That yielded 13 arrests and 120 pills.
Over 100 officers and dogs.
So pathetic, the operation would have cost tens of thousands of dollars and they took about $3500 worth of drugs off the street. Good going guys.

The headline on the Sunday Mail this morning made me lol.
DRUG SWOOP

this article says there were 40 arrests but even still, lame attempt.

Another 47 people were issued with on-the-spot fines for jaywalking.

f***ing lol

I was out and there were so many popo around. There were cops getting around on dirt bikes which I found pretty funny.
haha this real mean looking chick cop was frisking some street busker and I said "I hope you pay him after you search him," and she shot me the dirtiest glare I have ever seen in my life. I got out of there real quick before she could shoot me.

Anyone else see anything good?
Thoughts on spending this kind of money to yield such poor results?

coppers would have been stocking up for their xmas parties

pretty lame if you ask me, going after end users isnt going to deter anyone, nor bring decent results

i guess our cops have nothing better to do

Good i hope they get those techno twats out of the valley.

wtf?

techno twats are the valley

i guarantee you they are less trouble than city folk or emos

plus they look nicer and are better dancers

The operation is part of an on-going crackdown on the district, and Supt Carew said it also focused on licensed premises that turned a blind eye to drug use and irresponsibly served alcohol.

so how many of these premises that irresponsibly serve alcohol had their licenses revoked or was that just slandering all club owners in the area?

Suck s***.

Awesome, hopefully they do more of these.

yes indeed

how dare people go out and have fun with such sinful activities

no wonder allah is so angry with the world

Awesome, hopefully they do more of these.

they should better spend the money on gathering intelligence to take down suppliers, not waste that amount of money on a huge operation to take a few pills of users.

axtually, im quite happy for them to leave the suppliers alone as well :)

Spook is a supplier.

and an end user.

Double hell for joo.

hmmmm

arrest 18 year old

ask him where he got the pills

get intelligence about suppliers

lol.
Persay is right, this isn't 24 or TV/Movie.
18 year olds/young people/the majority getting busted by the cops are more likely to give up informatoin whilst they're s***ting bricks, they're not going to be defiant; and thus cops get what they need.

Why would they want to bust the suppliers, when they can keep gaining revenue from all the kids they arrest for taking a few pills?

Another 47 people were issued with on-the-spot fines for jaywalking.

Good. Driving through the valley at night is f***ing annoying with all the tards hanging off the sidewalk.

heh and how many did they seach to get 13 arrests?

sniffer dogs aren't cost effective, there have been numerous reports from police departments saying this. the most recent one from from an inquiry in nsw where the report recommneded they scrap the program. they never will but because its such a ohsosexy PR campaign - ZOMG DRUG ZWOOP!@#1

Good i hope they get those techno twats out of the valley.

Err as spook said, thats what most of the valley is. Valley is a better place to go to, eveery one is calmer and happier, not like all the jocks and twats in the city.

People on pills are much easier going people than the ones on alcohol

Good, better yet beat the s*** out of those god dang hippie buskers, make it compulsory to bath before busking...

As for the the Jay Walking, more of it, or allow it to be legal to run down the tards that walk out into the traffic against the lights, help increase the gene pool by removing retarded genes...

damn hippie buskers

they should be locked up for noise pollution

Persay wins the thread.

haha i'd be dirty as if i got a fine for jaywalking

probably in response to that dude who got run over the other week. was that in valley? cant remember.

If i ever got caught I'd dob in all the people on here that don't use.

8-)

haha either way they will never stop drugs.

probably in response to that dude who got run over the other week. was that in valley? cant remember.

Yep, and yep.
I standing there looking atit wondering how the f*** someone did that to their car and not even a dent in the bumper, figured they must have ran into a trayback ute or a truck or something as the driver-'s side A-Pillar was virtually bent in half and the windscreen looked like it had been pierced with the corner of something solid...
But it was actually someone collected by a car, not surprising given the amount of idiots running across the road, traffic banks up there frequently that you can walk across between the cars; no need to be a hero and do it when traffic is actually free-flowing there.
They had the entire strip sectioned off and diverting traffic so it must have ended pretty badly for the ped, cause the car didnt look too happy either.

last edited by Loki at 15:43:36 15/Oct/06

Valley used to be the place to be for "techno-heads".
Now its been taken over by main stream pop-techno s***-heads :(

lol.
Persay is right, this isn't 24 or TV/Movie.
18 year olds/young people/the majority getting busted by the cops are more likely to give up informatoin whilst they're s***ting bricks, they're not going to be defiant; and thus cops get what they need.

oh so they get to the 23 year old that deals to kids to pay for their weekend who gives up the distro for a supplier that wont give anyone up because theyll get killed for it and they already knew about this guy anyway. what a service that has been done. The whole argument is retarded anyway since it shouldnt be ilegal in the first place.

wtf?

techno twats are the valley

i guarantee you they are less trouble than city folk or emos

plus they look nicer and are better dancers

hahas spooks one of theM :P..

Hit the City last night, seemed to be pretty average in there, just the normal drugs last night.

The whole argument is retarded anyway since it shouldnt be ilegal in the first place.

Irony++

I dont care if the amount of drugs they seized is substantially less than the drugs they got. It isn't like they sell of the drugs to pay for the sting and while some could be fined we shouldn't be going after people who do the wrong thing just because you can get the money back.

Sucked in if you got caught with illegal drugs.Best way to not get caught is by not doing it!

traffic banks up there frequently that you can walk across between the cars; no need to be a hero and do it when traffic is actually free-flowing there

Or you know, you could cross at the lights.

Valley used to be the place to be for "techno-heads".
Now its been taken over by main stream pop-techno s***-heads :(

NO the valley used to be LIVE music and cool dingy music bars long before the beat was anything but a dingy gay bar surrounded by dingy LIVE music venues, the techno wankers ruined it!

theres like 4 or 5 proper dance clubs in the valley and like 20 bars and live music places.
besides, drugs have been around for longer than techno :)

yes indeed

how dare people go out and have fun with such sinful activities

no wonder allah is so angry with the world

I'm able to have fun without feeding my face full of pills.

cos your drug is legal?

they should better spend the money on gathering intelligence to take down suppliers, not waste that amount of money on a huge operation to take a few pills of users.

we only see and hear about the tip of the iceberg dude. it all starts somewhere eh

Man alive, drove through the city/valley then back again about 3am this morning. The number of tards that decided they could run across the road with a car at speed a few meters away was phenomenal. I'm surprised more people don't get hit.

Best way to not get caught is by not doing it!

haha so much ignorance

chakas you've been watching too much iron chef

Hahahahaha, I haven't seen that show in ages, it's good but not to the point I go out of my way to watch it.

man alive!!

it's a sweet show

haha so much ignorance

Why am I ignorant?

it's just seems so easy for you to sit back like mum and go 'lol you shouldn't do that' when you've never ever been apart of the culture

last edited by paveway at 18:42:46 15/Oct/06

I am absolutely touched that you think I am so innocent.

I'm dumbfounded that he thinks you are.

Why am I ignorant?

The best way to avoid getting arrested by a fascist government is to not practice free speech.

The fact that you call taking drugs as free speech kinda says to me you should shut up

All police busts soom to do to the drug scene is to jack up prices and force inferior junk onto the streets to fill the gaps.

I was making parallels to free speech. How far do you let the government control your life before you question their control?

How far do you let the government control your life before you question their control?

You question their control every time you vote - that's what the democratic process is all about. If you want drug-friendly laws, vote in a drug-friendly government.

You question their control every time you vote - that's what the democratic process is all about. If you want drug-friendly laws, vote in a drug-friendly government.

The democratic process doesn't work when the majority of people are morons. I don't do drugs (anymore) but I still think they should be legalised as nothing good comes from prohibition. I'm going to stop here otherwise I'll get onto attacking religion and derail this thread :\

(Yes, I mention religion, as it removes a person's ability to apply logic and reason, and most high-profile proponents of drug laws are... damnit *shuts up*)

Yes, I mention religion, as it removes a person's ability to apply logic and reason

Explaine how. Please provide various forms of evidence to back up your claim. Unless it is unfounded and you actually have nothing to base it on other then heavily biased anecdotal evidance.

I'd rather be in the valley taking drug with the techno twats and dancing the night away, then in the city with the angry jocks, easy city sluts and 'don't be mad at your dad' fake emo types because they always start drama.

plus they look nicer and are better dancers

As an ex raver, I challenge that quote :P

quite interesting this happened last night as me and b.hardball were discussing it today..

it's funny how obvious it is of who takes drugs and who doesn't in this thread..

i feel i've somewhat been on both sides of the story, and me and hardball agreed they need harsher punishments in place for pill poppers..

if they do a bust and are able to test people for drugs, if they're caught with an illegal drug in their system they should go to jail.. yes jail.. for 3 months at least, it sounds strict, and sure it is.. but i'm sure alot of people would not take the risk anymore and those who do certaintly wouldn't again, thus creating no business for the small time dealers, thus creating no business for the big time dealers...

unfortunately you'd probably have to open up a few more prisons which would cost a bit of dollar, and yes i know of other problems with it being viable, but i think it's a good idea.
kthx

if they're caught with an illegal drug in their system they should go to jail

Why?

Explaine how. Please provide various forms of evidence to back up your claim. Unless it is unfounded and you actually have nothing to base it on other then heavily biased anecdotal evidance.

catholic church banning the use of condoms in AIDS infested communities!

Do you require more?

Copernicus 100years before Galileo was persecuted by the church for suggesting that the earth wasn't the centre of the universe.

The democratic process doesn't work when the majority of people are morons.

actually thats the definition of democracy, just because a very small number of the morons think differently to the rest of the morons doesn't make their opinions any more valuable.

i feel i've somewhat been on both sides of the story, and me and hardball agreed they need harsher punishments in place for pill poppers..

luckily, u guys are far removed from reality and power

back to the roids dale

parabol, perhaps you missed the bit where i said illegal..

il‧le‧gal  / Pronunciation[i-lee-guhl]
–adjective
1. forbidden by law or statute.

there are 2 ways to look at it, either the govt legalises 'party' drugs and reaps the rewards, don't tell me there wouldn't be a tax on them, like alcohol (yes that is a drug) and cigarettes (again nicotine is a drug) - not that they will ever legalise them

If they did at least there would be a controlled substance about, i.e. tested and no back yard labs throwing in all sorts of dodgy s*** into the drugs they make etc etc

But personally, I've seen drugs f*** up a few people and would rather they aren't available at all, altho I am not totally clueless and ignorant, they will exist forever

But personally, I've seen drugs f*** up a few people and would rather they aren't available at all, altho I am not totally clueless and ignorant, they will exist forever

luckily alcohol and tobaco have never done any damage!

