep deprevation - prescribed them at 15, I needed them every night...they were nice and addictive...

What drugs have you done?

A lot legal and illegal - both equally as bad.

Are you a regular drug user?

Well I don't count cannabis as a drug :D so last time I did something "illegal" was new years eve...

Why?

Why not! heheh. You can't explain what you get from them so I won't bother trying. You're not interested in them so why ask.

I just don't really understand it.

Do you need to? You have no interest in drugs. As I keep reiterating, you can't talk about drugs unless you've tried them.

Oh, and have you written anything for the "experience" sections on that site, GF? Just wondering.

No.

TWT don't try and compare taking drugs to murder.

BTW: I don't know why you're all preaching anti-drug message, it's cuturally significant, especially for movie fans...how many great movies have been driven by drug induced minds...

anyone seen fear andl oathing in las vegas?

[The Silver Bullet]

I think you're just trying to be "cool" and more worldly than us because you've tried drugs. Ooooh, you're so cool. I wish I was you.

Murder and drugs basically interwine something chronic. They can get very, very close to being one and the same.

I think it's pretty funny you're not giving us the names of your drugs -- very credible. I believe everything you say.


By the way, none of that should be taken with any offense. I just disagree with you and think you're trying to make us go "Wow". The funny part is it didn't work that way for you.

[henry hill]

Idiot. is that what your mother told you ?

The reason why I didnt name drugs is so that one doesn't think that i'm trying to be cool. Mostly when I go to clubs ecstacy used to be my fav, but it gives me disfunctinal organs and jaw clenching is a ****er to deal with, especially in places where you have to queue a lot for drinks, or food. I also had a bad tab which gave me glandular fever. Only snorted coke once, that's an addictive drug, staying well away. I use speed when I need to get things done, it's fun you cna clean your room tidy your house wash the car do your work and still feel theres enough time to watch a few movies etc. Speed has a very medicinal quality to it, you wouldn't even notice you're on a drug. Cannabis smoke it regularly helps me get to sleep, can help you cool down if you're on speed too, it's effects are extremely similar to alcohol, but you know what you're doing all the time, there's a sober bit in your mind that just watches you doing stupid things. Acid a few times - that is the ultimate in mental ****ups - scared the **** out of me, especially when you have baby toys all over the place OOOOOH!
Ketamine - Horse tranquiliuzer, you can feel every bit of your body working, only done it once, didn't like it too much, it seemed to go on forever with me not being able to move smoke **** or piss...some people really like it, not for me. Mushrooms - out of season at the moment, but tried it first time a few months ago...not bad, close to acid qualities but nothing near as strong... But I'm only addicted to Nicotine and Caffiene. Hmm both are legal.

Main addictive legal drug:- amitryptillin + temazepam.

[The Silver Bullet]

You're calling me an idiot?
Hee hee hee.

This reminds me of the God conversation.
Next thing I'll be eating poo, I guess.

At least it's good that you're only addicted to legal things.
Never done Heroin? Morphine? Righteo. So be it.

[henry hill]

I think you're just trying to be "cool" and more worldly than us because you've tried drugs. Ooooh, you're so cool. I wish I was you.

Toose and Patti have both tried...does that mean they're trying to be more worldly than you?

Tis why I didn't bother responding with a comment more than idiot.

Murder and drugs basically interwine something chronic. They can get very, very close to being one and the same

Thank **** for murder and drugs, they make films a hell of a lot more interesting.

Where would pulp fiction be without murder and drugs? wehre would any gangster films be?

[The Silver Bullet]

Patti and Toose basically kept it to themselves. They didn't deliberatly start a thread to discuss their views on drugs.

I'm not talking about drugs and murder in the films.
I'm talking about them in real situations. Films aren't real, despite what a healthy dose of weed and 'shrooms will tell you.

I've expressed my views, disagreed with you a bit, so on and so forth -- just because my views are different doesn't mean I qualify as an idiot. Thanks all the same.

[Yoda]

No it's not you made it into that.
Yes, that's my argument. That's what I'm saying, man.

Although factually one of the effects of acid are enlightening spiritual experiences which is why magic mushrooms was often associated with religion...
People in the emergency room near death have what they believe are spiritual experiences. Like I said, I don't believe drugs enlighten you.

TWT don't try and compare taking drugs to murder.
I can, and I will. :) I'm not comparing them to say that they're equally bad...I'm comparing them to say, quite simply, that we ALL preach against things we've never done.

BTW: I don't know why you're all preaching anti-drug message, it's cuturally significant, especially for movie fans...how many great movies have been driven by drug induced minds...
I'm preaching anti-drug messages because there's almost no doubt in my mind that using them regularly is quite bad indeed. Now, I hope this isn't taken personally, but your style of writing is quite disjointed and hard to follow sometimes. How do I know that's not because of marijuana? I'd have to guess that it does have something to do with it, because your writing fluctuates on here unexpectedly.

anyone seen fear andl oathing in las vegas?
Saw some. Bored me out of my mind.

Only snorted coke once, that's an addictive drug, staying well away.
It's kinda funny to me that you completely agree with me on cocaine, but act like you can't possibly understand why I'd find other drugs as bad. Is it really that much of a leap.

Where would pulp fiction be without murder and drugs? wehre would any gangster films be?
What's that got to do with anything? Murder and drug-use making films more interesting is not an argument for both to be used in real life. I know what you'll say: someone had to murder someone for murder to become a topic in a movie. Well, ya know what? I'd rather no one was murdered like that, and go without the movies that built off of it as a result.

Yeah, the "idiot" comment was, well, a little childish.

Sorry man, but everything I've heard (first-hand reports) and read tells me that you're fooling yourself if you think you're GENUINELY learning something by using drugs. "It is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself." (you're right, Steve, it is philosophy for stoners! :laugh:)

[aspen]

No one has ever overdosed on Marijuana. People can OD on Marijuana mixed with heroine or cocaine, but not the plant itself.

Marijuana is actually good for you. It has more anti-oxidents than Vitamin E or Garlic and it can actually prevent brain damage. They are working on a pill derived from cannibis called cannibidiol(CBD) to give to stroke victims in the emergency room because it can prevent brain damage. The study that "proved" it caused Brain damage was done in the 70s, on monkeys, and no one has been able to duplicate the results.

Marijuana is only bad for you if you smoke it, like cigarettes. Also if it was legal people could make healthier joints (filters etc) and people could always eat hash brownies, or wear THC patches or whatever. If its not smoked there is no harm to your body.

People generally don't get mean and violent when they are high, they get happy, friendly, and sometimes paranoid. As such someone who is high is more likely to drive slow than drive fast.

The DEA spends 300 million dollars a year just killing naturally growing ragweed and other forms of cannibis. Seriously don't you think that could be better spent elsewhere?

Hemp and Cannibis would be huge cash crops for American Farmers. Right now even though its legal to sell Hemp its still not legal to grow it.

Marijuana is a gateway drug. Not because people who use it are more likely to try other drugs, but because you have to get it from a drug dealer. If you could buy it at Rite Aid it'd be a gateway to a 20z Mountain Dew and a little Debbie rather than Heroine and Crack.

