Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by smack
done md fair few times,not really my thing tbh but absoutley harmless drug.
People need education and the right education not propergander.
Not "drugs are bad, and will kill you"
I think you need to have a proper gander at your spelling tbh 
|
corsa - gus
Member
Registered: 8th Jan 07
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
User status: Offline
|
|
smack
Member
Registered: 7th Jul 04
User status: Offline
|
not heard that one before 
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
last year there were more horse riding related deaths than ecstacy related deaths. i think horses should be a class a drug.
[Edited on 11-02-2009 by lee_wee]
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
But ecstacy kills up to 30 people a year according to ministers...
30 fucking people, more people die in toilet seat related accidents ffs (maybe not true, but i'd imagine)
As far as i'm aware there's still no proven ecstacy deaths, just over-hydration or dehydration, which as someone said already is due to under-education of the drug.
It doesn't matter what it's classed as really it's readily available at anywhere you'd want to go to take it anyway.
The only reason people know about it is the Leah Betts thing which was heavily publicised ages and ages ago.
|
Steve X16XE
Member
Registered: 31st Dec 06
Location: Barnsley, South Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by dannymccann
Must admit im one of the 'primary school' lot, and I say no 
I'm the same. Cigarettes are a big no no for me. So anything else like drugs has an even bigger NO.
|
smack
Member
Registered: 7th Jul 04
User status: Offline
|
i can understand why people dont like smoking, altering their state of mind etc, thats completly cool.
But were do they get off ,saying other people who choose to do things , i.e smoking , altering their state of mind (their own bodies) shouldent be allowed.
Bit selfish maybe?
|
N3CRO
Member
Registered: 12th Apr 07
Location: Sandy, Bedfordshire
User status: Offline
|
Firstly, no.
Secondly, if they do, they'll regret it.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
I love these threads.
The whole face that everyone arguing for the fact it should be legal are looking at one tiny aspect of it and not understanding the bigger picture.
I personally couldnt give a shit if it where legal or not, i am not interested in taking drugs its not my bag. If someone else is then fair enough i wouldnt want to ruin other peoples enjoyment of something just because i dont like it. I know thats the usual English way but i class my self as above that neanderthul SP thinking (not in a spelling way mind :lol
However, it is extremely niave to think its legal/illegal due to how many people died from taking it
There are so many things to consider. For e.g Alcohol which is always the thing people compare it to because its a "drug". The government have enough issues to deal with with the known and well researched effects of abuse of the substance. Liver failure, kindey failure, heart disease, death by being a drunken twat etc etc Its legal and they are dutied to provide warnings and education about these dangers. Also sitting down to dinner with a glass of wine is different to chewing your face off over some pasta dish. Its social yes, but not in the same way. And everyone who drinks isnt automaticly A. and alcoholic and b. out of control.
They cant just simply endorse (which is what they would be doing if they legalised it) because of 2 issues. The social and the health. Yes you are more than likely not going to die instantly when taking ecstasy. However, death is the extreme and there are many other dangers with altering the chemical balance of ones noggin. Mental illnesses being the biggest, epilepsy blaa blaa. They have to find and prove all of these things in order to stick a governemnt "safe" stamp of approval on it. Otherwise if they approve it and 80% of young people go out pilling and it turns out 4yrs later you get dementia instantly then they would be in ALOT of trouble etc. Your toying with your life if you take it, if you want to fair play. However, the money your giving to theiving robbing tax evading scum is my main issue.
Its a cancer of society and funds crime. In the case of something like E which is not addictive (so im led to believe) then i am all for them testing and making it legal so that it will fuck the sum peddling it and make their industry that little bit smaller.
[Edited on 11-02-2009 by Jambo]
|
N3CRO
Member
Registered: 12th Apr 07
Location: Sandy, Bedfordshire
User status: Offline
|
Well said Jambo.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
Btw None of the above really answers the actual thread question 
|
mwg
Member
Registered: 19th Feb 04
Location: South Lakes
User status: Offline
|
Put it better than I ever could of done though 
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
Btw None of the above really answers the actual thread question
Was gonna say, the thread doesn't ask about Legality just downgrading it to a class B. I don't think i said it should be legal, but it shouldn't really be classed the same as Heroine, Cocaine etc, imo.
