Whats your stance on drug use?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

immortalfrieza:
I've never used any sort of recreational drug, including tabacco or alcohol in my life, so let's just get that out of the way. I think that especially in this day and age where it's common knowledge that drugs of any kind will most likely screw you up and eventually kill you, anyone that decides to take them are f***ing idiots and the world is better off if the drugs kill them or get them arrested.

That is not even true.
Most recreational users will not become addicts, and thus will not become screwed up and eventually die.

Smoke Weed Every Day

faranar:

Actually lots of people die because of exercise such as running and sex. There are however no reported deaths caused by smoking weed. And you can argue that smoking weed is healthy as it relieves pain, stress, and there are studies that show smoking weed can prevent cancer. What's more it isn't physically addictive, meaning people smoke weed not because they need to, but because they want to, because they like it.

MYTH, spend ten seconds looking it up for yourself.

-Marijuana does lead to addiction with regular use. I'm generally willing to cut it some slack because a truly recreational user is unlikely to become addicted, even in the long term. Regular use however has been shown to lead to both physical and mental addiction.
-Pot users are four times as likely to have a heart attack during the peak of their high, however, no overall increase to heart health risk while not on the influence has been recorded.
-Marijuana smoke contains over fifty percent more carcinogens than tobacco smoke, however, the one properly done study on the link between that and lung cancer showed no correlation, which seems to defy all logic. Regular pot smokers do however experience many of the same respiratory symptoms as tobacco smokers, from infections to issues with pleghm to reduced lung capacity. They also typically accumulate 3-5 times more tar compared to the same rate of tobacco use, most likely due to the common habit of holding the smoke in the lungs for long periods.

It is indeed destructive to one's health, mind and attitude. Its saving graces, and the only reasons I'm willing to tolerate it, are the fact that it is comparatively mild, and its health benefits for a small handful of cancer patients.

Do what you want. Stay out of your car

fenrizz:

immortalfrieza:
I've never used any sort of recreational drug, including tabacco or alcohol in my life, so let's just get that out of the way. I think that especially in this day and age where it's common knowledge that drugs of any kind will most likely screw you up and eventually kill you, anyone that decides to take them are f***ing idiots and the world is better off if the drugs kill them or get them arrested.

That is not even true.
Most recreational users will not become addicts, and thus will not become screwed up and eventually die.

That's true, but those people are not really the people we're really talking about when we refer to "recreational drug users", we're really referring to the addicts here, and anyway, it's idiotic to take the risk that you could end up addicted regardless. Besides, even if you only take a recreational drug ONCE can still get you arrested or killed, (tobacco probably won't, but the risk of death is still there) it's just less likely than a guy that's so addicted he ends up O.D.ing.

I say people should be able to do whatever drugs they want.

The lighter drugs like alcohol and weed should be legal in many public places.

The really dangerous stuff like PCP I think should still be legal, but only if you consent to being locked up alone for the duration.

Heronblade:

The Unworthy Gentleman:

Heronblade:
The human mind is one of the few things we actually have going for us as a species, deliberately tossing it in the gutter for the sake of some extra endorphin is incredibly stupid.

And some of the greatest minds the world has seen have been drug users. Freud used cocaine all the time but he still managed to be an awesome psychologist, partly because of his love of cocaine. Steve Jobbs said that taking acid was a profound experience, one of the most important things in his life. Not all drug use is bad.

Poor examples in my mind.

Freud managed to improve the way we treat and research the field of psychology, but nearly all of his actual theories have been proven dead wrong one way or another.

And Jobs was a pseudo-delusional megalomaniac in addition to the positive things he managed to achieve. Considering the effects of acid, I'm inclined to think if it had any lasting effect on his career it had more to do with the former aspect.

With both men, I have reason to believe they would have been better off without drugs, try again.

How about Francis Crick envisioning the double spiral helix of DNA while on acid?

immortalfrieza:

fenrizz:

That is not even true.
Most recreational users will not become addicts, and thus will not become screwed up and eventually die.

That's true, but those people are not really the people we're really talking about when we refer to "recreational drug users", we're really referring to the addicts here.

I would have said those people were pretty much exactly who we are talking about when we refer to "recreational drug users". If we were talking about addicts we would use the term "drug addicts" or "problem drug users". Pretty much all the academic literature I've seen on the subject makes that distinction very clear.
Maybe that's what you mean but it's very much out of whack with what everyone else means so it would be a good idea to define your terms properly otherwise you're just going to cause a lot of confusion.

revjor:

Heronblade:

The Unworthy Gentleman:

And some of the greatest minds the world has seen have been drug users. Freud used cocaine all the time but he still managed to be an awesome psychologist, partly because of his love of cocaine. Steve Jobbs said that taking acid was a profound experience, one of the most important things in his life. Not all drug use is bad.