In addition to what the DEA spends just killing the naturally growing plants we also pay for otherwise law abiding citizens to go to jail for marijuana.

Marijuana is less addictive than caffeine.

If it was legal we could tax it and in addition to the money saved and the money from increase farm revenues we'd also have tax revenues off it. These things could pay for education or for crime enforcement against real drugs, like Heroine and Cocaine.

If you could buy it at Rite Aid we could get some drug related violence off the streets.

If it was legal it would need an age limit of 21 I think, and while I'm at it cigarettes should be 21 too.

Now compare it to alcohol. Alcohol is a factor in 50% of all crimes and accidents. Seriously. It also can seriously damage your liver, and hang overs aren't fun. If you legalized marijuana this might change because some people may prefer to get high rather than drunk, and high people don't beat their wives.

Marijuana is much less harmful than alcohol, the only reason it isn't legal is that alcohol was discovered by modern civilizations much sooner and so it had become enveloped in our culture before we came to a point where we would think to ban it.

So in sum legalizing marijuana would:

Help Farmers
Save Tax Dollars
Make new Tax Dollars
Free Law Enforcement Resources
Save Lives lost to street crime
Stop the gateway effect
Maybe lower crime via less people drinking
Make it healthier (filters etc)


For more information norml.org

[henry hill]

my point isn't that drugs are a learning tool...this whole thread was started to see other people's opinions of them, and .

to me saying you do drugs cause you think you're cool is a childish comment and i would reply to it in an equally childish manner.

different drugs have different qualities coke has barely any short term side effects and it makes you feel superhuman....ooh scary!

[The Silver Bullet]

Saying that you think you're cool may be a childish comment, but in retrospect you entire reasoning behind this thread is a little childish in my opinion.

Meanwhile, aspen, you have presented you argument in a much more intelligent and user-friendly way. :)

I can see where you are coming from, and I think in some instances you are right. Personally, I can only think -- what comes next after the legalisation of marijuana? Cocaine? Heroin? Maybe I am being a little paranoid, but the question still remains. Thanks for your insights.

:)

[Yoda]

Yeah, I feel the same way. I don't know that I like the idea of marijuana being legalized...but I don't like the idea of putting any real effort into getting rid of it, either. Hard drugs are the serious threat. I don't know of any statistics on how much of a "gateway" drug marijuana is, though.

[The Silver Bullet]

Who the heck is Brandon Boyd and why do you hate him so?

I agree with everything you said.

[Yoda]

Brandon Boyd is the leader singer in a band called "Incubus." I don't hate him "so much;" heck, I don't even really "hate" him. He just annoys me. The type who's lyrics are meant to be deep, even though they're, in my opinion, just sort of stupid. I'm sure he's a nice guy, but his music/lyrics ain't my style. Just changed my title on a whim. It'll probably be different in a moment.

[henry hill]

Drugs were part of government mind control objectives.

http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/lsd/
http://peyote.com/jonstef/mkultra.htm
http://www.raven1.net/

Oooh scary!

I'm a government's puppet!

" Today a young man on acid realised that all matter is energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one conciousness experiencing life subjectivley. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Her's Tom with the weather,"

[henry hill]

drug induced madness

Now this is the theory behind the counterculture, the druggies, the desperate need to be seperated from the "Mass", the hate for pop culture, much more deep rooted TSB than "the need to be cool"

The little background knowledge needed: Basically the government has been experimenting with mind control from early 30's various methods using hypnosis and as time progressed various drugs were also introduced...this is all covered in the websites above. No doubt in Camp X-Ray there are a few new tricks to be tried....according to the drug induced paranoid mind, it's not merely criminals or "the enemy" that the government is trying to control...

The very phenomena or arrangement “Mass” was the prerequisite and primary goal of individual mind control; before anything else could be accomplished, its existence had to be contrived.

A mass has no individual will but only a kind of collective volition or momentum, and as such it is far more susceptible to the influence of another will, even if that of a single person.

The mass might be seen as a sort of dinosaur (at least as described in school-books), having bulk and “power” but little or no intelligence. It is child’s play to harness such brute force as one would any other impersonal, mindless energy; left to its own devices, it has only two “courses”—inertia or extinction, which amount finally to the same thing. Being unborn as yet, it has only one kind of will, the will to die. As such it is a simple matter to fulfill this will.

The mass-mind—so far as it exists at all—is like that of a child: an empty program, a blank page, on which the controlling “authorities,” be they parental or governmental or even spiritual, may freely dictate their own agenda. In my perception state-of-the-art technology as being directed and focused towards this one, single, unified end: the abolishment of the individual and the establishment of the blind mass.

All actual conspiracy theories aside, this is essentially the postmodernist perspective of existence, positing as it does the invasion and fragmentation of the human psyche by external factors such as media imagery, simulacra, viruses of the mind, artificial reality .

In the postmodernism, we exist vicariously, living lives which are not our own, but rather the products of an “alien” collective body or program, be it that of the media, the Church or the State, that of “ET mind controllers,” or the AI of a movie.

Ever since Descartes observed that—from an external perspective at least—the biological universe is “mechanical,” and that the human body—like all other bodies celestial or terrestrial—obeys certain, precise laws much like a machine, the potential for absolute (remote) control of the human race has been a tantalizing possibility for science to toy with. The mistake of Descartes and his followers however—whether deliberate or not—was not in what they observed but what they failed to observe: the so-called ghost in the machine. For machines—unlike biological organisms—cannot function without some external guidance.

This may be on the point of chaging, however, now the computer has introduced the possiblity of mechanized intelligence. Like Pavlov’s dogs, the mass has been conditioned into pre-ordained responses by the use of trigger-signals, post-hypnotic commands, and so forth, so that today it finds itself responding in an entirely automatic manner, independent of its own senses, thoughts, or feelings.

Much as Pavlov’s dogs experienced hunger—not as a bodily need but simply at the sound of a bell—so the entranced mass-man may find himself thirsty at the sight of a Coke ad, or frightened at the sight of a black man, angry at the sight of a beggar, lustful at the sight of an ice cream billboard, and so on.

His thoughts are indeed no longer his own, having become mere pre-conditioned responses to the “advertising.” To the paranoid, the only factor that allows us the fond conviction of “free-will” is that factor—ever unknown and undefined, call it spirit, will, instinct or impulse—which remains an absolute mystery to us, which can neither be observed nor proved, but only assumed—in absence as much as action being unremarkable.

The difference between the behaviour of an automaton and a self-willed individual (merely from my own self induced perspective - which accepts technological developments as-yet undisclosed to the public) is to all intents and appearances, non-existent.

A paranoid individual would probably be convinced by now that all his mental and bodily functions are subject to interference from without. Microwaves, UV lights, street lamps, auditory subliminals in ambience music and radio broadcasts, visual subliminals on TV, and God knows what emissions from “ordinary” household devices. (refer to MKULTRA links for more information on that)

How oblivious are you to what is happening around you?

[The Silver Bullet]

I'm reminded of the copy-and-paste tactics of Tyler in the God Isn't Real thread.

