• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

The Way to Peacefully Resist Entheogenic Laws

Migrated topic.

'Coatl

Teotzlcoatl
Common Illegal Botanicals-

"'Shrooms" ~ Psilocybe Mushrooms

"Peyote" ~ Lophophora williamsii

"Iboga" ~ Tabernanthe iboga

"Khat" ~ Catha edulis

"Opium Poppy" ~ Papaver somniferum

"Coca" ~ Erythroxylum coca

"Marijuana" ~ Cannabis



The way to peacefully resist laws concering entheogens is to grow, grow, grow!!!

We as human should have the right to cultivate any botanicals which we please! These amazing "entheogenic factories" of plants have been giving to us so we can produce our own psychoactive!

Propagate!!! Cultivate!!!

Since this site largely focuses on chemicals I also encourage those of you in that branch of the community to learn how to produce all the chemicals you need on your own!

Self-sufficency is the key!
 
Are you forcing people to condone to illegal activities?

How would that ever help "resist the law"? It sounds more like "peacefully getting yourself in trouble".

Especially in the case of mushrooms, marijuana and poppies (which are very easily recognised even by naive police officers) it is asking for trouble. They take a further look in your flat, hey, what is that bush over there, ha!, it is a coka plant. And this and this and this?? Boy now you're in trouble.

Have your children taken to custody because you are an "irresponsible" father because you grow them in a "drug dent", how the fuck is that gonna work Teo?

Are you referring to some special group of people that do not have much to lose if they got their asses arrested and convicted for producing Schedule I drugs? Because for many of us it is going to be the end of career and family.
 
It's easy to grow these botanicals and I never said you do it in the open.

There are various laws in various countries.

Nobody would have any idea if you were cultivating Iboga, Khat or Coca...

q0xc1l2d.jpg


coca.jpg



Even if they walked right up to it!!!

See my thread at Spiritplants about the Subject!
 
I wish I had a greenhouse.

'Coatl if you're single and don't mind doing time for the cause if it goes wrong then go for it, if they catch you plead enthogen use and maybe you'll make history!
 
I agree with you to these plants, no officer would ever realize they contain something illegal! Same goes for salvia, where police offcers cannot distinguish id from other "decorative foliage plants" commonly hold in houses or gardens.

But I can understand the case where police can get suspicious against ALL of your plants should they observe easily recognizable illegal ones (poppies, weed) in your property.

So, better if you do not propose cultivation of said plants. Alternatively, make clear in your posts the dangers associated with their cultivation.

I also had a look at the linked post from the other forum. I just scanned through the first page, it didn't seem that your ideas got a warm welcome there!
 
SWIM agrees about the poppies and marijuana being far too risky for most. Psilocybes can be a slightly different matter, however. With a proper setup, one could perpetuate a small-scale mushroom grow with very little expenditure and even less risk than extractions. SWIM can definitely see the point about growing rather than buying, but there are certainly limits.

SWIM disagrees with any of this being necessarily peaceful. Whether anybody involved in these sorts of things likes it or not, there is a war on, and they are combatants. Even if they don't recognize it, the opposition does and will treat them as such. Anybody who's been incarcerated for any length of time due to these things should recognize this.
 
Well hopefully none of us will get caught, that certainly isn't the plan...

I do believe we have the right to cultivate any botanical we wish...

Notice I'm not saying extract these plants or make drugs, I'm strictly talking about cultivation.

I think all can be cultivated on a small scale within reason, self-sufficently and produce enough for a couple users.

I plan on having a large farm with lots of greenhouse and 100s of plants! Mostly fruit trees and such...

To me these and other botanicals are all the psychoactives and medicines I'll ever need...

I would like to see us all doing this... self-sufficent tight-nit communities based around good friends, good family, good food and good drugs... based around plants.
 
Sometimes I admire your patience....

Growing Aztekium and Ariocarpus teaches you something!

