More on the "Psychoactive Substances" bill

simplistic2

A ban is really a death threat by the government if you follow it to its conclusion .

That is if a Garda stops me and I have some powder and I refuse to give it to him he will then assault me , if I defend myself from the assault and continue to defend myself with whatever means necessary there is possibility that I will be killed.

So what is more dangerous a bag of powder or a death threat from your own government?

Pace2008

simplistic2 wrote: »

A ban is really a death threat by the government if you follow it to its conclusion .

That is if a Garda stops me and I have some powder and I refuse to give it to him he will then assault me , if I defend myself from the assault and continue to defend myself with whatever means necessary there is possibility that I will be killed.

So what is more dangerous a bag of powder or a death threat from your own government?

Mate, I think our country's drug laws are archaic to say the least, but that's still a pretty ludicrous bit of spin right there.

simplistic2

Pace2008 wrote: »

Mate, I think our country's drug laws are archaic to say the least, but that's still a pretty ludicrous bit of spin right there.

How so?

If I defend myself from a Garda that is assaulting me because I am carrying a banned substance I will be killed its simple logic if you follow it through to its conclusion.

Not really rocket science there! All legislation is backed up by a death threat , taxes , fines , laws etc most people dont really like to acknowledge this because they think we live in a civilized society.

Since the state and the garda are the ones initiating the violence they are actually the people committing the crime.

I believe it is completely moral to defend you person against any aggressor weather they be in a costume or not their moral status does not change??

What spin are you actually talking about though? Spin like its somehow virtuous to be a "law abiding taxpayer " HA

kylith

simplistic2 wrote: »

How so?

If I defend myself from a Garda that is assaulting me because I am carrying a banned substance I will be killed its simple logic if you follow it through to its conclusion.

Not really rocket science there! All legislation is backed up by a death threat , taxes , fines , laws etc most people dont really like to acknowledge this because they think we live in a civilized society.

Since the state and the garda are the ones initiating the violence they are actually the people committing the crime.

I believe it is completely moral to defend you person against any aggressor weather they be in a costume or not their moral status does not change??

What spin are you actually talking about though? Spin like its somehow virtuous to be a "law abiding taxpayer " HA

I think you're mistaken there. The police, afaik, have every right to search you if they think you have an illegal substance on you. If you vigorously resist them then they're likely to call a bunch of their mates in to 'subdue' you, chuck you in jail and add resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer to your charge sheet.

It's unlikely that they'd kill you because Gardaí are unarmed. If you're in a country where the police are armed then resisting arrest is one of the dumbest things imaginable, especially if you have illegal substances on your person; it's likely to be reported as "A drug dealer was shot whilst resisting arrest".

Your belief that you can defend yourself from any agressor doesn't apply if you're in possession of illegal substances and the 'agressor' is a member of the police force.

Very few, if any, pieces of legislation are backed up with the threat of death. Mostly they're backed up with taking all your money and having you spend a significant portion of your life in a 6'x6' cell.

simplistic2

kylith wrote: »

I think you're mistaken there. The police, afaik, have every right to search you if they think you have an illegal substance on you. If you vigorously resist them then they're likely to call a bunch of their mates in to 'subdue' you, chuck you in jail and add resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer to your charge sheet.

No No Im not mistaken Im not arguing about rights. Im saying that putting on a blue uniform does not change your moral nature. What happens when he takes of his uniform can he still assault you and steal from you? A crime is still a crime uniform or not.

kylith wrote: »

It's unlikely that they'd kill you because Gardaí are unarmed. If you're in a country where the police are armed then resisting arrest is one of the dumbest things imaginable, especially if you have illegal substances on your person; it's likely to be reported as "A drug dealer was shot whilst resisting arrest".

Yes it is stupid but it is not immoral to defend yourself against these people who are trying to steal from you.

kylith wrote: »

Your belief that you can defend yourself from any agressor doesn't apply if you're in possession of illegal substances and the 'agressor' is a member of the police force.