I kinda agree with the mental state of people though, my housemate did coke and smoked weed and we had to get him sectioned in the end, he developed schizophrenia and threatened us. (wasn't anything to do with E, but it's the same theory)
Ecstacy isn't addictive as such, but i had a mate who did them a fair bit by himself just for the feeling of getting away from it, and being in a different state, so while not addictive it has addictive qualities and it just depends on the person
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
what real life implications does moving the classification have though, apart from the amount of shit you get in if caught wit hit?
I.e what will it change?
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
Not a lot other than finally let everyone see that the government are taking the advice of the experts in the field rather than asking their opinion then dismissing it.
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
Frankly, probably nothing, except the punishments.
As i said in my first post.
"It doesn't matter what it's classed as really it's readily available at anywhere you'd want to go to take it anyway."
So essentially it's a pointless arguement i suppose
|
sand-eel
Member
Registered: 15th Mar 07
Location: carluke/braidwood--IRNBRULAND
User status: Offline
|
The most rediculous thing is cannabis is a class B when drink is easily more dangerous, you don't see people going metal smashing up things/people after a smoking sesh.
|
strick206
Member
Registered: 12th Apr 07
Location: Wigan Drives:Integra DC5
User status: Offline
|
100% no for me
|
Daniel_Corsa
Premium Member
Registered: 21st Apr 04
Location: Wigton, Cumbria
User status: Offline
|
Never taken drugs, never plan to so changing the class doesn't really affect me!
People will still take it wether it be class A or class B so save the hassle and leave it how it is!
April '06' Corsasport Feature Car  | Aug '08' Total Vauxhall Feature Car | Spring '09' Fast Car Feature Car
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by nova_gteuk
Tbh ecstacy is the only drug i would do, probaly one of the safest.
The only reason people die from e's are if they drink to much water or not enough, if people where educated how to take them safely, there wouldnt be any death's at all.
Still amazes me that alchohol and smoking are the biggest killers yet there both legal?
Kinda proves against theyre argument drugs are illegal because they kill,its more like theyre to trying to control us.
It's because they are legal that they are used to such an extent. You could argue that folk would go to excess if they were legalised, just the same as they do with alcohol and smoking. I personally am happy that they are all illegal and see no reason to change it's classing. All my own opinion of course.
[Edited on 11-02-2009 by Eck]
|
drunkenfool
Member
Registered: 7th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Drives: Audi R8 V8
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sam
quote:
Originally posted by drunkenfool
Of course it was legal in the firstplace! You think that someone synthesised the chemical and that there was already a law passed making it illegal before it even came into existance?! Idiot
Yes - Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
Idiot 
MDMA was synthesised in 1913
|
drunkenfool
Member
Registered: 7th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Drives: Audi R8 V8
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cavey
But ecstacy kills up to 30 people a year according to ministers...
30 fucking people, more people die in toilet seat related accidents ffs (maybe not true, but i'd imagine)
As far as i'm aware there's still no proven ecstacy deaths, just over-hydration or dehydration, which as someone said already is due to under-education of the drug.
It doesn't matter what it's classed as really it's readily available at anywhere you'd want to go to take it anyway.
The only reason people know about it is the Leah Betts thing which was heavily publicised ages and ages ago.
There have been some deaths related to ecstacy alone, but, and I cant remember the exact figures from the documentary, it was literally 2 or 3 in a time frame in which MILLIONS of 'doses' of the drug were taken. You are statistically more likely to die from presciption medication than MDMA. Fair enough prescription drugs are designed to help and MDMA is purely recreational (aside from the amazing potential it has in psychotherapy, an issue also addressed in that first documentary) so those deaths are unnecessary ones, but thats a risk people are willing to take and should be able to decide for themselves. If its purely on a risk assessment basis, then pretty much all human activities should be illegal
|
nova_gteuk
Member
Registered: 15th May 02
Location: South Wales Drives: The Bandwagon
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eck
quote:
Originally posted by nova_gteuk
Tbh ecstacy is the only drug i would do, probaly one of the safest.
