10 years for DMT possession.

[Northerner]

but setting consequences for adults who deliberately break laws is also important.

This belief is exactly the reason DMT is illegal.

No. DMT is illegal because of fear and populace control spiraling from publicly unsupported 1930's anti drug campaigns. Not because people need some sort of deterrent for breaking laws. I'm sure you'd be all in favour of legal deterrents if someone was stealing your stuff or beating on you and your loved ones. Let's not confuse legality with morality, I'm fairly sure we are in consensus on that.

Laws evolve naturally as a mechanism of society, they have and always will. Empowering our young people to take the challenge of changing outdated and immoral laws is a worthwhile cause. Even though I'm not a smoker I am enjoying the trend of marijuana legalisation across the globe. It will spread to psychedelics too eventually I believe. I hope I live to see the reversion complete.

Bottom line is this man just lost ten years of his life for something most of us have done or actively do here. This should scare any of us.

It's unnerving to say the least.

-------------------------

This thread has forced a paradigm shift on me. How this presents in the context of US and how it would present in my own place of residence do not necessarily add up to the same intent.

While I can't support such lunacy (on all sides, police, media and victim), it's disquietening to think of young men sat with such powerful weapons in dense urban environments. It defies logic. But people will what they will... and they will own the outcomes too.

 

[Northerner]

Remember that dude who got caught importing 18kg of MHRB and got done for 18kg of dmt?

I remember that guy... he got 7 months home detention.

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

I can't imagine what would have happened to him in the US.

 

[Doc Buxin]

Bottom line is this man just lost ten years of his life for something most of us have done or actively do here. This should scare any of us.

Exactly!!!! As many of you know, I have been busted and incarcerated by the U.S. federal government for possession of a sheet of LSD. It was not a pretty picture and if it weren't for a few twists of serious luck or fate or whatever you want to call it, along with a loving family who helped me out to be able to afford a badass attorney (I never would have been able to afford it on my own at the ripe young age of 23), I would have rotted away in prison for a long, long time instead of simply just serving a few weeks, paying a hefty fine and being on probation for many years afterward.

So-called "laws" enacted by a centralized, power-hungry, control-freak group of people (what most people refer to as "government" these days) are so morally & ethically corrupt, unjust & sick in the head that it never ceases to amaze me that the vast majority of people willingly submit their freedoms, liberties, privacies, income (which is a form of property), tangible property, etc. to these groups of morally reprehensible control freaks (i.e., any modern, centralized governing power). It is simply antithetical to the freedom, liberty & pursuit of happiness of each & every human being born into this world.

As far as the gun goes. Sorry guys, Americans have a love affair with gunpowder. I really hate to tell all the Europeans in this thread that Americans really like guns.

Yep, and for very good reasons. I will not get into this contentious subject on this thread, but if anyone gets the itch to ask me, a gun-owning citizen of The Universe, questions regarding this important historical subject, I'll be happy to either meet you on the politics thread here on the forum or banter back & forth via PM.


Peace out everybody & stay safe out there! The world is becoming more of an Orwellian, surveillance-police-state with each & every second that passes...

 

[dragonrider]

I think that if everybody else in europe would have a gun, that would be a sufficient reason for me to also want one.

But i do find that latest sacha baron cohen project very, very funny though.

 

[obliguhl]

Laws evolve naturally as a mechanism of society, they have and always will. Empowering our young people to take the challenge of changing outdated and immoral laws is a worthwhile cause.

Well, the same argument can be used to justify the holocaust. "It is sad that the jews have to die, and not moral but its up to the youth to change the laws which are always evolving"

No, in some cases you have to openly break the law to force change.

I'm sure you'd be all in favour of legal deterrents if someone was stealing your stuff or beating on you and your loved ones.

Actually, i'm not...:|
I'd want the stuff back though :lol:

 

[Northerner]

Northerner scratches his head... thinks long and hard about that. Wonders how empowering young people to challenge long entrenched unfair laws has got anything do do with a genocide atrocity orchestrated by maniacs... comes up with with nothing.

Shrugs, moves along.