This perhaps could be a "foot in the door" and a pathway for the legalization of all drugs (be that your personal goal) but for the current time, in our current place, I believe we have the best chance of seeking religious exemption and attempting to push (if only for the moment) for strictly botanicals to be legal, but not "drugs".

The U.S. courts have already demonstrated a willingness to exempt the users of Ayahuasca and Peyote from "drug laws", however... anyone caught with research chemicals, N,N-DMT, MDMA or LSD-25 is thrown in the slammer.

So just due to the current trends in society it is best if we push for ONLY the legalization of botanicals at the current moment.
 
GROW! GROW! GROW! CULTIVATE! PROPAGATE!

Thats how we can win the war of etheogenic botanicals.

They're not going to legalize synthetics or extracted chemicals anytime soon, get over it...

But botanicals... well with psychoactive botanicals we might just have a chance of having them legalized in the next 25 years.

we can all help by not ever buying drugs again but only making them ourselves for us and our friends to share. where there are no dealers there is no need for DEA or something similar. nobody really gives a crap about what people do in their kitchens as long as it doesn't turn up on the streets.

That's a very good point and one I'm trying to make as well... if we grow our own plants we can become self-sufficent in producing all our own psychoactives.

It simple, legalize (and legitimize) Mother Nature... and leave "drugs" illegal.

Just think.... drugs are illegal, but you can grow/buy all the Mimosa and Caapi you want (and if you are discrete, you could extract and smoke DMT in your homes).

so you dont want heroin or meth legal..but you can get oxycotin from a doctor and you can get adderall from a doctor..i would say they are both just about as legal as they can be...

Both would be illegal without a prescription in my perfect society.

So you keep Coca legal and people import it, thereby simply making cocaine out of it in their own country, exposing themselves to dangerous chemicals in their basement if they do it 'discretely' in their own kitchen. Or allowing the criminal gangs to continue doing it for them in your back yard as well as overseas, thereby addressing none of the social factors inherent in cocaine use and in fact arguably furthering them.

Cocaine would be illegal. Coca leafs legal. You would get arrested for making and selling large amounts of cocaine. However.... if you made 1 gram of cocaine inside your house, never sold it and did it once, then you probably wouldn't ever get caught.

Well its kind of funny. Because if other drugs were legal (like LSD MDMA or whatever) would they be available only by prescription?

That is how I would want it. All botanicals are legal. All drugs are legal ONLY with a prescription.

Really intelligent scientist, poets and chemist could apply for prescriptions of pure pharmaceutical LSD-25, Mescaline and N,N-DMT on the basis of "internal exploration" or other worthy endeavors, and of course since the botanicals are perfectly legal anyone could import huge amounts of Mimosa root bark (or whatever) to quietly extract in their home-labs.

Botanicals would be legal for EVERYONE to grow and use as they see fit (unless it is transformed into an illegal (or prescription only) drug.

However the sale and production of dangerous substances could be regulated in some ways. If people really want to do meth they should be able to why the fuck not?

That is where I disagree, I don't want people doing meth, heroin, cocaine or other hard drugs unless they have a damn good (medical or research) reason.

The answer is allowing everyone a complete right to their own body and mind as long as they don't have any impact on anyone else. Unfortunately, where drugs are concerned they may have an impact on someone else. I come back again to ganja, or even mushrooms. Natural does not instantly equal safe. It may equal safer but people are people, they can use anything badly.

I find statements like this to be LUDICROUS!!! Nobody can use meth safely, No one can use heroin safely (unless they are a medical professional administering it to someone besides themselves for medical reasons).

How can you not use cannabis safely? How about Peyote? Certain drugs are worse than others as far as addiction and negative effects go, PERIOD!

Why just the other day I was arguing with a heroin addict who first told me how much pain he was in and how he would like to never do opiates again, but he "can't" and then 5 minutes later (after he shot up) he was telling me how safe it is and that there aren't really any negative effects.

One of my goals of all these crazy policies is to remove power from the hands of the rich pharmaceutical and agricultural companies and place it into the hands of the gardener and the farmer.

I envision a world full of magical plants. There would be a fruit orchard and a medicinal garden in every yard!
 
I'm so with 'coatl on this point. I think it's our natural right to explore and enjoy entheogens in the privacy of our own homes.
Peyote usage has been documented throughout the ages. I believe hallucinogenic plants have been part of our evolution since the dawn of time. Perhaps the Tree of Knowledge was a primordial Acacia? For our society to outlaw any plant and it's effects is a crime against nature in my opinion.
I think it's worse than ecological disasters, as it affects natures greatest triumph, MEEEEE! (And everyone else of course)
We evolved to a point where we can truly understand and recreate the beauty of nature, and ourselves, through our art, music, even through interation with others.

Why deny us what may be a key link in our development? Many studies have proven some highly illegal hallucinogens (Peyote, LSD) are in fact much less harmful than alcohol, even tobacco. Why...

Well I'm not about to join greenpeace, and I know what happens when you send letters to your local politician. They ignore you, then introduce laws preventing teenagers from painting art. (I'm not kidding, they outlawed kids doing art in my f***ing city) So if they can do this... Who knows what may become highly illegal in the future? It's up to entheogenic gardeners to keep these truly magical species alive and in the ground where they belong.

"The way to peacefully resist laws concering entheogens is to grow, grow, grow!!!" -'coatl

Hell yes.
 
All drugs should be regulated and controlled. Keeping any drug illegal just creates crime, disease, and death. Society and the individual pay significantly more under prohibition than with controlled drugs. Just look at alcohol prohibition. The tax revenue generated should and could be used to develop effective treatments pharmacological and psychological for addiction and drug abuse. Many people are able to use even hard drugs recreationally.

Who are you to tell people that they should not be able to do meth or heroin but they can do mescaline and LSD? An adult should have the right to control his or her own body. I think through regulation and education we can reduce the abuse of many of these substances as well as offer safer alternatives. This does not mean that heroin or meth is good and should be used by everyone. I wouldn't use meth weather it were legal or not as would most people. It has to do with the freedom of choice and harm reduction.

Please answer this question:
Prohibition has not decreased the use of illegal drugs. Thus it is quite clear that people are going to do these drugs no matter what so wouldn't you rather have them do it safely with minimal harm to themselves and society?

There could be strict regulations on price, purity, availability, dosage and packaging information. Similar to alcohol regulation. But by regulating these things we as a society gain control over them whereas by pushing them underground we lose all control and power over these substances. The control then goes to the hands of gangsters and corrupt politicians. The very point of government is not to act as mommy and daddy but to protect people from economics corruption and greed. They are there to regulate no control every little behavior. Prohibition creates a miniature anarchy within the economy. We have government to protect us from anarchy not create it.

I agree that the likely hood of getting busted are significantly decreased if one is self sufficient and only shares the fruit of her labor with close friends and family. Do not sell drugs. Maybe trade but do not sell, it will catch up to you and the punishment is not worth the money. Still there will always be drugs on the black market so long as they are illegal. Most people do not want to bother with growing and extracting and ....they want it easy and now. And as long as they are willing to pay someone is willing to supply it. Even if drugs were legal most people would buy them rather than grow them. In california medical patients are allowed to grow marijuana yet most still go to the medical club and purchase it.
 
[quote='Coatl]

The answer is allowing everyone a complete right to their own body and mind as long as they don't have any impact on anyone else. Unfortunately, where drugs are concerned they may have an impact on someone else. I come back again to ganja, or even mushrooms. Natural does not instantly equal safe. It may equal safer but people are people, they can use anything badly.

I find statements like this to be LUDICROUS!!! Nobody can use meth safely, No one can use heroin safely (unless they are a medical professional administering it to someone besides themselves for medical reasons).

How can you not use cannabis safely? How about Peyote? Certain drugs are worse than others as far as addiction and negative effects go, PERIOD!

