radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 27, 2009 0:06:54 GMT
whats your vice then? apart from sex? or is that actually it!?  |
|
|
|
Post by puffin on Jan 27, 2009 0:10:57 GMT
Hmmm.. pretty much.
I have hobbies but I don't think they count as vices, do they?
I collect things too, maybe that's a vice ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Beachcomber on Jan 27, 2009 0:12:38 GMT
Hey ... Nothing wrong with sex !
It's what most recreational drugs lead to. If you can enjoy it without the artificial build up, so much the better !
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jan 27, 2009 0:12:26 GMT
To each their own.
We don't all desire the same things and how could it be otherwise?
|
|
Muz
New Member
Posts: 12,255
|
Post by Muz on Jan 27, 2009 0:53:54 GMT
I've smoked dope. From solid to skunk. Don't get on with it, I'm a lightweight who whites out too quickly. Swollen tongue, nausea, etc. Peruvian Marching Powder, however, is the greatest substance in the world. Speed is a bit rough, as is base. Acid was awesome, haven't done it for a while though. Ketamine scares me. Magic Beans used to be my vice of choice but I soon got sick of the side effects.... and mushrooms are quality. I always felt like a hippy whenever I had them though.
Beachy, its a bit misleading to just say that cannabis is non-addictive, causes mild euphoria/lethargy. There is more tar in cannabis than in tobacco. Tar is a carcinogen, therefore, cannabis is more harmful if taken in the same quantities as tobacco. Also, what about the many cases of mental health problems attributed to sustained cannabis use? Whilst I agree with making cannabis legal, I don't agree that its as harmless as you made out.
|
|
|
|
Post by redanchor on Jan 27, 2009 1:55:36 GMT
I smoked lots of dope from age 16-22, drank like a fish, snorted speed here and there, but retired from illegal drugs at age 22 to focus on my career in the alcohol consumption department, then retired from alcohol when my liver started to fail age 28, leaving cigerettes, which I gave up at age 29, to fresh up my sperm for my upcoming breeding program. Did you know that smoking roots your sperm? FACT! urrrr...is swearing okay on this site?
|
|
sushimo
New Member
One tequilla, Two Tequilla, Three Tequilla - Floor.
Posts: 243
|
Post by sushimo on Jan 27, 2009 8:46:41 GMT
Do you all know one of the simplest and cheapest 'hits' you can get is Codiene? In certain countries you will be given the death penalty if found in possesion of it!
I heard of a bloke in Carlisle that all chemists were advised not to sell Codiene based cough mixture to, as he was an adict, he would get through a couple of bottles a day. He was permanently off his head.
|
|
VikingHumpingWitch
New Member
"My philosophy in life is keep dry and keep away from children. I got it from a matchbox."
Posts: 8,018
|
Post by VikingHumpingWitch on Jan 27, 2009 9:27:07 GMT
This is typical of this government. Ignore all advice and criminalise people who are hurting nobody. God I hate them.
|
|
radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 27, 2009 9:54:27 GMT
The mental health issues attached to the high grade weed thats around nowadays is a serious issue. But it wouldnt be an issue at all if the Government took control and started regulating the strength of the stuff. A little stronger than solid and nowhere near the strength of skunk. skunk is evil stuff. Although i still dont say no when i get offered it. But i always wish i had when the paranoia kicks in. I dont get that side affect from solid. |
|
dwad
New Member
Posts: 1,146 
|
Post by dwad on Jan 27, 2009 10:37:25 GMT
This idea that cannabis is harmless is a dangerous myth. Essentially research into its effects is in infancy and solid data not always easy to come by, but almost every piece of research on it links it to mental health problems from depression to schizophrenia, to bipolar and paranoia. Anecdotally you'll find that mental health pharmacists are hugely anti it and the vast majority of those on their wards smoke it. Cause and effect is not proven in those cases but while there is so much uncertainty around its effects it would be utter lunacy to legalise it until more is known.
|
|
radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 27, 2009 10:40:50 GMT
for a regular smoker to Dawd, its true what you say, but then again there is a big diff between the effects of Skunk compared to the effects of solid. And thats no lie. Legalise it and you can control the strength thus has less mental health issues to worry about. The mental health issues of smoking cannabis have only come into form in recent times, around the same time as Skunk began getting stronger and stronger.. thats a connection and im speaking from experience.
|
|
VikingHumpingWitch
New Member
"My philosophy in life is keep dry and keep away from children. I got it from a matchbox."
