Raves..

[Mooster7]

Good point M29,

Also, I am still waiting on a retort of my point of "unexpected" overdose complications.

eg:

Five friends sitting in a room enjoying "recreational drugs." They may be the responsible sort gPhonque cavorts with. They all take an identical dose of the same drug. One dies suddenly. The rest are simply stoned as expected. It happens all the time. It happens to people who have taken the drug for the first time, and it happens to people who have engaged in that particular drug for years. Not a good choice.

It's not always about defects in the drug. It can be about biochemical misability. Happens.

 

[Michele]

Originally posted by Rohan_


Me thinks you are a bit paranoid.

I was raised by relatively stable, catholic and supportive parents and they had no issues when I told them I had drugs.

They grew up in the 60's where drug use was the norm. Although drugs aren't good for you, at least they knew my situation: people experiment.

"drugs use was the norm" - said who? Drug use was not the norm. Uni students and drop-outs tried drugs, mainly marijuana. but the main ingredient wasn't anywhere near as strong as the commercially grown junk of today.

It is good that you can talk to your parents - the lines of communication are vital.

 

[Michele]

Originally posted by glenferrie boy



All Licit & Illicit Drug-Induced Deaths - 1998 figures.

---------Anyway, its not about getting the correct facts.


Hardly a persuasive argument. And obviously not a student of the School of Dan.

 

[Rohan_]

Originally posted by Michele


"drugs use was the norm" - said who? Drug use was not the norm. Uni students and drop-outs tried drugs, mainly marijuana. but the main ingredient wasn't anywhere near as strong as the commercially grown junk of today.

My dad served in the Vietnam War and he said the drug use there was massive. There was an explosion of heroin during this war and it has not been highlighted by the media.

 

[Michele]

I have seen the damage drugs do to teenagers - that includes all drugs, legal and illicit.

To my mind, heavy binge-drinking in some ways is as bad as some other illegal drugs - it is still abusing your own body.

I have seen some kids (not my own) so paralytic from marijuana, alcohol and someother drug. I happened to be the only adult around. One teenager with about 8 friends (high as a kite) was running, fell and hit his head on the kerb. He was bleeding from the head.

Lucky for him and his mates other teens were passing by, saw what happened and ran home to ask for my assistance. I took this kid to a doctor, stayed with him and his 2 friends until his parents could be contacted.

His other friends "disappeared" because I found out later, that it was not only alcohol but other drugs as well.

I didn't know this kid or his friends, but if I had not been available, I wondered what would have happened to him.

I have helped other teens (again not mine) after binge-drinking sessions that caused unconscioness and at other times so high on drugs that paranoia took over. And all I could do was keep on reassuring.
Why? Because I was the only person that they truly trusted.

But I asked myself why in Heaven's name would ANYONE put themselves through that? And what exactly do they get out of it? Because it certainly isn't enjoyment. They can't even remember what happened - so how in the hell can it be described as "enjoyable"?

Michele

BTW Last year was Victoria's worst road toll for some time. Everyone knows about drinking and driving (with the exception of Richmond players ) and speeding, BUT we still have to "educate" older drivers and new drivers about the dangers.
WHY? Is it because everyone thinks "that won't happen to me, I won't be a statistic - only happens to others".

Is this the same philosophy that drug-users state. "I'm in control won't happen to me - I'm only an occasional user."

 

[Michele]

Rohan,

Do you mean "here" or Vietnam? If the latter, yes, I could quite believe that. It was popular in some asian countries to smoke opium. But if you mean here, drugs were used or tried by only a very small minority of the population ie some uni-students and "peace" protestors.

 

[Grendel]

Originally posted by gPhonque


"drugs is drugs is drugs - stay away!!"

I said the first five words above, gPhonque you have added the last two.

Dead friend through smack, schizophrenic mate all indications through long term Weed use, two mates doing time at Loddon for supplying E that they sold to feed their own habits, Drunk mate who vomits every morning then downs a stubby.

