Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

So Harney has just banned BZP...

13567

Comments

  • #62
    redarmyblues
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 995 ✭✭✭redarmyblues


    CCCP^ wrote: »
    If you knew he was buying pills why didn't you try to stop your nephew? I have to say I can't see any 14 year old getting served in one of those places mate, I really can't.
    Yeah he is twisting things to justify his moral outrage


  • #63
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Horrible drug. Doubt there'll be many people crying over this ban.

    Magic mushrooms on the other hand..... DAMN YOU HARNEY!!!!


  • #64
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    KeyLimePie wrote: »
    Drugs are bad and anyone who needs them to have a good time or enjoy themselves need help :)

    and before people say it, yes I do drink but never to an excess !
    Drugs are an experience like any other. I applaud your ability to get satisfaction out of sitting at home staring at the wall but it's not every ones cup of tea.


  • #65
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    Upward Spiral wrote: »
    A mate of mine done some research into BZP capsules (he's a pharmacist) after his brother got some in a Head Shop. Of all the capsules he tested, 8/10 of them included ingredients that weren't listed on the pack. Mostly filler, but it just goes to show that you can't trust labels from the companies that produce them.

    As for BZP itself. Well, it was developed for worming cattle. That's a good enough reason not to take them, imo =p
    Alcohol is a solvent used for cleaning, good enough reason not to drink it?

    That said, BZP just wasn't a nice drug. I'm quite happy, as it'll be an incentive for party pill producers to use a different drug as the primary ingredient in their products, which might turn out to be a lot better.


  • #66
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,030 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    Upward Spiral wrote: »
    A mate of mine done some research into BZP capsules (he's a pharmacist) after his brother got some in a Head Shop. Of all the capsules he tested, 8/10 of them included ingredients that weren't listed on the pack. Mostly filler, but it just goes to show that you can't trust labels from the companies that produce them.

    Must have been a really bad pharmacist to not spot the fact the pills had such high doses of Vitamin B that they were illegal anyway. If the government bothered to enforce existing legislation there would be no need to have to try ban every substance known to man.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    generalmiaow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 865 ✭✭✭generalmiaow


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Must have been a really bad pharmacist to not spot the fact the pills had such high doses of Vitamin B that they were illegal anyway. If the government bothered to enforce existing legislation there would be no need to have to try ban every substance known to man.

    Surely that would depend on their being within the remit of the IMB act - which if they were, they couldn't be sold without prescription anyway as none of the active ingredients in these tablets are specifically exempted. I could buy as much pyridoxine as I want outside of health food shops if someone was selling it, even though it would kill someone.

    Edit: if you mean that they could use medicines regulation to ban headshops instead of specifically banning chemicals, that's something they could do, and the MHRA are doing it in the UK & Jersey already, but it wouldn't stop people buying BZP on the internet and selling it on the street legally, which making it a controlled substance, according to Mary Harney anyway, would.

    I agree that the pharmacy thing is curious - Upward Spiral, if he personally did research involving HPLC on them, where are the results?


  • #68
    Duck's hoop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭Duck's hoop


    Upward Spiral wrote: »
    As for BZP itself. Well, it was developed for worming cattle. That's a good enough reason not to take them, imo =p

    Don't think so. It was an aussie pharmacist came up with it, to help his brother get off his crystal habit. He was all over the meeja when the furore initially kicked off, last year some time.


  • #69
    My name is URL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Duck's hoop wrote: »
    Don't think so. It was an aussie pharmacist came up with it, to help his brother get off his crystal habit. He was all over the meeja when the furore initially kicked off, last year some time.

    lol, you're kidding right? BZP has been around since the 50's

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/GE0611/S00001.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzylpiperazine#Development_history

    The reason it was never commonly used for it's intended purpose is because it caused animals to have seizures


  • #70
    Duck's hoop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭Duck's hoop


    Not kidding. But I bow to your superior sources. I've definite memory of hearing this guy on a few radio shows but maybe I'm confused.

