New Legal Drugs Ready Already

[carbon selector]

The Isle of Man missed its chance here. Instead of criminalising the stuff - there was no public clamour to do so, only some MHKs jumping on the publicity bandwagon - they could have kept it legal.

 

We could make the Island a safe and attractive environment for mephedrone takers. I'm not sure what that would be but we could do some research, I know cannabis takers like chocolate and sweets and Cliff Richard songs, so it's not like asking the earth.

 

That way we would soon make up the £100million shortfall imposed on us by the UK in the VAT Common Purse debacle.

 

We could 'rename' the Isle of Man the Isle of Mephe or the Isle of Meow or whatever, perhaps best to find one of the names that has a ring to it but I'm sure someone could come up with a catchy one.

 

I think it's worth a try in these desperate times.

[mæŋksmən]

Read that if you dare.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html#ixzz0j2b7FJNs

 

Decriminalisation of drug use may not be such a bad thing after all.

[Albert Tatlock]

There seems to be a no-tolerance atititude to all this kind of stuff, and a public/governmental/media fear about it all, leading to all kinds of knee-jerk reactions simply to be seen to be doing something. Personally, I don't see the point of putting such crap into your body, even when reaching 'rock bottom', as I am sure many of us have done at various points of our lives. But such a tough approach doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere near tackling the overall drugs problem and its' associated societal problems, in fact the problem seems to be getting worse all of the time.

 

However, people do take this stuff for various reasons. I think there are two options for the island:

 

1. To be unique, and licence certain stuff, tax it - and only ban it if it is proven to be a danger. What is licenced here could be based on what the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs say. The advantage of this approach in my eyes (still calling them 'legal-highs' because that is what sells them to would-be takers wishing to stay within the law) would be to push people away from Cannabis and other illegal drugs.

 

2. Be unique in terms of tackling drugs. Do more as to the 'why' people take these things? What is in/not in their lives that makes them feel they need to do so? Again, working with the likes of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, and some kind of action plan that takes into account their advice in terms of the why's and wherefore's of it all - and try to enact some of their suggested solutions to the problem. A unique social experiment maybe, but one where with a little thought and commonsense, and facing up to reality, may well at least start to tackle the problem.

 

Criminalising every substance is doing nothing but leading to quick wins for the police, criminalising youngsters and wrecking their life chances of employment simply by experimenting, filling up the prison and costing Joe Public a fortune - and not tackling any of the associated issues. In this recent case, a couple of legislators on the island have, no doubt buoyed by the thought of a looming election, just followed the press here, followed the media outcry in the UK and followed what the UK government have been talking about doing. No one has listened to the experts, or attempted to enact their advice - the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. Education is not just about those that take drugs/substances, that education needs to extend to legislators and the public if the problem is to be tackled properly anytime soon.

 

Chemistry has evolved a thousand-fold in just the last 50 years alone - and one substance will simply be replaced by another and then another ad-infinitum. Meanwhile the whole issue remains largely unaddressed.

[loaf]

Personally, I don't see the point of putting such crap into your body

 

...says massive smoking apologist Albert Tatlock?

[mæŋksmən]

Well spotted.

 

Get out of that conundrum albert, would you buy your smokes of the criminal fraternity if the government banned tobacco.

[Albert Tatlock]

Get out of that conundrum albert, would you buy your smokes of the criminal fraternity if the government banned tobacco.

No connundrum...cigarettes are hardly mind-bending highs are they.

 

But yes I would buy my fags and booze off the criminal fraternity if it came to prohibition. Academic question though...I'd have long left the country if things went as far as that.

[loaf]

No connundrum...cigarettes are hardly mind-bending highs are they.

The high doesn't really enter into the argument. You were making pronouncements about "putting crap into your body" whilst consistently on the forum defending a drug addiction that demands that you imbibe very well documented harmful crap into your body every 30-60 minutes (?), every waking hour of your day.

 

So on the topic of undocumented harmful effects of any drug, including "Plant food", it clearly doesn't seem to make any difference that there are mountains of research demonstrating that cigarettes are downright dangerous for some people to still carry on smoking like chimneys.

