bonestoner
Rising Star
Well said.^^
Amen to that!MagikVenom said:Basically what I am saying is grow your own drugs make your own drugs use your own drugs.
MagikVenom said:Burnt this could be your number one profound reply.
Basically what I am saying is grow your own drugs make your own drugs use your own drugs once you start moving those drugs around its more likely you will get caught and then all the fun is over.
now thats some damn good advice:lol:
you got my vote
MV
burnt said:Yea but your results are biased because it was in a population of people who wanted to try it. I dunno if the responses would be so positive in the general population of non drug users.
I don't see pulling a timothy leary as a very good way of showing people this substance. Psychedelics are finally being appreciated slowly by scientific community and I'd hate to see that get swamped by some over idealistic naive persons. Also we are lucky to have such access to all the plants that some of these substances come from and attracting negative attention is the best way to get them banned. The best way to attract negative attention is to spread it far and wide. Let those who seek the substance come find it not the other way around.
burnt said:Yea but your results are biased because it was in a population of people who wanted to try it. I dunno if the responses would be so positive in the general population of non drug users.
I don't see pulling a timothy leary as a very good way of showing people this substance. Psychedelics are finally being appreciated slowly by scientific community and I'd hate to see that get swamped by some over idealistic naive persons. Also we are lucky to have such access to all the plants that some of these substances come from and attracting negative attention is the best way to get them banned. The best way to attract negative attention is to spread it far and wide. Let those who seek the substance come find it not the other way around.
1. As burned said, it was biased. I would also add that it was also an uncontrolled experiment, therefore of not much value (at least to people who are unfamiliar to dmt, also known as the vast majority of people)lbeing789 said:Also 1. I'm not quite sure how biased the experiment was, I mean, yeah, it wasn't on the general population... it was only drug users... 2. but if you've made the stupid decision not to even try drugs, then your definitely not gonna try DMT are you? when I say everyone should try it, I'm not talking about squares who will never try anything.... actually I'm not even sure of that, 3. for those people sometimes I think it would be good to spike them or something because I think personally think they're wasting their lives... especially the religious puritan folks, obviously SWIM would never do such a thing, but 4. SWIM wonders what the world would be like if they took good drugs instead of bad ones... 5. imagine if bars/clubs didnt sell alcohol, tobacco and just sold vapo weed and quality mdma for ravers (shit maybe even LSD if the quality could be regulated), barmaids just hand out water, people get a set amount every few hours based on body weight... I think the world would be so much more chilled... where SWIM lives, cocaine is a scourge, that and alcohol is turning the whole city into a bunch of tweeked out morons looking to fight people.
Also, having tried almost everything, SWIM really cant compare DMT to any other substances, it's not like a "drug" in the typical sense, it's more like a ticket to another world.
lbeing789 said:Also but SWIM wonders what the world would be like if they took good drugs instead of bad ones... imagine if bars/clubs didnt sell alcohol, tobacco and just sold vapo weed and quality mdma for ravers (shit maybe even LSD if the quality could be regulated), barmaids just hand out water, people get a set amount every few hours based on body weight... I think the world would be so much more chilled... where SWIM lives, cocaine is a scourge, that and alcohol is turning the whole city into a bunch of tweeked out morons looking to fight people.
Infundibulum said:1. As burned said, it was biased. I would also add that it was also an uncontrolled experiment, therefore of not much value (at least to people who are unfamiliar to dmt, also known as the vast majority of people)lbeing789 said:Also 1. I'm not quite sure how biased the experiment was, I mean, yeah, it wasn't on the general population... it was only drug users... 2. but if you've made the stupid decision not to even try drugs, then your definitely not gonna try DMT are you? when I say everyone should try it, I'm not talking about squares who will never try anything.... actually I'm not even sure of that, 3. for those people sometimes I think it would be good to spike them or something because I think personally think they're wasting their lives... especially the religious puritan folks, obviously SWIM would never do such a thing, but 4. SWIM wonders what the world would be like if they took good drugs instead of bad ones... 5. imagine if bars/clubs didnt sell alcohol, tobacco and just sold vapo weed and quality mdma for ravers (shit maybe even LSD if the quality could be regulated), barmaids just hand out water, people get a set amount every few hours based on body weight... I think the world would be so much more chilled... where SWIM lives, cocaine is a scourge, that and alcohol is turning the whole city into a bunch of tweeked out morons looking to fight people.
Also, having tried almost everything, SWIM really cant compare DMT to any other substances, it's not like a "drug" in the typical sense, it's more like a ticket to another world.
2. Not trying drugs is not a stupid decision. Many people live and die not less happy than people who take drugs. Even though one can say that everybody does drugs, especially endogenous drugs like endorphines and dopamine rushes.
3. A common problem with mainstream people is that they often believe they know what is better for others, they think they can judge others and try to enforce what they think to others. It is sad to see people with this ill notion here
4. The "my drugs is better than yours" is also a childish argument. Drugs are drugs, without moral. People have morality and can be "good" or "bad"
5. So you propose stop selling alcohol + tobacco in bars/clubs? these are great drugs, enjoyed by many. Ban them and you're a step closer to a dictator. Why not allow everything and let people decide what they should take instead of you deciding instead?