    Edit: I was onto something, confusedly.

    http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/bzp/bzp_info1.shtml


  • #71
    Sofaspud
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,626 ✭✭✭Sofaspud


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Drugs are an experience like any other. I applaud your ability to get satisfaction out of sitting at home staring at the wall but it's not every ones cup of tea.

    Didn't you hear the man? Drugs are for scumbags!

    Damn scummers, drinking tea! If you need caffeine to get your highs you should seek professional help!


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    consultech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,956 ✭✭✭consultech


    CCCP^ wrote: »
    If you knew he was buying pills why didn't you try to stop your nephew? I have to say I can't see any 14 year old getting served in one of those places mate, I really can't.

    I found out retrospectively, and took them from him.

    There was a primetime special on RTE about a year back where they sent various 13-16 year olds into all the head shops where they purchased them with no problems, for the most part. I'm sure you/someone else on here also saw it?


  • #73
    psilocybe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 246 ✭✭psilocybe


    JC 2K3 wrote: »
    I'm quite happy, as it'll be an incentive for party pill producers to use a different drug as the primary ingredient in their products, which might turn out to be a lot better.

    I sincerely hope not. The last thing we need is for attention to be brought to any of the more worthwhile substances.
    There was a primetime special on RTE about a year back where they sent various 13-16 year olds into all the head shops where they purchased them with no problems, for the most part. I'm sure you/someone else on here also saw it?

    I would certainly believe it. I never thought much of headshop owners/staff in general. IME most of them couldn't care less who they sell to and know almost nothing about their products.


  • #74
    Kold
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    Whilst I hated the stuff, I don't see at all why they would ban it. People aren't spunking all their wages on it, it's not killing anyone. It's just making kids who can't find proper pills not able to sleep for a day, if anything it probably stops them from doing pills.

    She's just looking for a headline. Clueless fat bint.


  • #75
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,046 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    a load of ****e and illegal stuff feels cleaner.


    it's a substitute to E so more people will now go back to it.


  • #76
    CCCP^
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,749 ✭✭✭CCCP^


    consultech wrote: »
    I found out retrospectively, and took them from him.

    There was a primetime special on RTE about a year back where they sent various 13-16 year olds into all the head shops where they purchased them with no problems, for the most part. I'm sure you/someone else on here also saw it?

    Good man.

    Do you need ID to get drugs from a drug dealer? Well thats the alternative. I didn't see this Prime Time program but I'd very interested in seeing it. I have gone into some Head shops and thought the staff to be muppets and walked out of them, and that will probably be the undoing of the whole trade thanks to a few eejits, but the same can be said for alot of pubs in this country, especially nightclubs. Take the Midlands for instance, I'm always seeing girls 16/17 in nightclubs, it's a joke. My Sister, who is a secondary school teacher, doesn't go to nightclubs or late bars because she will just run into students.

    I think as long as there is head shops, there should be legislation brought in to make it mandatory that all customers have their ID checked, and that a customer can only buy so much in one go, that you must be 18 years old to buy anything with a mind-altering effect and that nobody under the age of 18 is allowed on the premises.


  • #77
    consultech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,956 ✭✭✭consultech


    CCCP^ wrote: »
    I think as long as there is head shops, there should be legislation brought in to make it mandatory that all customers have their ID checked, and that a customer can only buy so much in one go, that you must be 18 years old to buy anything with a mind-altering effect and that nobody under the age of 18 is allowed on the premises.

    There are age limits. They are not enforced, in the same way those clubs allow 16/17 year old girls in. Neither establishment deserve to avoid the wrath of the long d1ck of the law.


  • #78
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    I thought it was Buyer Beware that did a piece on them not Primetime.

    They both might have covered the topic though.


  • #79
    CCCP^
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,749 ✭✭✭CCCP^


    generalmiaow wrote: »
    I think illegal dealers still have the majority market share on "party pills".