Posts: 8,018
|
Post by VikingHumpingWitch on Jan 27, 2009 10:46:11 GMT
Links it as in people with these illnesses are likely to use it? Or as in there's some real evidence to suggest it causes them?
|
|
radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 27, 2009 10:59:26 GMT
as far as i understood it, some people are more prone to mental illness than others, genetics amongst other reasons. I accept this and i accept the idea that cannabis or certainly high grade skunk can trigger, or accelorate, or emphasise the more suseptable (spelling) towards mental illness.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarrant on Jan 27, 2009 11:13:13 GMT
This is typical of this government. Ignore all advice and criminalise people who are hurting nobody. God I hate them. Sadly, the Tories seem to have an even tougher policy. This idea that cannabis is harmless is a dangerous myth. Essentially research into its effects is in infancy and solid data not always easy to come by, but almost every piece of research on it links it to mental health problems from depression to schizophrenia, to bipolar and paranoia. Anecdotally you'll find that mental health pharmacists are hugely anti it and the vast majority of those on their wards smoke it. Cause and effect is not proven in those cases but while there is so much uncertainty around its effects it would be utter lunacy to legalise it until more is known. My experience dawd is that cannabis is not a soft drug and certainly not harmless. But I've read what you've written a number of times. This is simply attempting to resurrect the scare mongering of the 50s and 60s when we were told that even looking at a drug would make you into a crazed druggie/communist. There are some people who will react badly to cannabis. These people may simply have a bad time or they may even have a psychotic breakdown. Worse, it seems that insight is lacking so, those that recover from one bad experience are not less likely to try it again. However, to attempt to apply this as a general rule for all users will simply push the anti-drug message back simply because most people will not have a bad experience any more than most people will not turn into raving druggies/communists. People use cannabis. It distorts their perceptions and in some cases, enhances their perceptions. The social effects of its legal status makes it an exclusive pursuit so their is a feeling of superiority. Trying scare tactics on these people leaves you open to ridicule. Probably justifiably. |
|
VikingHumpingWitch
New Member
"My philosophy in life is keep dry and keep away from children. I got it from a matchbox."
Posts: 8,018
|
Post by VikingHumpingWitch on Jan 27, 2009 11:19:45 GMT
I don't think there's any feeling of superiority in people who like to smoke now and again. Everyone I know would prefer that it was legal and taxed.
|
|
dwad
New Member
Posts: 1,146
|
Post by dwad on Jan 27, 2009 11:24:24 GMT
|
|
VikingHumpingWitch
New Member
"My philosophy in life is keep dry and keep away from children. I got it from a matchbox."
Posts: 8,018
|
Post by VikingHumpingWitch on Jan 27, 2009 11:38:18 GMT
Hmm, ok, comparatively harmless would be a better choice of words.
But class B puts it up with speed, and if you look at a long term speed user compared to a long term smoker, it's not hard to work out that there's something much nastier about speed.
|
|
dwad
New Member
Posts: 1,146
|
Post by dwad on Jan 27, 2009 11:45:22 GMT
Hmm, ok, comparatively harmless would be a better choice of words. But class B puts it up with speed, and if you look at a long term speed user compared to a long term smoker, it's not hard to work out that there's something much nastier about speed. Well, compared to heroine probably but actually compared to speed is still basically an unknown. I think "comparatively harmless" is a pretty coy way of saying "could cause major mental breakdown and personality disorder, but it's not quite clear yet". |
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,076
|
Post by mids on Jan 27, 2009 11:45:23 GMT
Dwad any evidence from a proper scientific journal...?
By the way, I can't summon much enthusiasm about this either way except to note my pleasure at Labour's headless chicken panicky reactions.
|
|
VikingHumpingWitch
New Member
"My philosophy in life is keep dry and keep away from children. I got it from a matchbox."
Posts: 8,018
|
Post by VikingHumpingWitch on Jan 27, 2009 11:49:41 GMT
Hum well, whilst we can all probably think of someone we know who smokes way too much and is a bit of a pain in the arse as a consequence, I know from my personal entourage of associates that repated use of speed will fcuk you up far more than smoking. And given the vast numbers of people I know who have smoked and not ended up a gibbering mental wreck compared to the big fat zero of people I know who smoked and went insane, there'll need to be a fcuk of a lot more solid evidence to convince me it's anything to worry about.
Alcohol's where they should be looking, this is just another opportunity to score a few points by having a pop at an easy target. I hate this government.
|
|
