Principia Discordia

THE PROPITIATION OF ST GULIK
Upon Commencement Of A Journey
being a lesser rite reclaimed by the FRUtestant Sect of the Holy Eristocratic Church of The Road Cone Holy

The driver* intones the blessing* of St. Gulik:

O blessed St Gulik, Guru of the Ganja, beloved of hitchhikers, protector of dumpster divers, and others of much ilk, ride shotgun with me. May the highway patrol be distracted by shiny objects. May the axe murderers give me a smile and a nod and let me go on my way. May the sun shine on my road, except when it rains. May the beers be cold and my fellow travelers beautiful. May the weed stay lit and most powerful. May the rental car* be blessed and brought into your fold. And if you don't listen to prayer, then to hell with you.

The driver takes a sip of coffee*, and intones the mystical phrase, "gooble gobba." The cup is passed around the passengers, who repeat the driver's actions and words.

The driver next takes a nibble of a snack*, intones "gooble gobba", and likewise passes the snack around.

The driver finally takes a hit from a joint, intones "gooble gobba", and passes the joint around, until nothing but a roach is left.

When all have partaken, the driver breaks off a piece of the snack and places it underneath a tire in such a manner that it will be run over when the car begins to roll. This is followed by a splash of coffee, also beneath the tire, and the remaining "roach" joint and the driver completes the incantation:

Gobble gobba
Gobble gobba
We accept you
We accept you
Gobble gobba
Gobble gobba
One of us

The driver finishes the coffee and snack, sharing with the passengers as desired. Then the driver says "Let's go."*
______
______

driver: or his designee, although the National League of Dynamic Discord refuses to accept the designated driver rule.

intones the blessing: Back in the day, it was traditional to give the entire blessing. In modern times, however, the practice has arisen of posting the blessing to the internets and incorporating it by reference; e.g., "O blessed St. Gulik, etc."

may this rental car: In cases where the vehicle is not a rental, or in fact not a car, the driver may substitute "may this vehicle".

coffee: or tea, or energy drink, or fizzy sugar-water.

snack: Cookies and chocolate are most traditional, but let's face it: Gulik is a cockroach. He'll eat anything. The Venerable Red Vines of Kallisticon have been used to great effect, but they are few and hard to come by.

Let's go: or something equally clever.
______
______

NOTE: Among the other blessings for a traveler are: sharing food or other needful items with fellow travelers; choosing the nicer route over the faster one; and picking up hitchhikers. One should hold close the words of Beatus Ffungo, who said, "Traffic is people."

So, you're advocating driving while stoned?


Fantastic.

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 12:53:57 PM
So, you're advocating driving while stoned?


Fantastic.

Why not?

Pretty much the same reason I'm not a big fan of driving while drunk.

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 04:24:00 PM
Pretty much the same reason I'm not a big fan of driving while drunk.

Well, I can understand that... though, in my experience the two chemicals don't act much the same at all. People drive under the influence of drugs all the time, from Caffeine and Nicotine to Tryptophan to Who Knows What sort of pep pills, anti-depressants, painkillers etc. I think THC is much less of a concern than quite a bit of the legal stuff.

Of course, that's not necessarily true if we're talking about one person sucking down three joints of Hydro Kind Bud, however it may be true for a single joint shared among a few people (as the OP mentioned).

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 14, 2007, 04:30:36 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 04:24:00 PM
Pretty much the same reason I'm not a big fan of driving while drunk.

Well, I can understand that... though, in my experience the two chemicals don't act much the same at all. People drive under the influence of drugs all the time, from Caffeine and Nicotine to Tryptophan to Who Knows What sort of pep pills, anti-depressants, painkillers etc. I think THC is much less of a concern than quite a bit of the legal stuff.

Of course, that's not necessarily true if we're talking about one person sucking down three joints of Hydro Kind Bud, however it may be true for a single joint shared among a few people (as the OP mentioned).

Pot has a different degree of impact for everyone, much like alcohol.

Driving while under the influence of alcohol is stupid. As is driving under the influence of pot.

There's probably people out there who can do it. But as someone who has been a passenger in many cars driven by people who insist vehemently that pot is a perfectly safe "driving drug," I can state with a degree of certainty that the impact pot has on a person is much less noticeable to that person than the impact alcohol has. Stoned people tend to be pretty shitty drivers. Really slow and cautious, so it seems less dangerous than alcohol, but still pretty shitty.

It just seems really pointless to do. But what seems REALLY stupid is making this whole ceremony out of it and encouraging it. I mean, most people I've met I wouldn't encourage to drive when completely sober. So adding any chemicals to the mix? Not needed. :wink:

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 14, 2007, 04:30:36 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 04:24:00 PM
Pretty much the same reason I'm not a big fan of driving while drunk.

Well, I can understand that... though, in my experience the two chemicals don't act much the same at all. People drive under the influence of drugs all the time, from Caffeine and Nicotine to Tryptophan to Who Knows What sort of pep pills, anti-depressants, painkillers etc. I think THC is much less of a concern than quite a bit of the legal stuff.

Of course, that's not necessarily true if we're talking about one person sucking down three joints of Hydro Kind Bud, however it may be true for a single joint shared among a few people (as the OP mentioned).

Both can and do reduce reaction time.  Reduced reaction time can cause accidents.  They react same enough in my book to want to keep them out of automobiles. 

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on August 14, 2007, 04:35:41 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 14, 2007, 04:30:36 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 04:24:00 PM
Pretty much the same reason I'm not a big fan of driving while drunk.

