Right, just been reading the "smoking ban" thread(s) and thought I'd throw this one out to the masses for a bit of fun.

Why exactly are some drugs illegal and some not, and who in their infinite wisdom decided which should and should not be illegal.

To take two examples, Tobacco and Ecstasy................................

Why is one so illegal and the other perfectly legal.................................

look into the stats regarding deaths (not the propaganda, the actual stats!!!)and ask yourself some questions.

Then compare the latter with alcohol and ask the same questions again............

I will say no more on my views on the subject just yet, I'll hand over to everybody else and see what happens!..............

Alcohol and cigarettes are taxed. I suppose they are socially accepted and the effects of alcohol (in moderation) and nicotine aren't really obvious at all (i.e. doesn't make someone hallucinate)

Mind altering drugs make you realise we are being shafted everyday of our lives Governments wouldn't like that

[Edited on 16/2/06 by Benzine]

as above mind bending drugs

(saying that some people are just as bad after a few drinks)

I just love em one the once was outside local shop Id never even Met him before he was obviously fuelled Up on everything and decided he could fight me I didnt even say anything to him..never looked at him etc etc

But he had what was coming to him So I knocked him down and he stayed there!

all these little fools who have adrink/drugs etc and change there attitude ie suddenly become nasty etc

Id like to leave them with some proper Shizo's at St Margarets that'd soon change there attitude on Life.....

Deceased American comedian Bill Hicks, did a great routine about substances.

Noting that the good drugs (alcohol and nicotine) where 'taxable", and the bad drugs (cannabis lsd etc) where not taxable also that never had there been an instance of people on Cannabis committing vandalism or fighting, he said it was not possible after a spliff.

I've never heard of a bunch of drug crazed hippies kicking shop windows in.........


Having said that, I work in the mental health services and have 1st hand experience of all the mayhem that both legal and illegal substances cause.

Cannabis does not suit everybody, and has been shown to trigger certain menta illnesses..............

[Edited on 16/2/06 by Surrey Dave]

newer drugs are tested for safety. Things like asprin and morphene are given safe maximum doses based on experimental data. Extacy, was tested for "legitamate" use and was found to be unsuitable, even as a prescription only drug.

Alcohol has been used for millenia. Not all that long ago it was drunk because ground / river water could not be relied upon to be clean and safe to drink. Alcohol has been tested and does have a prescribed maximum dose. Few people stick to it. For information, it is no more than 4 units in 1 day for a woman, 5 for a man, for no more than 5 consecutive days without a 2 day period of abstenance.

Tobacco has a zero safe maximum use.

Canabis is inteesting in that it is harmful to health in its common state but an extract is being used to treat MS on an experimental basis. We will soon have a prescription canabinoid drug for this purpose if the trials go well.

Sorry to be all sensible and potentially spoil a good arguement.

I've pondered that too; why should anyone, e.g. ythe government decide what we can or cannot pump into our own bodies?

In Victorian times, opium was smoked comonly (read any Sherlock holmes novel) and up to about the 20's coco cola contained cocaine (pretty sure it's not a myth).

no no no, that's the sort of answer I was interested Smart51!

The daft propaganda makes any sensible discussion impossible normally!!!

Yea, the mental health considerations are the things that have concerned me, certainly a real danger with overuse.

Having said that, overuse of alcohol and tobacco is hardly conducive to healthy living!!

The dilemma with alcohol & tobacco is mainly taxation & addiction. Yes, it is harmful, but the government earns so much in taxes that the economy would probably collapse overnight if either one were banned.

Cannabis has been on the fringe of legality for decades and I think that the government is seriously considering the legalisation of it so that it can capitalise on the taxes it could impose.

I also have connections with the mental health service and have personal experience with its influence in psychotic depression.

Like any drug, in small doses they can be harmless in most cases, harmful in some cases, and catastrophic in a few cases. It just depends on the catagory that you fall into.

daft propaganda? Canabis has been shown to be twice as carcinogenic as tobacco, though not as adictive. I'm talking about data here not opinion.

Small quantities of alcohol have been shown to be benificial to health. No quantity of tobacco is safe.