The only reason people die from e's are if they drink to much water or not enough, if people where educated how to take them safely, there wouldnt be any death's at all.
Still amazes me that alchohol and smoking are the biggest killers yet there both legal?
Kinda proves against theyre argument drugs are illegal because they kill,its more like theyre to trying to control us.
It's because they are legal that they are used to such an extent. You could argue that folk would go to excess if they were legalised, just the same as they do with alcohol and smoking. I personally am happy that they are all illegal and see no reason to change it's classing. All my own opinion of course.
[Edited on 11-02-2009 by Eck]
But by making them illegal hasnt made any diffrence?
People still take them to excess.
At least if they where leagalised and people knew how to take them correctly they could could buy safe pills from somewhere proper,it would be much better than making them illegal forcing people to buy dodgy drugs that could be cut with anything.
I used to go pilling every weekend with my mates,never did me any harm bit older now so dont really bother with them but if i was offered them id be there like a shot.
|
drunkenfool
Member
Registered: 7th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Drives: Audi R8 V8
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
I love these threads.
The whole face that everyone arguing for the fact it should be legal are looking at one tiny aspect of it and not understanding the bigger picture.
I personally couldnt give a shit if it where legal or not, i am not interested in taking drugs its not my bag. If someone else is then fair enough i wouldnt want to ruin other peoples enjoyment of something just because i dont like it. I know thats the usual English way but i class my self as above that neanderthul SP thinking (not in a spelling way mind :lol
However, it is extremely niave to think its legal/illegal due to how many people died from taking it
There are so many things to consider. For e.g Alcohol which is always the thing people compare it to because its a "drug". The government have enough issues to deal with with the known and well researched effects of abuse of the substance. Liver failure, kindey failure, heart disease, death by being a drunken twat etc etc Its legal and they are dutied to provide warnings and education about these dangers. Also sitting down to dinner with a glass of wine is different to chewing your face off over some pasta dish. Its social yes, but not in the same way. And everyone who drinks isnt automaticly A. and alcoholic and b. out of control.
They cant just simply endorse (which is what they would be doing if they legalised it) because of 2 issues. The social and the health. Yes you are more than likely not going to die instantly when taking ecstasy. However, death is the extreme and there are many other dangers with altering the chemical balance of ones noggin. Mental illnesses being the biggest, epilepsy blaa blaa. They have to find and prove all of these things in order to stick a governemnt "safe" stamp of approval on it. Otherwise if they approve it and 80% of young people go out pilling and it turns out 4yrs later you get dementia instantly then they would be in ALOT of trouble etc. Your toying with your life if you take it, if you want to fair play. However, the money your giving to theiving robbing tax evading scum is my main issue.
Its a cancer of society and funds crime. In the case of something like E which is not addictive (so im led to believe) then i am all for them testing and making it legal so that it will fuck the sum peddling it and make their industry that little bit smaller.
[Edited on 11-02-2009 by Jambo]
There are absolutely no links between ecstacy and long term brain damage though. The "This is your brain, and this is your brain on ecstacy" campaign that showed "holes in the brain" (somethign that I remember from primary school still) was a study carried out on rats, not humans, and they also 'accidently' used the wrong drug, so the trial wasnt even based on MDMA. Strangely, all the government funded studies find evidence to support it being abad, yet all the independent research finds the exact opposite. Out of interest, how many of the people on here with teh "just say no" attitude are even in the least bit interested in watching that documentary I posted? Im guessing none because you are happy in your little thought bubbles. Its teh same reason why religious people annoy the fuck out of me, cos its impossible to have a proper debate with him or get them to open up their minds to the possibility that there may be some other valid opinion!
|
Luke
Member
Registered: 9th Dec 05
Location: Oxford Drives:Corsa B C20LET
User status: Offline
|
I wont vote. I used to do alot of pills & MDMA about 2 years ago, I recently OD'd on pills & havn't touched them since. Bad times.
|
