why not let kids 15-18 smoke-pot/do-ecstacy with parent/guardian permission?
Marques de Sade
cause them to think and be creative...
to sum up: totally legal for 18 and up crowd,
parent or guardian permission from 15 to 18,
since they're gonna get it no matter what,
it might as well be from a somewhat safe source
instead of an unknown & potentially dangerous one.
--
NRN
octinomos
Esoterick:
http://www.nyx.net/~dlongori/strck.htm
Indeed, if marijuana legalization means people would avoid
use of alcohol or hard drugs and would use marijuana instead,
the net result would be positive, since the harm both to the
user and the society would be less. --DOUGLAS McVAY
joker
alcohol and tobacco would have the same permissions. 18 and up only is
the way it should be and the parents responsibiliy to teach responsible
use after the kid is old enough.
Brenda G. Tataryn
> why not let kids 15-18 smoke-pot/do-ecstacy with parent/guardian permission?
>
> From: jesuc...@netscape.net (Marques de Sade)
> Reply to: [1] Marques de Sade
> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:12:36 GMT
> Organization: Esoterick
>
>since it's not that harmful really, and it might
>cause them to think and be creative...
>
**** E reacts differently to different people...some people have
taken Ecstasy once..never to breathe again...some are luckier (?)
Pot is a different kettle of fish. I have no problem with it.
Brenda
Marques de Sade
>As far as parent or guardian permission. No. If it were that simple,
>alcohol and tobacco would have the same permissions.
i thought they did... my parents let me smoke and drink since 16 or
so, i mean they knew i did it... if pot had been legal, i would have
smoked that instead of nearly die several times from drinking 151 and
blacking out... also a lot of harm suffered from cigarette smoke that
my parents basically did not object... but again, if pot had been
legal, i would have suffered less harm...
Marques de Sade
speed in it. if it was monitored, purity would be assured...
On 27 Aug 2001 18:42:47 -0800, wt...@victoria.tc.ca (Brenda G.
Tataryn) wrote:
--
Doug
"Marques de Sade" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3b8aed68...@news.znet.com...
> since it's not that harmful really, and it might
> cause them to think and be creative...
now, ..no one needs that!
Sincerly,
Sarcastic Bee-atch
Sean Byrne
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:35:31 GMT, joker <joke...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >As far as parent or guardian permission. No. If it were that simple,
> >alcohol and tobacco would have the same permissions.
>
> i thought they did... my parents let me smoke and drink since 16 or
> so, i mean they knew i did it... if pot had been legal, i would have
> smoked that instead of nearly die several times from drinking 151 and
> blacking out...
There's your reason right there... very few 15- 18 year olds have a
responsible attitude to drugs of any sort... your parents letting you smoke
and drink has obviously not instilled a mature attitude towards alcohol in
you... how would letting you use pot and e instill a responsible attitude
towards those drugs?
also a lot of harm suffered from cigarette smoke that
> my parents basically did not object... but again, if pot had been
> legal, i would have suffered less harm...
>
Not necessarily... pot does a fair amount of damage as well.
Later
Sean
Sean Byrne
> that's because they don't normally get ecstacy, they get shit with
> speed in it. if it was monitored, purity would be assured...
>
ecstacy... nothing to do with speed/purity. In fact the purity of the e is
often the problem.
Later
Sean
Victoria
reations and mediction inteferances and kids who have died from using x.
As for pot, I have never heard of someone overdosing to death, but have had
people die from the impaired judgement choices they made while stoned (ie,
driving, using other drugs, or just plain getting in the wrong sitution that
they would have otherwise not put themselves in if it hadnt be for the fact
that they were higher then a kite|)
"Marques de Sade" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3b8aed68...@news.znet.com...
Stanley Jones
> reations and mediction inteferances and kids who have died from using x.
Drug Awareness Warning Network (part of the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services) Hospital Emergency Department information for 2000 (table
1.05, highly abridged) Estimated Episodes (median of 95% confidence
interval):
Alcohol 204,524
Marijuana 96,446
Acetaminophen 33,613
Metamphetamines (also including speed) 13,513
I don't know how you define "harmful" but it seems to me that 7% of the
number of alcohol episodes, 14% of the number of marijuana episodes, and
only 40% of the number of OTC painkillers like Tylenol (acetaminophen)
episodes, doesn't seem as bad as you make it sound. Especially considering
that speed is thrown into the mix as well (they didn't have stats for just
MDMA)...
Every time you take a drug (*any* drug) you're taking some kind of risk.
The number of Emergency Room visits associated with drugs (from the same
report) shows that over 40% are there for reactions to *prescription* drugs,
some 25% are there because they used the drugs to try and commit suicide.
In fact, only 10% of drug-related ER visits are due to complications with
recreational drug-use.
So let's all calm down and put the hysteria away. If we're going to improve
the world and make it a safe place to have responsible fun, we've got to
stop playing propaganda games. No more "my drug's better than *your* drug"
crap I've been hearing so much of lately.
We need to 1) educate people of the risks, 2) make sure they're getting what
they think they are, and 3) be prepared to catch them if they stumble. Any
more than that and we're acting like the world's mom, something I think we
have no right to do.
Keep shinin',
Stan
p.s. Man, I hate drug posts on alt.rave... especially ones I feel I have to
respond to.
Baelzar
says...
> since it's not that harmful really, and it might
> cause them to think and be creative...