You reckon that the people posting against the use of drugs in this thread would have "NO KNOWLEDGE OF DRUGS WHATSOEVER"

Ive all the knowledge I need when I see how screwed up some of my friends have become through the need to feed an addiction.

Im with Mooster who said "No, I don't know one single recreational drug user who is successful. Not one. I concede they exist, I just don't know any." Ive never seen one either.

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by Grendel

Im with Mooster who said "No, I don't know one single recreational drug user who is successful. Not one. I concede they exist, I just don't know any." Ive never seen one either.

I do...i know quite a few succesful recreational drug users

 

[gPhonque]

Originally posted by Mooster7
No, I don't know one single recreational drug user who is successful. Not one. I concede they exist, I just don't know any.
I disagree with you that there are more responsible drug users than drug abusers. You may know several people who have gotten along just fine being weekend party sorts. The true majority are the non drug users.

Drug use (ecstacy, pot, coke) is rampant among young people these days. Young successfull people at that. It's not exactly a dirt cheap way to have fun. (not to mention coke)

Most go through their "e phase" and then move on. (the smart ones anyway) As i said, i've had 1 in the past 2 years. And most of my friends are the same. We all still very occasionally get a pill, (some more occasionally that others) but we consider it something different - NOT an every weekend thing.

Ill admit - for a while when we were younger, it was an every weekend thing. Just as when teenagers turn 18, the majority of them (if they haven't been sneaking in to pubs already) generally go out and get pissed EVERY weekend. (and more often than not twice every weekend)

This would be complete guess, but i'd say there's more people having bad experiences drinking alcohol on a saturday night than there are people having bad experiences on ecstacy on the same night. (marijuana? pffft...)

Where are all these people who are dying as a result of ecstacy? Everyone in this thread is going on and on about the so called dangers of ecstacy - yet how many people have actually died after using ecstacy this year?

Nobody in this thread (apart from the people who use/have used drugs) is even considering the positives of drug use purely because it doesn't interest them. I have no problem with that.

But that's not to say that the rest of us don't get something out of it.

What do we get out of it i hear everybody ask?

The same thing you get out of a few drinks. Enjoyment. The undenyable pleasures of feeling intoxicated. Basically, it's the 'same shhit, different smell.'

I know you haven't experienced the "dark side" of it that cops, paramedics and firefighters see. Most of this doesn't end up in the news, and the public barely knows it exists. There ARE statistics of these events, and they are staggering. I read on an earlier post where someone thought these statistics were propaganda. They are not.

I hate doing this, but where are these statistics?

How many of these are actually ecstacy related? And i mean JUST ecstacy. I don't mean the people who mix their drugs using all kinds of ridiculous combinations and screw themselves up - they're only asking for trouble. (at the same time, good luck to them, but it's not something i'm interested in.)

A lot of recreational drug users who haven't had problems, haven't had problems - YET.

More generalizations.... Until i see solid proof that an E every few months is going to kill me before i reach 50, then i'm prepared to take the risk occasionally. I could get run over by a truck tomorrow. The long term effects of ecstacy are not really my main concerns. (especially considering how often i use it)

Remember - it really wasn't that long ago that you could apparently "die" from using marijuana as well.

Banning drugs doesn't equate with banning cars. It equates with banning reckless driving, which makes perfect sense doesn't it? I think you were generalizing too much.

lol

In that case, drugs should be legal as cars are, and only reckless use of them should be banned. Correct?

Otherwise, my first point was correct - cars should be banned, just as drugs are. After all, it's the small minority of people mis-using them that is ruining it for the rest of us.

Besides - I don't drive my car recklessly - just as i don't take drugs recklessly. (and i don't believe one e every few months or the occasional joint equates to "reckless drug use".)

One more thing - i don't believe that anyone can justify sending a responsible drug user to prison. That is the only thing that is keeping me interested in this thread/debate. THAT is what i am arguing - THAT is what i don't agree with.

