|
Pure Pillz (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| chinamon |
| quote: | Originally posted by way2hi
Chinamon is acomplete in tool(although he'll ever know it) |
haha if thats what you think then you're dumber than your username |
|
|
| way2hi |
| yeah, good one. heh...:S |
|
|
| RobotHouse |
| i dont see what the fuss is about nobody here does drugs anyway |
|
|
| Halycon |
| look what you started Justin |
|
|
| london_ta |
| quote: | Originally posted by The Ear
Solid colloquialism.
Please update the word of the day thread accordingly.
:D |
I dont want all your TA's to be flashing my word 'noodled' around. Thats a London word.... and none of u would be fit to use it.
Thank you.
Carry on your nonsense... |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by london_ta
I dont want all your TA's to be flashing my word 'noodled' around. Thats a London word.... and none of u would be fit to use it.
Thank you.
Carry on your nonsense... |
When I went to university in Thunder Bay 13 years ago we were using that term. |
|
|
| tatgirl |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nick Cenik
but there is no doubt that as 'ecstasy' gained popularity throughout the 1990s and 2000s and the number of producers and dealers expanded greatly there was a corresponding increase in the tendency for 'ecstasy' pills to contain less and less MDMA and more and more potentially dangerous filler ingredients (e.g. caffeine). |
I really dont think caffeine is the 'dangerous filler ingredient' in street drugs.... perhaps you're confusing it with ephedrine? There's far worse stuff that's been thrown in there, I'm sure.
Lets just hope some Asian isn't throwing in some melamine into the mix, they sure like to put it in everything these days.... |
|
|
| d-form |
| caffeine is dangerous? LOL! My heart would literally implode if it weren't for caffeine. I need 400mg before I can roll over and think about getting out of bed. |
|
|
| london_ta |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
When I went to university in Thunder Bay 13 years ago we were using that term. |
Congrats.... do you want a cookie? :whip: |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by london_ta
Congrats.... do you want a cookie? :whip: |
what kind? |
|
|
| Nick Cenik |
I usually do not reply to other people's responses to my posts but in this case I'll make an exception. The following are what I find objectionable about your response Aaron:
1) You said:
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
The discussion was about the relative safety of these party pills vs. the street drugs people take at clubs, not about the safety of the same drug before and after criminalization. |
Why, then, did you assert?:
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
MDMA...[is] no less safe now than it was before it was criminalized. |
What, exactly, were you attempting to establish by saying this? I ask because as I read it, you did indeed make an explicit comparison between the safety of MDMA before and after its criminalization.
2) I don't appreciate your attempt to discredit my response by classifying it as simply irrelevant. A friendly word of advice: if you are interested in securing more control over how others respond to your posts then you ought to spend a little more time explaining in greater detail what you mean when you say something (as opposed to providing one sentence on the subject).
3) Which part(s) of the following argument strike(s) you as incorrect?
P1: Drug use does not occur in a vacuum.
P2: Certain physical spaces are less conducive to safe drug use than others (raves, shooting galleries, abandoned buildings vs. safe injection sites, people's homes).
P3: Certain political policies and laws increase the dangers associated with drug use (e.g. prohibition vs. legalization).
C: Therefore, discussions of the safety of drug use will necessarily involve a treatment of issues such as where substance use typically occurs, which policies and laws currently exist affecting the possession, production, and sale of drugs, and so on.
If you do not find any of the above premises and/or the conclusion objectionable then you cannot accurately suggest that my reply was misguided (or irrelevant).
4) You were incorrect to establish a comparison between ecstasy and what you termed 'street ecstasy'. Ecstasy is the illegally produced tablets sold on the black market; there is no such thing as legal ecstasy. The proper contrast is between MDMA and ecstasy.
5) I have to disagree with what you said here:
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
The single most important problem with so-called prohibition, in my opinion, is the subsequent widespread perception that any "legal" substance is actually safe, or at least safer than what's illegal. |
I cannot accept that the main harm caused by prohibition is the ill effects suffered by those who consume legal drugs thinking that because such compounds have not been criminalized they must be safe to administer. Rather, I maintain that the following represent far more serious consequences of the War on Drugs-type approach that has been accepted and practiced by North America for over 100 years now:
i) The countless number of people who have secured a criminal record and, thus, faced difficulties in traveling, acquiring employment, and so on as a result of using drugs;
ii) The countless number of people who have contracted communicable diseases and/or died over the years as policing practices and the threat of prosecution have encouraged the former to engage in unsafe drug using behaviours (sharing injection equipment, rushing injections, refusing to measure potency of drugs, etc);
iii) The countless number of people who have died over the years as a result of gang violence associated with the drug trade. If substances like cocaine, heroin, marijuana, methamphetamine, and so on were taken out of the black market and regulated by the government then there would be no incentive for criminals to get involved in drugs (economic gains would be non-existent).
iv) The ramifications of the fact that over the years billions of dollars of taxpayers' money have been wasted on incarcerating millions and millions of people for drug crimes.
Finally,
| quote: | Originally posted by tatgirl
I really dont think caffeine is the 'dangerous filler ingredient' in street drugs.... perhaps you're confusing it with ephedrine? There's far worse stuff that's been thrown in there, I'm sure. |
Nat, I did not suggest that caffeine was the filler ingredient. Rather, I cited it as an example of a substance that has, in recent times, been pressed into ecstasy tablets. There was no confusion on my behalf. I am indeed aware of the fact that there are many other compounds that represent a more dangerous threat than caffeine, such as methamphetamine, DXM, and ephedrine. |
|
|
|
|