>
> to sum up: totally legal for 18 and up crowd,
> parent or guardian permission from 15 to 18,
>
> since they're gonna get it no matter what,
> it might as well be from a somewhat safe source
> instead of an unknown & potentially dangerous one.
Good LORD, kid!
We haven't even gotten pot legalized for ADULTS in the US, and you're
asking for the sheep to accept drugs for kids?
Baby steps, baby steps.
--
An armed society is a polite society.
-Robert Heinlein
Arclight
hotmail dot com> wrote:
>
>"Marques de Sade" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:3b8af8dc...@news.znet.com...
>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:35:31 GMT, joker <joke...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >As far as parent or guardian permission. No. If it were that simple,
>> >alcohol and tobacco would have the same permissions.
>>
>> i thought they did... my parents let me smoke and drink since 16 or
>> so, i mean they knew i did it... if pot had been legal, i would have
>> smoked that instead of nearly die several times from drinking 151 and
>> blacking out...
>
>There's your reason right there... very few 15- 18 year olds have a
>responsible attitude to drugs of any sort... your parents letting you smoke
>and drink has obviously not instilled a mature attitude towards alcohol in
>you... how would letting you use pot and e instill a responsible attitude
>towards those drugs?
on mainland europe, it's common for parents to give their children
watered down wine with meals, and most of them have a "mature"
attitude towards drink,
>also a lot of harm suffered from cigarette smoke that
>> my parents basically did not object... but again, if pot had been
>> legal, i would have suffered less harm...
>>
>
>Not necessarily... pot does a fair amount of damage as well.
such as?
--
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
What a beautiful day
I'm the king of all time
And nothing is impossible
In my all powerful mind
Szasz
More often than not, its the IMpurity of the E that's the problem.
Ask DanceSafe.... they're the ones closest to the action.
Slatts
"joker" <joke...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B8AF540...@yahoo.com...
> As far as parent or guardian permission. No. If it were that simple,
> alcohol and tobacco would have the same permissions. 18 and up only is
> the way it should be and the parents responsibiliy to teach responsible
> use after the kid is old enough.
Wait to 18 before being able to drink! How uncivilised ;-)
I started as a toddler as did my kids as did my grandkids and none of them
drink to excess.
Wine or beer is frequently on the table for meals and we would not dream of
prohibiting the kids from sharing.
So would I be breaking the law in the US?
Slatts
DCUclean
> since it's not that harmful really, and it might
> cause them to think and be creative...
>
> to sum up: totally legal for 18 and up crowd,
> parent or guardian permission from 15 to 18,
>
> since they're gonna get it no matter what,
> it might as well be from a somewhat safe source
> instead of an unknown & potentially dangerous one.
>
>
I agree with the legalization of all drugs but mdma is not harmful?
DCUclean
joker
less harmful substance to abuse rather than educating yourself on possible
effects. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for legalizing pot, however, it
should not be legalized as an alternative to education.
joker
anyway. It may as well be legal." If kids are going to do it anyway, we
should be teaching them the responsibility in waiting till they can make the
mature decision about its effects on thier lives. Making something legal
for irresponsible 12 year olds will only heighten the already exacerbated
drug problem this country faces.
Just because a 12 year old has already been using (insert drug of choice
here) doesn't make it good for them.
joker
drsquare wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:35:31 GMT, in talk.politics.drugs,
> (joker <joke...@yahoo.com>) wrote:
>
> >As far as parent or guardian permission. No. If it were that simple,
> >alcohol and tobacco would have the same permissions.
>
> They do. You can smoke at 16, and drink with parental guidance from 5.
>
> >18 and up only is
> >the way it should be and the parents responsibiliy to teach responsible
> >use after the kid is old enough.
>
> Eevn though they'll probably have been taking it since 12?
Szasz
As far as I'm aware, no- parents can serve their kids alcohol in
the US, just can't get 'em drunk.
This, of course, makes the question more convoluted.... if parents
are allowed to drink (not to excess) with their kids, and if pot ever
becomes legal in the US (not bloody likely), does that mean letting a
ten-year-old have a puff off your doobie after dinner is OK as well?
>
> Slatts
Molotov
it with :) J/K
"Szasz" <sz...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:eea9c00d.01082...@posting.google.com...
Mike
should be legalizied and distributed much in places that sale liquor.
Required age of 21 with valid proof of ID.
Tax the living crap out of it so the government stops dipping into my
retirement money. The generated taxes (going back to the early 80's for
this figure) would have (by some thoughts) paid off the national debt in
less than 10 years.
"Marques de Sade" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3b8aed68...@news.znet.com...
EtniesGirl03
>If my kids want to puff on me doobie they better have something to replace
>it with :) J/K
lol :D
kathleen
<snipped>
> What I'm saying is that too many people say "Kids are going to do it
> anyway. It may as well be legal."
Sounds like giving up to me. Really bad idea, to give up on a
noble cause like keeping mind/consciousness altering stuff away
from kids (including alcohol).
BTW, alcohol and tobacco are the drugs most abused by children,
and they're illegal for kids to use. I don't think we should
give up on our efforts in *that* regard, or say, "Heck, they're
going to use that stuff anyway, might as well make it legal for
'em."
The failure to achieve 100% compliance (no kids using tobacco or
alcohol) is no reason to give up entirely.