There is a popular liberal attitude that says that you should be alowed to do whatever you like to yourself so long as it doesn't affect others. I am broadly inclined to agree, especially the "doesn't harm others" bit. Some say that E doesn't harm others and that it is only danerous if you get a bad batch. OK. SENSIBLE use of alcohol is also safe and social. Overdosing on paracetemol is more dangerous than overdosing on alcohol but whenever a smoking ban is discussed, someone whinges about alcohol but never paracetomol. What about heroine or crack. Are you sure that one person being a wasted addict doesn't affect anyone else?

Smoking does affect others, whether you smoke tobacco or other stuff. regardless of the effect on the user, it is wrong to do something that affects the health of other people, without their consent.

I think that the reason tobacco has not been banned......yet, is because it has been around hundreds of years before we realised the damage. I remember that it was not until the early seventies that it was labelled with health warnings.
You cannot just withdraw this drug quickly, there would be rioting!
People are gradually being weened off it, by it's high price and the gradual social pressure, but it will take time.
Canabis has been regarded (by those who take it) as a harmless drug. I think that this is untrue if it is smoked, as there are still poisons.
Most addictive drugs damage you. The effects created in the body are caused by the body producing chemicals to combat these poisons.
I have watched my cousin slowly move through these 'soft' drugs until paranoia set in and then he became a secret drinker.
He was 2 weeks older than me and up until our teens, were inseperable.
He died 2 years ago, 2 months before his 40th birthday, after his weak liver could not handle normal doses of paracetamol that he was taking for a cold.
I watched a thin man baloon into this swollen person that I could not recognise, while his organs shut down one by one. It took 2 weeks for him to die.
Drugs of any kind have a slow effect on people. The ones who take them think that they do not.
All I can say is, I am still here and my cousin is not.

[Edited on 16/2/06 by nitram38]

quote:

---

Originally posted by smart51
daft propaganda? Canabis has been shown to be twice as carcinogenic as tobacco, though not as adictive. I'm talking about data here not opinion.

---

At the risk of hijacking the thread...

I'm a smoker and am seriously concerned about the new smaoking bans. Not just because it affects me directly... but because I firmly beleive that if we let this one through the next one on the goverments list will be alchole... You've all seen and heard the rethoric about bing drinking and considering the nanny state that we all agree this country has become does anyone seriously think they won't consider banning booze?

As for the question at hand... Personally I think that so long as it harms no one else then someone should be allowed to do whatever they like to/with their bodies. Although I would also say that anyone that takes any halucinagenic substance should really take a look at their lives. People turn to drugs as a means of escapism. Drugs will not solve any problems only you can do that.

thyeve just bought in later opening times in pubs

" it is no more than 4 units in 1 day for a woman, 5 for a man,"



just out of curiosity is this based on ther average man of 5"10 (i beleive) and 75.79 kg

surely someone with extra body weight and size has more blood for the alchohol to be absorbed in so can injest more alchohol before it becomes "unsafe"

just a thought

because although im 17 and cannot legally drink and would neve r indulge in underage drinking honest it interests me that there can be a safe "limit" and surely someone under the weight of the average man this "limit" would have more of an effect. theres a big difference in the effect 4 units would have on a 10 stone skinny "chav" to the effect it would have on me being 20.5 stone which is pretty much nothing ....

hehe

since smoking is voluntary and it has been proven that it shortens peoples lives do you not think selling cigarettes to people is assisted suicide

quote:

---

Originally posted by DorsetStrider
I would also say that anyone that takes any halucinagenic substance should really take a look at their lives. People turn to drugs as a means of escapism. Drugs will not solve any problems only you can do that.

---

The number of units that is safe for an individual wll vary. I don't think that weight is a particular variable, so much as liver capacity. Ethnic origin has also been shown to be a contributory factor but this isn't widley publicised for some reason. Welsh people are more likely to be sensitive to alcohol, aparently, than other European groups.

It is the same with all other substances. Some people are more tollerant to paracetamol than others. A single prescribed limit is published for simplicity.

How many drinkers stick to the 4 or 5 units in 1 day limit? Lets say that a few people can manage 6 units without causing liver damage, or even 7. What proportion of drinkers stick even to that limit?