[/quote]

Coatl: how is it ludicrous to suggest that nature does not automatically equal safe? Are you seriously trying to argue that just because it is natural it has no potential for abuse? That it is automatically used safely simply because it is 'natural'?

Read carefully: It may equal safer but people are people, they can use anything badly

Surely even you with your love of botanicals must agree with that?

How can you not use Cannabis safely? Are you serious in asking this question? Do you really think that Cannabis is completely safe and cannot be abused just because it's natural (and therefore in your eyes perfect and not open to any problems).

Safer does not = safe.

Whether or not meth and heroin cannot be used safely (and bufo has adequately expressed my views on this elsewhere) that is beside the point. That doesn't mean that natural substances are automatically safe for everyone.
 
But Malargue, using that reasoning presumably prohibition should be in place to stop people abusing alcohol, and surely this isn't feasible. People should be allowed to screw up thier lives with legal drugs and alcohol. The problem is that because hard drugs are illegal people are at much, much higher risk of overdosing, and starting a life of crime to support thier habits.
 
This thread made my Blue Bear laugh. About three weeks ago he sowed two 6ft rows of Flanders poppies on the side of his house, next to the driveway. He will have to be very carefull when it comes time to cut the suckers open.
 
I hope nobody was offended my ideas, but I'll stick to my botanicals- legal, drugs- illegal philosophy.
 
[quote='Coatl]I hope nobody was offended my ideas, but I'll stick to my botanicals- legal, drugs- illegal philosophy.
[/quote]

Coatl, how could they be? There's a lot of simple logic to your point of view; what the earth gives us should be legal. No questions asked. And your passion is to be admired, even if (imo) it does sometimes sway your objectivity.

I disagree with the finer points of your argument and the application - particularly because I think synthetic drugs have a place in what we do (a point on which we'll have to agree to disagree) but I completely respect your point of view.

I do still think we need a workable solution that goes further than botanicals.
 
nibpack said:
But Malargue, using that reasoning presumably prohibition should be in place to stop people abusing alcohol, and surely this isn't feasible.

Hey Nib, I wasn't actually making this point, the point I was making is that botanicals aren't inherently safe. It's nitpicking to a degree because botanicals are of course a lot safer and have a long history of human usage, but they aren't perfect because people aren't perfect. Whether this makes any difference is beside the point as you go on to say; the moral argument is let people do what they want. Either way, I think we need to go all the way or none of the way (i.e botanicals and synthetic drugs being allowed, or none, including alochol).

In fact, the logic that gets us to alcohol being illegal under current laws is probably one of our strongest arguments for a re-evaluation of current drug laws.

nibpack said:
People should be allowed to screw up thier lives with legal drugs and alcohol. The problem is that because hard drugs are illegal people are at much, much higher risk of overdosing, and starting a life of crime to support thier habits.

I completely agree.
 
Natural does not mean safer. This is ridiculous it all depends on the specific chemical of interest. There are many synthetic chemicals that are much safer than natural drugs. Terrence McKenna made a good point saying that with many natural drug preparations you at least know that they have been used safety by people for a long time. This is true but with modern pharmacology we can test any chemical we are interested in for possible adverse effects. It is just unfortunate with many synthetic recreational substances these studies are not performed before the drug hits the streets. Even still most of these chemicals have proven to be relatively safe.

No one can say that natural is safer. This is a ridiculous argument and obviously incorrect. Many compounds have even been synthesized by chemists only latter to be found in plants (DMT) so how can you even say a specific chemical is not natural. Shulgin gave a great talk about this. He said "well I am natural and thus so are the compounds I make in my lab". We are nature. I obviously know the distinction b/w natural and synthetic but it really does not matter at all. There are many dangerous natural compounds, and plants as there are synthetic. Every case is different you can not draw conclusions like that. Your chances of danger from eating some random plant are just as grim as from eating some random chemical.
 
Back
Top Bottom