Kathleen
Marques de Sade
hotmail dot com> wrote:
>
>"Marques de Sade" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:3b8af8dc...@news.znet.com...
>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:35:31 GMT, joker <joke...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >As far as parent or guardian permission. No. If it were that simple,
>> >alcohol and tobacco would have the same permissions.
>>
>> i thought they did... my parents let me smoke and drink since 16 or
>> so, i mean they knew i did it... if pot had been legal, i would have
>> smoked that instead of nearly die several times from drinking 151 and
>> blacking out...
>
>There's your reason right there... very few 15- 18 year olds have a
>responsible attitude to drugs of any sort... your parents letting you smoke
>and drink has obviously not instilled a mature attitude towards alcohol in
>you...
many parents only care that you aren't doing something illegal.
they think if booze and cigarettes are legal, that somehow that
means they are safe. so they figure, what's the big deal if
they drink at 19 or whatever, if it's ok to drink at 21 and what
not... so they're not freakish about the age... but mention pot,
and they bring out fucking machine guns and nuclear weapons...
> how would letting you use pot and e instill a responsible attitude
>towards those drugs?
by showing me alternatives to getting shitfaced on booze.
by taking away guilt feelings which lead to negative experiences.
>
>
>also a lot of harm suffered from cigarette smoke that
>> my parents basically did not object... but again, if pot had been
>> legal, i would have suffered less harm...
>>
>
>Not necessarily... pot does a fair amount of damage as well.
but you don't chain smoke joints, the way you do cigarettes.
and you don't bother other people with second hand smoke,
which recently there were tests in japan i think that half hour of
second hand smoke is enough to fuck your shit up hard core...
we're talking heart failure and all kinds of evil happenings...
Marques de Sade
wrote:
>
>"Marques de Sade" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:3b8aed68...@news.znet.com...
>> since it's not that harmful really, and it might
>> cause them to think and be creative...
>creative ,thinking children..
>now, ..no one needs that!
what do they want, retards?
i don't get you...
Marques de Sade
wrote:
>In article <3b8aed68...@news.znet.com>, jesuc...@netscape.net
>says...
>> since it's not that harmful really, and it might
>> cause them to think and be creative...
>>
>> to sum up: totally legal for 18 and up crowd,
>> parent or guardian permission from 15 to 18,
>>
>> since they're gonna get it no matter what,
>> it might as well be from a somewhat safe source
>> instead of an unknown & potentially dangerous one.
>
>Good LORD, kid!
>
>We haven't even gotten pot legalized for ADULTS in the US, and you're
>asking for the sheep to accept drugs for kids?
you don't understand, that's the reason they are illegal, i.e. to
protect the kids, supposedly. but that's why i say, then why aren't
cigarettes and booze illegal... see what i mean? so first thing is
make it legal, and then once it's legal, it can be discussed
rationally....then the question arises, but what about the kids? so i
say, let them smoke it, it's safer than alcohol which they're gonna
use because it's part of growing up, and that's more dangerous... i've
been there... and also safer than cigarettes... take away the fear
and the anguish associated with such a benevolent plant....
to sum up, there is no reason why pot should be illegal while more
dangerous drugs like alcohol and cigarettes are legal....
Marques de Sade
no more harmful than cigarettes or booze...
Marques de Sade
market for they youth... that's just what we have now...
Marques de Sade
i'm all about saving lives...
Marques de Sade
wrote:
>joker wrote:
>
><snipped>
>
>> What I'm saying is that too many people say "Kids are going to do it
>> anyway. It may as well be legal."
>
>Sounds like giving up to me.
nobody is saying YOU have to let YOUR kids smoke it...
> Really bad idea, to give up on a
>noble cause like keeping mind/consciousness altering stuff away
>from kids (including alcohol).
>
>BTW, alcohol and tobacco are the drugs most abused by children,
>and they're illegal for kids to use. I don't think we should
>give up on our efforts in *that* regard, or say, "Heck, they're
>going to use that stuff anyway, might as well make it legal for
>'em."
>
>The failure to achieve 100% compliance (no kids using tobacco or
>alcohol) is no reason to give up entirely.
>
>Kathleen
>
--
Guido Marx
> >
> > why not let kids 15-18 smoke-pot/do-ecstacy with parent/guardian permission?
> >
> > From: jesuc...@netscape.net (Marques de Sade)
> > Reply to: [1] Marques de Sade
> > Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:12:36 GMT
> > Organization: Esoterick
> >
> >since it's not that harmful really, and it might
> >cause them to think and be creative...
> >
>
> **** E reacts differently to different people...some people have
> taken Ecstasy once..never to breathe again...some are luckier (?)
> Pot is a different kettle of fish. I have no problem with it.
> Brenda
Really ? Have you got a cite for the deaths from E ? I saw a 20-20 on E a while
back - and the only deaths they could produce were kids that took other drugs that
were purportedly E - but were in fact various forms of stimulants.
Guido
Arclight
most of the deaths that are blamed on E, are infact a result of having
drunk to much or not having drunk enough,
Guido Marx
Bogus. With five minutes of research - you could have avoided looking ignorant
to the rest of the world. Check out this URL:
http://www.ao.bham.ac.uk/sscs2/Drugs-EcstacySTE.asp
According to this site from the University of Birmingham "It would appear that
nobody has died directly from the toxic effects of the drug i.e. been poisoned
or suffered an "allergic reaction". Instead, deaths have fallen into three
categories"...
