Have you ever used Cocaine?

[DirtyJunkieScum]

Did you know a few of the people that OD on drugs like cocaine and heroin do it because they get a "bad batch", or whatever you call it? Somewhere along the line a whole load of shit gets thrown into the drugs to weigh them down, and that whole load of shit can make the whole thing way more dangerous than it already is. I'm pretty sure that, if you were to decriminalize both drugs, you would see less OD'ing and probably less addicts too.

That generally leads to a bad hit or other unpleasant complications, rarely an overdose as such. Also as far as heroin is concerned the majority of the physical damage comes from impurities and the solvents used to break down impure heroin. Pure heroin dissolves in water and can be injected into a muscle (although it doesn't give you a hit that way) and aside from the addiction and possibility of overdose there aren't really many side effects. Initial vomiting until you're tolerant and some degree of constipation but you'll never feel it anyway. If you're lucky enough to live in good old socialist Europe like me then you can get it on prescription and then it really causes very little disruption at all, other than having to pick it up from the chemist every weekday and bring back the empty amps. Unfortunately stupid old UK has various daft laws made for the benefit of pharmaceutical companies that mean it costs the government about £40 a gram whereas the equivalent on the continent cost about £8-10. Fucking morons, they whine about it and try to get the NHS to stop doing it on grounds of cost when it costs 4x what it should thanks to them in the 1st place. It's ridiculous, I cost the government fucktons every year when they could just let me buy my own at European prices. Twats.

 

[rekabdarb]

I love cocaine!

Oh you mean the drug? Not the energy drink?

http://www.drinkcocaine.com/

=(. To lazy to go through 4 pages to see if someone else said something like this.

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

Winners Don't Do Drugs.

...For Serious.

That's a really funny statement in a thread about rich-kids' nose-candy. Most folks who like to separate "winners" from "losers" use financial success as a metric.

y'know who did a bit of cocaine? The 43rd president of the United States. Who smoked a bit of weed? The 42nd president. Both very successful men... "winners", one might say.

Are you insinuating that the drugs were the cause of their success?
Debauchery does not breed success, success breeds debauchery.

 

[loc978]

Winners Don't Do Drugs.

...For Serious.

That's a really funny statement in a thread about rich-kids' nose-candy. Most folks who like to separate "winners" from "losers" use financial success as a metric.

y'know who did a bit of cocaine? The 43rd president of the United States. Who smoked a bit of weed? The 42nd president. Both very successful men... "winners", one might say.

Are you insinuating that the drugs were the cause of their success?
Debauchery does not breed success, success breeds debauchery.

The statement "winners don't do drugs" implies that debauchery creates losers. Call me a pedant if you must, but I never said drug use caused their success, just that it didn't stop said success.

Also, I'm not really one to use such a winner-loser metric personally. Both of those men were successful through nepotism, but the USA's financial monarchy another discussion entirely.

 

[RJ 17]

This thread is likely going to be locked down...they don't like talking about drugs on this forum.

But the topic hasn't been locked yet so I'll say this:

Drugs are man-made substances, weed grows naturally. As such, weed is not a drug and there shouldn't be anything that keeps people from enjoying their "herbal supplements".

...

Um...

Ok, disregarding the whole idiocy of the "natural means it's good" thing (Lolopium), cocaine actually is refined from a plant as well.

There are plants/fungi/etc out there that can fuck you up. They're still drugs. They're psychoactive, therefore they are drugs.

You said yourself, "cocaine is refined from a plant". That means it's man-made. There's no cocaine plant out there you can go out, find, and do some lines from. It has to be prepared, therefore it is a drug.

The plants/fungi/etc out there that fuck you up, if taken by themselves, aren't drugs...they're plants/fungi/etc that can fuck you up.

And I never said "natural = good", I said "Weed grows naturally. As such, weed is not a drug and there shouldn't be anything that keeps people from enjoying their "herbal supplements". Specifically: weed. I don't believe I ever made mention of any other plants/fungi/etc, nor did I ever make the connection that we should go out and start eating/licking/sniffing everything we find in nature.

In short, all I said was that weed wasn't truly a drug, and I stand by that.

But they're still drugs. The fact that these things occur in nature does nothing to make them better, and if you agree with that, then I have to wonder what you think the difference is between a refined plant like cocaine and one that's picked like weed.

drug/drəg/
Noun:
A substance that has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body, in particular.

Note that there is no exception there that says "Unless it's all natural and organic and shit."

Weed's a drug. So are shrooms and opium.