Very few, if any, pieces of legislation are backed up with the threat of death. Mostly they're backed up with taking all your money and having you spend a significant portion of your life in a 6'x6' cell.

So by your logic any piece of legislation that is passed by a politician restricting your freedoms is ligitimite simply because they said so. Come on you dont really believe this?????

Pace2008

simplistic2 wrote: »

How so?

If I defend myself from a Garda that is assaulting me because I am carrying a banned substance I will be killed its simple logic if you follow it through to its conclusion.

Not really rocket science there! All legislation is backed up by a death threat , taxes , fines , laws etc most people dont really like to acknowledge this because they think we live in a civilized society.

Since the state and the garda are the ones initiating the violence they are actually the people committing the crime.

I believe it is completely moral to defend you person against any aggressor weather they be in a costume or not their moral status does not change??

What spin are you actually talking about though? Spin like its somehow virtuous to be a "law abiding taxpayer " HA

Oh right, it seems you're trying to push an anarchic or libertarian agenda here, as what you're saying doesn't relate specifically to controlled substances and could be applied to pretty much any aspect of our law .

While it's not my place to act as arbiter of the debate, its scope thus far has been how exactly the new bill will impact drug users and whether or not it can be viewed as just under our current democratic system. You're basically opening a whole new can of worms here, and the tangent you're going off on would probably be better in a thread of its own.

simplistic2

Pace2008 wrote: »

Oh right, it seems you're trying to push an anarchic or libertarian agenda here, as what you're saying doesn't relate specifically to controlled substances and could be applied to pretty much any aspect of our law .

While it's not my place to act as arbiter of the debate, its scope thus far has been how exactly the new bill will impact drug users and whether or not it can be viewed as just under our current democratic system. You're basically opening a whole new can of worms here, and the tangent you're going off on would probably be better in a thread of its own.

No it does specifically relate to how this bill affects mine and others personal life choices i.e. I would be killed if I refused and tried to physically resist this bill. Just because my claim can be applied to wider society does not make it any less relevant.

I think the real issue is that it makes you uncomfortable hearing the truth of the matter and you either try to rationalize it by saying " its just spin " or " pushing an agenda" when its clearly an objective statement. At least have the courage to say " I dont like the implications of what he is saying".

Pace2008

simplistic2 wrote: »

No it does specifically relate to how this bill affects mine and others personal life choices i.e. I would be killed if I refused and tried to physically resist this bill. Just because my claim can be applied to wider society does not make it any less relevant.

I'm not sure which military junta you're living under, but here in Ireland, police are armed with batons and handcuffs, hence the two most likely outcomes of this hypothetical confrontation are:

a) the policeman overpowers and detains you, or
b) you overpower the policeman and escape. A warrant is issued for your arrest, and you may be overpowered and detained by enforcers of the law in the future.

I think the real issue is that it makes you uncomfortable hearing the truth of the matter and you either try to rationalize it by saying " its just spin " or " pushing an agenda" when its clearly an objective statement.

It is not an objective statement because it's highly unlikely that you'll be killed if you resist arrest. Do you think no one's tried it before or something? I've done as much myself, stupidly, yet here I am typing out this message.

At least have the courage to say " I dont like the implications of what he is saying".

If you want to paraphrase me more accurately, try: "I think our current democratic and legal system is imperfect, but Christ, it still beats the hell of a world where everyone just rampages around doing what they want."

Steodonn

Killed lol

I am one of the first people to give garda abuse but your deluded if you think you will be killed for resisting arrest in this country. Get a beating likely but the garda would never purposely kill anyone

So by your logic any piece of legislation that is passed by a politician restricting your freedoms is ligitimite simply because they said so

Well actually it is. The government get the ligitimitmence (sp?) form the people so whatever they pass is law it might not be right and it might be a crap law but saying its not ligitimite is wrong

gazzer

The 6-APB pills that went on sale on Monday seem to get getting positive feedback judging from the reports on Bluelight. £10 a pill and a lot of users are saying that they are quiet similar to the E tabs of the good old days.