The damage caused by alcohol and tobacco only serves as a reason to not legalise other drugs. Why give retards easy access to more ways to f*** themselves up (and potentially other innocent people)? If you're going to do that, start by including boxes of razor blades with emo CDs.

actually thats the definition of democracy, just because a very small number of the morons think differently to the rest of the morons doesn't make their opinions any more valuable.

The small number of morons are usually more informed than the larger majority of morons. Take for example a lot of attitudes towards nuclear power. In the case of drugs, yes they can be harmful, but making them illegal only causes more problems. So many high profile (usually retired) officials have said this.

And toll, I actually meant organised religion. They're the ones stifling science, particularly in America.

People need to take responsibility for their own health. They shouldn't need to be babied by the government then have their lives ruined when they slip up.

The problem with the democratic process prohibiting people from taking drugs is that the majority then rules the minority's choice to do what they want to their body. The Majority is no longer allowed to persecute minority religious or racial groups becuase it is not seen as politically correct, but it used to be a-ok and the reason it took so long to change is because the Majority will not listen to the opinion of the minority in question, no matter how truthful the minority's cries because the Majority are a bunch of wankers (rightly or wrongly) in the eyes of the minority. So now there are groups of morons in a certain religion, which is as likely entirely made up to benefit the original creater as it is to be true, enforcing f***ed up religious laws which do harm to those that follow them. What the f*** is so different between a persons right to believe total s*** and be harmed (eg. muslim extremists, religions who believe god will save them and refuse proper medical aid) and a person that enjoys taking a pill instead of the currently legal drugs? At least one can be made relatively safe and can actually be proven fact through studies completed in a tangible plane rather than some fairytale story to make people eats*** their whole life to serve somones will? (aka. religion)

IM ON SO MANY DRUGS RIGHT NOW I DONT KNOW IF IM SPEAKING ENGLISH ANYMORE@!($#_$$#%$_(%^_$%+_!#@!#@#$&%^@

That's what she said.

it's just seems so easy for you to sit back like mum and go 'lol you shouldn't do that' when you've never ever been apart of the culture

I don't have to stick my hand in a fire to know it's not a smart thing to do so.

Good weekend (bday)... cop pulls me up, "whats in your mouth, OPEN IT, OPEN IT!"

lol @ jaw clenches = swallowing a baggy.

Glad I didn't head to the valley.

except in this case some people did stick their hand in the fire and realised it wasn't that bad

parabol, perhaps you missed the bit where i said illegal..

Congratulations on your ability to quote a dictionary on an internet forum.

The definition of 'illegal' doesn't say that it is 'wrong', just forbidden.

And why is it forbidden? The answer is not what you think it is.

last edited by parabol at 22:06:43 15/Oct/06

The scaring will be there, just wait.

qmass:

rant rant rant rant rant

IM ON SO MANY DRUGS RIGHT NOW I DONT KNOW IF IM SPEAKING ENGLISH ANYMORE@!($#_$$#%$_(%^_$%+_!#@!#@#$&%^@

- So long as I don't end up running over you because you act randomly and wander out into traffic.
- So long as I don't have to make any business dealings while you are under the influence of drugs.
- So long as you don't run over me or my family when you are picking up such munchies or just thinking you can drive when under the influence of other drugs
- So long as you don't go stealing s*** from me because you can't wait for another hit (yes I know not all drugs are physically addictive)
- So long as you don't end up harming other people because your ability to make reasonable judgements isn't impaired by your f***ed up mental state and said decisions do not affect me in a negative regard then sure.

Oh wait, you admitted it yourself, you don't even know if you are making a point so why do I bother responding.

I know there are some supposed safeguards in place regarding the consumption of alcohol, with regards to driving and apparently serving drinks.

What safe guards do you suggest should be put into affect for the myriad of drugs out there?

It's all fine to say legalise this that or the other, but it sounds like there is going to have to be a lot of legislation, and tools put out there for the enforcement of such.

So which drugs should be legalised and what safeguards are to be put in place to protect people from the harm they may do to themselves or the harm they may do to others. Since the reason to take drugs IS to change your mental state, how does one know when they have had too much?

...and there lies the problem.

I wish I could take the stand and answer that question. As much as I am for harm-reduction, making these harder drugs avaliable and cheap is going to end in hell.

The small number of morons are usually more informed than the larger majority of morons.

no they only think they are

no they only think they are

So in the case of drugs, police chiefs who are fed up with the broken system aren't actually more informed than joe 'just say no' bloggs?

Nuclear power isn't a safe alternative to our growing energy needs and concern for the environment?

Evolution isn't the best explanation to the variety of species on this insignificant lump of rock?

That silly minority with their silly education and their silling reasoning.

heh another drugs thread on qgl.

i lol at cops

ull never fine me u f***in pigs!!

I'd like to point out that maverik and i also talked about responsible service of alcohol. I'm pretty sure alcohol is doing much more damage than people taking hard drugs. I think pubs need to be checked far more regularly and handed down massive fines cause most of them make s*** loads of money selling alcohol to already very drunk people.

Having said that, in this community drugs are illegal. Brisbane is the ecstacy capital of the world, and I would have thought that now it's mostly harder to find people that don't use drugs than people that do. That is a problem, because, at the end of the day it's illegal. If you don't want to get speeding tickets, don't speed, if you don't want to get busted for taking drugs, don't take drugs, if you don't want to get hit by a car late at night, don't get drunk and stumble across a busy road.

I don't get why there aren't just harsher punishments for drug use. I know some people who have been busted for it and basically jack s*** happens to them. If authorities want people to stop selling drugs, punish the people who are buying them with harsher punishments. As long as there are people buying the drugs, there will be people selling them. Demand creates supply. Stop trying to track down dealers and punish the users.

Again I'd like to say though that something needs to be done about RSA as well because alcohol generally f***s people up more.

I disagree with the ideas they should go to jail for three months. I would prefer harsher crimes such as mruder, assault, rape, etc get more jail time than drug users.

If they ewere in line then fully agree.

We need harsher penalties so that people don't bother breaking the law as they know they wont just get a slap on the wrist.

There isn't much that is illegal that I disagree with. Maybe speeding but I fully understand why it is and I either have to follow the law or get busted for breaking it. Simple

harm minimisation ftw

unless you want to spend a f***load on extra gaols, screws and bureaucrats to manage them. vote 1 labor now.

- So long as I don't end up running over you because you act randomly and wander out into traffic.
- So long as I don't have to make any business dealings while you are under the influence of drugs.
- So long as you don't run over me or my family when you are picking up such munchies or just thinking you can drive when under the influence of other drugs
- So long as you don't go stealing s*** from me because you can't wait for another hit (yes I know not all drugs are physically addictive)
- So long as you don't end up harming other people because your ability to make reasonable judgements isn't impaired by your f***ed up mental state and said decisions do not affect me in a negative regard then sure.

All these things are 100% applicable to alcohol as well - which is a legal drug.

The problem with the democratic process prohibiting people from taking drugs is that the majority then rules the minority's choice to do what they want to their body.

That's not the problem with the democratic process - that's just a side effect of the problem. The problem with the democratic process is that uninformed ignorant masses define government policy based on what they see on TV.

So now there are groups of morons in a certain religion, which is as likely entirely made up to benefit the original creater as it is to be true, enforcing f***ed up religious laws which do harm to those that follow them.

Well, there are those that might argue that all religions are like that. But that's a freedom of choice thing and as a general rule (and contrary to what the media tells you), someone being religious almost certainly is never ever going to affect you, except in small annoying ways (like getting into conversations with them or having them knock on your door trying to sell you crazy).

What the f*** is so different between a persons right to believe total s*** and be harmed (eg. muslim extremists, religions who believe god will save them and refuse proper medical aid) and a person that enjoys taking a pill instead of the currently legal drugs?

I don't really get this sentence, but the big difference is, in my opinion, one of the only thing that should matter in any law making:

ONE OF THEM PUTS YOU AT RISK. ONE OF THEM PUTS OTHER PEOPLE AT RISK.

Anything that ever puts anyone else's health or safety at risk should be illegal and punished extremely harshly. Everything else needs to be measured up carefully as well, but if an action can bring about harm to another, then it should be legislated against and people found guilty of it should be smashed with the full weight of the law.

(eg, drinking is harmful to your self, but it's not harmful to others - until you go out and pick fights or try to drive).

I have changed my position on recreational drugs fairly radically in the last couple of years. Laws won't ever stop their use. Punishment won't stop others, because only a minority of people are ever caught. More people are likely to die because it's illegal. The trade is too good for criminals to miss out on because of the volume of money involve - if it was legal and cheap, you wouldn't see too many columbian drug lords - and you could tax the f***ing s*** out of it for support programmes for addicts.

I don't think selling it across the counter is a good idea, but I think legalisation might be. It's hard to be really anti-drug when you love beer and rum so much without being a complete and utter hypocrite.

What's worse? Buying a packet of filthy ciggarettes or buying some awesome pills?

Never done 'pills' but I have done illegal drugs. I have also smoked.

They are just as bad as each other

Brisbane is the ecstacy capital of the world

wtf?

hello UK?

dunno if this was mentioned i only skimmed the thread but

"During the night Queensland Ambulance responded to five drug overdose cases in the Brisbane Central District – this is why we are out doing what we do,"

if i had a dollar for the amount of times i've seen an ambo rock up to the beat / family / monestary for some dude laying flat out on the road convulsing...

Nice to see the fun police are up to their usual window dressing. Makes them look like they are cracking down on "the drug scene" when it fact they can't and won't ever be able to do s***. They know it, but they just have to keep up the look of doing something. There a lot of people around here they seem a bit too keen to tell people what is right for them. Get over it, drugs are here to stay accept or move to a cave. If people want to do it so be it, but don’t go preaching about how law abiding you are next time you do something like speeding or something.

and trog brings the common sense this thread was sorely lacking.

i never said i was law abiding, i speed all the time, though i think there should be harsher penalties for that too, but also consistency, i hate getting done for 10kms over the speed limit along the highway with no traffic when some f***head is doing 160 weaving in and out of cars dangerously and gets away none the wiser.

but as they say "every k over is a killer"

i speed all the time

Uh oh, I think when you get caught for speeding (the first time) that you should go for jail for 3 months, i'm sure you won't take the risk anymore, because you know that speeding is illegal right?