 

[obliguhl]

What i'm saying is, the measures to change laws have to be drastic sometimes. One of these measures is resistance e.g extracting dmt no matter the consequences.

It's not like dissatisfied youth could call hitler to complain about the genocide, no.

It is great that people like the one arrested extracted DMT and there need to be more and more and possibly even doing it very openly risking arrest.

The idea is to ignore the law because "just" law is always a reflection of the societal reality.

If people don't want a law, it can't exist for them.

 

[dragonrider]

Well there are laws that make sense. I think that's a sort of moral test for any kind of legislation: if anyone could see that a certain law makes sense, than to have this law is not immoral. Otherwise it is.

It is perfectly reasonable to ask people not to rape, steal, or commit murders. Most people also don't do these things because they've already figured oug by themselves that these things are just wrong. So to have a law that forbids you to do this, is not realy an infringement of your basic rights and dignity as a human being.

But how could you expect people to follow a rule that is not rational? How could you expect people to voluntarily restrict themselves, to give up something, anything, without there being a good, rational explanation for why this would be nessecary?

To say that you should, simply because it's the law, is nothing but saying "because i ask you to".

My theory is that drug-laws are basically a form of identity-politics avant la lettre. It's about a small group of people saying "we are essentially a traditional, christian nation", and "X or Y is not consistant with our traditions", imposing this view on others.
They are against psychedelic drugs, because they are against the idea that people can have their own, distinct, individual identity, the idea that people can decide for themselves what kind of "identity groups" they want to associate with. It's all about establishing dominance. About saying "no, WE decide what our collective identity is".

 

[Northerner]

The German people were led blindly by the Nazi party, at one stage it showed great promise and was a good thing for the nation... but then it turned dark and sinister. There was some heavy drugs and mass psychological manipulation at play. This all went down in a very short period. There's been some pretty wild experiments to show how these things were achieved, dark stuff... by the end of the war nationalism was almost dead in Nazi Germany. It was a great relief for many that this thing they had been lead into was finally over. I don't really see the parallel here.

Drug prohibition was overwhelmingly unsupported from the get go and was the brainchild of the person who just lost their role prohibiting alcohol. Bored meglomaniac run wild. Then generations of psychological manipulation have lead the majority or people to believe the feedback loop. The majority of people really do believe illicit drugs are dangerous and should remain illegal, though pharmaceuticals are safe and will take them without thought. Psychedelics get lumped in with illicit substances... (I know this isn't congruent)

What people do see though is the massive harm caused by highly addictive and psychotic drugs like meth and crack and see the staggering loss of life caused by opiates and barbiturates. To try and explain that psychedelics are not the same to these people, to get a majority view, to change laws, is a long and ongoing process. It's not that 80% of the people already want these laws changed, they really don't see that.

I do see it happening eventually though. But it will never happen by force. It will happen by challenge of the status quo... and gradually it will move as opinions shift, like we are seeing with cannabis legalization.

 

[Jagube]

What i'm saying is, the measures to change laws have to be drastic sometimes. One of these measures is resistance e.g extracting dmt no matter the consequences.

[..] The idea is to ignore the law because "just" law is always a reflection of the societal reality.

If you need DMT for your own use / growth / healing, or your friends' or others', then yes, do extract it if you know how to fly under the radar. But do it only for the growth and healing.
I don't see a point in extracting it just for the sake of 'resistance', it only reminds me of the Baixinha song "Rebeldia" (Rebelliousness), which - I don't know about DMT, but it seems Daime (Ayahuasca) heals.

If your resistance is aimed to affect the law, it must be heard, and that's not compatible with safety. Getting caught is going to get you jailed, not get the laws changed.

Don't ignore the law, that's just foolish. Take the law into account, so you can journey safely.

There are better ways to change the law - spreading information / education, promoting harm reduction, scientific research, political action (e.g. petitions) etc. As long as it's done wisely. It's ok if people break the unjust laws *as long as no one suffers because of it* (including their own imprisonment).

If we all, one by one, awaken through the safe use of entheogens, there will be no room for such unjust laws.