AKA pat sheen

gazzer wrote: »

£10 a pill and a lot of users are saying that they are quiet similar to the E tabs of the good old days.

Similar in price! 'E tabs', like any street drug, have always been a wide spectrum of substances. Good old days = "before I burned my neurons out"

Pace2008

AKA pat sheen wrote: »

Similar in price! 'E tabs', like any street drug, have always been a wide spectrum of substances. Good old days = "before I burned my neurons out"

It may just be ravers looking through their rose-tinted sunglasses, but by all accounts most pills in the early to mid-nineties did contain MDMA or MDA. There wasn't anywhere near the range of designer drugs that have been synthesised in the 2000's with which to adulterate the pills; the most common replacement/contaminant seemed to be speed.

Go back to 1999 and there was a similar MDMA drought to what Ireland saw in 2008/2009. Enter Mitsubishis, pills so strong they made the front cover of Mixmag, and a whole range of potent bangers that drove the trance explosion at the turn of the century. Even in 2006, when I first did ecstasy, the quality was far higher than the 2.5 years that succeeded it, and now again in 2010 the ratio of "real" pills to piperazines/duds is steadily increasing.

These things seem to go in waves, and everyone's going to view their "back in the day" in a favourable light, but there's no denying that there have been certain periods when the pill crop's been exceptionally good.

simplistic2

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'm not sure which military junta you're living under, but here in Ireland, police are armed with batons and handcuffs, hence the two most likely outcomes of this hypothetical confrontation are:

a) the policeman overpowers and detains you, or
b) you overpower the policeman and escape. A warrant is issued for your arrest, and you may be overpowered and detained by enforcers of the law in the future.

Yes but follow it to its conclusion, that being if a man tried to enter my home without permission I would use force and kill him if necessary. If I were to kill a Garda for trying to steal something from me , then trying to break into my home so he could kidnap me and try and extort money through the court system I would be killed by his friends that have have guns.

Pace2008 wrote: »

It is not an objective statement because it's highly unlikely that you'll be killed if you resist arrest. Do you think no one's tried it before or something? I've done as much myself, stupidly, yet here I am typing out this message.

Well I see nothing morally wrong trying to defend yourself against these people if It was a victimless crime they were trying to charge you with.

It is objective but it rarely happens in this country because people generally will pick extortion over death. Similarly the mafia will try to intimidate people into handing over their cash just people are more aware of the death threat that is implied (at least they have some honesty about what they do).

Pace2008 wrote: »

If you want to paraphrase me more accurately, try: "I think our current democratic and legal system is imperfect, but Christ, it still beats the hell of a world where everyone just rampages around doing what they want."

You mean like a world where politicians sanction laws that infringe on your own personal liberty , take out loans against our future children , imprison millions for victimless crimes and slaughter even more in illegal wars? Yeah Id hate to live in a world like that too.

Pace2008

simplistic2 wrote: »

Yes but follow it to its conclusion, that being if a man tried to enter my home without permission I would use force and kill him if necessary. If I were to kill a Garda for trying to steal something from me , then trying to break into my home so he could kidnap me and try and extort money through the court system I would be killed by his friends that have have guns.



Well I see nothing morally wrong trying to defend yourself against these people if It was a victimless crime they were trying to charge you with.

It is objective but it rarely happens in this country because people generally will pick extortion over death. Similarly the mafia will try to intimidate people into handing over their cash just people are more aware of the death threat that is implied (at least they have some honesty about what they do).



You mean like a world where politicians sanction laws that infringe on your own personal liberty , take out loans against our future children , imprison millions for victimless crimes and slaughter even more in illegal wars? Yeah Id hate to live in a world like that too.