They go on to list the categories as too much fluid, heat-stroke, and heart
failure - typically due to underlying undiagnosed heart condition.
> Later
> Sean
Remember - Google is your friend...
Guido
EtniesGirl03
>a Draconianly high age limit on it like that, and they'll just get it
>illegally
Ok coming from a 17 yr old here is my 2 cents...
when I was about 15, I used marijuana a lot...im not talking occasional, more
like damn habbitual..but thats besides the point, it was so fun because a) it
is illegal b) we were being "sneaky" and cooking up big elaborate schemes to go
somewhere with some people to smoke up (or in some cases in the safety of your
own bedroom) c) we lied all the time and didnt get caught...if it were
legalized it wouldnt be such a big deal to buy from your bro's ex best friend
who your parents forbid to hang out with ever again and smoke it behind their
backs ya know?
half the fun is getting away with it and being all "bad"..thats why i think so
many teenagers smoke pot
on the other hand, adults dont have the sneaking around factor
all im saying is that it was fun and it would be much different if it were
legal
joker
and alcohol. Reread before asking questions.
drsquare wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:34:48 GMT, in talk.politics.drugs,
> (joker <joke...@yahoo.com>) wrote:
>
> >What I'm saying is that too many people say "Kids are going to do it
> >anyway. It may as well be legal." If kids are going to do it anyway, we
> >should be teaching them the responsibility in waiting till they can make the
> >mature decision about its effects on thier lives. Making something legal
> >for irresponsible 12 year olds will only heighten the already exacerbated
> >drug problem this country faces.
> >Just because a 12 year old has already been using (insert drug of choice
> >here) doesn't make it good for them.
>
> So what difference does making it illegal do again, apart from making
> them more determined to get it?
joker
kids/young adults in the aspects of drug use both positive and negative. The
only arguments I've heard are that the kids are going to do it anyway. So it
may as well be legal. Rather than just saying screw it, legalize across the
board, we should be saying educate and regulate. Find me mention of education
in any post prior to mine and I will gladly retract my statement.
joker
drsquare wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:30:29 GMT, in talk.politics.drugs,
> (joker <joke...@yahoo.com>) wrote:
>
> >It seems to me that you are looking for a way to reduce harm in finding a
> >less harmful substance to abuse rather than educating yourself on possible
> >effects. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for legalizing pot, however, it
> >should not be legalized as an alternative to education.
>
> Since when does it have to be an alternative? Where the fuck did you
> pull that one from?
joker
answer to. It is, after all, still illegal.
joker
EtniesGirl03
>On the contrary, adults do have the sneaking around factor. Just few people
>to
>answer to. It is, after all, still illegal.
>
>joker
True, but an adult might not live with his/her parents, and adult can come and
go as they wish..no parents asking "where are you going? why are you going
there? who are you going with?" crap ya know?
Yeah everyone is sneaking around cuz its illegal and all but ya know..
S2C
I think this is true, but in my case we smoked cos basicaly we liked sitting
in the open air (we made camps) and getting cained :). It like bonded us
all, *old man* kids these dayz just hang about drinking crappy alchohol and
hanging round the back of 7-11 making a pest of em selves.. We use to hide
in the woods have a game of football, build a smoking camp , get cained have
a stick fight go home and do the same thing the next day ;) LOL...
Sept fridays when we use to eat shitty speed and go and mash the youth club
up by playing happy hardcore on the decks they kindly bought us or go to a
P A R T Y cos somones mum and dad had gone away :) :)
Laters
- J _
Sean Byrne
"Guido Marx" <gmarx@SPAM?_NO_THANKScmc.net> wrote in message
news:3b8d4a1b$1...@news.svn.net...
> Sean Byrne wrote:
> > Go do some research... people can and do die from allergic reactions to
> > ecstacy... nothing to do with speed/purity. In fact the purity of the e
is
> > often the problem.
>
> Bogus. With five minutes of research - you could have avoided looking
ignorant
> to the rest of the world.
<snip>
Really... 5 minutes of research on my part turned up this:
http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/mdma/mdma_health.shtml
'A small percentage (1-10%) of the population are "slow metabolizers", who
have low levels of a liver enzyme (P450 2D6) which metabolizes many drugs,
including MDMA (as well as Prozac, DXM, and many other pharmaceuticals).
These people are likely to be more sensitive to MDMA, may require lower
doses, and should be very cautious.'
And if we take 'allergy' to mean...'an exaggerated or pathological reaction
to substances, situations, or physical states that are without comparable
effect on the average individual', it would appear that a small percentage
of the population are indeed allergic to MDMA.
As for whether the allergic reaction in such people causes death... no doubt
you will say that 'too much fluid, heat-stroke, and heart failure' is the
cause of death... but that's just semantics... that's like saying someone
with an allergy to bee stings doesn't die from the bee sting but from
respiratory failure...
> Remember - Google is your friend...
Indeed.
Later
Sean
>
> Guido
>
>
Eowine Eomundsdottir
> taken Ecstasy once..never to breathe again...some are luckier (?)
If it comes from an illicit source and is not tested, taking any kind of
pill is putting one _hell_ of a lot of trust in the guy that sold you the
tablet. Why not have some sort of 'test-lab' on site with most raves so at
least people know how pure their pill is and how much MDMA it actually
contains.
Just a proposition... Perhaps it'll safe a few lives.
Eowine.