*sunglasses* Deal with it.


EDIT: Also, do you have any idea how much effort man has put into making weed what it is today? A caveman could not go out and find the type of plants people smoke these days. That took a few hundred years of work by... you guessed it, man.

To your edit: I've already been over that with sir Flarty.

As for your definition, in the words of Adam from Myth Busters: "I reject your reality, and substitute my own." I still say weed isn't a drug, it's a plant.

::clown nose:: Deal with it.

 

[somonels]

... yea, I do coke all the time, I carry it around in a plastic bag and snort it off of passed out hobos and prostitutes who get what's left on there.

 

[hooksashands]

Tried a few bumps here and there at parties. It made my skin feel hot and kicked my heartbeat up, but only lasted about half an hour. Later I learned that most coke is cut with something else, even if it's just baking powder. It's rare to find pure coke because a person with an average income can't afford it pure. This is why it's considered a "rich people" drug. Which is ironic, because the same substance is diluted to make crack, predominantly abused in poor neighborhoods the world over. Suddenly it doesn't seem so glamorous when you're smoking it off a brillo pad instead of vacuuming it up your nostril.

 

[Shpongled]

Short term speaking though, an average dose of cocaine would be much more likely to kill a newbie than an average dose of heroin. With heroin, if you know the purity and your body weight/tolerance you can dose perfectly safely, with cocaine there is no safe dose.

I'd have to say I think that's wrong. If you know the purity of coke and your body weight/tolerance you can do exactly the same thing. Opiates have just been used more extensively in medicine and continue to be used so there is more written on the matter.
I also have to ask quite what you think an "average" dose is.
It may well be that the average amount used illicitly by people who have no idea of the purity and their tolerance may be closer to the amount needed to OD than the average amount used by opiate naive individuals is to the amount they need to OD, but that doesn't mean that there is no safe dose of one while there is of the other.

captcha: jump the gun.. hope that doesn't turn out to be prophetic.

That's the point, you can't, at least not to the same degree of accuracy. Cocaine is very unpredictable, opiates and amphetamines and most other drugs in general aren't. Cocaine has multiple effects on multiple bodily systems and chemical balances etc (sodium channel action, and causes a wide variety of cascade effects that could kill one person and not another. Combined with how short it lasts leading to people redosing extremely often and the body really starts getting stressed.

By average dose i mean the average sort of dose any given user would take. Not a little just to wake you up, not a massive line to blow your head off, just an average line to get partying; which could kill you.

I mean, ok, obviously if i take half a microgram of coke i'm not going to die, but when it comes to average, standard doses people take in a session, coke is the one that could randomly kill someone.

Did you know a few of the people that OD on drugs like cocaine and heroin do it because they get a "bad batch", or whatever you call it? Somewhere along the line a whole load of shit gets thrown into the drugs to weigh them down, and that whole load of shit can make the whole thing way more dangerous than it already is. I'm pretty sure that, if you were to decriminalize both drugs, you would see less OD'ing and probably less addicts too.

That generally leads to a bad hit or other unpleasant complications, rarely an overdose as such. Also as far as heroin is concerned the majority of the physical damage comes from impurities and the solvents used to break down impure heroin. Pure heroin dissolves in water and can be injected into a muscle (although it doesn't give you a hit that way) and aside from the addiction and possibility of overdose there aren't really many side effects. Initial vomiting until you're tolerant and some degree of constipation but you'll never feel it anyway. If you're lucky enough to live in good old socialist Europe like me then you can get it on prescription and then it really causes very little disruption at all, other than having to pick it up from the chemist every weekday and bring back the empty amps. Unfortunately stupid old UK has various daft laws made for the benefit of pharmaceutical companies that mean it costs the government about £40 a gram whereas the equivalent on the continent cost about £8-10. Fucking morons, they whine about it and try to get the NHS to stop doing it on grounds of cost when it costs 4x what it should thanks to them in the 1st place. It's ridiculous, I cost the government fucktons every year when they could just let me buy my own at European prices. Twats.

You just trolling or did/do you actually take heroin? If you do I guess you're much more knowledgeable than me, so I'll take your word on it.

There are certain schemes taking place here right now with helping to treat heroin addiction with heroin itself, rather than substituting it for the inferior (but luckily for big pharma - legal) methadone, so maybe he's part of one of those....

 

[Jopoho]

One time I had a doctor try and use liquid cocaine to help stop a particularly nasty nosebleed I had in high school. He said he thought it could help coagulate the blood and get it to stop. So really, I didn't use it so much as it was tried on me.