 

People spout wonderfully poetic reasons why they smoke, drink, do drugs, get piercings and tattoos etc, but it usually boils down to four words - "Monkey see, monkey do". They see/know particular people doing it and want to identify with them, share an experience or aspire to be like them, perhaps they're pressured into it by their peers. Tribal behaviour. Thereon it becomes a habit.

[jeffontherock]

29 people killed my mephedrone?

dont think so................

 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18712-miaowmiaow-on-trial-truth-or-trumpedup-charges.html?page=1

[Twonky]

29 people killed my mephedrone?

dont think so................

 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18712-miaowmiaow-on-trial-truth-or-trumpedup-charges.html?page=1

 

That's a good piece. (I already knew the 29 deaths thing was a load of old shit, but it's nice to see a sane, balanced, objective, scientific view on these things.)

[pongo]

People spout wonderfully poetic reasons why they smoke, drink, do drugs, get piercings and tattoos etc, but it usually boils down to four words - "Monkey see, monkey do". They see/know particular people doing it and want to identify with them, share an experience or aspire to be like them, perhaps they're pressured into it by their peers. Tribal behaviour. Thereon it becomes a habit.

 

I don't think any of that is true. An inclination to experience some particular drug which you have heard about is no different than, say, wanting to experience some particular recipe or flavour which someone has written about. Or wanting to try a particular wine with a particular meal or see a certain view. And they do it again if they like it -- because nothing is instantly habitual.

 

Different sorts of highs are basically sensory things, like flavours -- and people like to experience different sensations and flavours. It's the same. Same as, for many people, tobacco is a pleasure. Or a cold bottle of beer on hot afternoon in a city. Or the view from the top of a mountain. It's all the same.

 

If mood altering drugs are made difficult to get hold of then people will try different probably nastier things. The state drives people towards ever shittier chemicals by restricting the availability of less insidious compounds.

[loaf]

I don't think any of that is true.

Really? I'm not sure we're disagreeing by much.

 

An inclination to experience some particular drug which you have heard about is no different than, say, wanting to experience some particular recipe or flavour which someone has written about.

Except with drugs it's 'verboten'. By choosing to take drugs you're crossing an invisible line, joining the ranks of 'people who are frowned upon', which is why I grouped it with smoking, drinking and even piercings and tattoos to a lesser extent. By contrast, society doesn't cast judgment on what Bordeaux wine you've read up about or a new use for oregano.

[mæŋksmən]

I don't think any of that is true.

Really? I'm not sure we're disagreeing by much.

 

An inclination to experience some particular drug which you have heard about is no different than, say, wanting to experience some particular recipe or flavour which someone has written about.

Except with drugs it's 'verboten'. By choosing to take drugs you're crossing an invisible line, joining the ranks of 'people who are frowned upon', which is why I grouped it with smoking, drinking and even piercings and tattoos to a lesser extent. By contrast, society doesn't cast judgment on what Bordeaux wine you've read up about or a new use for oregano.

 

Its called hypocracy loaf, something your middle and upper class brits are adept at.

[pongo]

I don't think it's about wanting to 'identify' with other people. On the whole.

[thebees]

Imagine putting "Caught in possession of plant food" as your criminal record. The most uncool criminal record in prison, for sure.

[Albert Tatlock]

No connundrum...cigarettes are hardly mind-bending highs are they.

The high doesn't really enter into the argument. You were making pronouncements about "putting crap into your body" whilst consistently on the forum defending a drug addiction that demands that you imbibe very well documented harmful crap into your body every 30-60 minutes (?), every waking hour of your day.

 

So on the topic of undocumented harmful effects of any drug, including "Plant food", it clearly doesn't seem to make any difference that there are mountains of research demonstrating that cigarettes are downright dangerous for some people to still carry on smoking like chimneys.

 

People spout wonderfully poetic reasons why they smoke, drink, do drugs, get piercings and tattoos etc, but it usually boils down to four words - "Monkey see, monkey do". They see/know particular people doing it and want to identify with them, share an experience or aspire to be like them, perhaps they're pressured into it by their peers. Tribal behaviour. Thereon it becomes a habit.