One person takes his pills and goes inside a club to have a good time with his mates, YOU speed on the road in an automobile...who's more likely to harm other people in the process? Who's more of a criminal than the other?

last edited by eK at 12:16:23 16/Oct/06

Both sides need to take a chill pill, that is before they are offence too. The people who agree with the cops are taking it way to personal. And the proside seem to think their s*** don't stink and that drugs have never done anyone harm. I simply do not care what happens to people at all. You want to go off and fry your brain do it, you want to be a goodie 2 shoes go & do what you are told. I will do whatever I want and never harm another soul while I do it. I like a drink, I like a smoke & I like the occasional treat. I don't kidd myself about it all. I just know that at the end of the day living kills you. I have a right to destroy my body how I see fit and if you don't like it just f*** off.

brissy aint ecstacy capital of the world

we'd go close to the fizz capital of the world though

i agree with the ape.

that's not really valid eK cos as i said i know it's a problem, all the drug-taking people seem to think it's all okay...
and besides, the law has taken action against me, the law hasn't, imo taken enough action against the drug takers

haha jails are over populated as it is, putting people in for 3 months for simply have ecstasy in their system is stupid. on so many levels.

the law has taken action against you dale, but you just said you still speed...

so I guess the moral of this story is, if you do any crime be prepared for the punishment, wow, How revolutionary

i saw you the other day liam, i was the loud bronze r31 that came past your house when you were out the front

I think what I said was valid, drug abusers and people speeding are both breaking the law...so which one is worse? and who should be put in jail for 3 months for their crime?

The law is just as harsh on drug users as it is on people caught speeding don't be naive... big fines, criminal records etc. So don't go preaching that drug users get off easily.

The main point is that the police used $3million dollars and 100 police officers to bust a bunch of 18-25 year olds using drugs to have a good time, when they could've used the same resources to bust people speeding, people drink/drug driving, patrolling train and bus stations and providing general SECURITY around the valley/city area.

last edited by eK at 13:51:47 16/Oct/06

I would prefer that drug dealers got done more so that drug users.

the law has taken action against you dale, but you just said you still speed...

fair call, but the law is still in the process of taking action against me, and i assure you if i do any "time" over any of the offences that i won't dare speed again.

I would prefer that drug dealers got done more so that drug users.

The easiest way to find dealers is to get the users and follow the chain

any good dealer doesn't put themselves in a position to have who they deal to tell the cops their address and when they are home from work

and if that actually worked, wouldn't there be alot more major drug busts? as the chain was followed. even if the end user and their s*** c*** dealer spilled the further you go up the chain, the less the people involved know about each other which ends up with cops chasing shadows

last edited by paveway at 13:35:11 16/Oct/06

any good dealer doesn't put themselves in a position to have who they deal to tell the cops their address and when they are home from work

Yeah and that's exactly the info they need to track you down...

Ahh true daniel, hope things are well with you these days

And Im suprised no one commented on the 9 arrested on Drink Driving, Certainly a much more serious offence than taking a couple of pills.

yeah i'm going alright liam

Busting the top of the tree has some bad effects.
ie. you get some huge shipment.
It pushes the price up and that leads to a mini crime wave.
The quality drops and the drugs will get cut with junk, more hospital cases.



If you go for the middle men, again bad side effects.
They have to pay their bosses still, mini crime wave.



If you go for the users, you cut off the demand and you kill the money to the rest of the tree.



Its similar to Sweden (and the Netherlands) where they decided to make prostitution legal, but made it illegal to buy a sex service.
And in lots of countries its illegal to be a pimp (ie. profit off others prostitution).

even making huge busts like 30 million dollars of pills, has f*** all effect .

theres prolly 10 of those shipments that customs missed, and they make a huge deal about it when they get one (which i guess fair enough it is a big deal)

i dont think some of you people understand it easy to get drugs if you want to, and how much of it there is, not to contradict myself, other countries are alot worse

in response to trogs response - basically what I meant (without proof reading and being half-asleep just before bed) was that we give people the right to belive in what they choose and we allow people to make many decisions which are bad for their personal health, but by prohibition we create harm to people who dont take drugs by forcing a criminal element into our society. I dont think that taking drugs causes harm to anyone but yourself, depending on the drug of course, as long as the proper safegaurds are in place. Things like alcohol related violence, which would not exist if responsible service of alcohol was adhered to (angry violent people are angry and violent but thats not alcohols fault if they are sober) or stupidity caused by inibriation (eg. jumping in front of cars crossing the road) which could be solved by proper care for drinkers leaving clubs (I learnt that bars are meant to call a cab and see the patron into it at the bar course I did for my RSA) are all examples of ways to minimise harm with this legal drug. Things like this could be EASILY done with drugs that people take recreationally outside of their home in most cases. The cost to run such preventions would more than easily be covered by the sudden surplus created in canning stupid police raids since the criminals would move over when the market goes to the gov for the drug, legally.

I dont have time to re-read yet again but im hoping I made my point this time in regards to self/others harm.

As for democracy and drugs. What I meant was what you said... the majority is grossly misinformed and unwilling to change their opinion and are even blind to the utter hypocracy of smoking and drinking being ok and pills/weed not. I just assumed that people would jump to the conclusion as to what causes the majority's opinion.

I dont advocate things like heroin and meth which rip peoples lives apart but mostly harmless things, certainly as 'harmless' as alcohol and tobacco (which many choose to give up knowing the true health dangers when educated factually) should be legal and standards controlled. (ie. I dont think there is a regular heroin or meth user that isnt a junkie where as its easy for somone to take pills every now and again or smoke the odd joint and be none the worse for it)

Oh wait, you admitted it yourself, you don't even know if you are making a point so why do I bother responding.

haha you idiot. I was making a subtle and sarcastic observation on anti-drug bandits propencity to jump onto some kind of drugs have made melted your brain bandwagon. congrats on keeping up appearances.

edit: I wish these sorts of threads were banned on QGL, I cannot help but post in them even though I know that no matter how much I say nothing will ever change.

last edited by qmass at 14:20:13 16/Oct/06

edit: I wish these sorts of threads were banned on QGL, I cannot help but post in them even though I know that no matter how much I say nothing will ever change.

That's because - as injust as it is - our laws are made by voted politicians, and not me and Jim as it should be

I dont advocate things like heroin and meth which rip peoples lives apart but mostly harmless things, certainly as 'harmless' as alcohol and tobacco (which many choose to give up knowing the true health dangers when educated factually) should be legal and standards controlled. (ie. I dont think there is a regular heroin or meth user that isnt a junkie where as its easy for somone to take pills every now and again or smoke the odd joint and be none the worse for it)

thats all good and well, but then look at the other side of the ball

im 19, iv been in the 'drinking clubbing drug taking' scene for 2 years now. i know alot of people who take various amounts of different drugs.

the VERY VERY LARGE majority of these people i know (with myself being excluded) started at just a couple of pills per month, like 1-2 max per night once or twice a month.

If you have self control and are smart like i am, thats where it stays, for the large majority, it doesnt.

then you start snorting pills, then, you'll go to big day out and decide to take an acid tab or some wizz or some coke.

what im tryin to say is legalising s*** like MDMA and hooter is just gonna lead to those people taking the legal drugs as well as the f***ed up illegal drugs ( herion + ice)

Lol trog.

If you have self control and are smart like i am, thats where it stays, for the large majority, it doesnt.

I wouldnt go as far to say large majority, I am probably more "smart" than you are in terms of drug usage (ie less frequent, with vitamins (5-htp, L-tyrosine, liver, alpha-lipoic-acid(super antioxidant)).
I know of a lot of people are are fairly infrequent users.

Where do you draw the line but? Isn't alchohol a gateway drug too?

The government could legalise it, but put restrictions in place like those in place now with the psuedo-ephedrine cold and flu tablets. Say each person has a limit of 2 per month to 2 months. And they have to be screened before hand and ensure they do vitamins etc afterwards as well.
This shouldnt be in place ^ but id much rather have this than what it is like now. Its pretty f***ing easy to get onto drugs, and then its pretty f***ing easy to start dealing drugs and just getting fully f***ed up - theres no limits to how much they can have because they get free s*** for dealing.

People need to grow up and be more informed in general i think. But the information out there is either "Its really bad for you" or "we dont really know". I think more research needs to be undertaken, and that research needs to be freely available in laymans terms. Many people will try drugs because they see the government saying how bad it is and then they meet someone who has had it and tells them the scare-campaign is absolute bulls***. Instead of scare campaigns maybe the government should tell the straight facts?
/rant

existence is correct.

A lot of people don't have the self-control to know when to stop. Trying one thing makes them want to try another. I've seen this s*** drag people down, and in their own words, "it just starts with a pinger..."

Speeding is illegal because it's dangerous and even though some people have the ability to drive at speed safely, a lot of people don't and it ends in disaster. Same with drugs.

good call petey

if you are an abuser, u will get your fix however

whether its alcohol, gambling, prescription drugs

u can do just as much damage abusing legal substances as illegal (sup pokies, alcohol)

ive been taking pillz (in moderation) since the early 90's
i love em
they give me exactly what i want when im out
they make me friendly, give me energy to dance and ive never not have a good nite when i take them

i dont doubt that the pillz are doing some damage, but everything does, so i try and use moderation

i dont go out every weekend, not even every month, just special occasions

i dont commit crimes to pay for my supplies, i pay my taxes, and im not hurting anyone when im out

leave me alone coppers

f*** me, existence from left field with the good response

mind=blown ;)

actually reports are that there is higher per capita use of ecstacy in brisbane than anywhere else in the world.

and australia, is also higher per capita than any other country. UK may have more but the per capita use is less

It pushes the price up and that leads to a mini crime wave.

i've never heard of an exctasy-bust crime wave. Sure, people may not pop pills because supply has affected price but I think you will find they will just take less or switch to something else.. certainly not going to lead to B&E's and muggings. They are cracking down on "recreational dance drugs" not get-a-fix-or-die type drugs.

If they legalised all drugs, what would the criminal underworld revolve around?

protection rackets, like the good ol days

I guess it all comes down to how serious the politicians are about stopping the "problems". Harsher punishments would fix it - like I said, if there were no demand there would be no supply, just like harsher punishments would fix any problem eg having only 1 point on everyone's lisence so you can't even get one offence (it would make a lot of f***in safer drivers out there), harsher penatlies for people who get into drunk fights etc. But if criminals keep just getting a smack on the wrist for doing these sorts of things then the problems will keep happening.

I guess another argument would be, every time you buy drugs off a supplier you give that person money and permission to sell drugs of all sorts to other people who might not have the same restraint as you.

fact: prices of pills never rise after you see those reports on the news of '11ty billion dollars worth of pills were seized today' even their estimates are bulls***, they use a street value of like $45 each to make their report sound good IRL it's more like $35

pete, i wouldn't really class wizz as a step up drug from pills they are pretty even i reckon, and wizz doesn't f*** with your brain chemestry so much. there is a rather large line between licking a point of wizz and either injecting wizz and/or smoking crystal meth. but as usual if you've watched 60 minutes and what not it's all blanketed as speed or amphetamines. with no real distiction between pills and the nasty stuff like meth

like I said, if there were no demand there would be no supply

I don't really get it, you go arrest a bunch of kids you're not really getting rid of demand. Demand for drugs is always going to be around as long as the drugs exist, and people know what effects they'll do for them. For every drug user the police remove from society and put in a cell, another one will pop up...it's inevitable...