...in front of my dad.


Also, apparently liquid cocaine is actually a thing that they have in the ER.

 

[DirtyJunkieScum]

That's the point, you can't, at least not to the same degree of accuracy. Cocaine is very unpredictable, opiates and amphetamines and most other drugs in general aren't. Cocaine has multiple effects on multiple bodily systems and chemical balances etc (sodium channel action, and causes a wide variety of cascade effects that could kill one person and not another. Combined with how short it lasts leading to people redosing extremely often and the body really starts getting stressed.

By average dose i mean the average sort of dose any given user would take. Not a little just to wake you up, not a massive line to blow your head off, just an average line to get partying; which could kill you.

I mean, ok, obviously if i take half a microgram of coke i'm not going to die, but when it comes to average, standard doses people take in a session, coke is the one that could randomly kill someone.

SNIP

There are certain schemes taking place here right now with helping to treat heroin addiction with heroin itself, rather than substituting it for the inferior (but luckily for big pharma - legal) methadone, so maybe he's part of one of those.... Other than that, there's no way in hell you'd get a G of H for £40 here, so maybe some wires got crossed somewhere..

Yeah as I said, that's more down to the amounts people take, not that you can't tell what strength it is. People taking more because it's effects don't last as long is again an unregulated dosage issue. Saying "there is no safe dose" is just wrong. Say "the amounts casual users take it in are more likely to cause overdose" and I will agree with you...edit: Ok, that's pretty much what you said last thing, so OK, I agree with that.

Yes, I get diamorphine on prescription.

Not currently, about 10 years ago you could ,street price, much cheaper if you want to buy an 1/8th, less than £30/gram. It's about £50 now in big cities. Also I was referring to the approximate per gram price that the government pays for pharmaceutical grade diamorphine, including the costs of all the amps and what have you, that's another thing that drives the price up, they have to give me 6 x 30mg dry amps with another 6 water amps instead of just 1 200mg amp. Stupid.

You just trolling or did/do you actually take heroin? If you do I guess you're much more knowledgeable than me, so I'll take your word on it.

The chap above already answered, but for politeness sake yes, it was pretty heavily implied that I get a diamorphine prescription and it annoys me that it costs the government so much when it could be done for so much less.

 

[Mint Rubber]

I dont think anyone here is questioning for a minute how potentially harmful any drug can be. The point of the matter is if people want to do drugs they will regardless of legality. Making them illegal only serves as a means to empower criminals with a way to make money, increases how harmful the drug is and which in turn presents the government with an oppurtunity to waste billions on fighting a losing war on drugs. It also attaches a stigma to drugs so when someone develops an addiction they will feel less inclined to seek help out of shame or any other unnecessary negativty as a result.

The solution is'nt prohibition, its education and regulation.

A fair point.

But if nobody is questioning the harmful effects of the drug why are people still using it?
Perhaps I don't understand human nature very well, but doing something just because it's illegal seems childish and utterly pointless. Apart from the obvious problems, it would completely disrupt society as a whole.

Let's imagine:

1) Cocaine is legalized as it is now:
People would just waste their entire life savings at the local Cocaine-Mart(TM). And they would still risk addiction and overdose. Reasonable people (I hope the majority) would avoid it, but what about impressionable/misguided people that don't know when to stop?

This is where the argument falls apart IMHO. The whole success of this endeavor hinges on people being reasonable and responsible.
Now let's be honest here: some people can/will think for themselves and some people just can't/won't. An argument can be made for education and responsible upbringing. But you can't magically make everybody a responsible adult (if there's a definition for that).
If not the state, witch has monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force (check out Max Weber [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence] a pretty cool guy), then who decides when you had enough drugs? Your friends, your family? But why should you listen to them?

If we were a race of logical beings we would be called Vulcans and we would be awesome. But alas we are not.

Let's take an example: a man overdoses on legal cocaine and leaves his wife and children with no financial support. Now legally he was only hurting himself so it would be ok...right? Nobody should step in and do something.
Also, if the amount of cocaine you can buy would be limited people would just turn to illegal sources because "hell I am unreasonable and I want more".

This is a slippery slope argument: if x and y are legal why not y and z too?
It can't bring anything to a conclusion since it only produces more questions.


2) The state legalizes a version of cocaine that gets you high with no consequences (lab-engineered magic cocaine). Everybody would be high at all times (the exact oppsite of Equilibrium). The demand would be astronomical, the legal supply would never be enough for everybody. People in poorer countries would never have the cash to buy it but they wanna be happy too. Hence illegal magic cocaine. It would still kill people but not the ones using it.

3) The state legalizes weak/mild recreational drugs. The demand for hard, potentially dangerous drugs would lower (probably). But people would still use them. Because "logic ain't got to do with it and why not?".

Don't get me wrong, I would love to live in a world hippie commune where everybody is free to do whatever if they hurt nobody else. But the real world doesn't work like that (the reason I believe Weber's theory is necessary for a state to function above a feudal level).

 

[flarty]

I dont think anyone here is questioning for a minute how potentially harmful any drug can be. The point of the matter is if people want to do drugs they will regardless of legality. Making them illegal only serves as a means to empower criminals with a way to make money, increases how harmful the drug is and which in turn presents the government with an oppurtunity to waste billions on fighting a losing war on drugs. It also attaches a stigma to drugs so when someone develops an addiction they will feel less inclined to seek help out of shame or any other unnecessary negativty as a result.

The solution is'nt prohibition, its education and regulation.

A fair point.

But if nobody is questioning the harmful effects of the drug why are people still using it?
Perhaps I don't understand human nature very well, but doing something just because it's illegal seems childish and utterly pointless. Apart from the obvious problems, it would completely disrupt society as a whole.

Let's imagine:

1) Cocaine is legalized as it is now:
People would just waste their entire life savings at the local Cocaine-Mart(TM). And they would still risk addiction and overdose. Reasonable people (I hope the majority) would avoid it, but what about impressionable/misguided people that don't know when to stop?

This is where the argument falls apart IMHO. The whole success of this endeavor hinges on people being reasonable and responsible.
Now let's be honest here: some people can/will think for themselves and some people just can't/won't. An argument can be made for education and responsible upbringing. But you can't magically make everybody a responsible adult (if there's a definition for that).
If not the state, witch has monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force (check out Max Weber [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence] a pretty cool guy), then who decides when you had enough drugs? Your friends, your family? But why should you listen to them?

If we were a race of logical beings we would be called Vulcans and we would be awesome. But alas we are not.

Let's take an example: a man overdoses on legal cocaine and leaves his wife and children with no financial support. Now legally he was only hurting himself so it would be ok...right? Nobody should step in and do something.
Also, if the amount of cocaine you can buy would be limited people would just turn to illegal sources because "hell I am unreasonable and I want more".

This is a slippery slope argument: if x and y are legal why not y and z too?
It can't bring anything to a conclusion since it only produces more questions.


2) The state legalizes a version of cocaine that gets you high with no consequences (lab-engineered magic cocaine). Everybody would be high at all times (the exact oppsite of Equilibrium). The demand would be astronomical, the legal supply would never be enough for everybody. People in poorer countries would never have the cash to buy it but they wanna be happy too. Hence illegal magic cocaine. It would still kill people but not the ones using it.

3) The state legalizes weak/mild recreational drugs. The demand for hard, potentially dangerous drugs would lower (probably). But people would still use them. Because "logic ain't got to do with it and why not?".

Don't get me wrong, I would love to live in a world hippie commune where everybody is free to do whatever if they hurt nobody else. But the real world doesn't work like that (the reason I believe Weber's theory is necessary for a state to function above a feudal level).

While i understand where you are coming from just look at people who smoke, thats highly addicitve (have you never seen water world? ) and highly dangerous. But the majority of people choose not to smoke due to health risks and its now considered a disgusting habit as opposed to a couple of decades ago. Now the reason it took so long for this to happen with tobacco is because there was multi billion £/$ profit making corpation behind the industry investing vast sums of money into lobbying and pseudo science.
With the abolishment of prohibition we are given the oppurtunity to regulate it by the state. Unfortunately you will allways get people who will go throw there lives in any number of ways be it drugs or fast food.

 

[Shpongled]

That's the point, you can't, at least not to the same degree of accuracy. Cocaine is very unpredictable, opiates and amphetamines and most other drugs in general aren't. Cocaine has multiple effects on multiple bodily systems and chemical balances etc (sodium channel action, and causes a wide variety of cascade effects that could kill one person and not another. Combined with how short it lasts leading to people redosing extremely often and the body really starts getting stressed.

By average dose i mean the average sort of dose any given user would take. Not a little just to wake you up, not a massive line to blow your head off, just an average line to get partying; which could kill you.

I mean, ok, obviously if i take half a microgram of coke i'm not going to die, but when it comes to average, standard doses people take in a session, coke is the one that could randomly kill someone.

SNIP



There are certain schemes taking place here right now with helping to treat heroin addiction with heroin itself, rather than substituting it for the inferior (but luckily for big pharma - legal) methadone, so maybe he's part of one of those.... Other than that, there's no way in hell you'd get a G of H for £40 here, so maybe some wires got crossed somewhere..

Yeah as I said, that's more down to the amounts people take, not that you can't tell what strength it is. People taking more because it's effects don't last as long is again an unregulated dosage issue. Saying "there is no safe dose" is just wrong. Say "the amounts casual users take it in are more likely to cause overdose" and I will agree with you.

Yes, I get diamorphine on prescription.

Not currently, about 10 years ago you could ,street price, much cheaper if you want to buy an 1/8th, less than £30/gram. It's about £50 now in big cities. Also I was referring to the approximate per gram price that the government pays for pharmaceutical grade diamorphine, including the costs of all the amps and what have you, that's another thing that drives the price up, they have to give me 6 x 30mg dry amps with another 6 water amps instead of just 1 200mg amp. Stupid.

Then we're in agreement. I admit i was wrong to word it the way i did. My real point was that, as you said, the doses people generally take on average are more likely to lead to OD, which is why i generally recommend people just don't even try it, or at least play VERY safe at first, whereas i'm happy to recommend something like LSD or mushies or even things like phetamine or drone to someone knowing that if they do go a little too far then there isn't really the same worry of OD. I've known so many people who've gone too far with coke on a night and paid for it with their lives, i'm sure it happens but it just doesn't seem often that friends have problems with mephedrone or amphetamine, even though they have been complete idiots with them in the past. (Edit: i don't want to seem like i'm advocating drug use too much here people, but if you do go for it make sure to educate yourself and be responsible!)

And yeh i asked my flatmate whose more into those sorts of circles and he says he could get a g for 40, so i edited that out. Have to admit i know little about the business side of H but i did always wonder why the prices for all the scrip opiates seem to be so much lower from euro sources so its interesting to find out why.

 

[Unsilenced]

This thread is likely going to be locked down...they don't like talking about drugs on this forum.

But the topic hasn't been locked yet so I'll say this:

Drugs are man-made substances, weed grows naturally. As such, weed is not a drug and there shouldn't be anything that keeps people from enjoying their "herbal supplements".

...

Um...

Ok, disregarding the whole idiocy of the "natural means it's good" thing (Lolopium), cocaine actually is refined from a plant as well.

There are plants/fungi/etc out there that can fuck you up. They're still drugs. They're psychoactive, therefore they are drugs.

You said yourself, "cocaine is refined from a plant". That means it's man-made. There's no cocaine plant out there you can go out, find, and do some lines from. It has to be prepared, therefore it is a drug.

The plants/fungi/etc out there that fuck you up, if taken by themselves, aren't drugs...they're plants/fungi/etc that can fuck you up.

And I never said "natural = good", I said "Weed grows naturally. As such, weed is not a drug and there shouldn't be anything that keeps people from enjoying their "herbal supplements". Specifically: weed. I don't believe I ever made mention of any other plants/fungi/etc, nor did I ever make the connection that we should go out and start eating/licking/sniffing everything we find in nature.

In short, all I said was that weed wasn't truly a drug, and I stand by that.

But they're still drugs. The fact that these things occur in nature does nothing to make them better, and if you agree with that, then I have to wonder what you think the difference is between a refined plant like cocaine and one that's picked like weed.

drug/drəg/
Noun:
A substance that has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body, in particular.

Note that there is no exception there that says "Unless it's all natural and organic and shit."

Weed's a drug. So are shrooms and opium.

*sunglasses* Deal with it.


EDIT: Also, do you have any idea how much effort man has put into making weed what it is today? A caveman could not go out and find the type of plants people smoke these days. That took a few hundred years of work by... you guessed it, man.

To your edit: I've already been over that with sir Flarty.

As for your definition, in the words of Adam from Myth Busters: "I reject your reality, and substitute my own." I still say weed isn't a drug, it's a plant.

::clown nose:: Deal with it.

Well fine then. If we're just making up definitions for words now, you're a drug.



Now, good sir. *monocle* Make arrangements to cope with it.

 

[RJ 17]

This thread is likely going to be locked down...they don't like talking about drugs on this forum.

But the topic hasn't been locked yet so I'll say this:

Drugs are man-made substances, weed grows naturally. As such, weed is not a drug and there shouldn't be anything that keeps people from enjoying their "herbal supplements".

...

Um...

Ok, disregarding the whole idiocy of the "natural means it's good" thing (Lolopium), cocaine actually is refined from a plant as well.

There are plants/fungi/etc out there that can fuck you up. They're still drugs. They're psychoactive, therefore they are drugs.

You said yourself, "cocaine is refined from a plant". That means it's man-made. There's no cocaine plant out there you can go out, find, and do some lines from. It has to be prepared, therefore it is a drug.

The plants/fungi/etc out there that fuck you up, if taken by themselves, aren't drugs...they're plants/fungi/etc that can fuck you up.

And I never said "natural = good", I said "Weed grows naturally. As such, weed is not a drug and there shouldn't be anything that keeps people from enjoying their "herbal supplements". Specifically: weed. I don't believe I ever made mention of any other plants/fungi/etc, nor did I ever make the connection that we should go out and start eating/licking/sniffing everything we find in nature.

In short, all I said was that weed wasn't truly a drug, and I stand by that.

But they're still drugs. The fact that these things occur in nature does nothing to make them better, and if you agree with that, then I have to wonder what you think the difference is between a refined plant like cocaine and one that's picked like weed.

drug/drəg/
Noun:
A substance that has a physiological effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body, in particular.

Note that there is no exception there that says "Unless it's all natural and organic and shit."

Weed's a drug. So are shrooms and opium.

*sunglasses* Deal with it.


EDIT: Also, do you have any idea how much effort man has put into making weed what it is today? A caveman could not go out and find the type of plants people smoke these days. That took a few hundred years of work by... you guessed it, man.

To your edit: I've already been over that with sir Flarty.

As for your definition, in the words of Adam from Myth Busters: "I reject your reality, and substitute my own." I still say weed isn't a drug, it's a plant.

::clown nose:: Deal with it.

Well fine then. If we're just making up definitions for words now, you're a drug.



Now, good sir. *monocle* Make arrangements to cope with it.

Indeed, Nine Inch Nails once said to me "YOU ARE THE PERFECT DRUG! THE PERFECT DRUG! THE PERFECT DRUG!" So I shall take your words as confirmation of that fact.

And if you don't appreciate my addictiveness...::Groucho Marx mask:: See to it that the forms for moving on are filled out in triplicate.

 

[DirtyJunkieScum]

And yeh i asked my flatmate whose more into those sorts of circles and he says he could get a g for 40, so i edited that out. Have to admit i know little about the business side of H but i did always wonder why the prices for all the scrip opiates seem to be so much lower from euro sources so its interesting to find out why.

The really moronic thing about it is that diamorphine has been legal in the UK all along, if you've had a serious operation in a British hospital then chances are that's what they gave you. GPs are allowed to prescribe it (although not for heroin addiction since...umm...I forget, some time in the 70's or 80's IIRC), yet it costs the government loads because...well, in my more cynical moods I think it's because half of them own shares in the pharma companies that supply the stuff so they make laws to make sure they have to buy the more expensive stuff for "quality assurance" etc. In less cynical times I think it's because...ummm...probably the same. Europe tends to be happy to use high grade heroin seizures as a base whereas the UK has to make sure it's all done in a lab from specially grown poppies (that's what I heard anyway, not from my CPN so I can't guarantee that's true).

 

[Quaxar]

As for your definition, in the words of Adam from Myth Busters: "I reject your reality, and substitute my own." I still say weed isn't a drug, it's a plant.

Damn right. And I'd go even further and would like to proclaim that oregano isn't condiment but a plant!

Also, in reference to a prior post of yours I'd just like to state that you can achieve a high by chewing cocoa leaves just fine. In fact, the bioavailability is even higher than taking it nasally though the dosage of a single leave is of course smaller than the powder.

Legalize and regulate all of them From heroin to weed. The most intoxicating drug on the planet is already legal, as is the deadliest (alcohol and cigarettes respectively).

The most... intoxicating and deadly drug on the planet... I, um... what? This is either trolling, ignorance in regard of various illegal substances or I'm missing an important point there. I'm sorry but care to elaborate please?

 

[Angry_squirrel]

Yeah, once. I'd worked out that not all drugs were as bad as society makes out, and was convinced that applied to coke too.
I've done some proper research since, and I wouldn't do it again

 

[Kelethor]

sorry, nothing hard for me.