Enjoy debating with phantoms, because I won't be entertaining your attempts at a derail.

simplistic2

Steodonn wrote: »

Killed lol

I am one of the first people to give garda abuse but your deluded if you think you will be killed for resisting arrest in this country. Get a beating likely but the garda would never purposely kill anyone



Well actually it is. The government get the ligitimitmence (sp?) form the people so whatever they pass is law it might not be right and it might be a crap law but saying its not ligitimite is wrong

Great so if you believe that morally bankrupt corrupt sociopaths have the wisdom to tell you how to live your life then fine subscribe to it all you want just dont try and violently force or support this type of legislation on the rest of us who would rather not be threatened for making personal life choices.

sbsquarepants

Pace2008 wrote: »

I seriously doubt the pills you had were real ecstasy, ie. MDMA. I'd be surprised if most people weren't blown away by clean MDMA, much less unimpressed by it.

For the last 2 years most purported ecstasy pills contained piperazines like BZP as their active ingredient, and weren't a patch on the real deal. MDMA pills have been filtering back into circulation these last few months, but you'd be paying closer to €10 than €2 for the privilege of trying one.

Exactly, make no mistake about it, proper MDMA is close to a life changing experience - and you don't need to be a raver or whatever to experience it's full effects. It is completely beyond the realms of possibility that you took a proper dose of clean actual MDMA and were unimpressed.
What you got was some MDMA analogue crap, which is like comparing a Bentley to a Lada, sure they are both cars, but that's as far as the similarity goes.

Steodonn

Back onto the 6-APB ( Packaged as benzofury. What a poor name choice ) sounds amazing. I Remember hearing about this awhile ago and little was know but reports sound good

Anyone buy it. Also is it available in the remaining head shops or just online ?

raven136

Pace2008 wrote: »

There are at least two headshops still operating in the city centre, though I'm not sure if we're allowed mention them under the Boards charter. I wouldn't recommend anything they're selling in any case - the current batch of products range from inactive, to dirty, to downright dangerous.

On a more positive note, has anyone noticed the quality of drugs in Ireland has improved tenfold over the summer? These past few weeks I've got my hands on pure MDMA crystal, fantastic pills, and clean acid tabs, and this is just from randomers at clubs and festivals.

Reading reports that other European countries have mainly muck available but this summer has seen some great pills,good coke,and i heard of some amazing acid being available too.
Anyone know if the remaining headshops will get in this Benzo Fury or is a banned product too?

strobe

6-APB isn't covered by the ban. There are plenty of chemicals not covered by the ban. Just to mention there appear to be several products being sold as "Benzo Fury" online right now. They are not all 6-APB or 6-APDB. Lots of people have bought Benzo Fury from different sources and are getting all kinds of different results from MMM tests, suggesting lots of different chemicals depending on the source. So like with all these branded products, don't presume you are getting what you expect to.

Kurtosis

simplistic2 wrote: »

Yes but follow it to its conclusion, that being if a man tried to enter my home without permission I would use force and kill him if necessary. If I were to kill a Garda for trying to steal something from me , then trying to break into my home so he could kidnap me and try and extort money through the court system I would be killed by his friends that have have guns.

Well I see nothing morally wrong trying to defend yourself against these people if It was a victimless crime they were trying to charge you with

Double standards much? You can't completely ignore the whole criminal justice system in order to make your point and then start talking about being charged with a crime...what is a crime? :pac:

simplistic2

penguin88 wrote: »

Double standards much?

Really where ?? Your going to have to point that out for me Im confused

penguin88 wrote: »

You can't completely ignore the whole criminal justice system in order to make your point and then start talking about being charged with a crime...what is a crime? :pac:

A crime is causing harm, injury, loss or fraud against your person or property.

AKA pat sheen

Pace2008 wrote: »

It may just be ravers looking through their rose-tinted sunglasses, but by all accounts most pills in the early to mid-nineties did contain MDMA or MDA

"Many regular users are convinced that the quality of Ecstasy is not as good today as it used to be." E is for Ecstasy - by Nicholas Saunders 1993

Steodonn

simplistic2 wrote: »

Really where ?? Your going to have to point that out for me Im confused




A crime is causing harm, injury, loss or fraud against your person or property.