Yawn.

[Sir Toose]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
drug induced madness

How oblivious are you to what is happening around you?


Very oblivious for the most part. Face it, almost all of us live in our own little worlds. We work, we play, we turn on the news for our daily feeding of events. I honestly have no idea what my government does beyond what they want me to know.

[The Silver Bullet]

The question is, do you really care?

The drug culture, as this shows, basically raises itself above everyone else. We know, we know.


"I AM A HEROIN USER AND I KNOW THAT THE APOLLO MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX!"

Do really care, Toose? Or are you happy to live in your own little world?

[Sir Toose]

Good question.

Yes I do care. Do I intend to do anything about it? Probably not unless someone close to me gets over-involved in drugs. I'm a live and let live kind of guy. If you find happiness there, so be it. No one can really stop it anyways... drugs are just too entrenched to stop and the desire for them is high.

At this point in my life, SB, I'm happy in my trek. And you?

[henry hill]

cut n paste it may be, but from "our" own thoughts and "our" own work...(essays written for various purposes under various influences with various friends)

Drugs - Heightened awareness, exaggeration of the key senses.

"I honestly have no idea what my government does beyond what they want me to know." - yeah ignorance is bliss... doesn't work for me though :( I want to know everything...

TSB the more you talk the more of a prick you seem to be. Did you even read my post, did you even understand the f'ing points made.

My point was this: TWT is saying that any insight isn't real insight and emotion is artificially induced, how much of YOUR emotions which you think are yours are actually artificially induced, thoughts beyond your control, meaning when you actually take drugs, you are controlling what your artificial stimulant is rather than having someone else control you.

But if you're happy you're happy.

TSB if you don't care don't post. I do care. I care about feeling isolated from many people I meet due to my way of thought, this extends way beyond - when some people are desperately seeking to clutch onto some meaning, you evidently want to be dismissive and obtuse about me...expect the same. I find no meaning in the way of life which is presented to me...

I feel like all the time I'm given restricted choices none of which satisfy the nature in me, who designs my educational curriculum? why is it so hard for you to extend your knowledge? why is religion accepted less and less in society? is there constantly a movement towards one single belief? if you don't conform you're stripped of everything...stripped of baisc human needs...these are all interlinked topics beyond social moralilty, drugs aren't for people trying to be cool, its an attempt at expansion of the mind expansion of emotion. Take ecstacy and you'll feel emotion you've never felt before as if you just want to give your entire soul and lay it bare there and then yet frustrated that you're not giving enough love to all those around you who deserve it. This emotional intensity may have been available previously but we are now living in a more desensitized state....

"I AM A HEROIN USER AND I KNOW THAT THE APOLLO MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX!"

Explain how this relates you f|cking retard.

I'm reminded of the copy-and-paste tactics of Tyler in the God Isn't Real thread.

Yawn.

Now i'm reminded of your age. Am I going for credit or am I trying to take a direction?

[Yoda]

Chill the hell out, goodf3lla. He's right: it's annoying to have somone simply cut and paste a gigantic post.

My point was this: TWT is saying that any insight isn't real insight and emotion is artificially induced, how much of YOUR emotions which you think are yours are actually artificially induced, thoughts beyond your control, meaning when you actually take drugs, you are controlling what your artificial stimulant is rather than having someone else control you.
I think you're doing a very poor job of representing what I've said. I don't recall saying that "emotion is artificially induced," I said that any supposed insight has got to be some kind of illusion. Big difference.

yeah ignorance is bliss... doesn't work for me though :( I want to know everything...
So, for you, ignorance is torture. So you're being tortured constantly, because, whether you like it or not, you know, roughly, jack crap about the things that go on. I am not nearly as paranoid as ya'll. I think the government has it's sh*t going on, but it's not as freakin' weird as a lot of people seem to think. I doubt the plot to kill JFK was as large as some people think, I don't think we've got Aliens stored away in a bunker anywhere, and I don't think the moon landing was faked, either. I do think that people in positions of power are corrupt, though. That's just human nature.

[henry hill]

I think you're doing a very poor job of representing what I've said. I don't recall saying that "emotion is artificially induced," I said that any supposed insight has got to be some kind of illusion. Big difference.

You stated insight from drugs is artificial insight, I'm saying your normal life, your standard emotions, they're artificially induced by various triggers which have been programmed into you through out your life and i'm not insane (questionable) so if your entire life basis is false....what hope have you got of having any insight into anything, anything could be a drug (requiem for a dream stylee) if you're addicted to tele, it could be your coffee, your entire life is artificial. Drugs are no different (big leap in statements I'm tired of typing)

I don't care whether Aliens are in bunkers or not I care about who I am what I'm doing and biggest f|cker of them all: Why am I doing it. This world is so unreal to me I need something that feels real to grasp onto.

He's right: it's annoying to have someone simply cut and paste a gigantic post.

So rather than cut'n'paste from a word document I'll make sure to open both windows and type it out instead for it would make a big f|cking difference.

I'm beginning to get aggravated, not because people disagree with me because that is what someone wants from a debate, give and take. Who knows, maybe someone’s opinions could help influence my own, change me, enlighten me into a new way of thought, a different style and direction, but to get responses from an adolescent prick such as "yawn" who is so insecure in his social position that he sees it a necessity to prove his status in an “alternative reality” by mocking what others may see valuable to them without drive or reason or any logical thought but merely to advance their self projected mental status, well I quite frankly find it pathetic.

My point was this: TWT is saying that any insight isn't real insight and emotion is artificially induced,

what i said here doesn't stand alone, it goes with the "gigantic cut'n'paste" post, ie. you're saying insight isn't real insight, and I'm saying emotion is artificially induced, the poor grammar is my bad!

[Yoda]

You stated insight from drugs is artificial insight, I'm saying your normal life, your standard emotions, they're artificially induced by various triggers which have been programmed into you through out your life and i'm not insane (questionable) so if your entire life basis is false....what hope have you got of having any insight into anything, anything could be a drug (requiem for a dream stylee) if you're addicted to tele, it could be your coffee, your entire life is artificial. Drugs are no different (big leap in statements I'm tired of typing)
And who says coffee gives you enlightenment? Look, if you're gonna get all freaky, surreal and strange, then yeah, EVERYTHING is insightful. Getting beat over the head with a hammer is insightful. It "shapes" who you are in a way. That doesn't mean you call it insightful. Let's stick with some common sense here. The world you see through drugs is fake. FAKE. It's that simple. If you can't take the real world, and hate it so bad that you must escape to some fake world brought on by drugs, well, go ahead, be my guest...but don't try to tell us it's actually worth anything, or educational.

I don't care whether Aliens are in bunkers or not I care about who I am what I'm doing and biggest f|cker of them all: Why am I doing it. This world is so unreal to me I need something that feels real to grasp onto.
Then maybe you've got a problem. It's funny, you say you can't stand ignorance...it's not bliss for you...yet you want to find something that "feels real." You'd be satisified with a Matrix-esque reality brought on by drugs, then? It wouldn't be REAL, though. Why is this world unreal? It's not. Maybe it just seems that way because you use drugs, now. The world is perfectly real. I see it all the time. Drugs don't change a dang thing. They're a temporary refuge for escapist's.