So let me get this straight....
It's ok for anyone to shoot up heroin because they are only harming themselves?
Err which planet are some of you people from?
How do these people then feed their habit?
A little robbery perhaps?
Then of course there are the discarded needles.....
But it's ok they're only harming themselves....Not the innocent kids who step on them on the beach...The cleaners who have to remove hundreds a night from public toilets...
Oh but of course stoned hippies don't harm anyone...Yea right...
The illegal drug trade doesn't use up huge ammounts of police resource... Doesn't actually harm anyone...
Come on guys think of the BIG picture not tiny isolated bits and pieces.
The fact is we are not becoming a "nanny" state in these areas. We are becoming less morally responsible as individuals and therefore laws have to be made to protect the innocent majority from the harmfull effects caused to them by an uncaring minority.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RazMan


But surely the same must be said for nicotine ... is probably the biggest addiction problem in the world next to alcohol.

---

I have just discovered that my son is addicted to computer and video games in the true sense of addiction

he had spent the day sitting on the sofa staring into space as he has been banned from the ps2 for his deteriorating behavour.

when asked what he spent his time thinking about, his reply was "the games and how i won or lost and how i could do things differently" he also has the physical with drawl symptoms (the dt's). my ex wife is metally ill with an obsessive behavour that he has inherited.

so when reserching addiction they are now thinking that it is not the drugs that are addictive but the persons nature that makes them more prone to addiction.

so the way i see it is that the powers that be are trying to protect the vunerable rather than the strong and as there cannot be one rule for one and one for every one else then everone has to be stopped.

Ditch

quote:

---

Originally posted by DorsetStrider
At the risk of hijacking the thread...

I'm a smoker and am seriously concerned about the new smaoking bans. Not just because it affects me directly... but because I firmly beleive that if we let this one through the next one on the goverments list will be alchole... You've all seen and heard the rethoric about bing drinking and considering the nanny state that we all agree this country has become does anyone seriously think they won't consider banning booze?

As for the question at hand... Personally I think that so long as it harms no one else then someone should be allowed to do whatever they like to/with their bodies. Although I would also say that anyone that takes any halucinagenic substance should really take a look at their lives. People turn to drugs as a means of escapism. Drugs will not solve any problems only you can do that.

---

If you really want to know the facts about the addictiveness of nicotine read Allen Carr's book "How To Stop Smoking The Easy Way". Fascinating reading. It explains lots of things about the tobacco habit. He maintains that it isn't really addictive at all... It's just a habit... It can't be an addiction as you get no physical withdrawal symptems when you stop...


Edit
Apart from becomming a fat bastard of course

[Edited on 16-2-06 by BKLOCO]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ditchlewis
I have just discovered that my son is addicted to computer and video games in the true sense of addiction

he had spent the day sitting on the sofa staring into space as he has been banned from the ps2 for his deteriorating behavour.

when asked what he spent his time thinking about, his reply was "the games and how i won or lost and how i could do things differently" he also has the physical with drawl symptoms (the dt's). my ex wife is metally ill with an obsessive behavour that he has inherited.

so when reserching addiction they are now thinking that it is not the drugs that are addictive but the persons nature that makes them more prone to addiction.

so the way i see it is that the powers that be are trying to protect the vunerable rather than the strong and as there cannot be one rule for one and one for every one else then everone has to be stopped.

Ditch

---

ditchlewis. We should maybe have a chat sometime your situation sounds remarkably similar to mine in lots of ways.

Sorry, off topic there

quote:

---

Originally posted by NS Dev

quote:

---

Originally posted by ditchlewis
I have just discovered that my son is addicted to computer and video games in the true sense of addiction

he had spent the day sitting on the sofa staring into space as he has been banned from the ps2 for his deteriorating behavour.

when asked what he spent his time thinking about, his reply was "the games and how i won or lost and how i could do things differently" he also has the physical with drawl symptoms (the dt's). my ex wife is metally ill with an obsessive behavour that he has inherited.

so when reserching addiction they are now thinking that it is not the drugs that are addictive but the persons nature that makes them more prone to addiction.

so the way i see it is that the powers that be are trying to protect the vunerable rather than the strong and as there cannot be one rule for one and one for every one else then everone has to be stopped.

Ditch

---

Sorry to hear about that, and fully agree with what you are saying, does make sense taken in that context. Only thing then is that Nicotine is MUCH worse than most illegal drugs when it comes to preying on the weak! I guess the answer there is on a post further up, you can't just ban it because it's use is too prolific perhaps?

---

I'm a firm advocate of legalising everything. I think that Tobacco, Drink Drugs are all bad for you. everyone knows this.
As are bacon butties, McDonalds, high speed driving, etc etc etc
More deaths in Scotland from Diet, lack of excercise than from drugs
Legalising it doesnt mean that people can shoot up in front of you or your kids.
We have waste bins, recycle bins, garden bins, so we can have sharps bins. The infrastructure to deal with syringes already exists.
discuss....