Boris Ryser
Eowine Eomundsdottir <eow...@my-deja.com> a écrit dans le message :
9mlhvd$a45$1...@gazette.corp.medtronic.com...
> > **** E reacts differently to different people...some people have
> > taken Ecstasy once..never to breathe again...some are luckier
(?)
>
> If it comes from an illicit source and is not tested, taking any
kind of
> pill is putting one _hell_ of a lot of trust in the guy that sold
you the
> tablet. Why not have some sort of 'test-lab' on site with most
raves so at
> least people know how pure their pill is and how much MDMA it
actually
> contains.
dears,
that's exactly what's happening in europ.......even in
France.....during raves.there is an ong.....that comes and test
pills..........for the customers 's safety......
(in true language: public health)
in switzerland, italy, holland, england......everywhere...when there
are raves...there's an o.n.g. which checks the pills' s quality.....
boris ryser
fdcc www.multimania.com/fdcc
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Eowine Eomundsdottir
Yes dear?
> that's exactly what's happening in europ
Ah.... Oui, Boris, je le sais. Je suis Neerlandais.. Mais les gents dans
cette n.g. sont des Americaines. Allors j'explique des choses bien entendu
chez nous.
>.......even in France
They learned the _hard_ way. Vous etes francais?
Eowine (... Bienvenue au debat ...).
Eowine Eomundsdottir
> They learned the _hard_ way. Vous etes francais?
Eowine.
Szasz
You haven't demonstrated that this "allergy" results in heatstroke,
excess fluid, and heart failure, Sean. The simpler explanation is the
one already widely available- Ecstacy has the tendency of throwing
people's internal thermostats out of whack, which necessitates
EVERYONE be careful when taking it (i.e., by taking frequent water or
rest breaks at raves). In addition, DanceSafe (which again I remind
you is much closer to the action than you) has quite a lot of
knowledge regarding the commonplace-ness of impurities found in "E" on
the street. These impurities can, and do, kill.
Regardless this is mostly moot - Ecstacy (or, that is, pills sold
as Ecstacy) has resulted in a vanishingly small number of deaths
nationwide.
>
> >
> > Guido
> >
> >
tripper
noticed that its easier for most kids to get weed than beer when their
minors? If they legalized weed and put constraints on it, such as beer, the
black market would wither away. Same as after prohibition was repealled.news:3b8ccf7d...@news.znet.com...
EtniesGirl03
baked) hehe..at my friends house we would always smoke on the trampolines
almost every night early in the morning or real late at night (same thing)
..his dad was totally cool with it too..sometimes he'd even smoke with us (no
lie)...i just remember those nights and wish i could be back there with the old
crew again : ( I guess some good things come to an end tho
> build a smoking camp
LOL i dont think we ever did that
ok all done
Vanessa/NesQuik
joker
best left to inexperienced debators. Are you saying that tobacco and alcohol should
be legal for purchase by children. Because they are. I guess that makes them
Illegal too, eh?
joker
drsquare wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:52:17 GMT, in talk.politics.drugs,
> (joker <joke...@yahoo.com>) wrote:
>
> >I didn't say it should be illegal. I said it should be regulated like tobacco
> >and alcohol. Reread before asking questions.
>
> I.e. illegal for them to buy it.
XxRainbowbriitex
that...im sure alot of ppl agree with me too...xoxo laura...plur
Marques de Sade
<trippi...@southerncali.com> wrote:
>Haven't you
>noticed that its easier for most kids to get weed than beer when their
>minors?
nope. i think it's easier for them to get booze and cigs...
Marques de Sade
weak... did you ever face any real danger?
On 29 Aug 2001 21:22:51 GMT, etnies...@aol.com (EtniesGirl03)
wrote:
--
Marques de Sade
>On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:12:36 GMT, jesuc...@netscape.net (Marques de
>Sade) wrote:
>>since they're gonna get it no matter what,
>>it might as well be from a somewhat safe source
>>instead of an unknown & potentially dangerous one.
>
> What are you trying to do,,,,, DRIVE the price
>down?????? Politicians make money from drugs and they want
>The price kept high.........Drugs are the largest part of our economy
>so NO one wants it legal but the honest people............
the ends don't justify the means.
>
>Michael
>
>A preacher is the blind
>leading the blind...
>
>The Last Church
>http://www.thelastchurch.org
>mic...@thelastchurch.org
Sean Byrne
"Szasz" <sz...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:eea9c00d.01083...@posting.google.com...
> You haven't demonstrated that this "allergy" results in heatstroke,
> excess fluid, and heart failure, Sean.
OK how about this
Premise 1: E can cause heatstroke
Premise 2: Heatstroke can cause death
Conclusion 1 (P1 + P2): E can cause death by heatstroke (generally accepted)
Premise 3: Some people are more sensitive to the effects of E because they
are lacking a particular liver enzyme
Conclusion2 (P3 + C1): Some people are more likely to die from heatstroke
after taking e because they lack a liver enzyme...
>The simpler explanation is the
> one already widely available- Ecstacy has the tendency of throwing
> people's internal thermostats out of whack, which necessitates
> EVERYONE be careful when taking it (i.e., by taking frequent water or
> rest breaks at raves).
Agreed... I never disputed that
In addition, DanceSafe (which again I remind
> you is much closer to the action than you) has quite a lot of
> knowledge regarding the commonplace-ness of impurities found in "E" on
> the street. These impurities can, and do, kill.