So rather than cut'n'paste from a word document I'll make sure to open both windows and type it out instead for it would make a big f|cking difference.
Sure it would. Can you imagine what it'd be like if everyone decided to argue by pasting essays in here?

Frankly I'm beginning to get aggravated, not because people disagree with me because that is what someone wants from a debate, give and take. Who knows, maybe someone’s opinions could help influence my own, change me, enlighten me into a new way of thought, a different style and direction, but to get responses from an adolescent prick such as "yawn" who is so insecure in his social position that he sees it a necessity to prove his status in an “alternative reality” by mocking what others may see valuable to them without drive or reason or any logical thought but merely to advance their self projected mental status, well I quite frankly find it pathetic.
To be blunt, there are a few things you're saying, and doing, that I find it to be pretty pathetic as well. What's his adolescence got to do with anything? Sometimes someone younger has the ability to step back, cut through the bullsh*t, and see something for what it really is.

[henry hill]

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I am not saying coffee gives you enlightenment

OK fine, here you go, goodf3lla's manifesto:

1. Insight induced by drugs is not artificial as everything else you go through in this world is artificial. That's what I'm trying to state, you're barely natural, adverts, marketing, they insult who you are and redefine you into something you are not, as TSB demonstrated with his obvious belief in the need to be cool.

2. There is no real world, everywhere you go everywhere you look everything is laid out for you. You have no freedom of choice, apart from choice within certain restrictions, which doesn't make sense, but that's how it works.

3. Drugs are merely an aid of obtaining a different perspective on "reality"

Explain to me why drugs are not real. Am I imagining taking these substances?

[Yoda]

1. Insight induced by drugs is not artificial as everything else you go through in this world is artificial. That's what I'm trying to state, you're barely natural, adverts, marketing, they insult who you are and redefine you into something you are not, as TSB demonstrated with his obvious belief in the need to be cool.
Stop taking shots at him, okay? I don't think you know half what you think you do about him. If you do, it's not unreasonable for him to think he knows about you, too.

Drugs are not fake, you say, because everything else is? No way. When I see an advertisement, it's trying to convince me...to persuade me. I can think it over. More often than not, I refuse to buy the product. When you use drugs, that same mind that you use to make those kinds of choices is changed. THAT is a real loss of choice. At least now, where I go, I can make my choices with a rational, functional mind.

2. There is no real world, everywhere you go everywhere you look everything is laid out for you. You have no freedom of choice, apart from choice within certain restrictions, which doesn't make sense, but that's how it works.
You're not making sense here. I have never bought, and never will buy, this whole "what is reality?" junk. It's just a bunch of Morpheus-like mumbo-jumbo. I have plenty of choice. If you don't, well, you're British, right? Move to America. I've got plenty of choice here. I think you have plenty of choice, too...but for some reason or another, you're not happy with the freedoms you have, so the only way you can get away from what you perceive to be a horrible, cruel, "unreal" (as you call it) world, is mess with your head until you're too messed up to care...at least for a little while.

3. Drugs are merely an aid of obtaining a different perspective on "reality"
I don't buy it. This different perspective is bull, IMO. When I see something from a different perspective, it means through another person's eyes, or another culture's eyes. The point is to learn something about reality, life, and other people. The point is not to see another perspective just to see it...otherwise I'd poke my eyes out to see life from ther perspective of a blind person.

Explain to me why drugs are not real. Am I imagining taking these substances?
The effect is not real. It's an illusion. A pair of VR glasses sitting on your head. When the time runs out, it's over...like it or not, real life comes right back at you. Maybe you're just telling yourself that the world seems "unreal." Maybe you really believe it. I dunno. I do think it's interesting that the odd, strange world of drugs is not the world you refer to as "unreal."

I don't doubt that you're taking drugs. Those are rule. The effect they produce is not, though. It's not tangible. It's made up. It's a temporary thing to help you forget about your troubles and get away from it all.

[henry hill]

OK I'm going to concentrate on the reality of drugs angle because that's one you've consistantly argued with...

The effect is not real. It's an illusion. A pair of VR glasses sitting on your head. When the time runs out, it's over...like it or not, real life comes right back at you. Maybe you're just telling yourself that the world seems "unreal." Maybe you really believe it. I dunno. I do think it's interesting that the odd, strange world of drugs is not the world you refer to as "unreal."

The effect is due to a chemical change in your body, that chemical change is there, it happens, you feel your body change, you feel your mood change, it's like someone telling a joke to make themselves laugh.

When it's over and life comes back, it changes you whether you like it or not because you see/feel/hear/taste something you've never had before in your life, something that can't come from the world around you (if it could, people wouldn't take drugs). But it doesn't change the world, it doesn't make it more or less real (part from acid) it plays with your emotions, just like advertising may trigger your subconscious to think of food when you're not hungry.

I don't doubt that you're taking drugs. Those are rule. The effect they produce is not, though. It's not tangible. It's made up. It's a temporary thing to help you forget about your troubles and get away from it all.

That can be said about many things, films, you watch them, they're fantasies, (normally from drug induced minds ;)) it's a temporary fix, escapism, toy with your emotions a bit.

[Yoda]

Well, anyone who goes to the movies to try to get away from a world they perceive as horrible has issues they need to deal with. Movies add to life -- they are not life. Children in abusive families run off in various ways to try to get away from it. Anyone who indulges in something again and again, to try to shield themselves, albeit temporarily, from responsibility and the roughness of life, is probably making a mistake (save for children in bad families...that's different). Now, this is not to be confused with kicking back and relaxing. We all need time off.

Going to the movies to chill out for awhile and get away from hard work isn't a huge deal...but if it becomes a recurring thing, where you're just putting off the inevitable because you don't want to face it, you're heading for trouble. If the world is so annoying/unreal as to cause you to need to get away from it with drugs (whose effects are far more unreal), then I think there's a problem.

Yes, some drugs just alter your mood. It's like medication: but, as we know, medication is regulated, because someone who controls their own medication is likely to do what feels best, rather than what IS best. Like a kid with full access to the cookie jar.

[Sir Toose]

Just curious:

If drugs produce a state of reality in an unreal world then why do you need drugs to get you there? If it were reality you'd be there already without drugs. What if drugs were never invented? We'd all be living in an artificial world? I don't get the line of reasoning.

I can see how one could say that drugs could expand one's senses and how they could alter perceptions of things once thought of as mundane. Whether this is a good thing or not is up in the air. Lewis Carroll could not have written "Alice in Wonderland" were it not for his "habit". I think the bad comes in when you fail to be able to seperate the two worlds. This does happen... I'm not positive but would venture a guess that it happens every time someone gets hooked. It's at this point that the hookee becomes a burden on the rest of the world... from family on up. I won't document the "bad" examples... read the newspaper, every single day.

[henry hill]

I think the bad comes in when you fail to be able to seperate the two worlds

:( :( :(

If drugs produce a state of reality in an unreal world then why do you need drugs to get you there? If it were reality you'd be there already without drugs. What if drugs were never invented? We'd all be living in an artificial world? I don't get the line of reasoning.