A guy who gets 10 years for extracting DMT, shoots a gun and gets bad press is hardly going to do any good for the cause, much less for himself.

It is great that people like the one arrested extracted DMT and there need to be more and more and possibly even doing it very openly risking arrest.

There is nothing great about the fact he's going to waste much of his life as a young adult in prison. Even the great cause of potential DMT legalization is not worth what he's going to lose.

 

[dragonrider]

Who said anything about the nazi-party? When i was talking about identity-politics i was more referring to something like that some muslims want all women to wear a scarf. Or at least al muslim women.

I definately think that drug laws are simmilar to that. It's highly symbolic. When people want to force something on others that is highly symbolic, and that lacks a good rational motivation, it's ALWAYS about establishing dominance.
At least for most supporters.

 

[Northerner]

Who said anything about the nazi-party?

obliguhl.

When i was talking about identity-politics i was more referring to something like that some muslims want all women to wear a scarf. Or at least al muslim women.

I definately think that drug laws are simmilar to that. It's highly symbolic. When people want to force something on others that is highly symbolic, and that lacks a good rational motivation, it's ALWAYS about establishing dominance.
At least for most supporters.

I enjoy reading your thoughts on the matter.

 

[dragonrider]

Who said anything about the nazi-party?

obliguhl.
.

Oh yes. How could i have missed it?

That comparison is always a bit.....too heavy.

On the other hand, some people are realy, realy ignorant about history. I watched a video on youtube recently, i believe it was a PragerU video but it could have been another, simmilar channel, and they where arguing that the nazi's where actually lefists. I couldn't stop laughing, i almost thought i was watching a cartoon.

 

[Doc Buxin]

...they where arguing that the nazi's where actually lefists. I couldn't stop laughing...

I can understand your laughter at an absurd argument like that.

The Nazi's reign of terror in Germany from the early 1930's until 1945 was indeed what happens when government control freaks take the right-wing to the extreme end of the spectrum.

However, let us never forget that Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc. were indeed leftists and, all combined, killed many, many more millions innocent, non-combatant human beings than Hitler's Nazi regime did. The communists even pulled off a lot of their genocides during "peace-time", unlike Hitler.

Do not misunderstand me here, I am in no way at all defending Nazis (that would be wholly unconscionable & sick). I am simply pointing out that the left is just as gnarly, brutal & evil as the right when it comes down to it.

Every one of them (any politician present, past or future), psychopathic, sociopathic, control freaks bent on telling other people how to live. All centralized governments eventually end at the extreme end one way or another, given enough time, it's their nature. There are no innocent politicians nor bureaucrats and anyone that even runs for a so-called "public office" is, whether they're conscious of it or not (my sense is that many are not conscious of this, at least not at first), a control freak bent on controlling you & I & everybody else.

However, thanks to history, we can all read, if we so choose to, about where this phenomenon eventually leads us back to, again & again & again. Kind of like the cycle of life itself, round & round on the merry-go-round until the veil of ignorance is eventually lifted, through, what I suppose would be termed, "Grace".

Ah, the cyclical patterns of human history...so obvious, so predictable & yet, so very, very few people actually pay any attention to these patterns.

 

[hug46]

Every one of them (any politician present, past or future), psychopathic, sociopathic, control freaks bent on telling other people how to live. All centralized governments eventually end at the extreme end one way or another, given enough time, it's their nature. There are no innocent politicians nor bureaucrats and anyone that even runs for a so-called "public office" is, whether they're conscious of it or not (my sense is that many are not conscious of this, at least not at first), a control freak bent on controlling you & I & everybody else.

While i agree that you have to be very thick skinned and maybe sociopathic to be in politics, i think that a lot of politicians take office with what they think are their best intentions. It's just that what are percieved as good intentions vary from person to person. There are simply too many people to try and please.
Some politicians are blatant liars and some are just made to go back on their word by having their hands forced by behind the scenes machinations. The electorate is partly to blame for dishonest politicians, as an admission of f~~~ing up by a politician is seen as an admission of weakness and being unfit for office.

Also in regard to politicians pushing evil agendas (ie the war on drugs) sometimes i do not think that it is intentionally evil. Sometimes these people just come from a completely different background, are mis-informed and do not have much of an idea as to what it is like to live in the real world. For instance if a country has a drug tzar to direct drug policy, i wouldn't choose someone to do the job with no practical experience of drugs. I would choose an ex addict,someone who has worked at an outreach centre or suchlike.

I don't envy anyone who has to work out how to try and please people while trying to maintain infrastructure, economy, order etc etc.......

I managed to write all that while sitting on the toilet taking my morning constitution.

 

[dragonrider]

Oh, i absolutely agree that extreme leftists are every inch as bad as the extreme right. To a sociopath, the narrative that excuses killing and torture is not all that important, i think.

Typical of sociopaths in public office is, that they do not even seem to care whether what they say resembles the truth to even the tiniest degree. In some cases they even seem to enjoy it that everybody can easily tell their lies. It probably feels to them like being able to shoot somebody and not losing voters.

 

[○]

I can understand your laughter at an absurd argument like that.

The Nazi's reign of terror in Germany from the early 1930's until 1945 was indeed what happens when government control freaks take the right-wing to the extreme end of the spectrum.

However, let us never forget that Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc. were indeed leftists and, all combined, killed many, many more millions innocent, non-combatant human beings than Hitler's Nazi regime did. The communists even pulled off a lot of their genocides during "peace-time", unlike Hitler.

Do not misunderstand me here, I am in no way at all defending Nazis (that would be wholly unconscionable & sick). I am simply pointing out that the left is just as gnarly, brutal & evil as the right when it comes down to it.

Every one of them (any politician present, past or future), psychopathic, sociopathic, control freaks bent on telling other people how to live. All centralized governments eventually end at the extreme end one way or another, given enough time, it's their nature. There are no innocent politicians nor bureaucrats and anyone that even runs for a so-called "public office" is, whether they're conscious of it or not (my sense is that many are not conscious of this, at least not at first), a control freak bent on controlling you & I & everybody else.

However, thanks to history, we can all read, if we so choose to, about where this phenomenon eventually leads us back to, again & again & again. Kind of like the cycle of life itself, round & round on the merry-go-round until the veil of ignorance is eventually lifted, through, what I suppose would be termed, "Grace".

Ah, the cyclical patterns of human history...so obvious, so predictable & yet, so very, very few people actually pay any attention to these patterns.

Great post Doc, especially on the highlighted portion.

And a small sidenote, for anyone that thinks that they're so vastly apart from these folk and their capacities to do these atrocities. I suggest reading 'Ordinary Men. Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland (1992)'. It's good to be cognizant of the capacities that 'all' humans carry within themselves. This obviously overlaying into the many other areas of this discussion.

 

[dragonrider]

Yes tatt, that's exactly what's so scary.

I think we all have felt moments of totally senseless rage at some point.
I know i have, for sure.

 

[obliguhl]

That comparison is always a bit.....too heavy.

It was not a comparison, i used this example to illustrate the argument, that adherence to law as a morally superior principle can't always be just in light of atrocities committed in the name of law.

In the german constitution, it is even written that every citizen has the right to resist those who try to abolish the constitution if there are no other means to stop them.

This is a similar idea.

Just that you'd have to follow the premise, that cognitive liberty is a fundamental human right that always precedes any other law. Similar as to what a constitution is supposed to be.

In my mind, cognitive liberty (includes use of drugs) is a necessity for development and change, which is in turn a necessity for prosperous human development and relations between us and this planet.

To actively fight this, means to inhibit potential.

It means to take away health & happiness.

It means to persue the destruction of this planet, the life of people and the sacred.

Laws that go against what can be considered just can't be justified by the principle of law itself.

It is not logical. It makes no sense. It is dangerous.

 

[dragonrider]

In the german constitution, it is even written that every citizen has the right to resist those who try to abolish the constitution if there are no other means to stop them.

That is a realy good principle.

What do you think would happen if the german police would by accident find a "drug lab" like the one described in the article, so say, a couple hundred grams of acrb or mhrb and some solvents?