Well, I can understand that... though, in my experience the two chemicals don't act much the same at all. People drive under the influence of drugs all the time, from Caffeine and Nicotine to Tryptophan to Who Knows What sort of pep pills, anti-depressants, painkillers etc. I think THC is much less of a concern than quite a bit of the legal stuff.

Of course, that's not necessarily true if we're talking about one person sucking down three joints of Hydro Kind Bud, however it may be true for a single joint shared among a few people (as the OP mentioned).

Pot has a different degree of impact for everyone, much like alcohol.

Driving while under the influence of alcohol is stupid. As is driving under the influence of pot.

There's probably people out there who can do it. But as someone who has been a passenger in many cars driven by people who insist vehemently that pot is a perfectly safe "driving drug," I can state with a degree of certainty that the impact pot has on a person is much less noticeable to that person than the impact alcohol has. Stoned people tend to be pretty shitty drivers. Really slow and cautious, so it seems less dangerous than alcohol, but still pretty shitty.

It just seems really pointless to do. But what seems REALLY stupid is making this whole ceremony out of it and encouraging it. I mean, most people I've met I wouldn't encourage to drive when completely sober. So adding any chemicals to the mix? Not needed. :wink:

D-Cup = riding the correct motorcycle

Getting fucked up and driving, for me, kind of negates the whole "victimless crime" defense most chemical junkies give.

Fine, get stoned in your house (I know I do), but leave the 2 ton potential wrecking ball in the driveway.

Also correct motorcycle.

Is it worse to go on a shooting spree while stoned, drunk, or sober?

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on August 14, 2007, 05:11:55 PM
Is it worse to go on a shooting spree while stoned, drunk, or sober?

d) Alone

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 05:08:18 PM
Getting fucked up and driving, for me, kind of negates the whole "victimless crime" defense most chemical junkies give.

Fine, get stoned in your house (I know I do), but leave the 2 ton potential wrecking ball in the driveway.

Nicely put.

Alternately, get stoned in your house and then go sing Disney songs on Boston Common.



...Do we have a :halo: emote? :lol:

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on August 14, 2007, 05:11:55 PM
Is it worse to go on a shooting spree while stoned, drunk, or sober?

Sober.  You might have a chance at an temporary insanity defence if you get fucked up.


-or-


Drunk.  Your aim gets worse.

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on August 14, 2007, 05:11:55 PM
Is it worse to go on a shooting spree while stoned, drunk, or sober?

It's all about intent. I don't take shooting sprees to get around town. but if you do, carpool! it saves bullets.

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 14, 2007, 04:30:36 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 04:24:00 PM
Pretty much the same reason I'm not a big fan of driving while drunk.

Well, I can understand that... though, in my experience the two chemicals don't act much the same at all. People drive under the influence of drugs all the time, from Caffeine and Nicotine to Tryptophan to Who Knows What sort of pep pills, anti-depressants, painkillers etc. I think THC is much less of a concern than quite a bit of the legal stuff.

Of course, that's not necessarily true if we're talking about one person sucking down three joints of Hydro Kind Bud, however it may be true for a single joint shared among a few people (as the OP mentioned).

A bullet in the head will kill you with a higher percentage but won't endanger others.

Did we all forget what Jerry Mungo said?

--"have a drink, have drive, go out and see what you can find."

He has Gold records. GOLD

Remember that...

Quick question, with all respect due...


Why the fuck should we care what Jerry Mungo says?

Seriously, if we're going by Gold status why not skip Mr. Mungo and go right to the Multi-Platinum Spice Girls?

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 22, 2007, 08:21:39 PM
Seriously, if we're going by Gold status why not skip Mr. Mungo and go right to the Multi-Platinum Spice Girls?

And we all know what they said...

IF YOU CAN'T DANCE
IF YOU CAN'T DANCE
IF YOU CAN'T DANCE TO THIS THEN YOU CAN'T DO NOTHIN' FOR ME BABY

-DC
Can't do nothin' for them :oops:

Still with the theme of 'not caring' but...I thought the band was called 'Mungo Jerry'.

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on August 22, 2007, 08:23:21 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 22, 2007, 08:21:39 PM
Seriously, if we're going by Gold status why not skip Mr. Mungo and go right to the Multi-Platinum Spice Girls?

And we all know what they said...

IF YOU CAN'T DANCE
IF YOU CAN'T DANCE
IF YOU CAN'T DANCE TO THIS THEN YOU CAN'T DO NOTHIN' FOR ME BABY

-DC
Can't do nothin' for them :oops:

It's ok DC, you can do plenty for me... and you won't have to dance to bad music  :lulz:

Quote from: Mangrove on August 22, 2007, 08:24:04 PM
Still with the theme of 'not caring' but...I thought the band was called 'Mungo Jerry'.

  No you're wrong i care, and yes you're right it's Mungo Jerry.  While Mungo Jerry does have GOLD albums, DWI or DUI is/are not a good idea.  This Discordian (the OP) has referenced marijuana more than one time before, what do you think about what he wrote vs. driving while high/drunk/stoned?  That's kinda a diffrnt topic, ne?

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 14, 2007, 04:41:16 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 14, 2007, 04:30:36 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 14, 2007, 04:24:00 PM
Pretty much the same reason I'm not a big fan of driving while drunk.