It's not about whether the world is real or not as much as how real you feel the world is depending on how much satisfaction you get from what you do in the world. Ie. sitting behind a PC all day as my skill and once hobby is IT doesn't give me satisfaction. Nor is buying and selling goods. It's human interaction and drugs used to help interact on some kind of unexplainable level...

I was discussing my general ramblings/musings with TWT and the basic thing is I have to relax. As I'm of a very paranoid uptight nature the best way is to...yup...

[Sir Toose]

You know....
As I ponder this debate I realized something. As I've said, I no longer do drugs of any type with the exception of an occasional cigarette and an occasional drink. I realized that I have far reaching perceptions about things in general and when I drink it's to quell those... not to enhance them. We are maybe playing on the opposite ends of the field... I'll give you some of the voices in my head if you want them... :D

[The Silver Bullet]

Yeah Toose, I think I care, but at the same time, as long as it's not hurting my way of life and me, me, me...I guess I'm okay with it [and I'd be guessing that the American public as the wool pulled over their eyes a lot more than us, because I don't think our politicians are capable...] The whole world always rotates around someone, a car crashes and you're in a traffic jam because of it you say "How could this happen to ME?" Out of sight out of mind, I guess.

I may be sixteen GF, HH, whatever the hell it is you want to be called, but who cares? Does my age matter? Some people would say that I have the better reasoning, because I'm arguing against drugs. I'm not saying that, of course. But just because of my age doesn't mean I can't have opinions, and what's more that my opinions can't be right and that you by some amazingly odd twist are wrong. I'm not saying that there's a right and wrong here, but you seem pretty fixated that you are right.

Don't call me a prick.

[henry hill]

You weren't arguing about ****, you were out to provoke with your post, Yawn. You were sensitive about your age somewhere else in another thread and I was bitchy enough to pick up on it, prick <-- see? bitchy to the core...

"I AM A HEROIN USER AND I KNOW THAT THE APOLLO MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX!"

Very constructive, very forward.

[Sullivan]

Drugs are bad, mmm'kay?

[Fez Wizardo]

E the drug of the younger generation. MMMM how attractive we all looked, firstly you had half hour of eyes rolling, tongue lolling deep breathing whilst sweating profusely, then up you go dancing like a cu** with wide manic staring dilated pupils fixated on someplace faraway, thinking you looked the biz making exaggerated arm dancing movements like your bruce lee blocking the shots of a thousand ninjas, then back to the bogs to fill up your empty water bottle (because it isn't cool to be seen drinking beer) talking bollocks with all and sundry whilst chewing on your gums and frothing at the mouth and then PING where did that go i want another...

Makes ya wonder why so many people do it dont it ??.

The moreish factor plays too big a part nowadays i knocked the little fellas on the head a long time ago, due to the fact i was eating em like smarties. FFS i could have 6 or 7 just sat in playing computer games. All i can say is im lucky and im glad i came to my senses before it came too late. We must all remember the people in the world who weren't so fortunate. Remember drugs can kill but so does ignorance.

Whats happened to all the acid these days? it used to more popular than cannabis when i were a lad. Purple ohms and strawberrys and even the odd microdot was to be found everywhere. Dont fancy taking it now mind you but i have fond memories of lying face up for hours on end just watching the clouds in the night sky and then the peace being shattered by my gf hanging out the bedroom window at 1 in the morning telling me to get my arse inside before any of the neighbours see me.

Looking back i done some crazy **** whilst tripping, i think the worst time was waking up the next day and remembering being stood in the middle of a frozen lodge at about 3 in the morning jumping up and down trying to break the ice (the concequences that could have resulted make me shudder even now). Another time was me and a mate were happily throwing a police cone at each other (?) for what reason I dont know, when i pulled off a peach of a shot and hit him full whack in the face causing a rip about 2 inches long across both lips. The next 3 hours (at the local hospital) were surreal to say the least I will never forget the look on my mates face as the surgeon kept trying to stitch the wound (quality) and while im here I would just like to take the time to apologise if you were on duty that night :D

You also get the same LSD story everytime

"Young man on acid, thought he could fly jumped out of a building, what a tragedy."

What a dick! Don't go blaming acid on this guy.

He thought he could fly, why didn't he take off from the ground first to check it out. He's an idiot, he's dead. Good! that means there's one less door knob in the world. Whoa! what a tragedy.

Personally I have never thought of cannabis as a drug. Dont take me the wrong - I have also lost friends (some of them without dying) to the dreaded H.

Addiction to hard drugs is the scourge of todays society.The town which i live has become the drugs overspill of the north west with homeless hostels popping up weekly and these places are just full of smackheads who have nowhere to live and for those who go into one of these places clean its only a matter of time before theres a needle sticking out of their arm. The local council have started special vans going around just to dispose of the discarded needles found around these places. These are much worse problems than people sitting around smoking spliffs all day.

Hope I haven't rambled on beyond your attention span.

[B&W]

As the saying goes,

Your gonna die sometime, you might as well die now!

[Fez Wizardo]

not really, I'd like to get a few things done before I go, and if I end up leaving a legacy behind ;) I'd like to help it along its tracks as much as possible (better my influence than any others)

[B&W]

As the saying goes,

Your gonna die sometime, you might as well die now!


I was just playing the devil's advocate mate:furious: ;D

[Steve]

I've been thinking a lot about the legalization of soft drugs, and I'm pretty much convinced now that it would be a good thing. In Amsterdam, for example, there are 60-some percent less hard drugs on the streets than in the United States, where all drugs are illegal.

I agree with TWT about hard drugs, most definitely. But just imagine how much money the government would make if marijuana & other drugs were legalized. You could put a ten dollar tax on a quarter and no one would protest, because it's pot. Then there would be enough money for more important things, such as nationalized health care, etc. I mean, the government is spending billions upon billions of dollars per year on stopping drugs from being distributed, and it's still happening. Just imagine how much money would be saved.

Someone posted a list of advantages before. Here it is:


So in sum legalizing marijuana would:

Help Farmers
Save Tax Dollars
Make new Tax Dollars
Free Law Enforcement Resources
Save Lives lost to street crime
Stop the gateway effect
Maybe lower crime via less people drinking
Make it healthier (filters etc)


I agree with all of these points. (Obviously. If I didn't I wouldn't have used them. :))


Also, it seems sort of silly that alcohol and cigarettes are legal, and marijuana isn't. At least when you're stoned you aren't prone to violence.

I'm just stating my opinion. I've thought about this issue a lot lately, because of a discussion I had in my writing class on the subject, & I've changed my stance on it. Just felt compelled to write them down here.

[Fez Wizardo]

there's never anything wrong with pot, until you stop it after 10 years and realise you got the most immense paranoia ever :laugh:

I'm completely against the legalisation of marijuana, ffs, they'll end up charging me more than £25 for an 1/8th of skunk! That thought is criminal in itself!

pfft - better get some seeds and a book on hydroponics :laugh:

[king_of_movies_316]

Drugs get alot of bad press. I think its more about the individual taking them rather than the actual drug (a few obviouse exceptions though).

I think if we legalised things like pot and shrooms, but made people need to have special licences and only be able to do them in desinated safe areas, then we would have alot less problems.

[downthesun]

I do agree that a lot of drugs get bad press. Marijuana should be legalised, it's absurd that Ketamine is now classed as a lesser drug than weed. I've seen people tripping on Ket and even know of a couple of people who have overdosed on it. It's a horrible sight watching someone going into a K hole and is much much worse than watching someone sitting in a sofa completely monged.

I think at the least weed should be reclassified to class C if not made legal.

As for MDMA/ Ecstacy, another drug which is classed in the wrong area. On a study done on the health hazards of 20 drugs, MDMA ranked 18th in terms of it's detrimental effects on your health. The only real risk with is is dehydration or sometimes drinking too much water which is why you will almost always see pill heads drinking a lot of with a bottle of water.

Drugs have opened up the minds of many great artisitic, literary and musical mind, take Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Aldous Huxley and Bill Hicks to name a few.

Whilst i'm no advocate of hard drug usage, I do believe society's stance on softer drugs should be rethough.

[TONGO]

Well I am a pothead. Smoke about half an ounce a week. Have done cocaine, ecstasy, acid, and just a lil bit of pills.

Are drugs bad for you?! Yep. I mean come on folks when you take all the media hype away these narcotics dont grow brain cells. In my ecstasy phase I met alot of 17-23 year olds that were complete burnouts. Burnout like a 20-30 year potsmoker type burnout. This one 17 year old girl I knew when sober couldnt follow the movie "The Truman Show". In my consumption of X I would take 2 maybe 3 in a day. I met a bunch of kids that would swallow 5 or more at a time. So the chance of overdose on a unmoderated drug that makes you feel like youre having an orgasm for like an hour is very high amongst young folks.

About 15 years ago an Arizona governor wanted to legalize all drugs. They interviewed him in Playboy and his reasoning was thats the only way you could control them. Like booze or perscriptions. Today we know that wouldnt be the solution. Oxycotin (mispelt) and painkillers are easier to get than any drug Ive done, including weed, and I live in Florida one of the top 3 states for importing drugs.

Was the Arizona governor right? In retrospect no. Are drugs necessary? No. Ysee pot is one thing, and if the world smoked out the end result would be world peace, and all industry would go to hell. For harder fare theres just no way to intelligently justify their legalization. Booze is the second hardest drug to detox off of behind heroin. Booze also "screws you up" more than most drugs.

Would anybody like to argue that we as a nation can "handle" our booze?! Nope. France can eat and drink us under the table, and their food is richer than anybodys. We are much more overweight than them. Their wine is better than anyones, most french can moderate, and they dont have drive-bys gangbangers killing people or even half the vehicular deaths caused from booze.

Until we stop hiding or pointing at the law or our elected officials, and start being accountable for our own actions then maybe they could legalize such things. Until then as a nation were just not mature enough. Remember folks - opium brought the oldest civilization on our planet China to its knees. Dont underestimate.

[rufnek]

Drugs have opened up the minds of many great artisitic, literary and musical mind, take Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Aldous Huxley and Bill Hicks to name a few.

I've heard this ol saw time and time again, but how "talented" is a person who needs a chemical corkscrew to "unleash" his talent? And for every artist you can name who was into drugs, there are hundreds, likely thousands of others equally talented who never did.

Reminds me of the ol joke about Grateful Dead groupies. When they came down, they found out the band really wasn't that good. :)

[Sir Toose]

Drugs are like buffers to the world ... they all kill you in one way or another. It's much better to try and not take any drugs. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MIPPZnrLhQ&feature=related)

[Sedai]

Hey man, I can tell The Grateful Dead are a bad band no matter how blasted I am!

;)

[Sir Toose]

I love The Dead. American Beauty is one of my favorite albums :)

[Sedai]

Yeah, the old debate rages on, I guess. As a life-long musician and sometime music teacher, I just feel that these guys couldn't ever get a solid band together, opting instead for haphazard jam sessions that would occasionally coalesce into a magic moment of music...few and far between, IMO. Sure, they wrote some pretty good tunes, but they seemed to not be able to play them very well.

Now, I don't doubt the influence these guys had, and I certainly don't doubt the dedication of their legions of fans, as I used to spend a fair amount of time with several dead-heads, but I have always found their performances lacking. I like tightly played and produced music, so I am sure that is the largest reason for my dislike of the group.

[Spikez]

I am for the legalization of softdrugs, any drugs that won't make you lose control over your life, weed should be legal!

Spikez has spoken

[Brother Blue]

Damn! I had a nice long post all written out then I accidentally clicked the wrong button and *poof* it's all gone :mad:. I'm not going to write is out again, so I'll give you the short version:

I'm for legalization for all narcotics. It'll be so much better for society as a whole if they were.

[jrs]

there's never anything wrong with pot.....





Marijuana when smoked, begins to effect users almost immediately and can last for one to three hours. When it is eaten in food, such as baked in brownies and cookies, the effects take longer to begin, but usually last longer.

Short-Term Effects
The short-term effects of marijuana include:

* Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch)
* Problems with memory and learning
* Loss of coordination
* Trouble with thinking and problem-solving
* Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure

Sometimes marijuana use can also produce anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.

Effects on the Brain
The active ingredient in marijuana, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, acts on cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells. Some brain areas have many cannabinoid receptors, but other areas of the brain have few or none at all. Many cannabinoid receptors are found in the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thought, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement.

When high doses of marijuana are used, usually when eaten in food rather than smoked, users can experience the following symptoms:

* Hallucinations
* Delusions
* Impaired memory
* Disorientation

Effects on the Heart
Within a few minutes after smoking marijuana, the heart begins beating more rapidly and the blood pressure drops. Marijuana can cause the heart beat to increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute, and can increase even more if other drugs are used at the same time.

Because of the lower blood pressure and higher heart rate, researchers found that users' risk for a heart attack is four times higher within the first hour after smoking marijuana.

Effects on the Lungs
Smoking marijuana, even infrequently, can cause burning and stinging of the mouth and throat, and cause heavy coughing. Scientists have found that regular marijuana smokers can experience the same respiratory problems as tobacco smokers do, including:

* Daily cough and phlegm production
* More frequent acute chest illnesses
* Increased risk of lung infections
* Obstructed airways

Marijuana contains more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke and because marijuana smokers usually inhale deeper and hold the smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers, their lungs are exposed to those carcinogenic properties longer.

One study found that marijuana smokers were three times more likely to develop cancer of the head or neck than non-smokers. Many researchers believe than smoking marijuana is overall more harmful to the lungs than smoking tobacco.

Other Health Effects
Research indicates that THC impairs the body's immune system from fighting disease, which can cause a wide variety of health problems. One study found that marijuana actually inhibited the disease-preventing actions of key immune cells. Another study found that THC increased the risk of developing bacterial infections and tumors.