A crime is more than that. Anything that breaks a criminal law is a crime and as a proud criminal I am going to get baked

Also just noticed your sig. Irishfreemen lol they haven't a clue about anything

simplistic2

Steodonn wrote: »

A crime is more than that. Anything that breaks a criminal law is a crime and as a proud criminal I am going to get baked

Ah the submissive Irish mentality just roll onto your back and purrr" A crime is what Im told a crime is by our benevolent government ".

Thats a good citizen:rolleyes:

Pace2008

simplistic2 wrote: »

Ah the submissive Irish mentality just roll onto your back and purrr" A crime is what Im told a crime is by our benevolent government ".

Thats a good citizen:rolleyes:

You know actually what makes me appreciate the brainless conservatives that appear sporadically on these drug threads; the ones that believe the bull**** they were fed in school, and think all users of psychoactives are scumbags setting themselves up for a life of mental illness and an early grave?

People from the other end of the political spectrum who think that anyone who doesn't agree with their absolutist ideology is a mindless sheep and a pawn of big government.

Pace2008

AKA pat sheen wrote: »

"Many regular users are convinced that the quality of Ecstasy is not as good today as it used to be." E is for Ecstasy - by Nicholas Saunders 1993

From the same author:

Trends in quality in January 1998

Recent drop in quality

Our January 1998 test results found that only 6 out of 35 pills contained MDMA, and these only contained about 70mg. (A normal dose is 100-125mg.) 27 pills, nearly three quarters, contained speed: caffeine, amphetamine and methamphetamine. Although pills sent in for testing are not representative and are always below average quality, this batch was very much worse than previous batches.

In Holland, government testing of street ecstasy has consistently found that 60% of the pills contain MDMA. This was true right up to last autumn, but in January 1998 only 20% contained a reasonable active dose of MDMA (according to Volksrant).

The reason for this sudden drop in quality is presumably that the Christmas demand exceeded the supply of MDMA by pill makers. Rumour has it that a large amount of pure MDMA was manufactured in Poland in an ex-government pharmaceutical factory, and that this was the main source of MDMA since the Dutch clamped down on home production about two years ago. Although the factory was closed some time ago, stockpiles only ran out in autumn 1997 creating a vacuum in the market. Pill makers simply switched to amphetamine and caffeine, often using the same brands that used to be MDMA.

History of changes in quality

According to the Forensic Science Department* who test drugs seized by the police, the quality of drugs submitted as ecstasy has remained fairly constant over the years, with MDMA still the most common active ingredient to be found. In fact, both the chance of getting pure MDMA and the quantity in an average E pill increased between 1993 and 1996.

Two things have changed over the years. 'Ecstasy' meant MDMA up to 1991 when many pills appeared like the renowned 'Snowballs' containing MDA. In 1993, MDEA appeared as a substitute, presumably because it was not illegal in Holland, and after that MBDB which was only recently outlawed in Germany. Now the second most common active ingredient is MDEA with MBDB coming third. These drugs are substitutes, but they are similar enough for most users to be unable to tell the difference.

The second change is that amphetamine-like drugs are often sold in the form of pills with logos instead of wraps. For clubbers who know which brands are speed and not ecstasy, this is just a new way of marketing. However, if these pills were sold as 'ecstasy', then it would be true to say that the quality has got worse.

In Britain, the proportion of fakes has stayed at around 10% * aspirin or other substances with no effect. Another 5% are active drugs such as amphetamine, ephedrine and caffeine, sometimes mixed with other active drugs. *That leaves 85% ecstasy-type drugs, of which about 60% is MDMA (the real thing); about 20% is MDEA and 10% MBDB.* These ecstasy-type drugs are seldom found mixed with other drugs. In particular, heroin has never been found in samples sold as ecstasy, apart from such small traces as to be inactive. Very much the same overall results have been found in Holland, where the government tests thousands of pills each year.

My own test results show a lower quality, but this can be explained by the the fact that I only accept pills when the donor can describe the effect. That means they are far more likely to donate a pill of a type that was disappointing and keep good ones for themselves.

Many illicit drug samples contain traces of other drugs, probably due to contamination during handling and pill making (illicit pill makers presumably press one batch after another without cleaning their equipment). The National Poisons Unit have found paracetamol, pseudo ethedrine, amphetamine, caffeine, codeine and dihydracodeine in tablets, but like many labs, they list the contents of samples without distinguishing between active ingredients and traces, fuelling support for rumours such as ecstasy containing speed or even heroin.

If what he's claiming is right, and 60% of pills assessed in 1998 contained MDMA, then the quality of ecstasy was certainly higher than it is now.

Steodonn

simplistic2 wrote: »

Ah the submissive Irish mentality just roll onto your back and purrr" A crime is what Im told a crime is by our benevolent government ".

Thats a good citizen:rolleyes:

The dictionary told me http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=15O&pwst=1&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&defl=en&q=define:crime&sa=X&ei=miNcTMyaOMeV4gausMn6AQ&ved=0CBoQkAE

Pace2008

Steodonn wrote: »

Back onto the 6-APB ( Packaged as benzofury. What a poor name choice ) sounds amazing. I Remember hearing about this awhile ago and little was know but reports sound good

Anyone buy it. Also is it available in the remaining head shops or just online ?

I was really excited about it earlier this year, but its release just kept getting postponed and when the rollout finally came, MDMA had returned and my interest in RCs went through the floor.

That said, I'll probably order in a few pellets (props to the vendors for selling it in pill form; less chance of idiots OD'ing) before the summer's through. Watch this space cadet.

NedTheHead

R_H_C_P wrote: »

Honestly tho, with all the interest in keeping the shops open etc. why dont we do something about it rather than talking about it on a forum. Lets protest and show the gov. that we arent just gonna sit back and take their nazi ways like we have done the past few years. This country is full of pussies who dont step up for the cause.

Yeah lets start organising protests. If we advertise this well, I guarantee thousands of people will show up because a significant percentage of the population are free thinkers who prefer to control their own minds and brains rather than letting the government and the media do it for them. I would be a completely law abiding citizen if it weren't for these laws making the exploration of ones own mind a crime.

On top of protesting, we can all contribute towards changing peoples minds about psychoactive substances and getting people who would ordinarily agree with prohibition to protest with us. These people have been turned against psychoactives by the bull**** inculcated into their minds through repetition. They are still rational, thinking people though so I'm sure they will change their minds when they've been exposed to the same information we have. So where do we start? I know HTML and PHP so I'll setup any websites we need. I'll spread advertisements for marches and protests around my area. I'm in college so I don't have that much time but I'll start setting up a website with a forum and chatroom so we can get this organised.

Jamiekelly

NedTheHead wrote: »

Yeah lets start organising protests. If we advertise this well, I guarantee thousands of people will show up because a significant percentage of the population are free thinkers who prefer to control their own minds and brains rather than letting the government and the media do it for them. I would be a completely law abiding citizen if it weren't for these laws making the exploration of ones own mind a crime.

On top of protesting, we can all contribute towards changing peoples minds about psychoactive substances and getting people who would ordinarily agree with prohibition to protest with us. These people have been turned against psychoactives by the bull**** inculcated into their minds through repetition. They are still rational, thinking people though so I'm sure they will change their minds when they've been exposed to the same information we have. So where do we start? I know HTML and PHP so I'll setup any websites we need. I'll spread advertisements for marches and protests around my area. I'm in college so I don't have that much time but I'll start setting up a website with a forum and chatroom so we can get this organised.

Why bother? Its banned. Thats it. As long as there are religious OAP's in Ireland then there is no hope for King B to be legal again. Best option now is just to focus on the legalisation of weed.