Well, I can understand that... though, in my experience the two chemicals don't act much the same at all. People drive under the influence of drugs all the time, from Caffeine and Nicotine to Tryptophan to Who Knows What sort of pep pills, anti-depressants, painkillers etc. I think THC is much less of a concern than quite a bit of the legal stuff.

Of course, that's not necessarily true if we're talking about one person sucking down three joints of Hydro Kind Bud, however it may be true for a single joint shared among a few people (as the OP mentioned).

Both can and do reduce reaction time.  Reduced reaction time can cause accidents.  They react same enough in my book to want to keep them out of automobiles. 

Though I don't think it's a brilliant idea to drive stoned, I'd like to see your evidence that pot reduces your reaction time.

According to studies in the UK, US, Australia and Holland, "reaction times to motorway hazards were not significantly affected [by smoking pot]."

Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1068625.stm)

http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm (http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm)

QuoteEffects of smoking are generally felt within a few minutes and peak in 10 to 30 minutes. They include dry mouth and throat, increased heart rate, impaired coordination and balance, delayed reaction time, and diminished short-term memory. Moderate doses tend to induce a sense of well-being and a dreamy state of relaxation that encourages fantasies, renders some users highly suggestible, and distorts perception (making it dangerous to operate machinery, drive a car or boat, or ride a bicycle). Stronger doses prompt more intense and often disturbing reactions including paranoia and hallucinations.

The thing is, reactions are going to vary depending on the makeup of the pot.  Different dealers cut it with different things, add chemicals, etc.  There may be some varieties that don't produce these reactions, to these extremes, though, I would tend to think that the draw to marijuana for a lot of people IS these kinds of reactions. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 23, 2007, 01:06:39 PM
http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm (http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm)

QuoteEffects of smoking are generally felt within a few minutes and peak in 10 to 30 minutes. They include dry mouth and throat, increased heart rate, impaired coordination and balance, delayed reaction time, and diminished short-term memory. Moderate doses tend to induce a sense of well-being and a dreamy state of relaxation that encourages fantasies, renders some users highly suggestible, and distorts perception (making it dangerous to operate machinery, drive a car or boat, or ride a bicycle). Stronger doses prompt more intense and often disturbing reactions including paranoia and hallucinations.

The thing is, reactions are going to vary depending on the makeup of the pot.  Different dealers cut it with different things, add chemicals, etc.  There may be some varieties that don't produce these reactions, to these extremes, though, I would tend to think that the draw to marijuana for a lot of people IS these kinds of reactions. 

I would agree with that.

Also, RWHN makes a really good point about what they cut it with. I smoked with some friends many years back and when we were walking away from where we had smoked, down to the diner to get some munchies, my whole body basically shut down. I could give an involved narrative of the colors and freaky sensations, but... Point remains that, whatever that shit was cut with, I'm glad I wasn't behind the wheel of a car when I basically completely shut down and did a giant faceplant onto the sidewalk. :lol:

-DC
Finds the entire incident hilarious in hindsight, but was a little scared at the time

And honestly, at least the data I've seen, most people who regularly use marijuana aren't using it alone.  Hell, most illicit drugs that are used are used in combination with something else, usually alcohol.  So, from a practical standpoint, it probably really isn't too enlightening anymore to study the sole effects of one chemical on a body.  It's interesting, but in the real world it doesn't work that way. 

Oh, and I am solely speaking with my professional hat on here.  Please not to be labelling me the board NARC.  I don't give a fuck what people do in their personal lives.  Just those that I get paid to care about, which is Maine adolescents. 

Yes, the youth of Maine shouldn't be abusing drugs, they should be giving random blowjobs to classmates, like normal children.



LMNO
-kinda wishes he went to Milton Academy.

LMNO is right.

I mean, is there any problem that can't be solved with some oral sex?!

Herpes.

 :eek:

Well, that shut me right up!

Hey, you asked.

And, in all fairness, I should've known that if anyone could deliver an answer to that, it's you. :p

Actually, it crossed my mind, but I thought I'd leave it to the master.   :lol:

 :digtbk:

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 23, 2007, 01:06:39 PM
http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm (http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm)

QuoteEffects of smoking are generally felt within a few minutes and peak in 10 to 30 minutes. They include dry mouth and throat, increased heart rate, impaired coordination and balance, delayed reaction time, and diminished short-term memory. Moderate doses tend to induce a sense of well-being and a dreamy state of relaxation that encourages fantasies, renders some users highly suggestible, and distorts perception (making it dangerous to operate machinery, drive a car or boat, or ride a bicycle). Stronger doses prompt more intense and often disturbing reactions including paranoia and hallucinations.

The thing is, reactions are going to vary depending on the makeup of the pot.  Different dealers cut it with different things, add chemicals, etc.  There may be some varieties that don't produce these reactions, to these extremes, though, I would tend to think that the draw to marijuana for a lot of people IS these kinds of reactions. 

Hrmmm, maybe its because I live in Ohio and the Green runs pretty freely, but I can honestly say that I've never smoked pot that was 'cut' with anything. I've known lots of dealers, growers, etc and cutting Pot just doesn't seem to happen around here. Now I'd never try any of the coke, ice etc that flourishes around here, but MJ as far as I can tell is just MJ, in Ohio.

yeah I'm pretty sure I would know it if it was cut with something. People don't really cut pot with anything (as far as I can tell) - what would be the point? the amount of weight you'd need to add to increase the price would be visible.

On my vacation to Amsterdam, we went to this marijuana museum. Our tour guide was saying that the headache, confusion, general denseness that people get from pot is due to the pesticides used on the crops. The pesticides are necessary if the grower is harvesting a huge field of cannabis, but they create most of the sensations that people don't like about being high. She recommended homegrown, organic pot, and directed us to a few places in Amsterdam where we could sample some. I must say, it didn't leave me with the headache and tongue-tied-ness that I got after smoking at the Bulldog cafe, a larger chain of coffee shops.

Cutting weed with, say, coke or pcp isn't something you do to enhance the value of the weed - it's something you do to sell coke or pcp. Sell herb laced with coke/pcp and then sell the same people unlaced weed - they'll be "missing" something with the high, wherein you work them over to what you laced the pot with, thus gaining a profitable customer rather than just another stoner. Ghetto weed (the stuff you actually buy on the street in dime bags) is the most common thing to get laced, but it sometimes pops up in other places.

Drug dealers can be bastards that way.

Also, it's pretty obvious to anyone that has smoked a fair deal of weed when it's laced with something, both in the taste and in the effects. I've smoked weed laced with coke, weed laced with pcp (not fun ... NOT FUN), and weed laced with heroin, and yes, it was a *puff-puff ... what the hell is that taste? ... DAMMIT* kind of thing.

As an aside, smoking a small amount of opium in your paraphernalia of choice will give the piece an amazing taste for months. I don't particularly care for opium or opiates beyond morphine in a medical environment, but DAMN it makes a bowl taste great for ages.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 23, 2007, 02:37:10 PM
And honestly, at least the data I've seen, most people who regularly use marijuana aren't using it alone.  Hell, most illicit drugs that are used are used in combination with something else, usually alcohol.  So, from a practical standpoint, it probably really isn't too enlightening anymore to study the sole effects of one chemical on a body.  It's interesting, but in the real world it doesn't work that way. 

Oh, and I am solely speaking with my professional hat on here.  Please not to be labelling me the board NARC.  I don't give a fuck what people do in their personal lives.  Just those that I get paid to care about, which is Maine adolescents. 

That's probably true that most cannabis users mix it with other substances, but I've rarely had my pot cut with anything. That's a paranoid scare tactic that doesn't happen often in the real world. And it's not a particularly effective one if your target audience is angsty adolescents. I was fucking stoked to have MOAR dRuGz in my dRuGz when I was still a 16 year old full of self-pity and venom. I didn't give a flying fuck what it was either.

The fact of the matter is that it's too expensive for weed peddler's to cut an already effective product with something the customer probably does not want or expect. That's also going to fuck with their reputation and repeat business. People may mix their drugs together of their own volition, but you remove that autonomy by cutting their dope and most people will not take kindly to it.

If you're going to make a case against pot, don't use a weak argument and a shitty source. That site ADMITS to speculation and genuinely appears to be ignorant of the historical and global contexts that make many of their claims utterly ridiculous. Gateway bullshit, medically questionable bullshit, "hallucination" bullshit (mild at best), and all sorts of decontextualized OH NOES crap.

And that's what pisses me off.

These anti-drug shits that your source is iconic of need to stop cutting their arguments with lies because a lot of kids will find out half the line being towed is a giant crock of turds. The entire set of arguments get called into question, even the legitimate parts when they do that. It's much more dangerous than just sticking with the unassailable truth. Which is pot is unlikely to hurt you much. But your pot-enhanced stupidity easily could.

Heh, speaking of impartial sources....recently, the daily national papers ran a bunch of scare headlines about how NEW STRONGER POT COULD MAKE YOU HAVE A MENTAL BREAKDOWN!

Which is funny, because according to The Lancet, it only has an effect on those who are going to have a psychotic episode at some point anyway.

But, when the government is on a campaign to reclassify a drug, facts get thrown out the window.

I think that as someone with experience in the field of green... I've never seen or heard of anyone with firsthand knowledge of their pot getting laced or cut with anything. Now, I'm not exactly hanging out with the dealers from the Dimension of Government Propaganda so maybe that explains it, I dunno.

However, I do think that various strains have notably different effects, which might explain why some people have thought that their pot was laced. I don't know.

Most of the people that I know who use pot, may either smoke or drink as much as an average person. However, I only know one individual who does other illicit substances on any sort of regular basis. I know dozens of other people whose only illicit substance is pot and some hippies *ahem* might occasionally use LSD or Shrooms, but anyone on LSD or Shrooms shouldn't be near a vehicle Marijuana or Not!

Quote from: Netaungrot on August 24, 2007, 01:11:29 AM
That's probably true that most cannabis users mix it with other substances, but I've rarely had my pot cut with anything. That's a paranoid scare tactic that doesn't happen often in the real world. And it's not a particularly effective one if your target audience is angsty adolescents. I was fucking stoked to have MOAR dRuGz in my dRuGz when I was still a 16 year old full of self-pity and venom. I didn't give a flying fuck what it was either.

If you're going to make a case against pot, don't use a weak argument and a shitty source. That site ADMITS to speculation and genuinely appears to be ignorant of the historical and global contexts that make many of their claims utterly ridiculous. Gateway bullshit, medically questionable bullshit, "hallucination" bullshit (mild at best), and all sorts of decontextualized OH NOES crap.

And that's what pisses me off.

These anti-drug shits that your source is iconic of need to stop cutting their arguments with lies because a lot of kids will find out half the line being towed is a giant crock of turds. The entire set of arguments get called into question, even the legitimate parts when they do that. It's much more dangerous than just sticking with the unassailable truth. Which is pot is unlikely to hurt you much. But your pot-enhanced stupidity easily could.

To be honest, I just googled and posted what I saw.  I'm on vacation so I don't have my materials handy, but I do know that there is research and studies that at least suggest that pot smoking can affect reaction time.  Even if it's only "possible" that it will have that affect, my point is that even the "possibility" is reason enough to not encourage someone to drive a car after smoking. 

As far as making a case against pot, I fully realize that is a tall order.  In fact, in all seriousness, when it comes to illicit drugs and drug abuse prevention, marijuana is on the bottom of the list.  Because, even within the prevention community there is not agreement on whether or not it should be illegal.  Me personally, I don't give a fuck either way.  I don't use it, and I don't care if others use it.  I would only care if someone who was under the influence ran over my kid and/or wife.  But beyond that, I know that kids are gonna smoke it.  It is easier for them to get than alcohol.  I personally would rather focus on alcohol and the rapid increase in prescription drug abuse.  Those two categories of substances, especially in combination, are a much bigger threat to young people than marijuana.

I smoked pot that was dusted.


The fuckes didn't tell me at the time.


Not very fun.

if i'd ever got pot that was cut with some kind of harddrug and i (or anyone else) would find out (which should be rather easy, going by your stories?), they'd be out of business within the week. license withdrawn. building shut down. end of story, and they know it damn well.

Well, see, that's one of the up sides of legal pot: it can be regulated like that, so that when you buy pot, you only get pot.

Whereas what would someone in the US do? Go to the cops and be like, "So I was smoking some pot when I realized it was cut with coke. Oh noes!" My gut instinct tells me that would be a silly idea. :wink:

Having some sort of system in place to make sure that people aren't getting fucked over is one of the best things about legality, IMO. Then you aren't running those stupid risks of getting dope cut with other dope. And that sucks.

-DC
More reasons why I almost never smoke, ITT :p

It's pathetically easy to avoid getting laced weed. Just avoid dime bags in the states. Get your weed an eighth or quarter at a time and you will rarely if ever encounter it being laced with anything. The law in the states isn't exactly a deterrent for this, nor is public reputation (they'd go to jail for just as long whether the weed is laced or not). Anyone that sells laced weed doesn't care about whether or not you buy their weed again - they want you to get hooked on whatever they laced it with. Anyone that laces their own weed and doesn't tell you should be beaten severely, then avoided in the future.

For dealers in the states, weed is rather low-profit compared to the "hard drugs", and consequently your serious, high-profit-minded drug dealer will manipulate things to enforce the "gateway drug" reputation of weed via lacing - and moving the customer to the high-profit "hard drugs". Avoid those people and you'll also avoid buying laced weed.

Would this be an issue if it was legal? Hopefully not, since there would be regulations involved (and the high taxes levied on sales to pay for the regulations/regulators). However, here in the states it's not legal, so you have to keep an eye on who you deal with.

Oh yeah, definitely agreed that it's easy to avoid getting laced stuff.

But still lame. Without lacing, I don't believe that weed would really qualify as a "gateway" drug. I personally am pretty ambivalent about weed--I smoke it sometimes when other people have it, but I don't really care whether or not it's in my life. But I would like to see it legalized if only to make it safer for those who do use it regularly, and to get rid of all the arrests/jailings of people who really shouldn't be put away. I mean, smoking a bowl? Not the end of the world.

Someone that does something stupid and endangers others/harms others because of smoking a bowl? Now we're talking about something a little different. But much like alcohol itself is not a problem, but rather how people act while using alcohol, I believe the same applies to pot.

Quote from: LMNO on August 24, 2007, 02:38:55 PM
I smoked pot that was dusted.


The fuckes didn't tell me at the time.


Not very fun.

Damn. I must be lucky living within an hour or so of Meigs County ;-)

I think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PMI think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

you mean, just like alcohol.

whether or not you become a giggling moron pretty much depends on the dosage and how used to it you are.

imagine somebody who hardly ever drinks chugging away on a double whiskey.

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PM
I think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

Ah thats right, its the governments job to stop people from doing what they want to do as leisure activity.

ratatosk makes a better point than I did, ITT

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 24, 2007, 08:39:46 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PM
I think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

Ah thats right, its the governments job to stop people from doing what they want to do as leisure activity.

I dunno. I'm not a fan of heroin or cocaine or things like that being readily available, because that shit is dangerous.

I realize that I don't have a leg to stand on, argument-wise, but just throwing in my two cents anyways. :wink: Otherwise, I agree with you and Trip0.

Quote from: triple zero on August 24, 2007, 08:36:04 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PMI think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

you mean, just like alcohol.

whether or not you become a giggling moron pretty much depends on the dosage and how used to it you are.

imagine somebody who hardly ever drinks chugging away on a double whiskey.

Please note the phrasing:  "a hit".

Not "18 hits", not, "sucked an enormous amount of smoke", but "a hit".

a single beer won't get you fucked up.  and you're supposed to sip whiskey.

If BMW said the girl took a hit out of a 5-foot (1.5 meter) bong, that might be different.

But how can you possibly smoke in moderation if one hit fucks you up?

Even a lightweight drinker won't be hammered after one tequila shot.

Actually, I do know someone who is drunk after one beer, and passing out after two.

It's pretty sad, actually. :lol:

But I do understand your point and realize that she is the exception and not the rule, by far!

Quote from: LMNO on August 24, 2007, 08:50:08 PM

Quote from: triple zero on August 24, 2007, 08:36:04 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PMI think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

you mean, just like alcohol.

whether or not you become a giggling moron pretty much depends on the dosage and how used to it you are.

imagine somebody who hardly ever drinks chugging away on a double whiskey.

Please note the phrasing:  "a hit".

Not "18 hits", not, "sucked an enormous amount of smoke", but "a hit".

a single beer won't get you fucked up.  and you're supposed to sip whiskey.

If BMW said the girl took a hit out of a 5-foot (1.5 meter) bong, that might be different.

But how can you possibly smoke in moderation if one hit fucks you up?

Even a lightweight drinker won't be hammered after one tequila shot.

Light puffs or cutting cannabis into small pieces is truly a baffling procedure.

:roll:

If you haven't got the brain power to figure out how to do that, you clearly have bigger problems.

there's a difference between dangerous+highly addictive and making people act totally stupid, IMO.

i don't think it's the job of the government to stop people from becoming a giggling moron. and even if that should be the case, i think they should start prohibiting bad sitcoms. seriously, i've seen people watch that shit for like 5 minutes and become a total giggling moron.

Quote from: LMNO on August 24, 2007, 08:50:08 PM

Quote from: triple zero on August 24, 2007, 08:36:04 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PMI think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

you mean, just like alcohol.

whether or not you become a giggling moron pretty much depends on the dosage and how used to it you are.

imagine somebody who hardly ever drinks chugging away on a double whiskey.

Please note the phrasing:  "a hit".

Not "18 hits", not, "sucked an enormous amount of smoke", but "a hit".

a single beer won't get you fucked up.  and you're supposed to sip whiskey.

If BMW said the girl took a hit out of a 5-foot (1.5 meter) bong, that might be different.

But how can you possibly smoke in moderation if one hit fucks you up?

Even a lightweight drinker won't be hammered after one tequila shot.

o

well if "a hit" was meant as literally one hit, i call bullshit. "one hit plus two seconds to a giggling moron" is not something i believe can happen.

but let's say it was 30 seconds.

i know myself, i don't have a very high tolerance either. but i often enough get passed a joint of which 3 hits make me very stoned (but not a giggling moron, sorry to dissapoint). which is why i only buy lighter weed, and put less stuff into it when i get to roll it myself.

Quote from: LMNO on August 24, 2007, 08:50:08 PM

Quote from: triple zero on August 24, 2007, 08:36:04 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PMI think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

you mean, just like alcohol.

whether or not you become a giggling moron pretty much depends on the dosage and how used to it you are.

imagine somebody who hardly ever drinks chugging away on a double whiskey.

Please note the phrasing:  "a hit".

Not "18 hits", not, "sucked an enormous amount of smoke", but "a hit".

a single beer won't get you fucked up.  and you're supposed to sip whiskey.

If BMW said the girl took a hit out of a 5-foot (1.5 meter) bong, that might be different.

But how can you possibly smoke in moderation if one hit fucks you up?

Even a lightweight drinker won't be hammered after one tequila shot.

Thats actually what I meant. A person can drink a beer and not have any anoying effects. One hit from a joint however, and this girls intelligence dropped below IQ 80. I don't really care what other people do, and the part about the legality of it was a joke. Just know that if you ever toke up around me don't expect me to stick around or come back, because I can't stand an annoying fool.

On the flip side, a person can actually still be interesting and satisfying to talk to when drinking alcohol.

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PM
I think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

Bullshit.

I know plenty of people who smoke in moderation and retain both their intelligence and composure.

I can also dig up a study that shows that while it takes longer to complete things, IQ is not significantly effected in adults.

Sounds more like you were being a judgmental prick than she was doing anything moronic.

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 09:16:53 PM

Quote from: LMNO on August 24, 2007, 08:50:08 PM

Quote from: triple zero on August 24, 2007, 08:36:04 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 08:09:07 PMI think it should be illegal because even the smallest amount makes people act totally STUPID.

Srsly, I decided I would never try it when I saw an intelligent young woman (womyn?) take a hit in Berlin, and in two seconds she became a total giggling moron.

you mean, just like alcohol.

whether or not you become a giggling moron pretty much depends on the dosage and how used to it you are.

imagine somebody who hardly ever drinks chugging away on a double whiskey.

Please note the phrasing:  "a hit".

Not "18 hits", not, "sucked an enormous amount of smoke", but "a hit".

a single beer won't get you fucked up.  and you're supposed to sip whiskey.

If BMW said the girl took a hit out of a 5-foot (1.5 meter) bong, that might be different.

But how can you possibly smoke in moderation if one hit fucks you up?

Even a lightweight drinker won't be hammered after one tequila shot.

Thats actually what I meant. A person can drink a beer and not have any anoying effects. One hit from a joint however, and this girls intelligence dropped below IQ 80. I don't really care what other people do, and the part about the legality of it was a joke. Just know that if you ever toke up around me don't expect me to stick around or come back, because I can't stand an annoying fool.

On the flip side, a person can actually still be interesting and satisfying to talk to when drinking alcohol.

BMW, I gotta say that your experience seems incredibly unlikely, not impossible, but incredibly, incredibly unlikely. A single hit of pot could turn you into a giggling moron, if the pot in question were perhaps White Rhino or some other highly cultivated strain and the person in question had only smoked once or twice.

However, I can tell you from experience that I can be high as a kite and no one can tell the difference. I'm just finishing up a two year project that involved designing an encryption architecture to protect the Credit Card data in our enterprise. The architecture had to cover AS400, Mainframe, Oracle, SQL, DB2, SAP, Linux, HP-UX and Windows. I am on occasion stoned as fuck while doing this stuff and there's no issue at all, no giggling nor any loss of IQ.

In fact, most of those crazy people that have examined pot using that Scientific method you seem to like ( :wink: ) come to a very different conclusion about marijuana.

Perhaps you witnessed an anomaly, with the prohibition on the study of Marijuana it seems possible that there may be some over the counter or prescription drugs that might cause such a reaction, or perhaps your Thinker and Prover were having one over on you.

At the least, I would say that your experience is neither normal, common nor indicative of how mosbunal people act when smoking pot. Perhaps you found the exception?

NOTE: I do have a friend that gets drunk on one beer and stoned on one hit. He doesn't usually smoke or drink, because his system apparently can't handle it. I have many, many friends that can drink and smoke in moderation and seem as normal as can be expected. I have other friends that get rip roaring drunk and yet other friends that get stoned out of their minds. I'd take the stoned ones over the drunks any day.

The stoned ones don't puke all over the place, don't lose their ability to socially interact (unless they fall asleep) and I've never met a mean stoner... I have OTOH met plenty of jackass drunks.

I just know that from that experience, I neither have any want or need to smoke the substance, less I too become an anoying moron in the process, nor do I want to be around people who are in the process of smoking it.

In other words, do whatever you want, but don't expect me to stick around.

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 10:11:53 PM
I just know that from that experience, I neither have any want or need to smoke the substance, less I too become an anoying moron in the process, nor do I want to be around people who are in the process of smoking it.

In other words, do whatever you want, but don't expect me to stick around.

Well you got the annoying part anyway ;-)

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 10:11:53 PM
I just know that from that experience, I neither have any want or need to smoke the substance, less I too become an anoying moron in the process, nor do I want to be around people who are in the process of smoking it.

In other words, do whatever you want, but don't expect me to stick around.

That's fine.

Do expect me to mock you should you ever want to discuss stereotypes around here, however.

Maybe the girl was suffering from inflated expectation. I've seen people smoke regular tobacco but appear stoned because they'd been lead to believe they had real weed.

I know this because a friend and me played this prank on someone we didn't especially like and thus did not feel inclined to waste our stash on.

Teenagers are cruel.

Quote from: Mangrove on August 24, 2007, 11:25:25 PM
Maybe the girl was suffering from inflated expectation. I've seen people smoke regular tobacco but appear stoned because they'd been lead to believe they had real weed.

I know this because a friend and me played this prank on someone we didn't especially like and thus did not feel inclined to waste our stash on.

Teenagers are cruel.

This may very well explain it. Some effects of Marijuana appear to be closely related with the psychological state and expectations of the individual. A Placebo effect almost...

That was pretty judgemental.  Hell, I don't do any drugs, except alcohol and caffeine, and even they are in moderation.  If people want to ingest substances that may or may not make them act like idiots, what issue is it of mine?  Unless they are operating a vehicle/heavy machinery/position of responsibility that requires clarity and fast responses (in which case they equally would not be drinking alcohol), I fail to see what it has to do with me.

All it means is I can remember what I was laughing at in the morning, as well as make fun of people "recovering".

Cain - other than caffeine, I am drug-free also, for pretty much the same reason.

I am not drug free... but since I don't drink much I usually remember what I was laughing at.

DRUGS ARE BAD. THEY WILL MAKE YOU STUPID. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT DUMBASSES ARE STILL DUMBASSES WHEN HIGH. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

You may now go back to your regularly scheduled thinking.

(Note: I'm not a big fan of many drugs (mostly benzos, opiates, and other downers), but there's nothing wrong with a mostly rational human being enjoying being sleepy and unmotivated for a little while. Nobody gets hurt from it, and it doesn't prevent a person from continuing being a smart person.)

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 10:11:53 PM
I just know that from that experience, I neither have any want or need to smoke the substance, less I too become an anoying moron in the process, nor do I want to be around people who are in the process of smoking it.
In other words, do whatever you want, but don't expect me to stick around.

I know you have met people, usually young ones, where in a social setting drink a few beers and act like they are wasted.  This shit happens all the time when motherfuckers want to fit in or have a good time, or maybe they think it's cool.  Whatever the reason, is it possible the intellectual woman just wanted to be an ass, using the "weed" and her "highness" and excuse?

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 09:16:53 PM
Thats actually what I meant. A person can drink a beer and not have any anoying effects. One hit from a joint however, and this girls intelligence dropped below IQ 80. I don't really care what other people do, and the part about the legality of it was a joke. Just know that if you ever toke up around me don't expect me to stick around or come back, because I can't stand an annoying fool.

see, that's the thing. i usually judge on behaviour of an actual person, taking into account the kind of drugs they may or may not have had.

for example, i know you were sober when you typed the above. if we were to hang out IRL and you were going to act like that every time, i might reconsider, or at least see if a few beers might lighten you up.

i know of my friends kind of what happens when they drink, drink too much, smoke, smoke and drink, etc. if they consistently act like fools or assholes while in such a state, and keep actively searching for that state (even when i suggest "maybe you had enough, cause you become an asshole if you drink like that"), i might break the contact.

personally, i think i may have hit it real lucky with the group of friends i go out with and their substance abuse. there's just one guy who has a problem with alcohol and he just enters into a kinda zombie-mode half-sleep state, which we either have a little fun with (he won't remember) or just make sure he gets home safely. it's not a big deal, he knows his problem and tries to avoid it, usually.
but when digging for these examples, what strikes me is that there are other factors which seem so much more important. my flatmate and a mutual friend of us, both really cool guys. he comes over here, drink and/or smoke a little, and then they play video games all night. sometimes other people come over, i'm there too, we're hanging around having fun and those two still keep playing videogames. i could say (and my other friends would be inclined to agree) that i've seen videogames turn people into anti-social assholes.