Billy: It's been proven many times over in many countries that harsher penalties do not significantly alter crime rates.

yeah true speed is on the same lvl at eccs for sure.

except you cant f***ing sleep ... man thats the worst ;p

and your eyes are this open O O

other countries shouldn't determine ours..

i don't think they would pop up somewhere else, because the people know the consequences therefore would choose the safe option to not do them.

umm you can go to jail for life for killing someone, but people still kill people.

haha yeah it's annoying hey especially if you have some and then everyone decided to leave and go back to someones house or something. so you just sit there O_O no point going home cause you can't sleep

umm you can go to jail for life for killing someone, but people still kill people.

A lot less than the amount of people that do drugs though.

Ex A: i had a bunch of mates at school who used to choof up cones every morning before class, they are now deabeats who work to choof.

Ex B: Some of my other mates moved onto party drugs. They used to live for the weekend until they thought "f*** it why not bring the weekend to me", so they took pills on the weekdays too. They're all deadbeat junkies now too.

Ex C: Being an aged care nursing home operator I read about some of the ample research coming out of medical science at the moment which suggests dementia will become the leading cause of poor mental health over the next 20 years, primarily due to abuse of dangerous substances. Now alcohol and tobacco have been round for thousands of years so they ain't leading the charge. It's the new s***. It fries your brain.

In summary, f*** locking the junkies up, that is a waste of tax dollars. Offer them rehab for sure, cause one less junkie is good for society, alternatively if they kill themselves society will be better off that way too. But the one thing I am not looking forward to is this generation of physically healthy younger people, who no longer function in society due to the excessive use of marijuana, speed, ecstacy, meth and other social drugs in their youth.

I just don't get it to be honest.

ermm unemployment hasnt exactly spiked in fact it is lower than ever.
damn deadbeat junkies!

lol anecdotal evidence.

yeah good ol party drugs, building a stronger australia. screw the grants to tech college, the govt should be handing out bikkies!

i don't think they would pop up somewhere else, because the people know the consequences therefore would choose the safe option to not do them.

There's a fair bit of drug education in schools today, but that doesn't neccesarily stop people from doing drugs...so how will things dramatically change just because you make the punishments harsher????

punishment is not a deterrant. in fact it acts as an incentive in most cases of anti-social behaviour. this is because the risk of being caught forms part of the excitement generated by the behaviour.

i think that school based drug education is the best bet, it seems to be working for the anti-smoking movement pretty well.

last edited by infi at 17:52:13 16/Oct/06

yeah good ol party drugs, building a stronger australia. screw the grants to tech college, the govt should be handing out bikkies!

I didn't say that you f***.
But you definitely did say that its creating people that no longer function in society which is clearly not the case.

eK are you honestly telling me if you got put in jail for 3 months for using ecstacy, you'd come back out and use it again risking a longer jail term next time ? and more arse poundings ?

either way dale, that is never going to stop people using it

and you can simply say my drink was spiked if they somehow ever had the power to just take you aside in the valley and test you for drugs

more than reasonable doubt

and jails are over crowded as it is.

You're talking about hypotheticals now Dale. Yes, I might rethink about using ecstacy if I was put in prison for it. But as has been previously explained, the last thing we need is to fill our already overcrowded prisons with people that have ecstacy in their systems. Especially when rapists and people that bash other people get off with lighter sentences.

okay eK, but you got a pretty face ;)

In other parts of the world, people get years for first time offences... doesn't really work.

errr didnt u listen to dale?

other countries shouldn't determine ours..

guessing is far better than looking at actual examples. idiot.

Ex A: i had a bunch of mates at school who used to choof up cones every morning before class, they are now deabeats who work to choof.

Ex B: Some of my other mates moved onto party drugs. They used to live for the weekend until they thought "f*** it why not bring the weekend to me", so they took pills on the weekdays too. They're all deadbeat junkies now too.

Ex C: Being an aged care nursing home operator I read about some of the ample research coming out of medical science at the moment which suggests dementia will become the leading cause of poor mental health over the next 20 years, primarily due to abuse of dangerous substances. Now alcohol and tobacco have been round for thousands of years so they ain't leading the charge. It's the new s***. It fries your brain.

In summary, f*** locking the junkies up, that is a waste of tax dollars. Offer them rehab for sure, cause one less junkie is good for society, alternatively if they kill themselves society will be better off that way too. But the one thing I am not looking forward to is this generation of physically healthy younger people, who no longer function in society due to the excessive use of marijuana, speed, ecstacy, meth and other social drugs in their youth.

I just don't get it to be honest.

The thing that freaks me out about anti-drug people is the retardedly blind opinion they take - how can you say such complete horses***?

LSD, Marijuana etc dominated the 60s and 70s and the baby boomers are running the planet. strike one for your this generation comment. Drugs that have been around for thousands of years? Marijuana and shrooms have been around just as long... cultures have been using them for just as long...

and as far as 'studies' ? Ive seen just as many studies that say things like inverse relation between marijuana and cancer and reduction of mental impairment in alzheimers sufferers that smoked weed during their life. You cant really trust ANY studies it seems.

please show me the studies you have read which say illicit drugs are actually good for the health of your brain. this will be interesting indeed...

from spoon infi

alpha_zero0@hotmail.com says:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html
alpha_zero0@hotmail.com says:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4286435.stm

hahahahaha
snap

please show me the studies you have read which say illicit drugs are actually good for the health of your brain. this will be interesting indeed..

and qmass didn't even say that anyway
Why do you keep taking what someone has said and then twist it into a some really twisted implied meaning, just like you did with what I said about unemployment before.
We keep offering moderate views and you keep giving extreme responses.

ok. carry on.

Nice concession.

ok. carry on.

awhhh, thanks for playing. So you can question something that I say then when you see it you wont say that you were wrong you just act like, that doesnt change anything, keep trying. Why dont you prove that they ARE bad cause right now, you are the least convincing IMO.

i didn't finish sorry. i meant carry on quoting your "may" studies.

http://www.nida.nih.gov/nida_notes/NNVol14N4/Ecstasy.html

"Ecstasy" Damages the Brain and Impairs Memory in Humans

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1076381.stm

a team from University College London has completed research which suggests that former ecstasy users may suffer memory impairment - even a year or more after giving up the drug.

and talk about irony - this one was on the same website as your fluff study:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/2/newsid_2540000/2540141.stm

In a laboratory in New Orleans, rhesus monkeys were forced to smoke the equivalent of two cannabis cigarettes a day for nearly a year.

Electrodes implanted in their brains measured brain activity, and the results have indicated major if not permanent damage.

last edited by infi at 19:32:45 16/Oct/06

Those articles don't say that much existence`. The first one says says stuff may happen and is basically put in a way that indicates it is pure speculation with no data to prove it yet. Many (scientific) journal articles end the discussion section with wild speculation indicating potential future research in order to make the real findings outlined (i.e. with data to back it up) seem more important or novel to the reader (and more importantly reviewers/editors).

The second one isolates a single compound which seems good for you. That doesn't really balance out positve vs negative effects of all the compound present and it may be better to synthetically produce a cannabinoid and taken on it's own.

TALK ABOUT IRONY YOU ARE THE BIGGEST MORON IVE EVERY READ THE THOUGHTS OF IN MY LIFE.

I might have quoted something from a fluff study on the same website but they give an opposing view to that study ON THE SAME f***ING PAGE - why dont you read things and understand them properly?

In Context
The most famous research from the time was carried out by a Dr. Robert Heath of Tulane University Medical School, New Orleans.

His findings of permanent brain damage have been dismissed by similar, independently conducted studies. But other scientists have argued these methods of animal research are inconclusive.

The debate continues to rage about the merits and perils of taking the drug. For example, some research argues cannabis aids multiple sclerosis sufferers, while other findings indicate cannabis increases the risk of psychosis and is more carcinogenic than tobacco.

One in three adult Americans now admit to having smoked the drug. In 2000, around 750,000 people were arrested on marijuana charges. The federal government spends billions of dollars enforcing its prohibition.

In the UK, cannabis possession remains a criminal offence, although the drug has been declassified.

Exactly what I said... many many conflicting studies, its hard to know if any are right.

I said

Ive seen just as many studies that say things like inverse relation between marijuana and cancer and reduction of mental impairment in alzheimers sufferers that smoked weed during their life. You cant really trust ANY studies it seems.

and you completely took it out of context, yet again.

You might not use drugs but even with my brain damage caused by drugs it seems that im smarter than you.

wtf
He never said s*** about mdma and he never said cannabis and the brain either.

Again with you being like "no you're totally wrong" when they are wrong about something they didn't even say.

EDIT: also irony? aside from the fact that you're an idiot for the reasons qmass points out below... it's a f***ing news site. holy s*** it gives news of contradicting studies! motherf***ing wow!

also, that was from 1974.

last edited by reload! at 19:40:25 16/Oct/06

i didn't even read them, i posted them on behalf of sp00n, cause he has no qgl account

keep choofin'

as long as you keep being wrong, sure thing guy

i didn't even read them, i posted them on behalf of sp00n, cause he has no qgl account

Meh, doesn't matter anyway.... I think this is long past the pointless debate stage. Without someone qualified undertaking a lit review for the next month or so to get to the bottom of which studies are more/less flawed etc and weighing up the evidence accordingly we can't really come to any conclusions. Also articles on the BBC etc are pretty much useless because they can tend to pick up on unproven speculation in studies and make an article out of it suggesting it is fact.

keep choofin'

oh look, the catch cry of the loser. I think the thread can be locked now, infi has admitted defeat.

It's funny because we wern't even trying to say cannabis use is good for you.
qmass said there are conflicting studies and infi's like "BULLs*** CANNABIS IS GOOD FOR YOU! LOOK! HERE IS A CONFLICTING STUDY!!!"

i posted them on behalf of sp00n, cause he has no qgl account

he does now, I just saw him create one!

It's funny because we wern't even trying to say cannabis use is good for you.

qmass said:

Ive seen just as many studies that say things like inverse relation between marijuana and cancer and reduction of mental impairment in alzheimers sufferers that smoked weed during their life.

'Inverse relation between' pot and a couple of prevalent diseases is verging on good for you in some sense so I can see how this argument started.

'Inverse relation between' pot and a couple of prevalent diseases is verging on good for you in some sense so I can see how this argument started.

Jesus christ can you actually speak truth or do you just lie nonstop?

I said, STRAIGHT AFTER ON THE SAME LINE:

You cant really trust ANY studies it seems.

Thats all... nothing else. If your attention span is so short or your comprehension is that bad then I have no answers that will be acceptable to you becuase you simply cannot comprehend them.

He said he has seen studies that present that view.
and then it was followed by this

You cant really trust ANY studies it seems.

Kinda reinforcing that there are conflicting studies.
I don't even care which studies people believe. I was just annoyed that infi would make it seem like someone said something different to what they said. Then when they pointed out that's not they said he gives a stupid answer like "ok carry on" or "keep choofin."

EDIT: beaten by the cornhole himself :p

it has been a priviledge to take part in this e-battle

Alright I'm gonna throw my thoughts out there from a drug users point of view.

I've dabbled in alot of diffrent genre's of drugs, I've taken well known drugs such as LSD to research chemicals like 2C-I all the way to prescription opiates and benzos. All the while I moderated my use, which is extremely hard to do when you've felt pleasure so great and so superior to anything you will ever feel sober and then have to come face to face with the reality that nothing will make you feel that good again. Theres always that dude in the back of your mind who's saying "f*** it would be nice to pill right about now" but you deal with that and the longer you space each experience out the more that voice fades away.

I'd say in terms of negative effects I've recieved from my use, my vision has suffered the most and I equate that mostly to the 2C-I. I get terrible tracers from lights, everything is bright and can become splotchy at times and I find I'm always second guessing myself like "s*** is that wall breathing". I knew that HPPD might be a consequence, I read up on the drug and accepted that and this is where harm minimization comes into play.

Infi you brought up drug education in school, yes definately but the old "xtc puts holes in your brain and lsd drains your spinal fluid" s*** just doesn't cut it. Let's face it, if you wanna experience a drug you're going to and the goverment realises this, hell everyone does. So you take a class, sit them down tell them what effects(pro&negative) a particular drug has on someone, but tell them how to avoid harm like in the case of xtc you would tell them that you should keep your water fluids up, don't over exert yourself and of course don't drink TOO much water because you'll kill yourself. Now little johnny has an informed opinion on the matter and if he chooses to take xtc he can do it relatively safely.

I'm certainly not for legalisation of any drug, but I'm all for decriminalising pot. I don't think pot is safe in terms of mental issues but I think it's fairly unharmful on your body, keep it somewhat controlled so that it doesn't blow out. I could care less for these BUT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO GET DRUNK arguements because well f*** it's here to stay.

I would agree that MDMA is neurotoxic, for sure it is. I believe the worst problem with MDMA though is abusing the substance which causes seratonin defiecencys. From what I understand and this will be fairly easy to grasp is that you have a pool full of seratonin and when you drop a pill it's effectively just dumping it out and over 4-5hrs the water evaporates if you will. Cool no worries right, the brain will just make more and it does, for awhile anyway that is until you keep dropping so much that your brain can't work out the original seratonin level and this causes depression etc not to mention the fact that you have lost what is known as "the magic" in mdma circles.

No drug user will try and convince you it's safe, nor will any smoker or drinker but they will tell you "I'm doing this for my enjoyment, I know the consequences(harm minimization) and I'm ok with that."
Last but not least, the 5 people who had overdoses from what I gather were mainly GHB overdoses and cases of meth psychosis not from these crazy MDMA overdoses.

I guess I should also comment on these raids and my main problem with them is people are now taking more than they normally would because they wanna get high before they get to the valley and this does not end well. This leads to overdoses and also people are gonna be buying more than they nromally would. Which is good for the media and cops but just not right for the peeps who are out for a goodnight.

Cheers to those who drug up in moderation, and cheers to the non users who are not flat out bat s*** insane(maverik).

last edited by spoon at 20:24:03 16/Oct/06

Jesus christ can you actually speak truth or do you just lie nonstop?

Huh? I said I can see how the argument started between you guys. That's me stating my opinion and pretty much cannot be a lie, unless you feel that's not my opinion? I wasn't taking infi's side I was just saying why he probably started arguing with you. If you look back to my previos post of:

Without someone qualified undertaking a lit review for the next month or so to get to the bottom of which studies are more/less flawed etc and weighing up the evidence accordingly we can't really come to any conclusions.

That's actually agreeing with your point that you can't really use any of these studies in this arguement. Obviously that's not right as I lie non-stop according to you?

good post

wahey it's spoon where you been bro why aren't you on irc anymore

also nice post

I know a guy who has tried pretty much every drug he could get his hands on, in just about every way imginable (aye, even rectally). It was one of his goals in life, and he's achieved it. He now works in an ordinary 9-5 labouring job and leads a fairly normal, happy lifestyle. I had a chat with this guy once, and he explained to me the experiences he's had on different drugs, and it has deterred me more than any high school propaganda or teacher lecture ever could.

The difference was that it was a real revelation of facts and events by somebody who has tried these drugs. Like others have said before, a teacher telling students in school that "drug A f***s your brain" and "drug B makes you impotent" is going to have very little effect or none. In this case we're only being given the negatives as told by someboyd who's never tried teh drug. As a result there's still a relative degree of mystery and novelty surrounding said drugs. When this guy explained the different drugs to me, I learned not only the real side effects and down sides, but also the positives to so I could take all into account and make a proper educated decision on the topic.

For example, I know now that LSD can give you a fantastic trip that may feel so good you never want it to end, and there's no hangovers and stuff. But I'm also aware that you can have massive panic attacks and have night terrors and flashbacks as a result of taking LSD. It can also be very expensive and take a while to completely stop effecting your system. There's also the medical problems which you can read about in a text book. Taking all this into account, I can decide that LSD isn't something I want to try, and shall leave it alone WITHOUT temptation.

Now imagine a young 18 year old fresh out of high school just getting into the clubbing scene. Suppose they were offered some LSD at a party. Now in school they had heard that LSD does some really bad things to you in grimy detail. However they've only heard hearsay and conjecture about the good side, and there as a result could still have some curiosity. This curiosity could cause them to try the drug, or they may be scared into refusing yet still maintain this curiosity. This sounds entirely unhealthy to me.

To summarise, I think kids need to be tought in school, by people who have tried the drugs and know what they are talking about. Kids need to be given the chance to ask any questions they have about drugs without fear of ridicule or reprimand. A high school student can go to a school nurse or a doctor (i.e. an experienced professional on the matter) to get information about how to practice safe sex, without their parents ever having to find out. Why aren't teens given access to real, serious answers about the drugs they see around them? Access to condoms and safe sex education have saved countless lives. Teens aren't going to stop having sex so we did the next best thing and taught them how to do it safely. Kids aren't going to stop taking drugs, so why not do the next best thing and teach them how to do it safely? The current system clearly fails.

Just to touch a little on what crizane said, when people freak out on acid or shrooms the first thing they're gonna think is "What bad things will this drug do?", now if you're an informed person you will realise that you just need to change your setting and calm down, maybe have a beer or benzo. The uninformed person is either gonna freak out in a big way and harm himself or others or hes gonna run to the hospital where he will be strapped down and have himself pumped with charcoal and have a nice catheter in his pee hole.

This is another thing which causes alot of bad attention to drugs, so seriously if you wanna use then get educated on the drug.

PS. Not that I've followed this rule but I think you should always have an experienced sober trip sitter with you, especially if you're trying something new.

"I'm doing this for my enjoyment, I know the consequences(harm minimization) and I'm ok with that."

That's what it boils down to for me and that's the role of education. Lay out the pros and cons then the kiddies can make up their own minds and can never say no one told them about the risks.

Despite living in a nanny state during the digital age, life is still hard, difficult, ruthless, relentless and immeasurably demanding. Also surprisingly enough one does inexorably become bored senseless after x years in the party scene.

So as an exercise count how many trully successful people you know who still blow thier brains out on X, speed, H, acid etc with monotinous regularity? Oh yeah and I do mean a lot older than 25 by the way.


Just food for thought.


last edited by C0deBasher at 23:38:19 16/Oct/06

So as an exercise count how many trully successful people you know who still blow thier brains out on X, speed, H, acid etc with monotinous regularity? Oh yeah and I do mean a lot older than 25 by the way.


Just food for thought.

What? That you have fun when you are young, been there done that, and move on? I dont see what your point is. How many trully successful people do you know go out and blow their brains out on alcohol with monotinous regularity oh yeah, and I do mean alot older than 25 by the way.

Suppose they were offered some LSD at a party.

hahaha bulls*** that ever happens. Any drug I have ever tried I have had to seek out.

also I found that pretty much the only reason I've ever tried the things I've tried is because I've heard about it from people who have tried it. I heard people talking about them and they sounded rad so I went looking for it. I've tried heaps of things and then not been interested in doing it again.

I think some of the pressure comes from the media constantly throwing it in our faces. Defintely not the main reason but I think it had an effect on me being curious when I was younger.

last edited by reload! at 00:35:23 17/Oct/06

hahaha bulls*** that ever happens. Any drug I have ever tried I have had to seek out

Uh, every illicit substance I've ever tried or had the opportunity to try has been first ever offered to me at a party, usually by a friend or acquaintance. Weed, ecstacy, LSD, speed, they've all been offered to me at parties.

Think before you try to be a smart ass. It was just one possible hypothetical situation to make my point. I never said it happens to everybody, nor did I say it was the only way somebody could wind up trying an illegal substance.

well jesus I want people to offer me free drugs!
im just jealous :(

LOL!

Yeah I realise the whole "so if somebody offers drug x at a party, what do you do?" kinda thing does sound a tad cliche, but it really does happen...

... too bad only the first one is free :(

I know a guy who has tried pretty much every drug he could get his hands on, in just about every way imginable (aye, even rectally). It was one of his goals in life, and he's achieved it.

I laughed so hard when I read that.

That truly has to be one of the most retarded things I've heard in quite some time.

mmm, shafting

That truly has to be one of the most retarded things I've heard in quite some time.

We can't all be doctors, sweetheart. While it may not be a goal you or I would aspire to, this guy set a goal for himself and he achieved it. Who are you to judge him?

How many of your goals and dreams have you achieved? Do you have any? Are the ones you have even yours, or seeds planted within you by your parents?

We can't all be doctors, sweetheart.

HAhahaha that so sounded like Sawyer. Are you going to append your next condescending statement with "freckles"?

Ok, so maybe that wasn't a very nice way of phrasing my thoughts...

Irrespective -

I'd hope he/she had a little more self esteem than to want to just expt with drugs in life...and to call that an achievement. That's almost like saying "one of my greatest achievements in life is trying every different type of cheese". Make sense?

Either way, glad to hear your friend is reasonably sensible and knows their limits.

My mum told me that drugs were bad so I don't take them. True story!

My mum told me that smoking is bad, I don't do that.

My mum said drinking in moderation is okay when you're a responsible adult. I drink in moderation.

My dad told me to treat women right, I treat women right.

Maybe you guys need to find parents who care enough to share their life experience with you while having built a mutual respect relationship that allows you to take onboard their life experience and wisdom without having to go and make all the same mistakes they made.

I don't blame you guys for taking drugs ... I blame your parents for not loving you enough to bring you up right.

"one of my greatest achievements in life is trying every different type of cheese"

Now that's a life ambition worth striving for!! mmmm cheese.