I completely agree Jumpy Guy, my viewpoint exactly.

Hearing views of those touched by problems does give me a twinge of guilt over my opinion though.

Certainly I think that tobacco being legal while many other and "less reputable" drugs are not is totally ridiculous.

Several of these "other drugs" are physically counter-addictive, and can only be used for a relatively short period before they become ineffective, whereas tobacco is completely the reverse!

People who are predisposed to have porblems such as addiction, will always have problems.
very sad, but true.

you cant legislate for this- drugs are illegal, yet lots and lots od people still take em.

its a health care issue, not a prohibition issue.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jumpy Guy
People who are predisposed to have porblems such as addiction, will always have problems.
very sad, but true.

you cant legislate for this- drugs are illegal, yet lots and lots od people still take em.

its a health care issue, not a prohibition issue.

---

Seem to recall having this conversation a little while ago walking back from the pub NS Dev )

I've got an interesting view on this. I know i've got an adicitive personality so stay away from most adicitive substances. Heck, i even try to avoid adictive activities as i'm a bit of an adrenalin junkie.

Alcohol was invited as a way of purifying water so it was drinkable as said before. The Chinese found a different way of doing this - boil it! Smoking was brough to England something like 400 years ago.

These things are now entrenched in our culture and whilst known to have harmeful effects, society is used to coping / ignoring them.

Drug abuse is a relatively modern concept. As such society has recognised the potential effects, decided that the risks to society in general are too high and has made them illegal and driven them underground. What would be interesting would be a comparitive study of the effects of the drug vs. the effects of trying to get the illegal drug (Crime etc)

If you look around the world, it will take a very brave government to legalise a lot of illegal drugs as the risk (if only of not getting re-elected is very high). Read Ben Eltons "high society" for an interesting take on the situation.

My personal view is that we have three choices, stick with a version of what we have now, ie managed risk. Decide life should be precious and ban everything damaging or go the other way, legalise everything. No solution is anywhere near ideal so with a lot of implications very few people understand ....... so lets make the best of what we've got.

If we legalise drugs, then we can regulate to a far higher level.
Have a minimum age of purchase, then rigorous licence control.
absolutley hammer anyone who produces them illegally. To be honest, Customs and Excise would be involved, since it would be a tax evasion issue.
As for mental health, you're right. People with addictive personality should self regulate. It should be taught as a welfare/ healthcare issue.
This is not a drugs issue. As someone else mentioned, kids and adults become addicted to many weird things- Video Games, Football., porn on the internet, text messaging, chat rooms.
We cant cover all of these by law, can we??

Legalisation of drugs has one major flaw:

By legalising something you are saying that in societies eyes its ok to do it. Regardless of the dangers to health etc etc

Remember that age restrictions on things are not enforceable (how many 12-16 year olds do you see smoking??). So how would you feel if your kid came home high or whatever? And you have no grounds on which to say they shouldnt be, as its legal?

Also remember some class A drugs are actually instantly addictive, heroin being one (also one of the most destructive mentally).

The only thing stopping a lot of sensible people (especially youngsters) trying drugs is the fact they are illegal and hard to obtain.

David

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jumpy Guy
As for mental health, you're right. People with addictive personality should self regulate. It should be taught as a welfare/ healthcare issue.
This is not a drugs issue. As someone else mentioned, kids and adults become addicted to many weird things- Video Games, Football., porn on the internet, text messaging, chat rooms.
We cant cover all of these by law, can we??

---

Illegal drugs are hard to obtain?

I think that we all know that that is utterlu untrue. I've lived in six cities in the past 8 years.
In all of those cities, I've been made aware of exactly where to buy drugs. In many, i've seen drugs buys, in pubs, clubs, alleys.
BTW I'm a dull bloke. I dont know lunatics. I dont take drugs. I'm utterly unconnected to the underworld. And i make no effort to find these things out.
Now, if i was 15, and made effort, then I'd find out a heck of a lot quicker.
My point is that we have to accept that people who want to try drugs, WILL try drugs. Easy to get. Cheapest they've ever been. Cheaper than booze.
Ok, sothese vulnerable people really want to take drugs, and they have the means to get them.
surely you dont want your kids down some dodgy estate, off some hoodlum.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by DorsetStriderAlthough I would also say that anyone that takes any halucinagenic substance should really take a look at their lives. People turn to drugs as a means of escapism. Drugs will not solve any problems only you can do that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by smart51
Overdosing on paracetemol is more dangerous than overdosing on alcohol but whenever a smoking ban is discussed, someone whinges about alcohol but never paracetomol.