Dancesafe is US based...IIRC none of the deaths in the UK have been caused
by impurities in the past 3-4 years..
>
> Regardless this is mostly moot - Ecstacy (or, that is, pills sold
> as Ecstacy) has resulted in a vanishingly small number of deaths
> nationwide.
Yes... if used sensibly it is a comparatively safe drug.
Cheers
Sean
BobArdKor
et c'est vrai qu'on trouve de plus en plus d'o.n.g., en rave
comme en free (Médecins du Monde, Techno +, Tipi,
La Croix rouge aussi, meme si son action est plus controversée)
-if anyone can translate this one - I'm too lazy ;)-
"Eowine Eomundsdottir" <eow...@my-deja.com> a écrit dans le message news:
9mlma7$bth$1...@gazette.corp.medtronic.com...
Eowine Eomundsdottir
BobArdKor <BobA...@infonie.fr> wrote in message
news:99925459...@remus.infonie.fr...
> Moi je suis français
Allors, bienvenue. On a besoin des voix francophone.
> et c'est vrai qu'on trouve de plus en plus d'o.n.g., en rave
> comme en free (Médecins du Monde, Techno +, Tipi,
Je croyais ils s'appelle 'Medicins sans frontieres'. Mais la langue francais
nes't pas facile pour moi et c'est possible je me trompe et ce n'est pas la
meme organisation. Corrigez moi, si vous voulez, mais corrigez mois en
anglais. C'est plus facile pour tout le monde.
> La Croix rouge aussi, meme si son action est plus controversée)
<translate>
I am french and it's true you will find more and more NGO's at raves
(Doctors of the world, Techno+, Tipi). Even the red cross, eventhough their
actions are the most controversial.
</translate>
> -if anyone can translate this one - I'm too lazy ;)-
Votre nom n'est pas 'Gaston Lagaffe' ? ;-)?
Eowine.
Eowine Eomundsdottir
quel est le situation de drogue (marijuana) en France au moment? Je croix ca
c'est une chose interresant pour cette n.g. Quel est 'l attitude des
francais moyen de la politique toxicomane neerlandais? Avez vous des 'links'
pour des sites anti-prohibitioniste? Ca m'intereste beaucoup.
Eowine (... un peu francophone ...)
BobArdKor
Still prohibited of course, the political class is still frightened by the
idea
of legalization - but the times they are a-changing :) - as the youth smokes
massively and some parties such as the ecologists ("les Verts") and the
right-wing liberals (Démocratie Libérale - which stinks) do prone a
controlled legalization.
It's slowly becoming a fact they can't stop.
However, sthg. similar to the english Criminal Justice Act was proposed
by the right-wing politician Mariani, and supported by the -so-called-
left-wing minister Daniel Vaillant : the "Amendement Mariani", which would
have allowed police repression and soundsystem's confiscation. By chance it
was rejected after some demonstrations and lots of controverse.
Here is a good link (french only)- I'll try to find out some more
www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/4102/Drogues.htm
BobArdKor
Still prohibited of course, the political class is still frightened by the
Arclight
Sade) wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:57:18 GMT, "tripper"
><trippi...@southerncali.com> wrote:
>
>>Haven't you
>>noticed that its easier for most kids to get weed than beer when their
>>minors?
>
>nope. i think it's easier for them to get booze and cigs...
it's easier for them to get weed, but most don't want to, most want
beer and cigarettes.
--
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
What a beautiful day
I'm the king of all time
And nothing is impossible
In my all powerful mind
Eowine Eomundsdottir
Eowine (... ne touche pas a mon pote ...).
Guido Marx
That's fine - except you're re-defining what the word "allergy" means. I assume
that that the word "allergy" means "allergy", and not something else. An
allergic reaction is an exaggerated immune response by the body resulting in
massive ammounts of histamines and other chemicals being released into the
body. The absence of a particular liver enzyme is NOT an allergy. Note also -
that women and some other ethnic populations lack a particular enzyme that helps
to metabolize alcohol - this doesn't make alcohol fatal or even particularly
more dangerous to these individuals. Your cite didn't indicate any specifics in
terms of the dangers of this particular condition - simply that those with this
condition should use caution.
Bottom line on this is that it appears that MDMA is fairly safe - but like most
any drug - does have its dangers. Everything that I've read indicates to me
that by far the largest risk with MDMA is the fact that its illegal - and
therefore dosage and purity are unknown.
Guido
noodles
> > > Go do some research... people can and do die from allergic reactions to
> > > ecstacy... nothing to do with speed/purity. In fact the purity of the e
> is
> > > often the problem
...and later he added:
> Really... 5 minutes of research on my part turned up this:
>
> http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/mdma/mdma_health.shtml
>
> 'A small percentage (1-10%) of the population are "slow metabolizers", who
> have low levels of a liver enzyme (P450 2D6) which metabolizes many drugs,
> including MDMA (as well as Prozac, DXM, and many other pharmaceuticals).
> These people are likely to be more sensitive to MDMA, may require lower
> doses, and should be very cautious.'
This quote does not state that "people can and do die from allergic
reactions to ecstacy" as you assumed earlier.