I can assure you that I have never seen a monkey smoke.

 

I agree you have a point about 'why' we do things though - we are all generally born innocent babies, and then are influenced by others throughout our lives (sometimes genetically disposed to things).

 

I said 'such stuff' above, meaning the mind bending 'get me outta here' type stuff they use. I do not expect an 'out of mind' or 'out of body' experience when I light a fag, or when I eat a bacon butty between two slabs of buttered covered bread either - even when I know both are not good for me. Those kind of substances - mind bending - are very different, it's seems all mostly about escapism and wanting to feel 'really different than normal' at the drop of a hat to me. So the mind bending stuff they consider OK, I deem to be 'crap', as I don't want to lose that control of my thoughts.

 

I like a drink, but I like that cos it's tasty, and I can relax and socialise with my partner/mates and have a larf. I lose a certain amount of control, such as the ability to drive a vehicle etc. but that is within my control by restricting how much and how slow/fast I drink. But, yes I agree that past a couple, alcohol is often a form of escapism/relaxation too - though personally, I don't feel I have to get out of my tree to enjoy a night out, just have enough to feel 'relaxed' and enjoy the experience. Fags relax me too, and I enjoy the experience.

 

If there was a pill to get you instantly completely drunk - I wouldn't take it. If there was a 'pill' that effectively made you feel like you had drank three pints, I wouldn't take one of those either, because it is the social aspect of drinking with people that is important to me - and I never drink alone. However, that doesn't mean that such pills wouldn't sell well to others, if they were a third of the price of a pint for instance and warmed people up and made a night out cheaper. If there was a pill to stop me smoking instantly (such as Champix which supposedly does the job) I wouldn't take that either as I have heard first hand of some nasty mind bending side affects - though if I knew for certain I'd die in excruciating pain from smoking, maybe with hindsight I'd take them. But of course, I'll live forever and there are no consequences! Or rather, I've made my educated informed choice and the choice is mine.

 

Personally, I think people should be allowed to ingest what they want within reason, provided it does not impact other people. Fags and booze issues are well documented, so it's an informed choice. The laws are clear too, when and where you can drink, and you can be sacked for drinking, even smoking now.

 

But I do think legislators, when you consider the views of the drugs misuse advisory committee, are not well educated on all the issues either. Overall, I think it would be better to licence and tax some of these mind-bending substances and control them, and with that better control the tendencies of some to seek out the more noxious and dangerous substances. Like you say, people do a variety of things for a variety of reasons and that is unlikely to change. But personally, I don't see why the state should go past education into criminalisation when it comes to some of the less noxious stuff such as these 'legal highs' - as that will encourage nothing but additional chemical experimentation, until eventually something comes out that does kill lots of people, say, two years after them taking it.

 

However, all that said, I can understand government thinking on the impact of a society where mind bending drugs abound. Where no one would do any work, and it would be a fairly dangerous world to live in. Fags and booze haven't seen off society in 400 years, so are unlikely to I imagine.

 

Personally I think the government has much to do with the drugs problem we have, as well as the booze problem we have. They represent society. It's all down to stress, pressure, finance and greed IMO, and we all have to work at least 60% of the time simply to keep an overpriced roof above our heads. The demise of the churches and religion has much to do with it too, and those morals have not been replaced. All most of us do is work and pay taxes, and spend far more time doing it every year (and have now bailed out the banks for what benefit other than more work to us really?). Plus we generally don't give a shit about other people anymore (and vice versa of course), often not knowing who lives in the same street anymore.

 

Little wonder people are looking for escapes.

 

The more you dig into the why's and wherefore's of it all, and by that I mean all habits and addictions, the more you find it's all about nothing more than the failure of society - especially it's lack of cohesion and goals, selfishism, greed, unfairness, lack of morals etc. Who the hell wants to give up all these addictions, habits etc. and live till 90 in such a place - and then have all your belongings sold just to keep you in nappies and drool napkins?