---

If they were buying their drugs with money they had earned I wouldn't mind, it's the misery and damage they cause breaking into property and stealing cars etc. to fund their habit, then when they go to court their addiction is used as an excuse for their crime. They should be made to accept full responsibility for their criminal action not given lighter sentences so they can get back to their next fix quicker.

Now that I really agree with Pete!

Responsibility for ones actions!!!

Unfortunately over-legislation tends to surpress this in a society (just look at the explosion of "claims culture" )

This is one of my most hated things about society today, the culture of "nothing is an accident" and "must be someone elses fault"

Sometimes we trip over and break a leg, and it's our fault. Likewise sometimes "one" might use an illegal substance, and again must face the consequences, not I feel in terms of the use of the substance, but in terms of how this affects the persons life.

If somebody becomes hooked on smack, they need to face the fact that they are goign to have to pay for it, which will probably be impossible, and result in crime, therefore they must avoid becoming hooked on it to start with.............

Now if only it were that simple, but in overall terms, that's how I see it!

[Edited on 16/2/06 by NS Dev]

Jumpy Guy - perhaps i'm blind but i've lived in 3 different towns / cities. None reknowned for having no drug users. I've NEVER knowingly seen anyone sell drugs!

Pete - i agree people should be made to face up to the consequences of there actions but ......... if you can get drugs in prison, prisons are over crowded, we don't have enough rehab spaces ....... what chance do we have? Everyone is unique and needs to be treated as such, each person needs tailored punishment to make them understand what they have done, why it is wrong and help not to reoffend.

So perhaps the question is not should we legalise these substances but should we improve society so rehabilitiation happens, reduce the desire / need for people to want escapism, improve the quality of the products so people aren't made ill by side effects........ and a whole load of other impossible things?

quote:

---

Originally posted by MikeR
Everyone is unique and needs to be treated as such, each person needs tailored punishment to make them understand what they have done, why it is wrong and help not to reoffend.

---

I'd love to see people putting back into the commuity. Vandals being forced to fix other vandels mess but in there community. Perhaps i don't understand but if you made me repeatidly fix up someone elses destruction, i think i'd get the message to stop destroying things.

I loved the story about the joy riders who built a car as part of rehab. Did everything, made it immaculate and on the last day of the course they got a day out ....... at a banger racing night with there car entered. I believe they all learned there lesson - especially after they had the debrief. Only problem as it was so widely reported everyone knows about this now.

Most of the crimes today can be directly attributed to drugs.
Shop lifting, burglary and muggings have gone up in society since more drugs came on the scene.
As to legalising everything, are you advocating that those who want to can do it and then use crime to fund it?
I live in a democracy and if they put it to a vote, most people would ban them.
They don't just destroy the users lives.

TAX, TAX, TAX, TAX

That's all it's about.

Drive an uneconomical car, pay more tax; smoke more, pay more tax; Drink more, pay more tax.

The government couldn't give a poo about peoples health or the environment.

If they wanted a healthy nation, smoking/drinking etc would all be illegal. If they wanted to protect the environment, they'd ban all IC engines and shoot all the cows.

ATB

Simon

legal or not... Ask a biochemist what these substances do to your brain chemistry. Most of the illegal ones can have a permanant change to your brain chemistry.

I would rather take risks with my viento than the inside of my head.

Interesting thread,
Maybe I'm a little naive, but as neither I, nor any of my friends have had anything to do with illegal drugs, I can't really be objective.
BUT I feel de-criminalising would be a huge mistake.
Drugs harm almost everyone in society. As has been said before most burglaries, muggings, car thefts are directly attributable to drug taking. It's a dangerous thing to allow kids and other vulnerable people easy access to such things. Even alcohol, I feel, should be more regulated. There are loads of kids drinking at home, when they get bored of that buzz, it's drugs.

Perhaps my views aren't popular, but that's how I feel. A friend of mine has an alcoholic wife (she was always obsessive, a workaholic before she was made redundant) I rarely see him - HE's become withdrawn and never goes out, scared of leaving her with a bottle.