L
EtniesGirl03
>weak... did you ever face any real danger?
well i dont call fun getting caught either...so i guess instead of all the
times i thought i was having fun i was just being weak cuz i didnt get caught
and get crucified by my parents..right. my brother already paved the way for
that..
although, when i was 5 i got stuck in an alligators nest at the lake behind my
house with my brother and 2 of his friends., that was dangerous
Marques de Sade
wrote:
>although, when i was 5 i got stuck in an alligators nest at the lake behind my
>house with my brother and 2 of his friends., that was dangerous
huh? but there were no alligators in it? or what?!
if there weren't, that isn't dangerous. if there were,
why didn't they bite you, or what'd you do, shoot
them, show them a crucifix and they got scared,
or what?! did your daddy come and beat it up??
EtniesGirl03
>if there weren't, that isn't dangerous. if there were,
>why didn't they bite you, or what'd you do, shoot
>them, show them a crucifix and they got scared,
>or what?! did your daddy come and beat it up??
>
tree..then my dad the big alligator wreslter showed up out of no where and
picked all the alligators up by their tails and swung them around..one wasnt
dead so i whipped out my crucifix and stabbed it..then it was dead..later we
came back up there and chopped all their heads off with butter knifes then ate
them. it was good
Szasz
Yeah thats the same problem I had with this thread as well. Oh
well. This is a casual forum and not a scientific panel.
Since people normally don't go around measuring their liver
enzymes, I guess the most practical thing for Ecstacy-takers to do is
simply be more careful when they pop E, drink water, and take breaks.
*Anyone* can have a bad reaction to E if they don't take proper (and
really, quite simple steps). For the moralistic nosybodies out there:
yes, the best way to not have a bad reaction to E is to not take it in
the first place!
>
> L
joker
Pilbeam
> >Not necessarily... pot does a fair amount of damage as well.
>
> such as?
>
For example, my friend had some pot the other week and had a major paranoia
attack...
You could get into all sorts of trouble doing pot...
Pilbeam
Stanley Jones <s...@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:B7B12C90.12C6%s...@ecn.purdue.edu...
> > Not that harmfull??? Ex?? Tell that to the hundreds of overdosers, and
bad
> > reations and mediction inteferances and kids who have died from using x.
>
> Drug Awareness Warning Network (part of the U.S. Department of Health and
> Human Services) Hospital Emergency Department information for 2000 (table
> 1.05, highly abridged) Estimated Episodes (median of 95% confidence
> interval):
>
> Alcohol 204,524
> Marijuana 96,446
> Acetaminophen 33,613
> Metamphetamines (also including speed) 13,513
>
I know what you're saying here and I agree to an extent, but alcohol causes
so many more problems because it's legal (well, with an age limit), socially
acceptable, (relatively) inexpensive and easily obtainable.
I don't think we can really say drug a is more harmful than drug b. drug b
should be legalised cos it isn't very harmful. All drugs are harmful.
But what we should all surely agree on is what you said at the end of your
post Stan...
> We need to 1) educate people of the risks, 2) make sure they're getting
what
> they think they are, and 3) be prepared to catch them if they stumble.
Any
> more than that and we're acting like the world's mom, something I think we
> have no right to do.
> Keep shinin',
> Stan
>
> p.s. Man, I hate drug posts on alt.rave... especially ones I feel I have
to
> respond to.
>
Big Daddy
Marques de Sade wrote:
> since it's not that harmful really, and it might
> cause them to think and be creative...
>
> to sum up: totally legal for 18 and up crowd,
> parent or guardian permission from 15 to 18,
>
> since they're gonna get it no matter what,
> it might as well be from a somewhat safe source
> instead of an unknown & potentially dangerous one.
>
> --
>
> NRN
> octinomos
>
> Esoterick:
> http://www.nyx.net/~dlongori/strck.htm
>
> Indeed, if marijuana legalization means people would avoid
> use of alcohol or hard drugs and would use marijuana instead,
> the net result would be positive, since the harm both to the
> user and the society would be less. --DOUGLAS McVAY
--
On October 25th,
Microsoft will introduce
Windows XP.
And you'll see why 2001
will be like "1984".
Szasz
> > >Not necessarily... pot does a fair amount of damage as well.
> >
> > such as?
> >
>
> For example, my friend had some pot the other week and had a major paranoia
> attack...
> You could get into all sorts of trouble doing pot...
Well, caffeine is universally recognized to have the ability to
cause panick attacks in the uncareful user. Is that "damage" as well?
Every activity has risks. Illegal drugs are nothing special (its
just a matter of degree)..... except of course there is artificial
risk added to drug use, namely, the risk of arrest. But the principle
is the same.
Arclight
wrote:
>
>> >Not necessarily... pot does a fair amount of damage as well.
>>
>> such as?
>>
>
>For example, my friend had some pot the other week and had a major paranoia
>attack...
that doesn't cause damage it's just scary,
>You could get into all sorts of trouble doing pot...
you could get into all sorts of trouble if you were tired,
Michaeldekka
word here but im going to use it). Lets say, you make it legal for 15?! - 18
year olds to do pot and ecstacy if they have consent of their parents, A:
itll be impossible to prove the consent and B: Those who do give consent are
probably the ones who really sohuldnt. and possibly vice versa.
Have any one of you EVER discussed your usage with your parents? i never
have, and if everything goes right, never will. If the day comes that i need
to ask my parents for permission to ask for drugs, ill know ive gone WAY
over the imaginary line that seperates "normality" from dependancy.
I think you can have great experiences using these recreational drugs, but i
also think that without experience, and maturity (which you only get thru
experience), bad things can happen.
People are talking about harm reduction. Talking about only getting ''good''
pills etc for the young and dare i say it foolish. I know people that would
say a youngin would not appreciate a good pill as much as you or i. And also
we know that some pills that we might think awsome might push someone over
the edge.
As usual, ive created many a tangent with a few endless arguments thrown in.
not that its ever stopped me before.
My point (as brief as it will make it)>:
1 . While drugs are capable of causing death in the hands of an
inexperienced user, said user will never be given a legal right to bear
drugs. (sounds somewhat like the usas constitution - how i.. <-stopped due
to inevitable rambling)
2/ Parents would not give their kids drugs. A generalisation, but it even
comes down to alcohol on this one.
/me tells himself to make argument now please
I think the reason drugs are illegal, is to stop people doing too much of
them. Being illegal makes them expensive, which in turn makes them hard/er
to get. and to afford. and thus stop many overdoses im sure, which are only
stopped because the person ran out of money, got to the atm and then
realised, im standing out in the cold in a tshirt, i have goosebumps
everywhere, and im stilll hot, maybe i should slow down.
Theres alot of cases where police turn a blind eye,
Stuff it, i was never good at english, i cant make an argument. im not going
to try,. Make comments, ide like to hear them.
Maybe i should just make all the thoughts go away. ,, ,, ,,
NAH. :)
Have a cruisy one people
Michael from melbourne.
"Pilbeam" <bpil...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:3b92...@news.iprimus.com.au...
*snatch
why don't they at least legalize it over a certain age like tobacco and
alcohol
i sure as hell know that if i got into a situation while rolling, i would
compose myself my faster than I would when drunk ... same as being high
like alcohol doesnt cause people to get out on the road and drive like
assholes
rolling and/or getting high never make me want to get on the road and drive
like an asshole :)
--
----------------------------------------------------
Editor, TheCampusRag.com
http://www.thecampusrag.com
edi...@thecampusrag.com
Seventh Enterprise, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------
"Arclight" <daniel...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lhc5pt8f9vp7vq9k1...@4ax.com...
S2C
"In Complete Darkness We Are All The Same , It Is Only Our Knowledge And
Wisdom That Seperates Us, Dont Let Your Eyes Decieve You..
----------
In article <20010830173919...@mb-cs.aol.com>,
etnies...@aol.com (EtniesGirl03) wrote:
> Yea I forgot that part (*doo doo dooo* marijuana effects the memory* - half
> baked) hehe..at my friends house we would always smoke on the trampolines
> almost every night early in the morning or real late at night (same thing)
> ..his dad was totally cool with it too..sometimes he'd even smoke with us (no
> lie)...i just remember those nights and wish i could be back there with the
old
> crew again : ( I guess some good things come to an end tho
>
>> build a smoking camp
>
> LOL i dont think we ever did that
We built the most elaborate camps ever they had 'dining' (well munching
anyway) area's!!! and one had a ickle 'swimming pool'!!! they are all mashed
up now , people must see em out walking and think WTF :)
C ya Later
S2C
>
> ok all done
>
> Vanessa/NesQuik
>
>
Marques de Sade
Marques de Sade
<michae...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>People are talking about harm reduction. Talking about only getting
>''good'' pills etc for the young and dare i say it foolish. I know
>people that would say a youngin would not appreciate a good pill as
>much as you or i. And also we know that some pills that we might think
>awsome might push someone over the edge.
i'd rather they get the information as to effects, shit to avoid in
combination, etcetera.... be given the exact shit that they asked for
and not be ripped off.... especially not be given poisonous shit or
bunk shit.... also be given information as to effects of smoking
cigarettes and drinking alcohol.... basically educate and inform and
let the people decide on their own what to do with the information.
and be given more choices than just alcohol to get fucked up on...
and i don't mean kava kava or banana peals or stupid shit like that...
Ethan Straffin
"Victoria" <victor...@home.com> wrote:
> Not that harmfull??? Ex?? Tell that to the hundreds of overdosers, and bad
> reations and mediction inteferances and kids who have died from using x.
Seven overdoses per year in the U.S., and holding pretty much steady
according to DAWN. Yep. That's an epidemic all right. Of course, it
should be a lot worse, given the "crackdowns" and tragically misguided
new sentencing initiatives that are making it ever more attractive to
sell PMA, meth, ketamine, MDA, DXM, DOB, cocaine, atropine, caffeine,
and god knows what else as Ecstasy. (I truly hope that "Kelley's Law"
in Illinois isn't about to cause what I'm afraid it's about to cause; at
least it's just one state, though who knows what will happen after the
media starts getting restless again.)
The good news is that the kids seem to be reacting a lot better than the
parents and public officials who are helping to flood them with all this
crap. Thank god for testing kits. But seriously, shout-out to
DanceSafe: keep an eye out for class-action lawsuit opportunities. I
hate to sound harsh, but the next time a kid dies from PMA who should
have gotten MDMA instead, I want to see parents' groups getting slammed
with subpoenas. This shit has gone far enough.
Ethan
--
"We must not blindly add to the body count and the terrible cost of the
War on Drugs, only to learn from another Robert McNamara 30 years from
now that what we've been doing is, 'wrong, terribly wrong.'"
-- Walter Cronkite, 1995
CyberKreig
and our friend would be out of business then!! LoL
- Joe