Effects of Exposure During Pregnancy - (Ifyou know someone smoking pot who is pregnant)
Several studies have found that children born to mothers who used marijuana during pregnancy exhibit some problems with neurological development. According to those studies, prenatal marijuana exposure can cause:

* Altered responses to visual stimuli
* Increased tremulousness
* Problems with sustained attention and memory
* Poor problem-solving skills

Young people who do not smoke marijuana end up with a better quality of life and higher levels of educational achievement than their peers who do smoke marijuana. Those who do smoke pot early in life have lower incomes and greater health problems later in life, according to a study.

[spudracer]

Spoken like a true doctor. :D

[Used Future]

I don't get it; Drugs debate what? It's not like drugs are sentient beings or anything. How can they debate stuff?;)

[adidasss]

Effects on the Heart
Within a few minutes after smoking marijuana, the heart begins beating more rapidly and the blood pressure drops. Marijuana can cause the heart beat to increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute, and can increase even more if other drugs are used at the same time.

Because of the lower blood pressure and higher heart rate, researchers found that users' risk for a heart attack is four times higher within the first hour after smoking marijuana.


Doesn't any strenuous physical activity do exactly the same?

[Yoda]

Strenous physical activity comes with physical benefits, same as any exercise. And I don't think exercise makes it four times as likely that you'll have a heart attack (assuming that is accurate).

I get that you like pot, but this doesn't obligate you to pretend there's absolutely no downside to using it, or make disingenous comparisons.

[adidasss]

I'm actually asking an honest question. What exactly is the difference? Physical activity also lowers the blood pressure and increases the heart rate. If that's the sole requisite for increasing the likelihood of a heart attack, as that post would imply, I'd like to know about it. :|

And I don't think I've ever pretended there are no downsides to using it. I'm just a little skeptical when it comes to "some research says" type of posts. :\

[FILMFREAK087]

Have you ever listened to the side-effects listed in a prescription drug commercial? They're usually worse than the supposed "diseases" they are meant to treat. Have you ever noticed that there seems to be a pill for everything these days, as well as new diseases to be treated?

Using the "it's bad for you" argument is rather pointless, considering that if we legislated based on beneficial vs. negative consequences, that food itself would be regulated.

[Ðèstîñy]

Have you ever listened to the side-effects listed in a prescription drug commercial?

They list every last possible side-effect so they won't/can't be sued. You know, in case someone spills hot coffee on herself.

Think about it. A prescription that helps you sleep . . . "May cause diarrhea" . . . I doubt you'll be sleeping. Then they list everything possible from anxiousness, drowsiness, constipation, diarrhea, weight gain, weight loss . . .

Again, it's so they can avoid lawsuits.

[Yoda]

I'm actually asking an honest question. What exactly is the difference? Physical activity also lowers the blood pressure and increases the heart rate. If that's the sole requisite for increasing the likelihood of a heart attack, as that post would imply, I'd like to know about it. :|
How could that be an honest question, unless you somehow believe that smoking marijuana confers the same health benefits as exercise? Do you think the reason someone's heart rate goes up is unimportant?

And I don't think I've ever pretended there are no downsides to using it. I'm just a little skeptical when it comes to "some research says" type of posts. :\
You may not say there are no downsides to using it when it's stated that way, but it nearly comes to the same thing if your main contribution to the discussion is to question any such claims.

I think being skeptical of those kinds of posts is reasonable, but not in this manner. I think you know the basic difference between a raised heart rate from imbibing a substance, and a raised heart rate from going for a jog. If you have an actual argument about why one of the claims is dubious or misleading, by all means, speak up. Wouldn't surprise me at all. But questions like that just make me wonder if you're taking the discussion seriously.

[John McClane]

I'm actually asking an honest question. What exactly is the difference? Physical activity also lowers the blood pressure and increases the heart rate. If that's the sole requisite for increasing the likelihood of a heart attack, as that post would imply, I'd like to know about it. :|One, you can control how much your heart rate increases by your level of exercise. You can't do that with drugs.

Two, steady and constant exercise over a long period of time will strength your heart allowing it to beat at that faster rate without hurting itself. Once again, drugs don't do that.

Three, if you have a weak heart and exercise too hard you can have a heart attack just the same as if you took drugs. The only difference: you can control and strength your heart with exercise so it doesn't reach that danger zone. Can't do that with drugs either.

I mean, this is stuff I just learned in basic physical education, of course...

[adidasss]

Do you think the reason someone's heart rate goes up is unimportant?
I have no idea, that's why I asked the question. My heart goes crazy when I'm anxious, presumably there are no physical benefits from that, am I exposed to the same risk of a heart attack every time I have an exam as when I'm smoking marijuana? Really. Any doctors in the house?

[Yoda]

The same risk? No, probably not. More than sitting there with a slower, steady heart rate? Yeah, probably. I don't think you need to be a doctor to realize that increasing your heart rate and lowering your blood pressure can be bad, but that exercise is usually good, and that the reason your body does something is important.

If you want to make the case that marijuana use isn't so bad, go right ahead, but comparing its effects to exercise is just silly.

[Fenwick]

There is a saying that me and my mates have coined over here in rainy ol' England - drugs are a mugs game. And nothing gets my goat more than people saying to me, 'don't knock it til' you've tried it'. Honestly, could this be the most ignorant line in crappy proverb history?

[adidasss]

The same risk? No, probably not. You base this one what, exactly?

[Yoda]

A degree of common sense? The fact that one is chemical and one is psychological, so they're probably not identical? Good grief, man. If you have an argument to make, make it, but these half-points that compare apples to oranges and sorta-kinda try to undermine the original point are just a waste of time, in my opinion.

[adidasss]

Then you should probably stop answering to them. Maybe someone who actually has some knowledge on the matter will come along and enlighten me...:yup:

[Yoda]

Or I could keep pointing out that they're probably not genuine questions based in genuine doubt, and are more likely kneejerk attempts to cast some vague shadow of doubt over the original point.

The idea that you think a raised heart rate from imbibing a substance that alters your perception is even remotely akin to a raised heart rate from basic exercise should be absurd to anyone, doctor or not. I don't believe you don't realize this. If you were after an expert, you could Google these sorts of things on your own and formulate a reply based on that. But I'm saying I don't think that's the purpose of these questions.

[adidasss]

Apparently wasting your time is your favorite pastime too! Anyhow, you're free to think whatever you want, wouldn't stop you from being wrong (shocking I know).

Incidentally, I actually did try to google this but it seems my google-jitsu isn't what it used to be...:(

I'll keep trying though...*sigh*

[Yoda]

I don't think pointing these things out is a waste of time once they've already been said. And If I were you, I'd be more insulted by me believing you really think the two things have no obvious difference than assuming that you know better.

Not sure what you were Googling or looking for, specifically, but a search for "marijuana raises heart rate" produced some seemingly relevant results that describe the specific physiological changes involved:

Smoking cannabis 'raises heart attack risk' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1308865/Smoking-cannabis-raises-heart-attack-risk.html)
Marijuana Use May Raise Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke (http://health.pvhs.org/RelatedItems/6,615402)
More Evidence that Marijuana May be Linked to Heart Attack (http://www.wellsphere.com/general-medicine-article/more-evidence-that-marijuana-may-be-linked-to-heart-attack/123507)

[John McClane]

Since we're *actually* having to deal with this silly question here's just one thing I've found rather quick after a search for "marijuana heart exercise."

"Mittleman [assistant professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health] noted that, as an immediate trigger for heart attack, pot smoking is nearly twice as dangerous as sex for a sedentary person, exercise for a fit male or female, a tantrum of rage, or a bout of anxiety. But it’s less risky than a spurt of exercise for a couch potato or a snort of cocaine."

[adidasss]

I don't think pointing these things out is a waste of time once they've already been said. And If I were you, I'd be more insulted by me believing you really think the two things have no obvious difference than assuming that you know better.

Not sure what you were Googling or looking for, specifically, but a search for "marijuana raises heart rate" produced some seemingly relevant results that describe the specific physiological changes involved:

Smoking cannabis 'raises heart attack risk' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1308865/Smoking-cannabis-raises-heart-attack-risk.html)
Marijuana Use May Raise Risk of Heart Attack, Stroke (http://health.pvhs.org/RelatedItems/6,615402)
More Evidence that Marijuana May be Linked to Heart Attack (http://www.wellsphere.com/general-medicine-article/more-evidence-that-marijuana-may-be-linked-to-heart-attack/123507)

Ok well, you obviously haven't read them, but only the first one seems to say anything about an increased heart rate when smoking marijuana and does very little to expound on the possible reasons. I've found another article which talks about the same research and the scientist involved expressly states that they do not know what could cause this increase in the likelihood of a heart attack in marijuana users, meaning that the only reason they concluded the two might be related is because out of 4000 thousand people who had heart attacks, 125 smoked marijuana, 40 smoked on the same day they had the heart attack and 9 within the hour of smoking a joint. I don't think that proves anything other than you know, 9 people out of 4000 happened to smoke a joint an hour prior to having a heart attack... So, you know, still skeptical, still don't understand the connection between a higher heart rate/lower blood pressure and a heart attack and/or the difference between these conditions when they're caused by excitement/exercise or substance abuse. If you could google that last bit, I'd be much obliged. :|

[Yoda]

Ok well, you obviously haven't read them, but only the first one seems to say anything about an increased heart rate when smoking marijuana and does very little to expound on the possible reasons. I've found another article which talks about the same research and the scientist involved expressly states that they do not know what could cause this increase in the likelihood of a heart attack in marijuana users, meaning that the only reason they concluded the two might be related is because out of 4000 thousand people who had heart attacks, 125 smoked marijuana, 40 smoked on the same day they had the heart attack and 9 within the hour of smoking a joint. I don't think that proves anything other than you know, 9 people out of 4000 happened to smoke a joint an hour prior to having a heart attack... So, you know, still skeptical, still don't understand the connection between a higher heart rate/lower blood pressure and a heart attack and/or the difference between these conditions when they're caused by excitement/exercise or substance abuse. If you could google that last bit, I'd be much obliged. :|
I read the first one entirely, skimmed the second for relevant bits, and read most of the third. And it seems to me they absolutely explain the physiological changes that smoking marijuana triggers. From the third link:
"The study authors say that marijuana creates a resistance to blood flow."

"We know that heart disease risk can be measured by several inflammatory biomarkers that promote clot formation in the lining of the blood vessels. In one study, it was shown that transient spikes in triglyceride levels from diet (http://www.wellsphere.com/linkOut.s?link=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Farticle%2FblogBurst%2Fhealth%3FbbPostId%3DBB1sZ4AY8Z13 BznJYDRudGILCz6eQBt78305FCz3ov06OcxU51) can cause enough inflammation to immediately increase our risk of heart attack. The current study found that marijuana users experience increased levels of ApoC3 (http://www.wellsphere.com/linkOut.s?link=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FApolipoprotein_C3) , a major lipoprotein that delays the breakdown of triglycerides."
From the first link:
"Marijuana is associated with an increase in the heart's demand for oxygen, while at the same time decreasing the oxygen supply."
I'm not sure just how technical you want these things to get, but the cause/effect seems to be pretty straightforward.

[adidasss]

I read the first one entirely, skimmed the second for relevant bits, and read most of the third. And it seems to me they absolutely explain the physiological changes that smoking marijuana triggers. From the third link:
"The study authors say that marijuana creates a resistance to blood flow."

"We know that heart disease risk can be measured by several inflammatory biomarkers that promote clot formation in the lining of the blood vessels. In one study, it was shown that transient spikes in triglyceride levels from diet (http://www.wellsphere.com/linkOut.s?link=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Farticle%2FblogBurst%2Fhealth%3FbbPostId%3DBB1sZ4AY8Z13 BznJYDRudGILCz6eQBt78305FCz3ov06OcxU51) can cause enough inflammation to immediately increase our risk of heart attack. The current study found that marijuana users experience increased levels of ApoC3 (http://www.wellsphere.com/linkOut.s?link=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FApolipoprotein_C3) , a major lipoprotein that delays the breakdown of triglycerides."

As I've said previously, the last two don't refer to increased heart rate/blood pressure, but, since you bring it up, to a "30% increase in a protein that raises trigliceride levels which “can contribute to hardening of the arteries or thickening of the artery walls, raising the risk of stroke, heart attack and heart disease.” I've done a bit more research and found out that the research included extremely heavy smokers (they smoked from 11 to 50, yes 50, joints a day. I'm not even sure that's possible but hey...). Not only that, but apparently (http://health.pvhs.org/RelatedItems/6,615402) there's no conclusive evidence of cause and effect or that this increase will cause physical problems/disease for users.From the first link:
"Marijuana is associated with an increase in the heart's demand for oxygen, while at the same time decreasing the oxygen supply."

Again, so does physical activity and stress. Sorry, still a retard, still not seeing why one would increase the likelihood of a heart attack and the other not (or not as much).

Essentially, google finds there are two main researches in this matter, neither of which is anywhere near being conclusive or particularly persuasive. So yeah, I guess that was my point.

:|

[mark f]

What? Not even Floyd (Brad Pitt) in True Romance could smoke 50 joints a day. I can actually accept that he can probably smoke 11 joints a day, but he still has to eat, drink, go to the bathroom and sleep, so even 11 seems like it's pushing it.

http://chattahbox.com/images/2009/07/brad_pitt_true_romance.jpg

Apparently increased heart attack risk is preferable to extreme pain from both cancer and the side effects of cancer treatment. At least according to some doctors and their patients (aye, there's the rub... ). I have no evidence to offer now because I'm in No Man's Land (I'm currently typing from my new house and the Internet obviously works, but my cable just went kablooey and the phone still doesn't work. Meanwhile, the rest of my family are working at our old house in 85 degree temps and 65% humidity. I know, you guys have it a lot tougher, but are you moving heavy furniture and cleaning majorly yucky houses all day in said heat indexes?

[jrs]

Two all time "classic" Anti-Drug PSAs:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Elr5K2Vuo



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMwxWHaZUro