Life without headshops.

General Zod

Pookah wrote: »

You can't beat AH for satire.

The scary thing is I wouldn't be suprised if FB actually believed this.

Shulgin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Sure

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/mephedrone-ban-blamed-for-rise-in-cocaine-deaths-2142097.html

Mephedrone ban blamed for rise in cocaine deaths


Banning the "dance drug" mephedrone may have cost lives rather than saving them – by driving users back to cocaine, an expert said yesterday.
Latest figures show deaths from cocaine and ecstasy fell during the first six months of 2009 at a time when the popularity of mephedrone, then still a "legal high", was rising. Separate evidence suggests that many drug users may have substituted it for cocaine, which could account for a decline in cocaine-related deaths.
Although mephedrone itself has been linked with several deaths, subsequent investigations have cast doubt on how dangerous it really is.

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Sure

Are you just going to keep spamming links to articles you've Googled to back up your predetermined position, without trying to put them in any sort of context?

Two anecdotal instances instances per week of patients presenting symptoms caused by head shop products does not sound like doomsday stuff, especially when you consider the amount of people who end up in A&E purely as a result of their own stupidity.

I don't want to drag this down the well-trodden alcohol vs. drugs route, but I'd say if hospitals imposed a measure whereby patients who appear in the emergency department with drink-induced injuries would be arrested for public intoxication after receiving treatment, you'd free up a lot more valuable doctors' time.

So what's next: a link to an unreferenced sixth-year biology slide on the effects of cannabis from none other than Gráinne Kenny's EURAD, the organisation that petitioned to have Japanese Maple plants removed from a café in Cork as they resembled cannabis plants? Or maybe another piece from the DEA on the dangers of liberal drug laws that actually contradicts what you're trying to say? (see: the last substantial thread on head shops, in which I had the sense to refrain from posting.)

Asmodean

I have no interest in drugs whatsoever so it doesn't mean a thing to me.

FlutterinBantam

General Zod wrote: »

so the main jist of your argument is that Headshops were bad because there was a cocaine and heroin epidemic in 2007?

Not as many tooting these days, I'd wager.

Nope, that was a reply to a poster who put up an example of a good doctor who apparently survived enormous drug use.

My post was to show that that is not always the case.

Do read the posts please.

Yakult

Lando Griffin wrote: »

Its now almost 6 months since the Parents against Headshops got these evil, opportunist businesses closed down.
Now with a generation of young people without drugs, has it made this country a safer place to walk the streets of the villages knowing that a crazed drug fuelled youth will jump out at you and rob your purse?
Or when you are at 8.30am mass on Sunday morning the sound of the choir will be drowned by a fire engine coming to rescue 2 out of their mind youths from the steeple?
It has also probably freed up more space in our A&E wards on Saturday nights as mind bent drug users no longer start fights and are no longer demented from illusions.
Our mental institutions are now not suffering from an influx of thousands of youths and the like trying to get over their last "high".
Employers can now relax as their staff turn up for work without the ill effects of drug taking over the weekend.
Youth and the like also have more money to spend on the important things in life instead of throwing it away to some legalised drug peddeler.
Do you thing Ireland is a better place without headshops.

Now they just get them from drug dealers who support crime. Much better and safer indeed.

Those legal drugs on their own were pretty harmless. It was the idiots who drank while taking them that caused the problems.

So alcohol gets some of the blame.

Nodin

Pookah wrote: »

You can't beat AH for satire.

He's not being satirical. Yes, that is very hard to believe, but its true.

FlutterinBantam

Pace2008 wrote: »

Are you just going to keep spamming links to articles you've Googled to back up your predetermined position, without trying to put them in any sort of context?

Two anecdotal instances instances per week of patients presenting symptoms caused by head shop products does not sound like doomsday stuff, especially when you consider the amount of people who end up in A&E purely as a result of their own stupidity.

I don't want to drag this down the well-trodden alcohol vs. drugs route, but I'd say if hospitals imposed a measure whereby patients who appear in the emergency department with drink-induced injuries would be arrested for public intoxication after receiving treatment, you'd free up a lot more valuable doctors' time.

So what's next: a link to an unreferenced sixth-year biology slide on the effects of cannabis from none other than Gráinne Kenny's EURAD, the organisation that petitioned to have Japanese Maple plants removed from a café in Cork as they resembled cannabis plants? Or maybe another piece from the DEA on the dangers of liberal drug laws that actually contradicts what you're trying to say? (see: the last substantial thread on head shops, in which I had the sense to refrain from posting.)

An eminent Doctor in an emergency ward,Dr Chris Luke has warned of the dangers of headshops and has been on radio and tv numerous times outlining his experiences with headshop users.

If you can tell me you have more experience and qualifications than Dr. Luke, then I can evaluate your stance.

Elevator

thebigbiffo wrote: »

jesus yeah - i actually thought those pesky headshops weren't too bad till i found out (obviously thanks to prof flute) that they were selling heroin and coke to school kids. i rang joe duffy then and he sorted it out. where'd we be without flute and jow to protect us?

yes, we're still buying fcuk knows what for a buzz, we're no better off really!! 40+ years of a completely failed drug policy!! the facts speak for themselves when you actually know what you're talking about. how many have died around the world due to drugs being illegal?!? Mexico ffs!!! at the risk of condemnation Veronica Guerin and the many many others that have suffered because of very serious professional criminals up and down the country!! I guarantee you accross the country there were a good few cases of people suffering because of having to associate with criminals last night, will be the same again tonight, tomorrow, the day after, the day after that etc etc etc

it's about time governments took the drugs trade from the criminals

I want to know what's stopping them?? they see people doin it in the head shops and they can turn heaven and earth to shut them down but when it comes to nailing the final nail into the criminals they back off and give us token raids, token objects of their "war against drugs" when in reality they only catch roughly 1% of the illegal drugs imported into eu countries!!


luckily there does seem to me to be slight glimers of hope on the subject of drug strategy, IMO due to the ever rising governments debts and guys like Professor Nutt in the UK. as he said himself recently the only people it pays to sensationalise this "drug problem" is the government, big pharma and the press!! you talk to most people and they are actually fairly clued up that what has been done up to now hasn't worked and in fact has more than likely done more harm!!

thebigbiffo

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Sure

head shop drugs may kill...as may changing a lightbulb, going for a drive or over-exercising.

http://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/12130/

a quarter of all poisoning deaths are related to alcohol, and you and joe duffy dont get bent out of shape about that because if your fluffy, cocooned world we dont like talking about your socially accepted drug being a big killer.

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

An eminent Doctor in an emergency ward,Dr Chris Luke has warned of the dangers of headshops and has been on radio and tv numerous times outlining his experiences with headshop users.

If you can tell me you have more experience and qualifications than Dr. Luke, then I can evaluate your stance.

I can count to two, if that means anything.

I can also identify when someone doesn't know much about a particular issue and will simply Google a few choice terms to reinforce their prejudices:

Step 1: Google "Drugs are bad."
Step 2: Link to site concernedchristianparentsagainstdrugs.com
Step 3:????
Step 4: PROFIT!!!!

thebigbiffo

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

An eminent Doctor in an emergency ward,Dr Chris Luke has warned of the dangers of headshops and has been on radio and tv numerous times outlining his experiences with headshop users.

If you can tell me you have more experience and qualifications than Dr. Luke, then I can evaluate your stance.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/02/david-nutt-dangerous-drug-list

hows this guy for ya? experienced enough? qualified enough?

FlutterinBantam

Pace2008 wrote: »

I can count to two, if that means anything.

No it doesn't.

Can you answer my question?

thebigbiffo

thebigbiffo wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/02/david-nutt-dangerous-drug-list

hows this guy for ya? experienced enough? qualified enough?

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

No it doesn't.

Can you answer my question?

admit you're wrong?

yeah, right...

jkell061

Lando Griffin wrote: »

Do you thing Ireland is a better place without headshops.

Yes, most certainly better off without them. Is it any wonder that Ireland, along with something like two or three other nations were the only places the stuff was legal in the world, and that's because it was absolute junk!! I thought it was grand after trying the stuff the first time, few years back, but after another couple times, never again! IN THE HORRORS!

Stick to the organic shrooms!

FlutterinBantam

thebigbiffo wrote: »

head shop drugs may kill...as may changing a lightbulb, going for a drive or over-exercising.

http://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/12130/

a quarter of all poisoning deaths are related to alcohol, and you and joe duffy dont get bent out of shape about that because if your fluffy, cocooned world we dont like talking about your socially accepted drug being a big killer.

can you stay on the topic by any chance. it's Headshops.

Last I heard they didn't sell alcohol in Headshops, or did they?

Elevator

watch this thread grow legs ladies and gentlemen!!

look at her go \o/

FlutterinBantam

Pace2008 wrote: »

I can count to two, if that means anything.

I can also identify when someone doesn't know much about a particular issue and will simply Google a few choice terms to reinforce their prejudices:

Step 1: Google "Drugs are bad."
Step 2: Link to site concernedchristianparentsagainstdrugs.com
Step 3:????
Step 4: PROFIT!!!!

I can also pick out someone who is afraid to answer a direct question

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

No it doesn't.

Can you answer my question?

I'm an accountant, and neither a qualified doctor nor a pharmacolgist. There is no unanimous consensus on the issue amongst experts in the field, so you’ll forgive me if I won’t base my opinions solely on the word of one doctor who is concerned the relatively low number of cases of patients presenting symptoms caused by head shop drugs.

I could take a leaf out of your book and start spamming links to experts In the area who believe the current prohibition laws are causing more harm than good to society’s overall wellbeing. We could pitch our champions against each other like Jedi knights and see who emerges the victor.

A bit like Top Trumps.

Nodin

Elevator wrote: »

watch this thread grow legs ladies and gentlemen!!

look at her go \o/

Flutter played the 'appeal to authority' card early on and was thrashed decisively.....will he limp on regardless...is his nervous system advanced enough to know he's dead on his feet....?

thebigbiffo

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

can you stay on the topic by any chance. it's Headshops.

Last I heard they didn't sell alcohol in Headshops, or did they?

are you missing the point or just have ADHD (if you do, i suggest you self medicate with some diazepam)?

Shulgin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Last I heard they didn't sell alcohol in Headshops, or did they?

It's a powerful, dangerous, psychoactive drug available everywhere, It has many parallels with illegal drugs, in fact it is more dangerous than most. but you knew that already right?

But don't mention the alcohol in a headshop thread. we can't have that eh?

Pace2008

Oh, and for the record I believe mephedrone is a dangerous drug. But then I’ve long ago realised that the world exists not in black and white, but in glorious technicolour.

Nodin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I can also pick out someone who is afraid to answer a direct question

Do you accept that a drugs advisory commitees list of harmful substances rather overides the opinion of an A&E Doctor?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/02/david-nutt-dangerous-drug-list

Feelgood

Hate to break up the debate, but with all this talk of headshops...

Anyone else craving a blow job?

Pace2008

thebigbiffo wrote: »

are you missing the point or just have ADHD (if you do, i suggest you self medicate with some diazepam)?

Adderall

Pookah

Nodin wrote: »

Do you accept that a drugs advisory commitees list of harmful substances rather overides the opinion of an A&E Doctor?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/02/david-nutt-dangerous-drug-list

To be fair, that list was compiled using data from 2007, pre the headshop explosion in mephedrone, bzp etc. and they don't appear anywhere on the list.

As much as I don't like Flutt's stance, that link shouldn't really come in to the argument.

Duggy747

Everything is bad for you, mmmkay?

Moderation, people. That's the key word.

Wompa1

Wasn't there a spate of people on here talking about people having seizures and the like when the second round of "legal highs" came out a few months back?

Don't know how people could say they are not dangerous....there's alot of arguments saying alcohol is more dangerous which is fine but then does that not bring more attention for the need to do something about booze rather than do something about legalizing these again?

If people are going for illegal highs now maybe that means more focus should be put into support groups for people that want to kick the habbit...just a thought...

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I can also pick out someone who is afraid to answer a direct question

Answered, honestly, above.

If David McWilliams comes on the radio saying what the country needs to do to ameliorate our fiscal situation, would you drop what you're doing and follow his instructions because he knows more than you about economics n' stuff?

FlutterinBantam

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'm an accountant, and neither a qualified doctor nor a pharmacolgist. There is no unanimous consensus on the issue amongst experts in the field, so you’ll forgive me if I won’t base my opinions solely on the word of one doctor who is concerned the relatively low number of cases of patients presenting symptoms caused by head shop drugs.

I could take a leaf out of your book and start spamming links to experts In the area who believe the current prohibition laws are causing more harm than good to society’s overall wellbeing. We could pitch our champions against each other like Jedi knights and see who emerges the victor.

A bit like Top Trumps.

Thank you.

I will take your advice if I need my firm's accounts done.

I will take Dr. Luke's advice on medical and pharmaceutical matters.

No hard feelings there.

Pace2008

Wompa1 wrote: »

Wasn't there a spate of people on here talking about people having seizures and the like when the second round of "legal highs" came out a few months back?

Don't know how people could say they are not dangerous....there's alot of arguments saying alcohol is more dangerous which is fine but then does that not bring more attention for the need to do something about booze rather than do something about legalizing these again?

If people are going for illegal highs now maybe that means more focus should be put into support groups for people that want to kick the habbit...just a thought...

After mephedrone was banned, the head shops started stocking naphyrone which is what caused this spate of seizures.

Chemists on one of the drug forums I frequent were warning about this compund before it hit the market, stating that the nature of this chemical's structure suggested it was potentially very dangerous and absolutely unfit for man or beast.

I lost any sympathy for head shops vendors when they opted to supply this drug to the public.

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Thank you.

I will take your advice if I need my firm's accounts done.

I will take Dr. Luke's advice on medical and pharmaceutical matters.

Sure I know your mind's been made up from the start, and come Wednesday you'll believe the same you did on Monday, never mind what happens on the day between the two.

I’ll continue to draw my opinions from a wide range of experts in the field, who may have a better knowledge of the overall implications drugs and current drug legislation on society than EURAD, the DEA, and this one dude you like.

No hard feelings there.

I have good weed and MDMA on tap; I’m happy out, man,

Duggy747

I remember one time I saw these college fellas (presumabley new to the whole drugs thing) and they bought "cocaine" from a head shop. The "cocaine" packets were labelled as bath salts, the powder was pink and they hoovered it up.

I asked them why they were snorting such chemical shìt and they said "because it's like cocaine but safer"

Their ignorance was astonishing.

The head shop "weed" was horrible stuff, you knew there was rotten crap in it as you smoked it...........blllllllaaaaaaaaarrrrrgh!! I and most people I know stayed away from that shìt

the_syco

Lando Griffin wrote: »

In a recent survay in my village the results were as follows.

35% of youths took no drugs
37% dont take the drugs that were sold in head shops.
28% have immigrated.
So there you have it 65% of our youth are better off without Headshops.

I read it as:
35% do no drugs
37% support organised crime
28% have gone elsewhere


=-=

TBH, the sh|t on the streets have been there for a while. Everyone knows coke can be mixed with sh|t to sell it off at a higher price, but people know the risks. The sh|te in the shops... was often pulled once long-term affects became known.

The difference: people falsly thought that the stuff in the shop, as you could buy it in a shop, was somehow safe. It often turned out that the stuff you get in the shop either a) had no effect on you or b) had an effect on you, and was banned not so long afterards.

FlutterinBantam

Pace2008 wrote: »

Sure I know your mind's been made up from the start, and come Wednesday you'll believe the same you did on Monday, never mind what happens on the day between the two.

I’ll continue to draw my opinions from a wide range of experts in the field, who may have a better knowledge of the overall implications drugs and current drug legislation on society than EURAD, the DEA, and this one dude you like.

I have good weed and MDMA on tap; I’m happy out, man,

Good man, so as well as an accountant you are a mind reader too... good combination.


Glad to see you are well supplied, and don't overdo the dosage.

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Good man, so as well as an accountant you are a mind reader too... good combination.

I'm not one for believing in clairvoyance and the like. When someone links to DEA rhetoric* and articles about heroin deaths it’s not wholly unreasonable to infer that their position is set in stone, and they’re selectively looking for literature, pertinent or not, to reinforce this.

*I’m aware that you didn’t do that in this particular thread, but if we’re supposed to accept arguments from authority as valid instruments of debate, I assume fallacious lines of reasoning are fair game, so I’ve gone and poisoned the well.

PS. If I recall correctly, you corrected me on my misuse of the term “perpendicular” a while back. I think you’re talking cobblers here, but I’ll always issue thanks where it’s due.

karma_

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'm not one for believing in clairvoyance and the like. When someone links to DEA rhetoric* and articles about heroin deaths it’s not wholly unreasonable to infer that their position is set in stone, and they’re selectively looking for literature, pertinent or not, to reinforce this.

*I’m aware that you didn’t do that in this particular thread, but if we’re supposed to accept arguments from authority as valid instruments of debate, I assume fallacious lines of reasoning are fair game, so I’ve gone and poisoned the well.

PS. If I recall correctly, you corrected me on my misuse of the term “perpendicular” a while back. I think you’re talking cobblers here, but I’ll always issue thanks where it’s due.

Don't think it, know he is, and always does.

thebigbiffo

i'll just sum up these 6 pages if i may:

head shops supplied unregulated and possibly dangerous drugs, the government decided to ban those drugs and the headshops. all recreational drugs are now illegal and unregulated and people still take drugs thus playing into the hands of organised crime; increasing their profits and therefore increasing the likelihood of other associated crime like murder and assault.

i dont know about anyone else, but everytime there's a drugs thread it all comes back to that - and 'that' is that the whole, entire thing is all wrong. everything.

Pace2008

Duggy747 wrote: »

I remember one time I saw these college fellas (presumabley new to the whole drugs thing) and they bought "cocaine" from a head shop. The "cocaine" packets were labelled as bath salts, the powder was pink and they hoovered it up.

I asked them why they were snorting such chemical shìt and they said "because it's like cocaine but safer"

Their ignorance was astonishing.

One of my major gripes with the head shops was the fact they didn't provide details of the active chemical in their wares, let alone information on dosage.

This was frankly dangerous when the measure of active chemical could vary from batch to batch, with the psychoactive compound even being switched for another at times. Apparently, there were a number of adverse reactions from a particular batch of Ivory Wave, sold in grams or half grams, which contained practically uncut MDPV, a substance active at 5mg.

One thing conspicuously absent from newspaper articles around the time of head shop hysteria, though, was that one of the staple bread earners of dealers, cocaine, dropped in price from €100 to an all-time low of €50 as the head shops rose in prominence.

Whilst I'm not even sure if a switch from cocaine to the relatively unresearched mephedrone (euphemistically described by some users as "moreish") was a good thing, you can safely draw 2 conclusions from this price-drop:

a) Head shop drugs were not entirely, or even mostly, being consumed by a hitherto abstinent market, and
b) as has been stated ad nauseum, the dealers were really being hit where it hurts.

Zascar

What most people do not realise, is that Headshop drugs had been around for a very long time before they became mainstream - anyone who took normal recreational drugs would not touch them because they were thought to be rubbish, filled with all sorts of crap (ironic I know) and the skeg the next day etc was worse than with illegal drugs. Why would you bother when you could get normal decent drugs without too much hassle. However, what basically happened is the quality of ecstasy specifically, went tumbling downhill over the last number of years - and roughly two years ago, proper actually MDMA pills were very difficult to find. They were replaced by all sorts of other chemicals that have vaguely similar effects - mainly Piperazines - which are generally horrible. So, people start experimenting with the headshop stuff, the demand increases. Mephedrone took off like a rocket cause it was so much better than all the other **** and you can buy it 99.9% pure over the internet for less than €15 a gram. In a short space of time it was all over the place and very noticeable in the clubs & festivals.

Parents went nuts and the standard Irish knee jerk reaction happened and it was banned. What most people do not know is that literally within a few weeks, actual proper decent MDMA ecstasy pills arrived back on the scene for the first time in years. Coincidence? I doubt it. From what I hear right now there is a very plentiful supply of high quality MDMA ecstasy pills around Ireland – “like the pills we used to get back in the day” is what I have been hearing – and this is most likely because of the demise of the headshops. So most recreational drug users are pretty happy the headshops are gone. This is not as bad for you as what Mephedrone probably was – and after all, Professor Nutt – head of the UK Drug Task force, came out and said that “Doing ecstasy is no more dangerous than Horse riding”. He advised a downgrade, but was sacked - because told the truth about his research, and didn't do say the politicians wanted him to say

RGDATA!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

let me introduce you to reality

drugs are bad...... mmmkay?

thebigbiffo

Zascar wrote: »

From what I hear right now there is a very plentiful supply of high quality MDMA ecstasy pills around Ireland – “like the pills we used to get back in the day”

i hadn't taken e in a couple of years up until last month simply because they's become utterly useless s'hite - no decent 'come up', no real e buzz. when i was offered a couple then i said no, was assured they were the real deal and though f'uck it, i dont have anything on the next couple of days. had me 3 of them after. lovely - brought me back to the summer of '99!!:D

Hammered hippie

Head shop owners were not squeezing enough money out of their trade...
The car industry needed a boost
Drug dealers force more money out of their customers and buy fancy cars

Joe Duffy has family that deals in BMW's

It all makes sense.

Hammered hippie

Too bad that the sales person that sells the better quality MDMA comes to break your bones if you fail to pay and offers you heroin too..which has also become plentyfull and cheap.

Gun crime also has gone up and crime gangs rule the streets once more.
Dunno...but the head shops were way more relaxed an enviroment.
And you knew what you got once you bought the same product.

Hammered hippie

One more thing

If someone downs 2 bottles of whiskey and ends up in A&E or worse...the general opinion is that that person was stupid to drink soo much

If someone snorts 3 grams of mephedrone and ends up in A&E the general opinion is ...burn the witch that sold it...buurnn the witch buuurrnnnnn

But not before the media had their go at making us believe in these modern witch hunts ofcourse.

Politcians wanted to distract from their own incompetence, the media doesn't mind lying if it sells and the public is a sheep with an unsettling taste for witch hunts and hysteria.

Hamiltonion

Hammered hippie wrote: »

Too bad that the sales person that sells the better quality MDMA comes to break your bones if you fail to pay and offers you heroin too..which has also become plentyfull and cheap.

Not really, you can generally divide dealers into 3 classes

1. Sells mainly weed/hash, sometimes some party drugs but rarely
2. Sells party drugs, eg MDMA, Ketamine, Coke, Speed, Acid etc as well as weed.
3. Scumbag selling Heroin, crack, meth, Methadone, oxys. And generally weed

People buying off 1 and 2 never need to rely on credit as they are mainly non addictive substances. Come to think of it I've never met a guy who'd sell ANYTHING on credit, bar a mate selling weed who knew me well.

Dealers deal to make money, not to break legs. If Johnny Dealer owes his supplier for a kilo of heroin, thats a different matter

Pace2008

Hammered hippie wrote: »

Too bad that the sales person that sells the better quality MDMA comes to break your bones if you fail to pay and offers you heroin too..

Ah, would you stop with the sensationalism. Just because it's the standard gambit employed by the prohibitionists doesn't mean the regulation side should use it.

The guy who sells me MDMA is a lovely lad, friend of a friend, and as middle class as they come*. Bloke wouldn't hurt a fly, let alone break a person's legs (who buys MDMA on tick anyway?). He spotted me three pills a few months back because I'd lost my bank card that night, and when I caught up with him a few weeks to pay him back he'd forgotten I owed him anything.

Psychoactives like ketamine, weed, MDMA and the like are often sold by very unassuming, respectable-looking collegey types. My mates and I don't have to skulk around back-alleys dealing with faceless hoodies to get these things. It's drugs like heroin with a high potential for physical addiction that are generally sold by nasty types. When you have a unpredictable, desperately dependant userbase you've got to be a bit of a scary **** to avoid getting ****ed over.

My connect would be deeply offended if I were to ask him for heroin, but some head shop owners would have happily sold me naphyrone post mephedrone ban - a chemical which would be as likely to stop your heart as curl your hair.

Look, I was disgusted with the way the media and government handled the issue, I think the attitudes and ignorance displayed by a few choice posters here are laughable and frankly embarrassing, but the legal-high vendors weren't the good guys either. Let this one go. The thread's over a month old if nothing else.

I'd advise you to spend your time and energy raising the nation's conciousness and campaigning to have the better, safer drugs legalised.

*not that that's necessarily a guarantee of civility, but he doesn't exactly fit your dealer stereotype

Raffo69

It's nearly just as easy to get headshop stuff as it is other drugs like Cocaine, Ecstacy. If there is a market for it you can be sure people will smuggle it into the country

bluecatmorgana

A question for everyone and slightly off topic:
If some drugs were legalised would we not begin to have the same problems that we have with alcohol? in other words more a and e causualities, more drugged and driving victims, more fights and accidents induced by drugs?
Just wondering what people think?