Fine, so what was the point of the distributing the dmt to 50 people again? Was it just to see whether others can have similar experiences? what was the conclusion?lbeing789 said:1. SWIM is actually a scientist with a Phd, I never claimed it was a controlled experiment.. I dont really understand where there notion is coming from, it was not a proper experiment and I will point out yet again, if it was an experiment it would not have been biased because the experiment was to test the effect of DMT on drug users... if I was trying to establish the effect on the general population then it would've been biased.
I agree with what you say yet I consider it irrelevant to my initial point. In your original post you said: "..but if you've made the stupid decision not to even try drugs.." this is what I argued with, it is not a stupid decision to decide not to try drugs. People outside the "drug" community are not so stupid as we'd like to think, they have their own fair values, amazing experiences from life and the sort...lbeing789 said:2. Well you answered your own point here, everyone does drugs it's natural, mother nature is not perfect (that's the great misconception), we have bad drugs running through our blood stream... people are born with "bad" chemicals... thats why a lot of people to take medication to repair various conditions. SWIM would argue that you cant know what something is like if you've never tried it, new experiences are the spice of life. You're probably missing out because nothing in my life has taught me more than drugs and when I found out at 22, I was a little annoyed that I bought the hype that they rot your brain and stuff... I will explain more on this in the next points.
My point was more about enforcement of what people think its better/worse to the others. That said, I agree with most of your post. A scientist knows more about aspartame than laymen, yet he doesn't enforce compulsory aspartame consumption to the population.lbeing789 said:3. Once again, I think this is completely wrong, another global misconception... democracy has created this idea that every man has an equal and valid voice, and somehow there is no right or wrong answer... as a scientist I know this is bullshit... if you are an experienced chemist you WILL know whats better for a person if they know nothing about it... I mean, would you call an electrician to fix your plumbing? If you are a moron, you dont know whats best for you, if you are smart you know whats better for you and whats better for others. Surely you've met people with wisdom that you respect and you know better than you do? for example, if you've ever done a class, your trusting someone to teach you something because they know more about it than you do. Personally I hate the fact that the world doesnt let the professionals get on with their job... look at things like the aspartme conspiracy, completely unfounded, chemists dont think there is anything wrong with it, yet you'll meet people in bars who are convinced it's toxic when they know literally nothing about it.
Apologies for the ad hominem; Your response is however your opinion and I will not discuss your topics much. My opinion is that drugs are amoral. It is the user who makes a bad drug or a good drug. In addition, side effects are irrelevant when it comes to the correct use of a drug. I do not even know what are side effects - take alcohol for instance. It tends to make some people violent, but is it a side effect of alcohol consumption? Or does it precipitate violent tendencies that have been building on individuals because of oppressive social conditions?lbeing789 said:4. Well to say it's a childish argument is not cool for a start, maybe it's just childish to write that. Let me explain what I mean by good drugs versus bad drugs, bad drugs are drugs where the payoff is not worth the sideeffects... bad drugs are ones with serious side effects... bad drugs are drugs that cause social harm, bad drugs are drugs that are highly addictive, if you think alcohol is a good drug, I think you're mad, it's a depressive and there is no wisdom in it, that like a lot of drugs is just for getting fucked up and forgetting about the world... pills these days arent even MDMA most of the time, they're filled with ket, speed and even smack + a tonne of RC's (which are very dodgy without clinical testing)... they're bad drugs because you dont know what you're getting. If the government legalised these substances you could get good clean drugs and with proper research they could probaby eliminate side effects all together. Not to mention cut down crime and poverty and misery.
I didn't say banning them either. What is better for social lubrication is up to the users to decide. I like alcohol and cigarettes so I like to see them sold in clubs. For me they are better social lubricants compared to mdma.lbeing789 said:5. I didnt mean banning them, I meant it like how coffee and cakes arent sold in clubs.. because they're not appropriate... in my experience people that smoke tobacco do so because they are addicted and become hooked on the mood stablising effect, most smokers hate smoking, I mean c'mon, you know this. Plus I would think if people had access to better smoking materials (good weed, herbs) + good vaporizing technology then you're not gonna get addicted and you're gonna get better effects making it worth it... bare in mind most people have not tried the alternative because cigarettes are sold in shops, weed is not. Alcohol + Tobacco are great drugs? I'm sorry I respect your views but that just sounds absolutely crazy... of course I believe people should be allowed to do whatever they want... I'm merely saying there are much better substances for social lubrication and mood stablisation... and these ones dont cause depression, liver damage, cancer, I mean 1 in 3 smokers die from smoking related illnesses... I mean this is so obvious.
everyone does drugs it's natural, mother nature is not perfect (that's the great misconception), we have bad drugs running through our blood stream... people are born with "bad" chemicals... thats why a lot of people to take medication to repair various conditions. SWIM would argue that you cant know what something is like if you've never tried it, new experiences are the spice of life. You're probably missing out because nothing in my life has taught me more than drugs and when I found out at 22, I was a little annoyed that I bought the hype that they rot your brain and stuff... I will explain more on this in the next points.
democracy has created this idea that every man has an equal and valid voice, and somehow there is no right or wrong answer... as a scientist I know this is bullshit... if you are an experienced chemist you WILL know whats better for a person if they know nothing about it...If you are a moron, you dont know whats best for you, if you are smart you know whats better for you and whats better for others. Surely you've met people with wisdom that you respect and you know better than you do?