If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
The reform of drugs legislation thread;
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
OK im starting this one up with the intention of continuing a running debate about the status of legal reform of various substances and attitudes to frameworks within, if at all, this should take place.
Not that im trying to dictate rules or anything, but i thought it would be interesting if we carried this on a substance specific basis; that is to say for one week (if it runs well enough) we continue a week-long debate on a specific substance and change the substance in question after 7 days. This doesnt mean you cant bring in the issue of other substances (for example in many cases cannabis use could pop up in discussions about E) but it has to relate to the main substance being discussed.
These arent hard or fast rules just general guidelines for what i think could be an interesting and long running thread potentially.
So first up people; MDMA; what is your opinion on the UK legislation regarding MDMA?
Not that im trying to dictate rules or anything, but i thought it would be interesting if we carried this on a substance specific basis; that is to say for one week (if it runs well enough) we continue a week-long debate on a specific substance and change the substance in question after 7 days. This doesnt mean you cant bring in the issue of other substances (for example in many cases cannabis use could pop up in discussions about E) but it has to relate to the main substance being discussed.
These arent hard or fast rules just general guidelines for what i think could be an interesting and long running thread potentially.
So first up people; MDMA; what is your opinion on the UK legislation regarding MDMA?
0
Comments
You are not your own master in actuality even though you may wish it in ideology; by your interactions with others in society you form part of an interdependant network.
However there IS a point at which your arguement is vital to this topic and not irrelevant as you profess. If you live with this society and hold the view that your body is sacrosanct to any chemical experiences you choose to inititate within it, then are you not then bothered that you are not afforded the same safeguards and regulated mechanisms by which to attain these chemicals? The pesticides and floride you have 'no choice' in are (ostensibly at least) regulated and subject to safeguards, why should your chemicals be any different? Should you not be afforded protection and safety and have resources be made available to promote your well being in an endeavour which you believe it right to undertake?
(note: i am expressing no personal opinion here just expressing how your arguement's nature is explicitly linked with legislative frameworks, not irrelevant to it)
hmm well yes legislation does affect me, in that i cant get my drugs from boots.........i meant it's irrelevant as a deterrent from taking drugs, i am my own master in that respect and i won't be told what i can and cannot ingest.......as for safeguards and mechanisms, i don't believe the 'regulated' pesticides and chemicals like fluoride are safe for me at all, so the hypocrisy is that they can damage my body but i can't?.........btw if you take a drug there is always some risk, no matter how regulated that is the nature of drugs........i steer clear of pills most of the time because who knows whats in them, but occasionally i take the risk which i perceive to be a small one..........i must have smoked 1000's of joints without going crazy, now i have calmed down on that for other reasons.........done shrooms in the past and likely to do them again, but again it's rare.........drugs will always be available, regardless of the law.........so in my mind it's irrelevant to a large degree........cannabis oil is class A ffs, didn't stop me from trying it cos i won't be scared off..........i am sensible enough to run my life without having terms and conditions dictated to me..........
What i am getting is YOUR opinion of how current legislation is functioning and how (if at all) it should be reformed, which means in the case of apollo's point that he doesnt believe current deterrant legislation is valid or working but gave no indication as to how he should like to see it reformed.
turlough; in terms of the substance, we are talking about MDMA in its chemical preparation not withstanding any cuts or misleading sales of other substances. What you CAN do is to bring in the possible problem that a substance is, for example, being adulterated under current legislation and that that is a potential problem.
That aint always a problem - sometimes its a bonus!
Personally, i think it's a difficult issue...on one hand, there's freedom of choice, which we all obviously support...on the other, E is a dangerous drug with potential to cause serious problems.
I don't know, being a user of E (at least in the past anyway) - it would be a bit hypocritical to suggest continuing to prosecute dealers. But limiting dealing & supplying convictions to a suspended sentence is definitely a good idea - at least until a permanent solution to legal situation is found.
There's no easy answer. I can't envisage a Layer-Cake style row of shelves stocked up with E - but at the same time, legal controls are the logical progression.
If we had no NHS or State support then fine, that works, you get hurt then you pay for your own repairs, but thats not how it works.
Drugs do cause harm and the legal framework should be there to minmise this because unregulated legal supply would be just as bad as unregulated illegal supply.
In my view MDMA and its related drugs should be moved down to Class B, further seperations need to be made between them and the cocaine/heroin drugs.
Education and testing of pills needs to improve. Then after a while MDMA should be Class C like cannabis is now.
At which point we can start considering what we want to do about the International Treaty on Narcotic Drugs and whether or not we can get out of it.
What I am against is the idea of unregulated, uncontrolled legal supply, its nuts.
Yes smoking is harmful, and because of this tobaco is restricted to those of a certain age and to certain places, warnings are given and people are given help giving up.
Of course not all drug users end up using the NHS, but some do, and we should try and minimise this.
No man is an island, as the saying goes. The vunerable should be given the protection they deserve but the rights of the many to enjoy relatively harmless past times shouldnt be trampled on.
Heroin shouldnt be legal, it should be Class C Schedule IV which would put it on par with valium now. Your local GP could prescribe various forms of the drug, ideally in oral form, then smoking and if it is definately needed in injectable form.
This would at a stroke wipe out virtually all black market dodgy supply of heroin.
MDMA, LSD and all those should gradually move down through Class B to C and then after that out of the statutes, with all the time lots of education to help people understand them and what they do.
Only after MANY years of better education could you have proper legal supply if you ask me. And of course you'd need time to revise things with the UN.
A personal licence system would be incredibly combersome to operate resulting in mountains of paperwork.
The big issue is also that the general voter does not want legal supply of MDMA or similar, this has to be overcome by years of simple, straightforward education stating the benefits of each law change as it happens, otherwise the government will change and the whole lot will go back.
The pendulum effect is strong, if you move too fast then there will be a backlash and it will get even harder than it is now.
Recreational users are really not a problem to society at all in the scheme of things, they maybe a problem to themselves but thats different.
It is the issue of problematic users which needs to be tackled, they account for 99% of the cost of drug use in this country.
I agree that legal supply of MDMA is a desirable goal, and on the face of it I'm not really sure it would affect consumption much. But I think an incremental process would be much more effective.
The legal status of LSD
but ...the best education going would be to allow companies to manufacture and sell all mood altering substances.
some over the counter ...some on script only.
yes some people would fuck up ...good education for others.
those people will fuck up anyway.
coke for example could be sold at the chemists or other lcontrolled places.
if you want to wash it up into crack ...then maybe there should be a law about finding you in posession of crack but not coke.
i seriously believe that ...yes there would be some horror stories along the way.
yes i do believe the mass of the population of planet earth ...will decide for themselves what is good and bad.
and a much better balance would finaly be achieved than we have now.
but jail ...no way should a person go to jail for posession of drugs.
if they commit any crime in their persuit of posessing those drugs ...come down heavy.
Social pressure is by far the most effective method of getting people to behave, however communities have changed and that pressure isnt there anymore.
So unlike in the past when your neighbors would know if you were out binging and would look down on you, now they dont know and you can do it without comment.
This is an important stop gap we have lost.
As for LSD, well it should be moved down through the schedules like MDMA and its related compounds.