User Controls
Snorting Ritalin
-
2017-12-24 at 1:53 PM UTC
Originally posted by Something Squirrel They cause harm when used at all in any amount.
Originally posted by Lanny Alcohol causes liver damage and has poor dietary qualities at any dose. It's negligable damage at low doses, but it's still damage.
Stimulants at therapudic doses aren't much worse than alcohol.
Classical psychadellics are exceedingly difficult to induce any degree of pharmacological injury with.
It's basically impossible to ingest enough cannabis to do bodily damage, it's possible to take cannabis products without burning plant matter.
Opiates, barring habituation, dependence, or combinations with CNS depressants are fairly benign and have an extremely long history of medical use.
In short you're fucking retarded.
lanny just pretty much beat me to it lol.
but its obvious all your drug knowledge is garnered from tv and newspapers or government sources. these sources want to demonize drugs for their own benefit. they do so by exaggerating the harmful effects to a ridiculous level, both to the physical self and to society. often shit they report is completely made up, like crack being addictive with one hit or 2cb turning people into cannibals(i mean you didn't actually believe that shit, did you?) etc.
the fact of the matter is that prohibition is making drugs far more harmful then they would normally be by handing the supply over to irresponsible people who(because of legal risk) adulterate the substances with more harmful chemicals.
it was funny in the late nineties when the british government came out with a campaign against ecstasy following the high profile death of leah betts. their slogan was 'ecstasy, you never know what you're actually taking', referring to the fact that other more dangerous substances were being substituted for mdma in the pills. all us users at the time were thinking 'well who's fucking fault is that?'. without prohibition, regulation would mean you would know exactly what you were taking, it would be printed on the box with purity, warning and usage instructions just like fucking tylenol. the irony was that leah betts may well still be alive if it hadn't been for prohibition.
please explain how i'm wrong.
.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-12-24 at 7:41 PM UTC
-
2017-12-24 at 7:44 PM UTC
Originally posted by Kolokol-1 Ignore our resident fail-troll here and go back to your doctor. Tell him the Ritalin isn't working and that it makes you feel funny. Do this until he prescribes you adderall, dexedrine, or vyvanse.
These three are much better. Vyvanse you have to take by mouth though.
based on first-hand observations of individuals on long-term vyvanse usage i STRONGLY recommend not taking it for any continuous length of time. -
2017-12-24 at 7:52 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist please explain how i'm wrong
youre correct. basic human nature...imparted after 4 billion years of evolution...results in anything that is restricted/in short supply/withheld to be more desirable.
combine that with the fact that there are no legally-sanctioned sources for the pharmaceuticals that can be regulated for their safety and the safety of their consumers leaves no possible outcome other than drug users being victimized not only by the pushers charging exorbitant prices for products that are marked-up in price thousands-of-percent, but the manufacturers producing products of dubious quality and safety...as well as being victimized by government-sanctioned enFORCEers which also victimize the user in the fines and jail time.
the government. putting the DUMB in freedom since...forever. -
2017-12-24 at 8:26 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock combine that with the fact that there are no legally-sanctioned sources for the pharmaceuticals that can be regulated for their safety and the safety of their consumers
the same thing i believe is going on with tobacco industry.
the truth is when i was smocking, i didnt know what i was smoking. it appears to be finely cut tobacco leaves and chipped tobacco plants or woods but other than speculation ...
i have no idea of what i smoked.
i always believe that cancers and mortality due to smoking were due to shitty additives and impurities they, fucking tobacco companies add to their cigarettes. -
2017-12-24 at 9:17 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Alcohol causes liver damage and has poor dietary qualities at any dose. It's negligable damage at low doses, but it's still damage.
Stimulants at therapudic doses aren't much worse than alcohol.
Classical psychadellics are exceedingly difficult to induce any degree of pharmacological injury with.
It's basically impossible to ingest enough cannabis to do bodily damage, it's possible to take cannabis products without burning plant matter.
Opiates, barring habituation, dependence, or combinations with CNS depressants are fairly benign and have an extremely long history of medical use.
In short you're fucking retarded.
did u really just spell psychedelic like that tho? -
2017-12-24 at 9:18 PM UTCand therapudic?? are u ok lanny? r u having a stroke?
-
2017-12-24 at 10:03 PM UTC
-
2017-12-25 at 12:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by greenplastic did u really just spell psychedelic like that tho?
Originally posted by greenplastic and therapudic?? are u ok lanny? r u having a stroke?
Lol, I'm using the dev build of a browser and the spell checker is broken. I honestly have the spelling ability of like a 5th grader, the proliferation of reasonably good spell checkers has just made my inability to spell less obvious. -
2017-12-25 at 12:47 AM UTCu sniff aspatame i sniff rasta cane but not coke dont murk my nose dont corrode my throat
-
2017-12-25 at 2:56 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist lanny just pretty much beat me to it lol.
but its obvious all your drug knowledge is garnered from tv and newspapers or government sources. these sources want to demonize drugs for their own benefit. they do so by exaggerating the harmful effects to a ridiculous level, both to the physical self and to society. often shit they report is completely made up, like crack being addictive with one hit or 2cb turning people into cannibals(i mean you didn't actually believe that shit, did you?) etc.
the fact of the matter is that prohibition is making drugs far more harmful then they would normally be by handing the supply over to irresponsible people who(because of legal risk) adulterate the substances with more harmful chemicals.
it was funny in the late nineties when the british government came out with a campaign against ecstasy following the high profile death of leah betts. their slogan was 'ecstasy, you never know what you're actually taking', referring to the fact that other more dangerous substances were being substituted for mdma in the pills. all us users at the time were thinking 'well who's fucking fault is that?'. without prohibition, regulation would mean you would know exactly what you were taking, it would be printed on the box with purity, warning and usage instructions just like fucking tylenol. the irony was that leah betts may well still be alive if it hadn't been for prohibition.
please explain how i'm wrong.