Let's face it - if the cops wanted to, they could walk into any rave and lock up 1000's of people for possesion of drugs. But they don't. And that itself shows how ridiculous the current drug laws are. The police realise that the majority of people at raves are there to have a good time. They realise that the amount of violence at raves is virtually non existant when compared to venues where alcohol is the drug of choice. The realise that locking up innocent people is not going to achieve a thing. Yet still we are breaking "the law."

Ecstacy would be a lot safer if it were legalised.....

As i have said, drugs use wil NEVER EVER be eradicated - therefore, the obvious thing to do would be to minimise the risks, correct?

Keeping it illegal is only increasing the risks for the users.

If i had a choice of buying my pill at a chemist, or buying it from some seedy dealer type person, i'd take the chemist every time. I'd even pay more for it.


And ONE last thing: Heroin.

I was discussing this thread with a friend earlier and he made a very good point:

There are 2 types of drug users - those who use heroin - and those who don't.

Yes - many heroin addicts would have tried E's etc. (although a suprisingly large amount actually haven't....) But heroin users are, for the most part, a completely different group of people next to those who use 'other' drugs such as e and coke. (i'll admit that a lot of heroin users started on marijuana - but you could say that they started on alcohol as well. And tobacco. Blaming marijuana is just another pathetic excuse to keep it illegal.)

I, for one, will never try heroin. I've seen the results too many times. Being in the music industry, you tend to see a fair bit of that you know.

cheers

PS. I'll get that article from The Bulletin off my friend as soon as i can. I'll email it to you if you like. It's such a shame i can't find it on the net and post a link to it. It really might make a few people in here think twice about what they're saying.

 

[Eagle_Fan]

Do what you like guys, just so long as you dont expect any agreeance, assistance (financial, physical or otherwise) or respect.


Personally, I see daily the effects that just micrograms of legal, highly researched, tightly regulated, quality controlled and government subsidised substances can do to the human body. Consequently I just cannot fathom that you'd actually take (and then attempt to justify it and play down the risks involved), something that you, the supplier and very possibly the manufactuer dont really know the contents of.


Ignoring the issues of addiction, related crime and the legalities, I wouldn't and don't touch the stuff. But each to his own, right? Wouldn't want to appear boring and unadventurous now would we?

 

[jod23]

Originally posted by Eagle_Fan
Do what you like guys, just so long as you dont expect any agreeance, assistance (financial, physical or otherwise) or respect.


Personally, I see daily the effects that just micrograms of legal, highly researched, tightly regulated, quality controlled and government subsidised substances can do to the human body. Consequently I just cannot fathom that you'd actually take (and then attempt to justify it and play down the risks involved), something that you, the supplier and very possibly the manufactuer dont really know the contents of.


Ignoring the issues of addiction, related crime and the legalities, I wouldn't and don't touch the stuff. But each to his own, right? Wouldn't want to appear boring and unadventurous now would we?

Post of the year so far...couldnt agree more K.

 

[mantis]

I wonder if any one has the stats of how many crimes that are committed in WA are by drug addicts, I don't, but I think you will find that the majority are committed by drug addicts, not cigaratte addicts, alcohol drinkers, or people speeding in cars.

 

[Grendel]

Originally posted by gPhonque


Drug use (ecstacy, pot, coke) is rampant among young people these days. Young successfull people at that. It's not exactly a dirt cheap way to have fun. (not to mention coke)

Most go through their "e phase" and then move on. (the smart ones anyway) As i said, i've had 1 in the past 2 years. And most of my friends are the same. We all still very occasionally get a pill, (some more occasionally that others) but we consider it something different - NOT an every weekend thing.

[/B]

Right where it is underlined, you lose your whole argument. What of those who stay in their "e phase" the ones that dont 'move on' or who move on to heavier drugs?

Who cares for the ones that arent so smart? Why do they have to fall by the wayside?

Thats where laws come into it, to protect those that cant protect themselves.

Society might not always be right, its not always wrong either. Laws are there to protect us all, if it infringes on your use because of these 'not so smart' ones isnt that a price worth paying? Id like (seriously) to shoot a few people, Laws stop me from doing so (so far). Its a price I pay to live in a (relativly) stable society.

A lot of what you say holds argument (the alcohol bit in particular) but theres an awful lot of double standards ('I know what im capable of taking, dont stop me or others... even though some are not as capable as im am of making those choices) in what you say as well.

I really dont know the rights or wrongs of it overall. All I know (and Macca this one's for you) is that ive NEVER seen any long term good out of it, never. Thats from all addictions (gambling could go into that too... but thats a whole other debate).

Casual use? Doesnt all addiction start out that way?

For the sake of those that cant be strong enough for themselves is where society MUST be strong for them.

 

[Bloodstained Angel]

Grendel

How do you do - allow me to introduce myself.

My name is BsA - successful drug user

cheers

 

[Grendel]

Originally posted by Bloodstained Angel
Grendel

How do you do - allow me to introduce myself.

My name is BsA - successful drug user

cheers

So you say BSA but you couldnt even get all your intials out in CAPiTALS!!

ps, seriously, I only know you via the net and while I do quite like you (aww) I would need to know you better before I could fully make a judgement. Id expect you to be the same towards me on what sort of person, successful or otherwise, I may be.

Cheers!

 

[Bloodstained Angel]

absolutely mate

same with me.

i don't really wish to discuss my personal drug taking history but I would glad to swap anecdotes with you anytime.

I'm not trying to defend a position here or anything like that - I have friends and acquaintances like you have, and there are some pretty tragic stories there as well, but I guess I just got lucky and have not let my various addictions get on top of my life.

Oh and I actually prefer BsA to BSA - after all "Bloodstained" is one word, not two

cheers

 

[glenferrie boy]

Originally posted by Eagle_Fan
Consequently I just cannot fathom that you'd actually take (and then attempt to justify it and play down the risks involved), something that you, the supplier and very possibly the manufactuer dont really know the contents of.

Isn't it just as bad that smokers actually know what they suck into their lungs, and they still do it?

 

[Jars458]

Originally posted by glenferrie boy


Isn't it just as bad that smokers actually know what they suck into their lungs, and they still do it?

And smoking affects other people, potentially to a higher degree than the actual user.

Smoking is a social disease.

On that point

Would it be fair to say that alcohol is a social drug whereas other illegal drugs such as E's and Coke give a personal experience but don't lend themselves to improving social interaction.

After seeing the effects of illegal drug use it doens't seem to me to promote good conversation or good social interaction

Moderate use of alcohol in my experience often has.


RE the use of tax dollars

The minute we have a helath system that judges how far a person contributes to their own illnes, we are buggered.

Sure we try to eductae people to stop engaging in behaviour that makes them unewell (eg for me eating fatty foods and drinking too much Coopers) but once someone is unwell, as a society we have a duty to look after them.

Lets not whinge about our tax dollars, human life is far more sacred.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Michele
WHY? Is it because everyone thinks "that won't happen to me, I won't be a statistic - only happens to others".

That'd have a fair bit to do with it I'd say.

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by glenferrie boy


Isn't it just as bad that smokers actually know what they suck into their lungs, and they still do it?

EXACTLY!!!