    I guarantee you this legislation will have zero effect on the headshops' revenue. The headshops in the UK simply used more obscure ingredients in their tablets. There is no theoretical limit to the number of stimulants organic chemistry can give us. Ban amphetamines, and we have phenethylamines. Ban phenethylamines, we have piperazines. Ban piperazines? The world has already moved on to beta-ketones, simple aliphaticamines. You can buy a cocoa bean alkaloid extract that's as powerful as any of these tablets. Nobody's about to ban them. The only effect of this is that you'll see a move towards more untested and exotic compounds.

    Was just down in a head shop around lunchtime. They still have everything in stock they normally do. The new stuff doesn't contain BZP, something else, but I haven't a clue. You were right, they'll just change the ingredients.


  • #80
    psilocybe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 246 ✭✭psilocybe


    consultech wrote: »
    There are age limits. They are not enforced, in the same way those clubs allow 16/17 year old girls in. Neither establishment deserve to avoid the wrath of the long d1ck of the law.

    At the moment the products available in headshops are completely unregulated. The only age restrictions are ones which are voluntarily enforced.


  • #81
    consultech
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,956 ✭✭✭consultech


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    I thought it was Buyer Beware that did a piece on them not Primetime.

    They both might have covered the topic though.

    Maybe so, I cant remember tbh. I used the term "prime time" in it's investigative journalism context, it may well have been Buyer Beware. Irresepective it consisted of candid footage of them sending teenagers in to the shops, facnig little to no protest when they "forgot" their id's, and walking out with the party pills.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    generalmiaow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 865 ✭✭✭generalmiaow


    psilocybe wrote: »
    At the moment the products available in headshops are completely unregulated. The only age restrictions are ones which are voluntarily enforced.

    True - and not only this, but there won't be any age limits for the foreseeable future. Creating legislation around that, in the view of the state, would legitimise the existence of head shops which makes it extremely difficult to "deal with" them. The only time I've ever heard of a head shop product being legitimised in that way anywhere in the world is in California, where salvia divinorum is subject to an age restriction.

    I reckon they will go the medicine route, and throw in a broad analogue act (taking care of the spicy/smoky products as well) before they ever try measures like that.

    In fairness though, and I am not one to trust brick-and-mortar headshops, in the last few months (probably since that programme) they have been enforcing ID policy, at least in Dublin. It will only take one young man or woman attempting suicide using these things, or someone supposedly attempting to fly (but never trying it from the ground...??) before they rapidly lose favour...and planning permission


  • #83
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    That's crap sensationalist journalism tbh.

    If the govenment only wanted people over 18 to be able to purchase these legal highs, they'd pass legislation as they've done for alcohol. If it wasn't illegal for people under 18 to buy alcohol, off licences wouldn't be asking for ID either. Young people not being ID'd is a failing of the government, not a reason why head shops and their owners are dodgy and thus these legal highs should be banned.

    All that someone under 18 going into a head shop and buying a legal high shows is someone doing something perfectly legal.


  • #84
    petethebrick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,031 ✭✭✭petethebrick


    Deleted User wrote: »
    a load of ****e and illegal stuff feels cleaner.

    .

    If you get decent illegal stuff - the majority of illegal pills now are full of BZP as well. Be great to see a change in that and back to MDMA


  • #85
    g5hn710m4xpdwy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,763 ✭✭✭g5hn710m4xpdwy


    Wheres Plug and his pro-Ecstacy post :pac:


  • #86
    Kold
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    petethebrick wrote: »
    If you get decent illegal stuff - the majority of illegal pills now are full of BZP as well. Be great to see a change in that and back to MDMA
    Either BZP or speed, both of which are nasty.


  • #87
    psilocybe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 246 ✭✭psilocybe


    Kold wrote: »
    Either BZP or speed, both of which are nasty.

    Or if you're really unfortunate, mCPP :(


  • #88
    eightyfish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,100 ✭✭✭eightyfish


    I tried it maybe four or five times over the last couple years and quite liked it. Only ever took one though, and didn't drink much along with it. Good night every time.