.
None of that is true at all. You can die from taking one pill nowadays because you never know what's in it. Even if you knew what was in it, nobody else does so good luck in the emergency room telling someone trying to save your life you just took the newest hip street drug and neither of you have any idea how to treat it.
Look at the stats of hospitalizations from drug overdose, it's very clear these people knew what they were taking and the blame is on them, you can't just pass the buck and ignore the fact that if these drugs were not around these people, or any people than there would be nobody in the hospital from drug overdoses.
Why would you want to give all these people access to more of the same? It's baffling logic -
2017-12-25 at 4:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by Something Squirrel None of that is true at all. You can die from taking one pill nowadays because you never know what's in it. Even if you knew what was in it, nobody else does so good luck in the emergency room telling someone trying to save your life you just took the newest hip street drug and neither of you have any idea how to treat it.
Look at the stats of hospitalizations from drug overdose, it's very clear these people knew what they were taking and the blame is on them, you can't just pass the buck and ignore the fact that if these drugs were not around these people, or any people than there would be nobody in the hospital from drug overdoses.
Why would you want to give all these people access to more of the same? It's baffling logic
then nobody would have any fun. we're not all boring pricks like you. if you wanna be ignorant to drugs then that's your choice. but others have choice too, and others choose to use, they choose life. not mind-numbing monotony and ignorant allegiance to over-lords who only seek to control them for their own greed and self-satisfaction.
. -
2017-12-25 at 7:36 PM UTC
Originally posted by Something Squirrel None of that is true at all. You can die from taking one pill nowadays because you never know what's in it. Even if you knew what was in it, nobody else does so good luck in the emergency room telling someone trying to save your life you just took the newest hip street drug and neither of you have any idea how to treat it.
Look at the stats of hospitalizations from drug overdose, it's very clear these people knew what they were taking and the blame is on them, you can't just pass the buck and ignore the fact that if these drugs were not around these people, or any people than there would be nobody in the hospital from drug overdoses.
Why would you want to give all these people access to more of the same? It's baffling logic
Because if they were legal, purity and dosage would be known. No (unintentional) overdoses and no unknown substances.
When heroin is pure, it's most dangerous side effect is constipation.
Look at what alcohol does. -
2017-12-25 at 8:20 PM UTC
Originally posted by Kolokol-1 Because if they were legal, purity and dosage would be known. No (unintentional) overdoses and no unknown substances.
When heroin is pure, it's most dangerous side effect is constipation.
Look at what alcohol does.
we're wasting our time. his mind is well and truly enslaved by the propaganda media.
. -
2017-12-26 at 5:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist then nobody would have any fun. we're not all boring pricks like you. if you wanna be ignorant to drugs then that's your choice. but others have choice too, and others choose to use, they choose life. not mind-numbing monotony and ignorant allegiance to over-lords who only seek to control them for their own greed and self-satisfaction.
.
If the only way for you to have fun is to take some kind of illegal drug than you are fucked. Why can't you just be happy like the rest of the world and get a career, a wife and a home.
Drugs are escapism from reality for people who don't want those things, that's why it's degenerate because it literally takes the will of life out of you and keeps you content and happy sitting around doing nothing, and then it's the only thing that can make you happy anymore.
Does that sound like life to you? It sounds like the opposite of life to me. -
2017-12-27 at 4:30 AM UTC
-
2017-12-27 at 5:20 AM UTC
Originally posted by Something Squirrel If the only way for you to have fun is to take some kind of illegal drug than you are fucked. Why can't you just be happy like the rest of the world and get a career, a wife and a home.
if you think that's what will make you happy then do it. sounds like a fucking nightmare to me tho. so why would i live my life in a way that would make some one else happy but not me?Drugs are escapism from reality for people who don't want those things, that's why it's degenerate because it literally takes the will of life out of you and keeps you content and happy sitting around doing nothing, and then it's the only thing that can make you happy anymore.
Does that sound like life to you? It sounds like the opposite of life to me.
that is literally word for word from the war on drugs propaganda handbook.
. -
2017-12-27 at 7:53 AM UTC
Originally posted by Something Squirrel None of that is true at all. You can die from taking one pill nowadays because you never know what's in it. Even if you knew what was in it, nobody else does so good luck in the emergency room telling someone trying to save your life you just took the newest hip street drug and neither of you have any idea how to treat it.
Look at the stats of hospitalizations from drug overdose, it's very clear these people knew what they were taking and the blame is on them, you can't just pass the buck and ignore the fact that if these drugs were not around these people, or any people than there would be nobody in the hospital from drug overdoses.
Why would you want to give all these people access to more of the same? It's baffling logic
We were talking about the justification for drug policy on alcohol vs. illegal drugs. Everything you just said applies equally to alcohol. More so, there are more alcohol related hospital admissions than drug related admissions, a person drinking alcohol is _vastly_ more likely to understand what they're consuming and what it does because of alcohol's legal status. If alcohol weren't around drunk drivers we'd have reduced one of the leading causes of fatalities in the US, and yet you don't seem to have a problem with alcohol.
Listing off all the terrible things about illicit drugs doesn't help your argument here, you need to give us some reason why is different from illicit drugs in such a way that justifies a different legal status and social attitude. -
2017-12-27 at 10:23 AM UTCYou have ADHD.
Also Ritalin makes me a little jittery. So i usually ghetto speedball it by snorting it with some oxy. Takes the edge off.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-12-27 at 5:33 PM UTCLanny getting fished a again