Poor examples in my mind.

Freud managed to improve the way we treat and research the field of psychology, but nearly all of his actual theories have been proven dead wrong one way or another.

And Jobs was a pseudo-delusional megalomaniac in addition to the positive things he managed to achieve. Considering the effects of acid, I'm inclined to think if it had any lasting effect on his career it had more to do with the former aspect.

With both men, I have reason to believe they would have been better off without drugs, try again.

How about Francis Crick envisioning the double spiral helix of DNA while on acid?

The problem with giving drugs credit for discoveries and inventions and so on, is that you're just assuming causation on something that is actually a correlation. The problem with assuming that recreational drug use=invention is that back when these so called "great minds" were inventing stuff, practically EVERYBODY was taking some sort of recreational drug either because it was medicial at the time or laws prohibiting recreational drugs wasn't really very well enforced, so there wasn't any reason not to.

Look at enough great scientists that made groundbreaking discoveries and you'll find at least a few that took drugs, but that doesn't necessarily mean the drugs had anything to do with their genius. Who's to say that it would have made any difference whether they took drugs or not in whether they discovered anything?

immortalfrieza:

revjor:

Heronblade:
Poor examples in my mind.

Freud managed to improve the way we treat and research the field of psychology, but nearly all of his actual theories have been proven dead wrong one way or another.

And Jobs was a pseudo-delusional megalomaniac in addition to the positive things he managed to achieve. Considering the effects of acid, I'm inclined to think if it had any lasting effect on his career it had more to do with the former aspect.

With both men, I have reason to believe they would have been better off without drugs, try again.

How about Francis Crick envisioning the double spiral helix of DNA while on acid?

The problem with giving drugs credit for discoveries and inventions and so on, is that you're just assuming causation on something that is actually a correlation. The problem with assuming that recreational drug use=invention is that back when these so called "great minds" were inventing stuff, practically EVERYBODY was taking some sort of recreational drug either because it was medicial at the time or laws prohibiting recreational drugs wasn't really very well enforced, so there wasn't any reason not to.

Look at enough great scientists that made groundbreaking discoveries and you'll find at least a few that took drugs, but that doesn't necessarily mean the drugs had anything to do with their genius. Who's to say that it would have made any difference whether they took drugs or not in whether they discovered anything?

Who's to say? Probably the people themselves. For example "What if I had not taken LSD ever; would I have still invented PCR?" He replied, "I don't know. I doubt it. I seriously doubt it." - Kary Mullis on developing polymerase chain reactions.

Drugs like LSD or the half dozen won't magically turn you into a genius. But if you are already one you will think in ways you NEVER would have otherwise. and that can produce results like figuring out how to clone pieces of DNA.

freedom of choice.

Nuff said.

Cannabis should be Gedoogd like in holland
1:Smoking and possessing it is illegal but the police wont trouble or fine you.
2:Production is illegal but the police wont ask the shop's any questions.
3:It cant contain more than 15% THC or the police WILL bust down your door.
With this the police can focus all it's anti drug efforts on the real dangerous stuff and dont need to waste time on other stuff like kid's wanna relax after their exam.
And if the police needs to they can kill a coffieshop before you can say "It is illegal"

revjor:

immortalfrieza:

revjor:

How about Francis Crick envisioning the double spiral helix of DNA while on acid?

The problem with giving drugs credit for discoveries and inventions and so on, is that you're just assuming causation on something that is actually a correlation. The problem with assuming that recreational drug use=invention is that back when these so called "great minds" were inventing stuff, practically EVERYBODY was taking some sort of recreational drug either because it was medicial at the time or laws prohibiting recreational drugs wasn't really very well enforced, so there wasn't any reason not to.

Look at enough great scientists that made groundbreaking discoveries and you'll find at least a few that took drugs, but that doesn't necessarily mean the drugs had anything to do with their genius. Who's to say that it would have made any difference whether they took drugs or not in whether they discovered anything?

Who's to say? Probably the people themselves. For example "What if I had not taken LSD ever; would I have still invented PCR?" He replied, "I don't know. I doubt it. I seriously doubt it." - Kary Mullis on developing polymerase chain reactions.

Drugs like LSD or the half dozen won't magically turn you into a genius. But if you are already one you will think in ways you NEVER would have otherwise. and that can produce results like figuring out how to clone pieces of DNA.

If you're capable of thinking up something while on drugs, you're just as capable, possibly even more capable of thinking up that same thing without them. Just because a select few people decided to take drugs and while on them coincidentally thought up something brillant doesn't mean that drugs=thinking up something brillant, whether you're a genius or not. In fact with many drugs they'd impair your ability to think correctly and thus your ability to think up anything brillant, in fact some may even cause permanent brain damage and thus they may even PERMANENTLY prevent you from ever thinking up anything good, even if you would have been able to otherwise.

Marijuana has improved my life in quite a few ways, but I can see how it could be overused. I only have a few experiences with LSD, mushrooms, and ecstacy, and each one I feel could have benefits if their production was regulated and held to a specific standard, instead of from a dealer who tells you "this is the shit".

Conversely, I'll drink alcohol when I'm with friends and want to loosen up, but I find myself doing less and less of that. I haven't even touched alcohol in several months. It doesn't improve my life in any way, and I feel a lot healthier when I don't use it. I'm not against the use of alcohol at all (as long as it doesn't lead to driving or 2 AM phone calls), but I think it's funny that something that has proven to be more harmful and addictive than any of the drugs I mentioned is more or less accepted just because it's been part of the culture for longer.

Marijuana is far safer than alcohol (as in, it can't even kill you), and should absolutely be legal. The only reason it isn't is because of political bullshit. Same with shrooms, which have some massive psychological benefits for people with mental illnesses. It straight-up CURES obsessive compulsive disorder and OCD-related depression, yet it can't even be truly studied in the US because of FDA bullshit.

As for other drugs, I plan on trying almost every single one at least once in my life, barring the extremely stupid ones like meth.

Even heroin, if I'm on my deathbed already, is fair game to me. Might as well, right?

Until that point though, normal drugs are fair game for me and others morally-speaking as long as it doesn't interfere a lot with normal life, like any other activity. It's the same as, say, someone that plays video games. As long as it doesn't wreck your life and you're safe: go for it. And if you're already playing some video games...why not spice up the games with some external pleasure? Once they're legal in your jurisdiction, of course.

I have personally tried weed, alcohol, and shrooms before, and once took double the dose of cough medicine not expecting to get high off of it.

Muspelheim:

Wolverine18:

Correct, you are trying to escape reality.

And people "above" drugs aren't?

Did I say anything people "above drugs"? No, stop putting words in my mouth.

But then again, isn't enjoying a delicious cake also an attempt to escape reality? Or reading a book or watching a film?

We're all escapees in the grand scheme of things, if you ask me.

Yes, those are escapes, where did I say they weren't. I was replying to a post however claimed that drugs were not an escape from reality, when they are one of the more serious escape methods, similar to alcohol.

immortalfrieza:

revjor:

immortalfrieza:

The problem with giving drugs credit for discoveries and inventions and so on, is that you're just assuming causation on something that is actually a correlation. The problem with assuming that recreational drug use=invention is that back when these so called "great minds" were inventing stuff, practically EVERYBODY was taking some sort of recreational drug either because it was medicial at the time or laws prohibiting recreational drugs wasn't really very well enforced, so there wasn't any reason not to.

Look at enough great scientists that made groundbreaking discoveries and you'll find at least a few that took drugs, but that doesn't necessarily mean the drugs had anything to do with their genius. Who's to say that it would have made any difference whether they took drugs or not in whether they discovered anything?

Who's to say? Probably the people themselves. For example "What if I had not taken LSD ever; would I have still invented PCR?" He replied, "I don't know. I doubt it. I seriously doubt it." - Kary Mullis on developing polymerase chain reactions.

Drugs like LSD or the half dozen won't magically turn you into a genius. But if you are already one you will think in ways you NEVER would have otherwise. and that can produce results like figuring out how to clone pieces of DNA.

If you're capable of thinking up something while on drugs, you're just as capable, possibly even more capable of thinking up that same thing without them. Just because a select few people decided to take drugs and while on them coincidentally thought up something brillant doesn't mean that drugs=thinking up something brillant, whether you're a genius or not. In fact with many drugs they'd impair your ability to think correctly and thus your ability to think up anything brillant, in fact some may even cause permanent brain damage and thus they may even PERMANENTLY prevent you from ever thinking up anything good, even if you would have been able to otherwise.

You are ignoring what I just said and just reiterating your point. There are drugs which cause you to think in drastically different ways and yes there are many more which could easily break your brain forever. But there are ways of thinking on certain drugs that the same person wouldn't achieve sober, synethesia being an example. They aren't necesarry but it does happen and has produced results that have propelled humanity. You can say maybe it would have happened without drug induced thought, but they did happen and flipside is also true. These discoveries may have never happened when they did or ever without drugs.

Wolverine18:

Muspelheim:

Wolverine18:

Correct, you are trying to escape reality.