Depressing situation for all concerned.

Marcus

pretty popular views from where i'm sitting!

people talk about freedom of choice. How about if i decide to break into your house, should i be allowed to do that? What about mug you, shoot you, blackmail you, kill you? Ok, extreme, but what about disturb the peace, throw my rubbish in your garden, vandalise your walls?

Breaking the law is breaking the law. We have laws there to protect society from *US*. We are animals at the end of the day & if we're not regulated we revert to type (remember the rose bowl or what ever in new orleans?)

It boils down to what we are here for. Some would argue we are only here to have fun, and get as high as possible in as many different ways as possible - i know a few people who will literally try anything, even homemade chemicals (locost at least!). It is possible to hold down a job and live this way, though i suspect crack and heroin cannot be used like this unless you are a rock star...

I dont believe that sh*t myself, i never drink to excess anymore (literally, usually sober enough to drive home). I grew out of drugs years ago, and feel nothing but pity for my old friends who havent changed since they were 18 - rented house, same crap job as when they left school, no sign of savings, no real achievements except a load of blurred memories, and doing nothing constructive with their lives.

The lad i employ is struggling with cocaine, knows its shite but cant leave it for good as he got all his friends into it and it seems too normal when he's with them. He's 22 and going nowhere fast.

Legalising it would make no difference to people who are already into drugs, as its all easy to get hold of. But as flak monkey says, it sends the wrong message IMHO, that it is moral. It isnt.

As for whre the line is crossed with regards to acceptable pastime and unacceptable substance abuse, like all things its a slippery slope. You can draw the line where you like, but it is undenyable that there is a line somewhere - would NS dev or jumpy guy make heroin or crack legal? Do you understand how powerful these things are?

And finally, i know a few people who have been sectioned after cannabis use. Some people just have paranoid personalities and dont stand a chance.

I support the smoking ban simply because im a selfish sinner, i dont give a toss about smokers rights and i dont care who dislikes me. One day i hope to live in a world where people care enough that i can care back, and worry about compromises, but it wont happen in this life.

nite all.

legalise cocaine and crack? yep, i'm afraid i would.
and yes, i have seen the effects of drugs on people, and my wife is a forensic psychologist, so i understand the mental health aspect.
As an aside, one of her patients recently tried to kill themselves with an OD, and was rushed to hospital.
On wakening, she was then charged with possesion of a class A drug.
If someone can tell me how that helped this persons problems, or improved society as a whole,then I'd love to hear it.

I have also seen an uncle die, riddled with cancer as the result of a 20 a day habit. I never met two of my grandparents- both also the Big C, both also heavy smokers.
I've seen cousins killed in crappy wars, and i've seen friends seriously injured in motorsports, one of whom has been in a vegetative state for three years.

So, from a purely selfish point of view, I could put rational arguments forward to ban all tobacco products, all armed responses, all motor sport. All of these achieve very little towards the common good, cost millions, and result in death.
And have huge knock on effect on friends and family.

My point is- legislation achieves very little. Most of the objections are about knock on effects of criminality- burgulary, muggings. If these vulnerable people could ask for help without fear of prosecution, then maybe we could begin to deal with the problems that drive people to drug use.

An interesting point- statisticaly, a few people on this website will have had serious drug problems in the past. I'd be interested in their viewpoint, rather than the rest of us soapbox loiterers.

Again very well put Jumpy Guy.

regarding experiences, a very good mate of mine has (in the past) taken most substances to considerable excess, not including heroin.

I regard his opinion as pretty reliable on that basis, and he is probably the most level headed, reliable, astute and generally likeable person that I know.

As was said, the effects of substances evidently depends on the mental condition of the taker, as with him, they seem to have had little or no permanent effect.

[Edited on 20/2/06 by NS Dev]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JoelP
It boils down to what we are here for. Some would argue we are only here to have fun, and get as high as possible in as many different ways as possible - i know a few people who will literally try anything, even homemade chemicals (locost at least!). It is possible to hold down a job and live this way, though i suspect crack and heroin cannot be used like this unless you are a rock star...

---

build cars! and maybe enjoy natural highs...

damn that sounds hippy like

[Edited on 20/2/06 by JoelP]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Surrey Dave
Deceased American comedian Bill Hicks, did a great routine about substances.

---