Remember the late 80's and early 90's, when 'drug education' was scare tactics? They never actually educated people on drugs, they just reinforced the worst possible scenario of the most deadbeat junkies and pushed it. It worked to some degree, the results are posting in this very thread. They have no f***ing idea what they're talking about and appear naive to the point of rediculousness to anyone actually educated on the subject.

Drugs aren't going away, and I guarentee you the people who use recreational drugs in moderation are having more fun then you'll ever know.

PS Just for the record, I don't have any doctors in my family and my dad is still pushing for me to go into business/economics...

So in answer to your question, every thought I have in life is my own and/or one I have independently decided to be reasonable/to my liking. I'm going into med purely out of interest in the subject.

PS just for the record Stinky, if you're serious, you're a f***ing idiot.

i've always wanted to learn french.

edit: also this just in

courier mail

last edited by infi at 08:21:00 17/Oct/06

That's almost like saying "one of my greatest achievements in life is trying every different type of cheese".

That would be awesome! In general cheese is great and was part of the driving force behind my greatest achievement - trying every letter (pizza) at the UQ pizza cafe.

PS just for the record Stinky, if you're serious, you're a f***ing idiot.

My father once told me that in order to be offended by a person I must first respect them. Strangely, I don't find your words offensive ... what could that mean ?

So in answer to your question, every thought I have in life is my own and/or one I have independently decided to be reasonable/to my liking. I'm going into med purely out of interest in the subject.

Who are you trying to convince? My point is that you're obviously of above par intelligence can aspire to higher goals, where as this guy may not have been. He has more 'normal' goal these days, like owning a home etc. A lot of people's dreams and aspirations are based on something other than their own desires. This person went out and found their own goal, and accomplished it. This wasn't something their parents pressured them into, nor was it something he just had to do to 'succeed'. Just because you and I are capable of more prestigious and respected goals doesn't give us any right to sneer at those of others.

That would be awesome! In general cheese is great and was part of the driving force behind my greatest achievement - trying every letter (pizza) at the UQ pizza cafe.

Oh man, I haven't had pizza there in a good 6 months. I'm going laters! :)

Now that's a life ambition worth striving for!! mmmm cheese.

Pfft. Been there, done that. Keep up boy! :P

There was a DJ from the family talking about it on Hack yesterday arvo, said the general vibe that night was people were scared the cops were being a******s and it was generally unorganised and chaotic. I reackon it was a dumb move and cost a f***load of money to turn up crappy results.

Stinky it scares me that you have no desire to live life outside of your parents guidelines. Staggering.

Dude, how totally wrong you are. by not having to make the same mistakes my parents made I have the opportunity to move forwards and improve myself and my life more than they were able to as I don't need to slow myself down stumbling over areas that they've shown me how to avoid. One day I'll be able to do the same for my own children and their lives will be even more eventful and fruitful than my own.

stinky i think you parents told you not to post on qgl

do it


reload i've been offered coke a coulpe of times now :p among other things.
granted not from complete strangers but friends of friends i met at the time.

I don't understand what sort of 'friend' would offer you drugs. Maybe you should hang around with better people. I would suggest looking into your local youth group for some friends who'll have a positive influence on your life ... not a negative.

shutup you twit

hey you know what stinky is totally right. i think im gonna fly straight now, thanks guy.

hahahaha taggs has seen the light, praise the lord

That's great taggs! I'm glad I could help you see clearly.

Egh.

Seems a bit frustrating that people both pro and anti drugs seem to be glazing over what Spoon has said when it actually manages to be a half decent read.

For those that are students(considering you should have access to it) which are unconvinced about dangers or anyone that really wants to actually have a look at studies on the Psycinfo and Medinfo databases - only need to put in Drug Abuse into the search to get a decent lot of responses - results range from increased panic attacks/panic attack sensitivity in longterm cannabis users, eating disorders and illicit drug links, causal depression and cannibis abuse, maltreatment of children under drug abusing parents or relations to parental figures, amplified risk for violence in schizophrenia spectrum disorder when substance abuse is involved, hell even the varieties of effects drug abuse can have on a menstrual cycle.

One thing I'd have to say though is that a lot of these studies deal with ABUSE, people will get curious, people will want to do what they want to do and the best form of management and protection isn't removal or scare tactics - its effective education about all the risks involved with taking any substance - pros and cons if you want but fewer people fall into traps if they know about correct usage and real risks.

Anyway, after a lot of study and dealing with this crap - let people do what they want to themselves if it doesn't affect you... if it comes round to doing so, seek a way to deal with it.

I'll let you e-heroes get back to your internet wars now

Harsher punishments would fix it - like I said, if there were no demand there would be no supply, just like harsher punishments would fix any problem eg having only 1 point on everyone's lisence so you can't even get one offence (it would make a lot of f***in safer drivers out there), harsher penatlies for people who get into drunk fights etc.

wrong. did you know that in queensland from 1977 to around 1986 peterson introduced the 'drug misuse bill' that gave police extra powers to search & sieze, detain without warrants for 48hours & mandatory sentencing for illegal drug users. there was a mandatory life sentence (15years with hard labor) for any drug possession, even just a joint. during this period anonomous surveys showed a steady rise in drug use. when the bill was rescinded in the late 80's, as the national party started to fall apart as it's corruption was unvieled by the fitgerald enquiry, surveys showed the same rise in drug use.

there will always be recreational drug use. let the punishment fit the crime.

err demon didn't you read, other countries shouldn't determine ours..

O WAIT!

Gotta love the damage control from the Brisbane pigs:

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,20590437-3102,00.html

"A FLURRY of text messages may have prevented police from nabbing more drug offenders in a late-night raid in Fortitude Valley at the weekend."

Sure. Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the cops just messed up, would it?

Oh, and to the dill who claimed that "Harsher punishments would fix it - like I said, if there were no demand there would be no supply": yeah, the death penalty prevents murder, rape, heroin trafficking, etc... Get a clue. While you're at it, outlaw alcohol and tobacco, too, and give possession of those a 'harsh punishment'. I'm sure people will straighten up and fly right in no time *rolls eyes*.

Prohibition = black markets = more harm caused. It's very simple.

LOL such an intresting thread,

Government Would be better having a drug Zone, where People could try different drugs without any issues,And the Government should Make Drugs,

This Would .


A. Remove Dealers
B. Cover the Costs of Ambo overdose Call Outs+ Profit for Government
C. Allow Drug Users to Have a safer enjoyable time
D. Isolate Areas of Drugs = More happier people both sides of the issue

War on drugs is not stopable, It would be better to Remove Dealers and make some money to help with other issues than get nothing. (50% of something is better than 100% of nothing)

* I don't take drugs.

stinky speaks the truth

my dad told me to not talk at dinner. i do that though.

Government Would be better having a drug Zone, where People could try different drugs without any issues,And the Government should Make Drugs,

hell yeah, call it hamsterdam

do it

my parents told me lots of stuff as well

but i like to find out things for myself, coz im my own person

my parents never told me to play sport, and that could have been a disaster, coz sport is the best thing in my life

Anyway, after a lot of study and dealing with this crap - let people do what they want to themselves if it doesn't affect you... if it comes round to doing so, seek a way to deal with it.

Words to live by (at least I do). In the end thos who want to do drugs will do them and those who don't, won't. But those who keep whinning that they should be made legal should get a clue, they are illegal and at least in our lifetimes they never will be made legal. You break the law, you pay the price.

that's true, i have many a friends who do drugs which i don't agree with, but it doesn't mean i'm not going to be their friends, what they choose to do with their body is up to them

it's the same with smoking, which i passionately hate, i would prefer they didn't do it around me or in my face, but i'm not going to hate them because of it..

just because i don't agree with drugs doesnt mean i hate all you who do it.
look @ rev, i <3 rev!

I agree with Tanaka.

I don't do drugs, but I have many friends who do. Do I give a s***? No. Each to their own.

I don't go around preaching how drugs are bad, so I don't want u doped up c***s preaching to me about how great and harmless they are. My friends don't pressure me to use them, and I don't pressure them not to use them. Everyones happy.

It's futile to argue that drugs should be legalised so stop wasting your breath - it AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

Oh and to all those people who say "drugs make me happy and loving and a great dancer, and I get along with everyone when im on drugs!". Get a clue. Have u ever actually been sober when you've seen or spoken to people hepped up on s***? They look f***ing rediculous. They dance like lunatics whilst all the time they think they're Michael Jackson. And then they bail u up for a "deep and meaningful" conversation all the time talking a million miles an hour and even though you haven't been able to get a word in edgeways, they think they've just had the best conversation of their lives with u. Then there's all the chewing and teeth grinding, and the sweating and sputtering.

I don't do drugs because I think they're dangerous, I don't do drugs cos I don't want to look like a f***ing tool.

Right now many of u hippies will be itching to write a comparison of boozed people to drugged people (i dont know the 'cool' word for it). Well don't waste your time, because it's a whole other level. I've been to 1000 bars and clubs in my time and interacted with thousands of people either drunk or the a to z of drugs, and the drug people are 1000x more irritating and disruptful than the drunks. And if u argue otherwise it's probably because you're so out of it when u go out your perception is completely askewed.

Do I give a s***?

From the rest of your post it sounds to me like you do give a s***....

No, I'm actually a very mello person.

Whilst I don't enjoy being dragged into a conversation about nothing with a someone pinging or on whatever, I don't get revved up about it.

And I generally don't go out with the mates when they're doing pills and whatnot. Stick to my booze buddies when I want to party.

The second part of my post is merely stating how the "other half" looks at the drug takers, and why their arguments are never going to get anywhere. As much as a lot of people will want to flame me, and although I have nothing personally against drug users, this is how the non-drug taking community looks at u.

I'm happy to let u guys do your thang and I'll do mine. U go to your raves, I'll go to my bars. Everyone wins : )

So you represent the whole non-drug-taking-community? or do you represent yourself and your own views?

I represent the whole non-drug-taking-community.

Dude, how totally wrong you are. by not having to make the same mistakes my parents made I have the opportunity to move forwards and improve myself and my life more than they were able to as I don't need to slow myself down stumbling over areas that they've shown me how to avoid. One day I'll be able to do the same for my own children and their lives will be even more eventful and fruitful than my own.

This, my friends, is what parenting should be all about.


Also, I think some people posting in this thread, should get an understanding of various reasons why people abuse drugs.

For the people saying there should be tougher laws, would it be ok for people to take drugs that are legal, or as yet not illegal?
There is a growing trade in all sorts of various plant extracts and synthesised drugs that have similar effects, sometimes even more powerful, that are not illegal. It seems that the speed of discovery, extraction and trade of these drugs is faster then the speed of making them illegal.

So, basically what I'm hinting at is, if you put very heavy laws on some currently known and abused drugs, people will tend to shy away from them and move onto something 'legally safer'. Usually substances that havnt been tested much and certainly have little to no long-term effects documented. Potentially making these people even more likly to be a burden on the economic system.

Most of the laws about drug use, in my opionion anyway, arnt really about protecting the drug-user, but more of a mechanism to protect the economy.

Here's an easy example of how the greater community looks at u recreational drug takers, by allowing the drug-users to look at another group of drug users...

Look at the attitudes on this forum when it comes to steroid use. 99.9% of u would be in the greater community view on steroid use and abuse. That is, you only know what u THINK u know. The media pumps it up and distorts the info with bs, and pretty much everyone buys into it. Apparently if u take gear then your nuts will dissapear, your dick shrinks, you start punching holes in walls and u have heart failure.

Reality is very different. Most of the drugs used by bodybuilders were pharmaceutically designed for medical treatment, and can be safely used for athletic performance enhancing. But what's important is the general public's PERCEPTION.

Even though many steroid users are very well versed in how to use them safely (many more are not), and pretty much every bodybuilder i know is a very mello person, the community perception of the drug use is that it's wrong and dangerous, and they'll point at a really big dude and whisper "what a freak. get off the steroids!". Much like non-rec users will point at some knob dancing up a storm with glowsticks and some crazy outfit and say "what a freak, get off the pingers".

This is why u can't win. Firstly you're outnumbered by those who are anti-drug use. Secondly, the media and hype out there is all geared against u and designed to perpetuate anti-drug attitudes.

Enjoy your drugs, but quit whinging about changing the laws because it is never going to happen. The whole idea that the government should start producing MDMA is laughable and just making u all look even more out of it. No offence.

I would like to add that I find it incredible that people are admitting to illegal drug use on a public forum - don't forget if the feds come knocking, your IP address is in these posts and is relatively easily traceable.

So do you actually talk to this greater community on a regular basis Le Cock?

When the laws are reversed and rec-drugs become legal u can come back and be a smartarse, eK. I won't be holding my breath though.

Sorry, I'm just trying to gauge how one person can represent the whole community before I can take any of your posts seriously.

Reality is very different. Most of the drugs used by bodybuilders were pharmaceutically designed for medical treatment

Alot of abused drugs were designed/studied for medical treatment, certainly dosn't make them any safer.
LSD, Morphine, THC, MDMA, Nitro Glycerine, Caffine, Panadol, Amphetamines, Pseudoephedrine, the list goes on and on.

Just like steroids, abuse of any of these will have adverse effects. Taken at the right time for the right reasons, however, they are potentially life saving. Dont really have a point to all this though, Spam I guess.

Umm I think the fact that drugs are illegal and we live in a democracy kind of runs with the idea that the general community are against drugs...


*edit: this is in response to eK, not Tollazor. ta.

the general community are against drugs...

I would have to say that assumption as it is quoted is incorrect.

You just have to look at figures for pharmaceutical sales and you can quite easily see that the Western world, at least, are huge druggies.

Only a small proportion of drugs are frowned upon by the 'general community'

EDIT: Also, you would have to ask, why do people frown at these drugs when they are quite gun-ho for the rest. Mostly it would be from media, which hopefully sourced scientific journals. However we know that the media isnt great with facts. I do agree that abuse of many drugs makes people strange tho.

EDIT: I figured it was ;)

last edited by Tollaz0r! at 13:39:24 17/Oct/06

Only a small proportion of drugs are frowned upon by the 'general community'

Now now Toll Booth, how can you say that when we have Le Cock in here representing the greater community and it's stern hatred towards illegal drugs?

Aren't we talking about the 'small proportion of drugs' tho???

We were, then you brought in the roid's, so I thought I'd up the ante too :D

The only reason i brought in roids was to allow the rec-drug users to see how non-rec-drug users view them.

By realising how they view steroid users, they can maybe see how non-rec users view them. This is of course assuming that they are not rec-drugs users AND steroid users.

Just trying to give some perspective.

I guess I was just trying to widen the perspective of Drug-Users viewing Rec-Drug-Users.

That, or I was trolling. Not sure. :)

The only reason i brought in roids was to allow the rec-drug users to see how non-rec-drug users view them

I'm a non-rec-drug user(s***, alcohol and coffee!) and have no intention in drug abuse (abusing my liver with alcohol for a few too many drinkin nights was enough) and I see the average rec-drug user as a pretty typical human -- sure a few of them may be a bit more foolish than non-taking counterparts... but you get fools in any walk of life - those that do too many drugs, pick fights and bite off more than they can chew, drive fast in a black spot :P Only got a real deal with people that abuse drugs and harm others

calculated risks.. Anyway all I'm sayin dude is please speak for yourself, not 'all non drug takers'

kthx

Right now many of u hippies will be itching to write a comparison of boozed people to drugged people (i dont know the 'cool' word for it). Well don't waste your time, because it's a whole other level. I've been to 1000 bars and clubs in my time and interacted with thousands of people either drunk or the a to z of drugs, and the drug people are 1000x more irritating and disruptful than the drunks. And if u argue otherwise it's probably because you're so out of it when u go out your perception is completely askewed.

While i respect your opinion on everything else you have said, in MY opinion this is a bit bulls***(yes there are many people who take drugs and alcohol for that matter too far).
I think that drunks (DRUNKS - not a few drinks) are f***ing REDICULOUS. Many people are violent and agressive and alcohol just makes it come out, the amount of times i have accidently bumped some drunk and had him yell and scream at me for knocking him is rediculous.
Yes i am argueing otherwise, and yes i have been out straight, few drinks and fully drunk. My early drinking days just make me cringe as to what a f***head i was (never violent mind you..), stumbling around, throwing up in toilets, almost passing out, making inappropriate comments/passes at people, being a general immature f***ehad. Now when i see people even remotely the same I don't want anything to do with them.

In my opinion people who moderate their usage of alcohol AND drugs (from what ive seen of people out) are fine to talk to, get along with. These are the people that are in control of themselves. But it seems every time i go out there is always 10x as many out-of-control drunks than there is out-of-control druggies.

But it seems every time i go out there is always 10x as many out-of-control drunks than there is out-of-control druggies.

Yeah but there's probably 20x as many people drinking alcohol than doing drugs.

I would like to add that I find it incredible that people are admitting to illegal drug use on a public forum - don't forget if the feds come knocking, your IP address is in these posts and is relatively easily traceable.

Would you honestly believe a public internet forum would be permissable evidence in court?

Yes your i.p. might come back to your house/computer/you, but there's nothing at all that says you weren't just lying to 'look cool'.

Anyway,

And then they bail u up for a "deep and meaningful" conversation all the time talking a million miles an hour and even though you haven't been able to get a word in edgeways, they think they've just had the best conversation of their lives with u.

Not entirely true.
People on something (Except usually weed) including alcohol are at least more receptive to talking to people [and that's how people SHOULD BE], you just have to facilitate the conversation pretty specifically and keep them on track.
Whereas alot of sober people are as socially and conversationally incompetant as a gorilla with a monkeywrench stuck around its dick and require just as much if not more effort.


To prove my point; Go for a walk tomorrow afternoon in the city and try to strike up conversation with complete random people, try people who don't look like they're in a hurry/anywhere to go - sitting down etc. might work.

You'll find people are usually uncessarily unreceptive and defensive to begin with.
If someone walks up to you on the street and says "hey" I bet your first thought is "what does this person want?" and I bet you're thinking something 'negative' "they just want something from me, money or a cigarette etc."...

The majority of people's natural behaviour when sober is actually very anti-social, which is strange considering most people's basic desire and drive is to be sociable with other human beings (And share experiences/thoughts/feelings etc. with another), but that's where drugs/alcohol come in...

Repeat same thing with people on drugs [including alcohol] and that disappears, yeah, maybe the world would be a better place if we were all fried as f*** on E. 24/7, who's to say...

But one things for sure, taking drugs/alcohol gets people closer to what people ulimately want (to be sociable with their fellow man [or girl]).
Not all drugs fall under this category of course.

So, I propose then, if all people were able to be more sociable, less insecure about themselves (e.g. dancing) would they need drugs? Hard to say, but given the context and reason they're taken - possible not as [some] people would be happier with themselves in an unaltered state of mind...

Which brings us back to the original point... If people are 'unhappy/unsatisfied' with their state or capability of mind when sober/straight, what does that tell you about 'sober being better'?
That it's completely relative, each person has unique experiences and thoughts.
And basically you saying that 'everybody is better off sober/straight' is bulls***.

I propose something else - If ecstacy, for example, could be made so that it had a guarantee (scientifically proven) ZERO adverse health-effects (no possibility of death from OD/no long term damage etc.) but still had the same desired effects as current (extreme euphoria, lowered inhibitions etc.) would you still say it's wrong to take it?

Probably if you take a stupid (imo) religious stand-point on the issue.

They look f***ing rediculous. They dance like lunatics whilst all the time they think they're Michael Jackson.

Says who? says you who's sober/straight?
Why are they 'dancing like lunatics'? Is it because your perception of dancing is to stand there likea brick with arms and sway about occasionally moving your arms?
Is your perception of dancing that it 'has to look good'? Why?
Or is it about having fun and being 'free' to enjoy the rhythm etc. and not care about what it looks like?
Or can it be about both? But can also be about one or the other and still be just as good?

I mean no offense, but your own 'sober/straight' thoughts on the whole issue are actually pretty narrowminded without seemingly much consideration into your own perspective.

[edit] expanded a little.

last edited by Loki at 14:56:09 17/Oct/06

Have you been to the beat/rockafellas/family? Every 2nd-3rd person seems to be on drugs!

And then they bail u up for a "deep and meaningful" conversation all the time talking a million miles an hour and even though you haven't been able to get a word in edgeways, they think they've just had the best conversation of their lives with u

hahahahaha

quoted cause it's true, except the part about not getting a word in.

catholic church banning the use of condoms in AIDS infested communities!

By the churches opinion they shouldn’t have been f***ing anybody but their wives.

Copernicus 100years before Galileo was persecuted by the church for suggesting that the earth wasn't the centre of the universe.

You don’t need to be religious to be a persecuting f***. In fact, any governing body will persecute people that don’t agree with them. Here’s one for you, China.

actually thats the definition of democracy, just because a very small number of the morons think differently to the rest of the morons doesn't make their opinions any more valuable.

No, not really. Real democracy works only when people are informed and can make intelligent decisions on that information, otherwise you end up with America and to a lessor extent, Australia. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not blindly attacking America here; most of their population don’t vote, don’t care to vote, and are not informed.

Gotta love the damage control from the Brisbane pigs:

Everybody hates cops, until you really need one.

hai guyz drugs are bad mmkay!

wahey there goes the neighbour hood typo joined the thread

I find it incredible that people are admitting to illegal drug use on a public forum - don't forget if the feds come knocking, your IP address is in these posts and is relatively easily traceable.

Saying that you take drugs isnt a big deal, it is nothing compared to that hooker i killed last week

Would you honestly believe a public internet forum would be permissable evidence in court?

Yes your i.p. might come back to your house/computer/you, but there's nothing at all that says you weren't just lying to 'look cool'.

Oops I left my wireless router unsecured and I guess someone haxed into my network from outside and posted s*** through my account!!!!


NFI how well that'd stand up but with the huge rise in wireless home networking taking off recently a lot of which are setup unsecured by complete nubes... I am really interested to see what kind of laws come into play governing this kinda s***.

Would you honestly believe a public internet forum would be permissable evidence in court?

Yes your i.p. might come back to your house/computer/you, but there's nothing at all that says you weren't just lying to 'look cool'.

Are you serious? People get slammed in jail for s*** they do online ALL THE TIME. Do you think the feds all over the world aren't using the Internet to keep track of terrorists?

If you want to test your little theory, go to some random Australian forum and make a post about how you like having sex with 6 year olds and see how long it takes you for the police to kick your door down at 4am. If it's longer than 24 hours I'd be f***ing surprised.

The police can request pretty much any information they want from an ISP if they believe a crime has been/will be committed, IIRC. Obviously the scale of things here (ie, random pill-popping teenybopper dancers) is different to serious crimes, but s*** - don't confess to criminal activities in public if you don't want to get arrested.

Alternatively, keep confessing to criminal activities in public because that's just evolution in action as far as the rest of us are concerned :)

If they're reading this forum, they'll probably go to our ISP and ask them for details - they'll then ask us. What do you think we'll do?

NFI how well that'd stand up but with the huge rise in wireless home networking taking off recently a lot of which are setup unsecured by complete nubes... I am really interested to see what kind of laws come into play governing this kinda s***.

This is basically probably your only chance - and it's a pretty slim one. At the moment you might be better off leaving your network completely insecure and blaming it on the hardware manufacturer.

But yeh - eventually THE MAN will plug that gap, and you'll soon be entirely responsible for what happens on your connection (s***, you might be already depending on how the law is worded, I don't know).

The feds are just biding their time until the next QGL lan when they can get us all in one big sting! But the joke's on them! Ha!

How could they get your account details from stealing your bandwidth?

And just for the record I'd like to say that it is NOT illegal to be under the influence of any illegal drugs. What some people are suggesting in regards to harsh penalties is frankly f***ing stupid. Do you all want to live in some sort of police state or something?

To prove my point; Go for a walk tomorrow afternoon in the city and try to strike up conversation with complete random people, try people who don't look like they're in a hurry/anywhere to go - sitting down etc. might work.

You'll find people are usually uncessarily unreceptive and defensive to begin with.

In my last job I was required to ask people for opinions on software applications. I had to get a mostly random sample, so I would approach pretty much everybody. The vast majority of people are polite and, assuming that they are not busy, often likely to help. Most of the people who don’t want to assume that their lack of technology will hinder the test.

Out of the hundreds of people I’ve interviewed, polled, or surveyed I’d have to say that I’ve only had a handful of people who where actually rude or anti-social.

Maybe you just look like a pov c***.

Repeat same thing with people on drugs [including alcohol] and that disappears, yeah, maybe the world would be a better place if we were all fried as f*** on E. 24/7, who's to say...

Correlation doesn’t equal causation.

If people on drugs [including alcohol] are so awesome and friendly, why are there so many fights in the city late at night compared to, say, during lunch?

Repeat your s***ty experiment with anybody in most enjoyable social activity. Chances are they will be open for social engagement.

The problem is that you seem to be comparing two totally different situations and only pulling one item out that is convenient for your baseless argument.

When people are out doing stuff, they are there to complete some sort of task and come home. They are not thinking about social interaction other than everyday politeness. In social settings, people are there because of social interactions, and it totally changes their perceptions on new social interactions.

But one things for sure, taking drugs/alcohol gets people closer to what people ulimately want (to be sociable with their fellow man [or girl]).
Not all drugs fall under this category of course.

Alcohol doesn’t really get people closer to anything.. It gives them a socially acceptable excuse for acting like a d*******. “Oh, don’t worry about Bob, he’s pissed as f***”. I don’t know about you, but every time I’ve been so drunk I’ve done stupid s***, I’ve still known it was stupid. You’d have to be practically paralytic not to know you’re being a douche.


---

Quite frankly, do as much drugs as you want. Just make sure that when you're old and f***ed up you just take yourself outside and shoot yourself.

In my last job I was required to ask people for opinions on software applications. blah blah lolol

There's a difference between asking people to do a survey such as that, your intentions are expressed instantly and removes any doubt as to what your intentions are.
Just walk up and start talking to someone, asking them how their day was, what they do for a living and start to get an understanding of who they are and lead to a flowing conversation, you know, actually get to know them [or start to] etc.
You'll find people are alot more apprehensible..

You fail.

I stopped reading here, because the chronicles of 'Typo The Sheltered - Level 14 Mageknowitallanswerforeverythingcantbewrongquotelineforline' are jsut too f***ing gay to read.

Alcohol doesn’t really get people closer to anything.. It gives them a socially acceptable excuse for acting like a d*******. “Oh, don’t worry about Bob, he’s pissed as f***”. I don’t know about you, but every time I’ve been so drunk I’ve done stupid s***, I’ve still known it was stupid. You’d have to be practically paralytic not to know you’re being a douche.

Alcohol relaxes me and loosens my tounge a bit. Allowing me to be more at ease in social situations therefore allowing me to get closer to my friends. I rarely get the stage where i do something stupid, because i never let myself get that drunk.

And just for the record I'd like to say that it is NOT illegal to be under the influence of any illegal drugs. What some people are suggesting in regards to harsh penalties is frankly f***ing stupid. Do you all want to live in some sort of police state or something?

Yeah but your wording may f*** you over.
For example i read about a person who was at a drug raid and was woken by police asking him if he has drugs or bought drugs of this person. Being half asleep "I havn't had anything for 6 months" - cops took it to meat he hasnt had anything on him for 6 months therefore busting him for possession 6 months ago.
Different situation yes, but can easily be applied.

Alcohol doesn’t really get people closer to anything.. It gives them a socially acceptable excuse for acting like a d*******. “Oh, don’t worry about Bob, he’s pissed as f***”. I don’t know about you, but every time I’ve been so drunk I’ve done stupid s***, I’ve still known it was stupid. You’d have to be practically paralytic not to know you’re being a douche.

Yes... that's if you're completely drunk. But if you've just had a few drinks you'll find your confidence grows and you're more likely to spark up conversations with other people. It's a social lubricant.

typo is obviously the sort of drinker who can't stop with one

just like he can't stop with 1 <quote>s

so what are you doing tonight joanna ;)

Getting lubricated.

by me

on another note, i wonder how many people actually read through typo's posts

Yes... that's if you're completely drunk. But if you've just had a few drinks you'll find your confidence grows and you're more likely to spark up conversations with other people. It's a social lubricant.

But why is it a social lubricant? Because it’s socially acceptable to do silly things after you’ve had a few drinks.

typo is obviously the sort of drinker who can't stop with one

If you’re only going to have one drink, what’s the point of drinking.

on another note, i wonder how many people actually read through typo's posts

I touch myself at night knowing that you e-stalk me.

Drugs should not be legalised because then the stupid people will kill themselves... or maybe they should be.

Moderation is the key.

But why is it a social lubricant? Because it’s socially acceptable to do silly things after you’ve had a few drinks.

Who the f*** does stupid things after a few? How many drinks does it make YOU to be stupid?

Your twisting her words moron.

typo posts ?

i like alcohol and drugs

i like all fun things

I heard I could buy drugs in this thread confirm/deny?

Your twisting her words moron

No, not really. I think just generalised too much. Her point was that alcohol gives you more confidence. My response was meant to say it wasn’t the drug that gives you confidence, it’s the social allowances that we make because of alcohol.

nope its definately the alcohol.

ps. spook knows where its at

i really don't know why you are complaining typo, if it wasn't for alcohol you'd have never had sex you ugly c***

Don't answer its a booby trap!

It's not a good argument for pro-drugs to say "alcohol is worse than drugs, alcohol is legal so drugs should be legal!"

It doesn't work that way.

Using that argument would work more towards illegalising alcohol rather than legalising drugs.

2 negatives don't make a positive. You're basically saying "both are bad so both should be legal!". s***e argument.

i really don't know why you are complaining typo, if it wasn't for alcohol you'd have never had sex you ugly c***

That’s rohypnol, not alcohol.

Besides, I’m not complaining about anything. I’m pointing out that Alcohol as a drug doesn’t give people confidence, it’s the social acceptance of drunk people that in turn gives people confidence.

p.s. my girlfriend says I’m cool.

What some people are suggesting in regards to harsh penalties is frankly f***ing stupid. Do you all want to live in some sort of police state or something?

if jack bauer is in charge, yes.

Her point was that alcohol gives you more confidence. My response was meant to say it wasn’t the drug that gives you confidence, it’s the social allowances that we make because of alcohol.

Actually, a small to moderate amount of Alcohol lowers ones inhibitions, allowing one to speak their mind with a little less care for the consequences. They are still the person they were before-hand, only a little more of their unfiltered personality shows, mixed with slightly euphoric feelings due to the drug in their system. This can be viewed as a kind of psudeo-confidence, due to the drug. So I would say that the drug does indeed give you, at the least, a pseudo-confidence that has little to do with social allowances and more to do with the drug-induced euphoric feelings.

I for one, do not forgive someones actions, even partly, because they were drunk at the time. I'd like to think many others wouldnt also.

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/drugs-alcohol/dn9923-glossary-drugs-and-alcohol.html;jsessionid=PEEELPCCBHEO

I for one, do not forgive someones actions, even partly, because they were drunk at the time. I'd like to think many others wouldnt also.

only took me one stupid slut of a g/f many years ago to get drunk and f*** some random to tell me "oh but i was drunk" to never trust that excuse ever again.

I am not a huge fan of the drunk excuse, most of the time its something you wanted to say or do, but didnt feel you could do it while sober. In my opinion its a bit of both, alcohol reducing inhibition and people using it as an excuse.

I'm sorry guys i took down the twin towers... i was drunk.

*counts down to ASIO knocking down my door*

Retarded statements probably falls outside the scope of asio investigations.

due to the drug

or maybe due to social conditioning.

can we just lock this thread?

i really don't know why you are complaining typo, if it wasn't for alcohol you'd have never had sex you ugly c***

thread over

I cbf reading this thread but you'd have to be on crack to think the plane would take off lol

Yeah if a bunch of drug smuglers were in a plane on a treadmill wouldn't take off, anybody who says otherwise is a f***ing idiot. However IF one of the plane passengers were a priest, the plan will crash on some spooky island, only to be found by the priest's brother years later.

but guys, the planes wheels spin freely. it's pushed by the jet engines

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/pixEstix/towlie.jpg

That's the melody to funky town!

I shouldn't get high to come up with good ideas, I should come up with good ideas then reward myself by getting high.