And people "above" drugs aren't?

Did I say anything people "above drugs"? No, stop putting words in my mouth.

But then again, isn't enjoying a delicious cake also an attempt to escape reality? Or reading a book or watching a film?

We're all escapees in the grand scheme of things, if you ask me.

Yes, those are escapes, where did I say they weren't. I was replying to a post however claimed that drugs were not an escape from reality, when they are one of the more serious escape methods, similar to alcohol.

I don't understand how it's escaping reality. Or how anything is. There is absolutely no activity that isn't just taking part in another form of reality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNR9xxkUaDk&feature=fvwrel

Just watch some of his stuff, he's got a real positive attitude. :p

revjor:

Wolverine18:

Muspelheim:

And people "above" drugs aren't?

Did I say anything people "above drugs"? No, stop putting words in my mouth.

But then again, isn't enjoying a delicious cake also an attempt to escape reality? Or reading a book or watching a film?

We're all escapees in the grand scheme of things, if you ask me.

Yes, those are escapes, where did I say they weren't. I was replying to a post however claimed that drugs were not an escape from reality, when they are one of the more serious escape methods, similar to alcohol.

I don't understand how it's escaping reality. Or how anything is. There is absolutely no activity that isn't just taking part in another form of reality.

Not being able to tell reality from drug induced haze or illusions is not a good sign for you.

It's funny how this topic always seems to sprout one or two heated discussions between extreme pro and extreme contra. And of course a lot of free choice advocates missing a few points.
In any way, I shan't take active part in this argument since I simply cannot be bovvered today to defend my stance of even adding an alcohol ban but I wish you all good fun. Go, my side!

Wolverine18:

revjor:

Wolverine18:

Did I say anything people "above drugs"? No, stop putting words in my mouth.

Yes, those are escapes, where did I say they weren't. I was replying to a post however claimed that drugs were not an escape from reality, when they are one of the more serious escape methods, similar to alcohol.

I don't understand how it's escaping reality. Or how anything is. There is absolutely no activity that isn't just taking part in another form of reality.

Not being able to tell reality from drug induced haze or illusions is not a good sign for you.

...What? This isn't Candyland? ahaha.

I'm only stating that everything, even your imagination is real in the sense that it exists as electric pulses in your head goop. A drug induced haze is just that. The naturally evolved brain influenced by a very real chemical synthesized by another brain's actions. A biological function. I guess only questioning what "escaping reality" means. I think I'm taking the statement too literally.

I think there are some drugs that people shouldn't be allowed to take because doing so can realistically and highly likely have negative effects on others. I'm talking herion, P, that shit. People can say, 'I'm a responsible adult.', and while I'm more on the spectrum of freedom to babysitting society, some drugs are simply too dangerous.

I've no problem with people drinking, smoking pot, and taking extacy.

I don't like it how some people have no problem with drinking, then have a problem with smoking pot or something because its 'illegal'. Dude, make your own decisions. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean its wrong. Just be careful.

as long as you know what you are doing and don,t bring other people into danger (IE stoned driving or sharing needles)

As long as it doesn't effect me in anyway, I don't really care.

As for the actual users, to me you have to be pretty fucking stupid to use any drug, barring caffine, chocolate and things to help you get/feel better.

To me using a drug (alcohol and smokes inc) is a waste of money, it is quite expensive, doesn't last long and can fuck you up in the long run/in hefty use. There is no upside to me, so it's just a waste.

The way I see it, drugs don't need to exist because you can get the same high, safer through different means without either forever harming your body. I've only seen people get their lives wrecked from drugs and I don't think that I'm going to change on this.

Of course this goes for alcohol and cigarettes.

My job is to sell people drugs, naturally I think they're good.

...
I work in a pharmacy, btw.

As for recreational drugs, I don't really see why so much stigma is attached to so many of them. The whole 'but its bad for you' argument doesn't hold a lot of water; it isn't bad for anyone else. We let people eat their way to obesity and otherwise wreck their bodies, why illegalise other things with comparable physical effects?
That said, some drugs can make people act extremely aggressively and obviously those should be controlled. Again, with many drugs this argument doesn't really stand up; I can't imagine a stoner attacking somebody.

I'm not necessarily in favour of any particular drug being legalised, but I do think that there is a serious lack of unbiased research on these things that could allow the government to make a genuinely informed decision on the matter.

Also, I don't think that drugs' proven positives can be ignored. Many or even most users never become reliant and just take drugs to have a good time. Others use them for stress relief or escapism. Some of the species' greatest thinkers, scientists and artists have been drug users and many have claimed that it had a positive effect on their work. One of my good friends uses a great deal (and a variety of) recreational drugs whilst writing music, and the stuff he comes up with is frequently incredible.

...

Aprilgold:
The way I see it, drugs don't need to exist because you can get the same high, safer through different means without either forever harming your body.

I'd be extremely interested to hear how, exactly?

The lighter stuff, like Weed, Alcohol Smoking are fine, but in moderation. The harder stuff ARE NOT okay. I wouldn't want to associate myself with people who do those kinds of drugs, anyway.

Also, I like how everyone says as long as the peron doing it doesn't affect anyone else, then its ok. Don't you know that people have TREMENDOUS affects on other people? Would you think its okay if your friends started doing hard drugs? "I have a scholarhip? My parents can't afford college without it you say? Well herp Derp, its my life to live! Fuck thinking about my actions, I wanna see the Heroin Pegasus!"

Vault101:

I mean before that it was just plain wrong and people who did it were bad people...

... I have to admit that I used to kind of think that way too and am now kind of embarrassed about it >__>

But now for me it's more or less I won't mind what other people do so long as it's not getting out of hand and will try to avoid judging them for it, but personally I'll never touch stuff beyond alcohol.

Used to smoke marijuana all the time, done ecstacy, MDMA, whizz & tried coke once.(thought it was crap & overpriced for the buzz you get). Also used to smoke habitually.

Quit them all & grew up, have a family, starting career, etc.

Now all I do is have a beer here & there & the occasional whisky bender. Fuck mixers, just whisky on the rocks like it should be! That's how I unwind these days(apart from the gaming, of course)

Did I have fun doing drugs?

Why, yes. Yes I did indeed.

On a side note, if marijuana was legalised(it REALLY should be, look at the evidence) I would strongly consider taking it occasionally in cakes or tea or summat.

I can't comment on hallucinogenics, except to say as long as it's done safely in privacy/comfortable surroundings; I have never tried any myself. Shrooms & LSD sure sound interesting if done right, but didn't want to risk a bad trip.

From my experiences, I realised some of us just have a great deal more self-control & common sense under the influence than others, this is where most of the danger comes from. Any existing flaws in one's psyche or personality seem to be enhanced to varying degrees, depending on the poison & dosage thereof.
I could be pissed as a fart & barely walking but still not shout my head off or be a general twat to those around me, for example, whereas most people seem to swing the other way.

Why are the youngsters so judgemental these days? Sheesh. Enjoy it while you can, you know?

I don't have a problem with alcohol, smoking (tabacco) and caffiene, the rest of the stuff i don't really care if you take it but your an idiot if you do considering what some drugs can do to you.

In all honesty i've managed to avoid anyone who take drugs other than 1-2 people i know who smoke weed, and i don't intend to get involved with any addicts any time soon. As for alcohol, smoking and caffiene provided your not addicted i don't even see a real problem with them.

Alcohol and pot are fine in my book. Apparently there are no long term problems that will arise from LSD use, and salvia seems like it could be alright from what I've heard, but I've not tried either of those. That said, like literally everything else in the world, too much of anything isn't good for you.

Seems like most every other 'drug' than the ones mentioned above will end up wrecking you so I'm not sure why anyone does them. I'd like to be able to say 'as long as you can still function as a human being and get your priorities straight it'd be fine', but as we all know that never happens. Ever.

I do not use many drugs...occassionally pain killers and even less often ethanol. That said I think that it is much safer for most drugs to be legal. BUT I do not think that any drug use is a justification for diminished responsibility. You get high, you break laws, you get tried for your crimes.

I believe to some extent a person should be allowed to put whatever they want into their body if it makes them happy, but I do believe in regulation. We need drugs to be approved and cleaned by the government so that they are safe for our consumption.

I don't believe in using drugs for myself as I don't feel I need to get high to enjoy my life, but I have nothing against others if they want to use it. The drug war is pointless, it is just prohibition from the 1920s and 30s all over again.

Personally, it is up to the individual. Just as how some people are dangerously idiotic when drinking and need to know not to drink for their own and other's benefit, so too should drug-users recognise that - if they are the type of person to take unnecessary risks with their or other's lives when under the influence - that specific drug is not for them.

I've little experience of drugs myself, I admit, but a lot of people around me have/had regularly used drugs at points in their life and only one person has had any bad experience with it. Hell, most of them are university students or graduates going on to very well paid jobs, and one of them in particular is probably the most intelligent nicest guy I know. If people want to do something with their own body, let them.

Side note: While it's not legal in England, in many areas I've lived people will quite happily smoke weed as they walk about or outside of their homes. I just think the police have stopped caring.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked