Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to
register
and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head
here.
I got the impression he was listing all the common misconceptions about drugs in order to send up those people who form opinions on misinformed sensationalist bollocks, but that was just my impression....
Suppose he didn't seem to put it in a very obvious way! That changes my mind a bit about LSD then, though what is he advocating if his post is ironic?
LSD isnt really any more or less dangerous than say mushrooms, its just the dosages for mushrooms are easier to get right because the dosage curve isnt as steep. And of course LSD is more internal so can cause problems with negative thought paterns.
But as with all hallucinogenics what is safe (relatively) to one person isnt to another, it hugely depends on set and setting. Which is why legal supply would be better because you could give information.
Correct. LSD is fine is you are in a good mental frame of mind and have friends with you. We studied LSD and its effects in psychology, its basically dreaming while awake. So long as you stay away from negative stimuli (preferably indoors) then its all good. I'm sure that could be written into laws concerning hallucinogenic substances, that you are not to be outside under the influence of them. That would make sense, like certain public drinking laws.
I can get 'euphoric recall' just from reading posts on here sometimes, kind of feels like a mild coming up sensation :thumb: .
Regarding regulation and control, I once did an economics essay based on the views of the ex-head of DEA for Northern Ireland and why he believed all drugs should be legalized. I've been a total advocate of legalization since then. I suppose that's why he's ex-DEA? :chin:
Correct. LSD is fine is you are in a good mental frame of mind and have friends with you. We studied LSD and its effects in psychology, its basically dreaming while awake. So long as you stay away from negative stimuli (preferably indoors) then its all good. I'm sure that could be written into laws concerning hallucinogenic substances, that you are not to be outside under the influence of them. That would make sense, like certain public drinking laws.
I don't think forbidding people from leaving their homes while on LSD would help (if that's what you mean). Not only would it restrict their freedom, but it would be awkward for everyone: if the other people at home don't like it, the LSD user has nowhere to do their drugs without pissing anyone off.
Having a supply that people are allowed to bring home, but don't have to, is a different question though. I definitely like the idea of having licensed premises if we had legal supply, but I don't know how to answer this one
Correct. LSD is fine is you are in a good mental frame of mind and have friends with you. We studied LSD and its effects in psychology, its basically dreaming while awake. So long as you stay away from negative stimuli (preferably indoors) then its all good. I'm sure that could be written into laws concerning hallucinogenic substances, that you are not to be outside under the influence of them. That would make sense, like certain public drinking laws.
LSD still does come with dangers no matter how much prep you do or the enviroment, but through quality control, known dose quantity and information you could drasticly reduce the chance of harm to the user.
But I dont think its a good idea to force people to stay inside, certainly ban them driving or such like though.
LSD still does come with dangers no matter how much prep you do or the enviroment, but through quality control, known dose quantity and information you could drasticly reduce the chance of harm to the user.
But I dont think its a good idea to force people to stay inside, certainly ban them driving or such like though.
Thats the question, but just because it looks unlikely is that a good enough reason not to try?
The arguments for legalisation are at the moment the most articulate and 'professional' they have ever been, its much more organised and smart than just stonners saying 'free the weed man'.
I know you have built a belief system around me, and thats very flattering, but you do need to stand on your own two feet, and preferably not stand in my garden looking up at my windows all night.
If you wouldn't mind. I'll even abide by the restraining order if you oblige.
OK, but I cant just pull something like last time out of thin air (though technically thats what I did do, if I'd pulled it out of a box it wouldnt have been anywhere near as impressive) you'll have to give me a bit of time.
Comments
LSD isnt really any more or less dangerous than say mushrooms, its just the dosages for mushrooms are easier to get right because the dosage curve isnt as steep. And of course LSD is more internal so can cause problems with negative thought paterns.
But as with all hallucinogenics what is safe (relatively) to one person isnt to another, it hugely depends on set and setting. Which is why legal supply would be better because you could give information.
Regarding regulation and control, I once did an economics essay based on the views of the ex-head of DEA for Northern Ireland and why he believed all drugs should be legalized. I've been a total advocate of legalization since then. I suppose that's why he's ex-DEA? :chin:
I don't think forbidding people from leaving their homes while on LSD would help (if that's what you mean). Not only would it restrict their freedom, but it would be awkward for everyone: if the other people at home don't like it, the LSD user has nowhere to do their drugs without pissing anyone off.
Having a supply that people are allowed to bring home, but don't have to, is a different question though. I definitely like the idea of having licensed premises if we had legal supply, but I don't know how to answer this one
LSD still does come with dangers no matter how much prep you do or the enviroment, but through quality control, known dose quantity and information you could drasticly reduce the chance of harm to the user.
But I dont think its a good idea to force people to stay inside, certainly ban them driving or such like though.
who the hells gonna listen anyway
Thats the question, but just because it looks unlikely is that a good enough reason not to try?
The arguments for legalisation are at the moment the most articulate and 'professional' they have ever been, its much more organised and smart than just stonners saying 'free the weed man'.
You're right, I always put that extra n in for some reason, I guess I cant always be perfect.
I know you have built a belief system around me, and thats very flattering, but you do need to stand on your own two feet, and preferably not stand in my garden looking up at my windows all night.
I told you it was the gort, was that not enough? Must I perform another miracle?
OK, but I cant just pull something like last time out of thin air (though technically thats what I did do, if I'd pulled it out of a box it wouldnt have been anywhere near as impressive) you'll have to give me a bit of time.