 

[PeteLX]

Regarding Raves (remember?), I used to love them, had the best and most memorable experiences of my dwindling youth. I've tried and continue to use ecstacy, and believe me I've had more problems to my health caused by my cigarette smoking than by any pill. I would like to stand up for raves as a pleasant and safe way to spend your time as well, based on my extensive experience going out to all sorts of places. No where else can I go and find between two hundred and twenty thousand people all in the same happy friendly mood, concerned only with dancing and enjoying music. Compare this with my local pub, where every weekend theres a few punch-ups, vandalism, vomit and sexual assault. I have never, ever seen a fight or even an argument (other than "Is Fatboy slim actually any good?") at a rave or dance party. The very name, Dance Party defines what these gatherings are about. Having a good time with like minded people. Go to one of these parties and witness first hand the camaraderie and positive sociality. The friendships and socialising may only last for that night, but at the time any negative feeling is washed away. It's a beautiful feeling knowing that all the people around you care about your wellbeing, and people who haven't danced at a rave will say "responsible drug users don't exist". This is an uneducated opinion, and should be treated as such. I know it sounds funny to you people, but when on ecstacy (an empathonagen), other peoples wellbeing is often the most important aspect of partying in a large group. I hope other rave goers back me up, but I am open to listening to educated responses on this topic. Hopefully reactionary people won't pick my post to bits to find my weakness. Well, my weakness is having fun and dancing. It's not E.

The first time I used e, I was educated by the friend that helped me acquire it. This information may have saved my life, or at the very least made my experience all it could be. Young people who are only told "drugs is drugs" will try all of them, and will have only that ill conceived notion that beer is the same as smack. Obviously I'm using an extreme example, but I think we should stop blaming drug users for corrupting our children and look at the media who use gross populist generalisations to sensationalise and trivialise any debate on substance use. It seems that some people are easily convinced by A Current Affair and Today Tonight and 60 minutes et al that drugs 'r bad, mmmkay, and we should be shocked and appalled by human nature to experiment with ourselves and our spirituality by using drugs. Did native American Indians not use mind altering drugs to access their spirit world? Did this lead to the destruction of their culture, or did white-gun-toting-oppression do that?

Drug use is part of history, and the worst thing we can do is to not learn from history. We've learnt that: Prohibition doesn't work; drugs can and will be used no matter what the law; many many famous (and _successful_) artists, writers, visionaries, politicians, doctors, deities and genius' all through history have used drugs of all sorts, for all kinds of reasons, both legally and illegally and the Earth has still kept turning; the United States has a very tough stance on drugs of the non-taxable variety, and also has one of the worlds highest prison populations. The Netherlands on the other hand, where some soft drugs are legal, is one of the safest places I've ever been. When drug users are called criminals, they will be forced to live like criminals.

I personally have tried every drug other than heroin, and I never will use heroin. Addiction is the worst affliction caused by drugs, and people can be addicted to any drug (especially cigs and booze, as previously pointed out). I work, and I'm sure most of the people in this forum do. Did we all lose our jobs/motivation when we discovered drugs? Um....nup. We're just like you, only more experienced and thus, educated. If you choose not to use, at least educate yourself on the actual effects of drugs before condeming people (just like you or your children) who do.

Please pick me apart, wowsers, as I feel a great debate coming on.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by PeteLX I am open to listening to educated responses on this topic.

Aah yes, "educated responses" being those that agree with you.

Mr "A W Owser".

 

[PeteLX]

Originally posted by Dave


Aah yes, "educated responses" being those that agree with you.

Mr "A W Owser".

Well done on reading my post and replying so quickly! You've obviously gained a lot from it.

So you don't agree? I'm confused.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by PeteLX
Well done on reading my post and replying so quickly! You've obviously gained a lot from it.

Five minutes for 4 paragraph's is quick? Don't over-rate yourself

So you don't agree? I'm confused.

That's obvious. I have little time for people who nominate the opinion of others as "uneducated" when said opinions differ from said nominee and then call for only "educated" responses.

And no, I don't agree with you. I think Grendel was spot on when he said that we have laws to protect those that cannot protect themselves. If you wish to ignore them that's up to you, but you also risk the consequences. If that makes me a wowser so be it.

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by PeteLX
.

Please pick me apart, wowsers, as I feel a great debate coming on.

You want to define "wowser"?