    This decision is really stupid. Through the late 90s, many of my friends bought MDMA illegally. Now they buy BZP legally (albeit far less often than before). This is forcing people back onto the streets to buy god-knows-what from god-knows-who.

    The Lacent (major medical journal) recently said that MDMA was safer than alcohol or tobacco, and New Scientist called for new legislation as taking MDMA is statistically less dangerous than eating peanuts. BZP is similar, has been taken millions of times and has killed no-one.

    Some people are always going to want to get high. It felt civilised to be able to walk into a shop to do it. Pushing people back onto the streets is not the way to go.


  • #89
    Leprachaun
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,043 ✭✭✭Leprachaun


    Bitch.


  • #90
    CreepingDeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,015 ✭✭✭CreepingDeath


    sunnyjim wrote: »
    So Harney has just banned BZP...

    I didn't know she was a mod here.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    rubadub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,387 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    sunnyjim wrote: »
    So Harney has just banned BZP... Who is affected?
    Legitimate businesses who choose to sell the stuff, and their customers who wish to stay within the law and do not want to deal with shady scumbags. Same as if any currently legal recreational drug was made illegal with such short notice. Like it or not they are legitimate businesses, the products are legal, it is up to the government to ban them, if you personally think a substance is so bad then contact your local TD. People seem to have little sympathy for the headshop owners, imagine it was alcohol being banned and off-licences & pubs who would lose out. Oh sorry, lots of people use that particular drug so you can sympathise.

    BZP might be a load of crap, but that is not the point. MDMA was legal in the 80's, cocaine was once available OTC in dublin pharmacies. One main reason BZP was legal for so long was the very fact that it is crap. If a drug has a "potential for abuse" it is likely to be illegal. If there is little hangover/comedown and safe in moderately high doses and not particularly addictive then you have a drug ripe for abuse and therefore has "potential for abuse" and so banned. It is no coincidence that many of the illegal drugs are quite benign relative to legal ones.

    The Lancet list as mentioned earlier.
    Research published in the medical journal The Lancet rates the most dangerous drugs (starting with the worst) as follows:
    1. Heroin
    2. Cocaine
    3. Barbiturates
    4. Street methadone
    5. Alcohol
    6. Ketamine
    7. Benzodiazepines
    8. Amphetamine
    9. Tobacco
    10. Buprenorphine
    11. Cannabis
    12. Solvents
    13. 4-MTA
    14. LSD
    15. Methylphenidate
    16. Anabolic steroids
    17. GHB
    18. Ecstasy
    19. Alkyl nitrates
    20. Khat
    consultech wrote: »
    TBH I'm not going to get into what I think of adults (Im talking 25+) still taking BZP, as I'll come off condescending and all the more conservative than I actually am. Nor will I debate against people who think the rules don't apply to them and that taking banned substances is their god given choice/right.
    In this case BZP was a legal recreational drug, up with tobacco, caffeine & alcohol. I take it for some reason you do not think it is "right" that anybody over 25 would take recreational drugs, I can't think of a single person I ever met over 25 who does not take recreational drugs. Or is it stimulants in particular that you have some issue with? Would you have similar issues with people over 25 taking caffeine in high doses?

    consultech wrote: »
    What I will say is good riddance. Awful fuckin things altogether. If this ban saves some poor unsuspecting kid the horror bad trip I have experienced on these things then I'm all for it. I took them half a dozen times a few years back and on one occasion (same brand/amount I always took) I took a horrible turn and had the worst night of my life. In short I nearly died.
    Most people have plenty of tales similar to that, but about booze. "oh horrible booze I do not like the taste and effect so ban it for everybody":rolleyes:

    If you don't like something, don't buy it...
    consultech wrote: »
    There was a primetime special on RTE about a year back where they sent various 13-16 year olds into all the head shops where they purchased them with no problems, for the most part. I'm sure you/someone else on here also saw it?
    Think I saw that, was the headshop called O'Briens? I seem to remember some girl all dolled up getting booze no problem, shocking stuff, who'd have thought it could go on...


Advertisement
Advertisement