Quote from: triple zero on August 25, 2007, 11:56:26 AM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on August 24, 2007, 09:16:53 PM
Thats actually what I meant. A person can drink a beer and not have any anoying effects. One hit from a joint however, and this girls intelligence dropped below IQ 80. I don't really care what other people do, and the part about the legality of it was a joke. Just know that if you ever toke up around me don't expect me to stick around or come back, because I can't stand an annoying fool.

see, that's the thing. i usually judge on behaviour of an actual person, taking into account the kind of drugs they may or may not have had.

for example, i know you were sober when you typed the above. if we were to hang out IRL and you were going to act like that every time, i might reconsider, or at least see if a few beers might lighten you up.

i know of my friends kind of what happens when they drink, drink too much, smoke, smoke and drink, etc. if they consistently act like fools or assholes while in such a state, and keep actively searching for that state (even when i suggest "maybe you had enough, cause you become an asshole if you drink like that"), i might break the contact.

personally, i think i may have hit it real lucky with the group of friends i go out with and their substance abuse. there's just one guy who has a problem with alcohol and he just enters into a kinda zombie-mode half-sleep state, which we either have a little fun with (he won't remember) or just make sure he gets home safely. it's not a big deal, he knows his problem and tries to avoid it, usually.
but when digging for these examples, what strikes me is that there are other factors which seem so much more important. my flatmate and a mutual friend of us, both really cool guys. he comes over here, drink and/or smoke a little, and then they play video games all night. sometimes other people come over, i'm there too, we're hanging around having fun and those two still keep playing videogames. i could say (and my other friends would be inclined to agree) that i've seen videogames turn people into anti-social assholes.

Triple Zero Lays out some TROOF, ITT!

Mang/Cain -- correctness of the motorcycle.

I know what substances have what effects on me, so I stay away from things that will have effects on me that I don't like, or regulate them carefully. (At least, I try to. I'd be lying if I said I have this perfected. I'm still awfully young to have ANYTHING figured yet!) Most people I know do the same, but not everyone does. Those that can't take themselves into consideration are not necessarily people I want to be around when they are using substances.

And oh my god is it true that videogames turn people in anti social assholes!

-DC
Has lost boyfriends to videogames :? Sometimes drugs seem almost preferrable!

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 24, 2007, 09:58:38 PM
I've never met a mean stoner...

You obviously have never been to a hardcore show in Baltimore, then.

Since I feel partially responsible for the way this thread turned I'd like to throw in another 2 cents. 

There was a comment a couple of pages back about me wanting to "get rid of marijuana" or something like that. 

In my profession, we are currently taking an environmental approach to substance abuse.  We don't focus on the substances.  Our goal is not prohibition, to eliminate drugs.  The "War on Drugs" is a federal government thing.  Sure, the State throws in symbolically, but really when you get down to it, we are about treating people. 

Those who are addicted and who engage in risky, antisocial behavior, have issues.  And they were issues that existed before the drugs.  Indeed, for many the drugs are the coping mechanism.  Except, it really doesn't help them cope, it simply postpones their pain.  It's interesting, in this regard I find I can interject a lot of BIP ideas without the terminology into our discussions.  Because that kind of philosophy lends itself to this environmental approach to treating drug addicts.

There are those in my field who are hell-bent at attacking the issues from the supply end.  But most of us think that is pretty much this:   :argh!:

If you can't help the individual, they are going to keep using the drugs.  But this isn't the occassional toker or drinker that I'm talking about.  It's the hardcore who smoke weed like they are cigarettes, drink vodka like it's water, and pop pills like they're tylenol. 

Nicely put, RWHN.

I, for one, am glad to hear that at least somewhere there are people in the business of worrying about the problem, not the symptom. That's very heartening.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 02:02:03 PM
Since I feel partially responsible for the way this thread turned I'd like to throw in another 2 cents. 

There was a comment a couple of pages back about me wanting to "get rid of marijuana" or something like that. 

In my profession, we are currently taking an environmental approach to substance abuse.  We don't focus on the substances.  Our goal is not prohibition, to eliminate drugs.  The "War on Drugs" is a federal government thing.  Sure, the State throws in symbolically, but really when you get down to it, we are about treating people. 

Those who are addicted and who engage in risky, antisocial behavior, have issues.  And they were issues that existed before the drugs.  Indeed, for many the drugs are the coping mechanism.  Except, it really doesn't help them cope, it simply postpones their pain.  It's interesting, in this regard I find I can interject a lot of BIP ideas without the terminology into our discussions.  Because that kind of philosophy lends itself to this environmental approach to treating drug addicts.

There are those in my field who are hell-bent at attacking the issues from the supply end.  But most of us think that is pretty much this:   :argh!:

If you can't help the individual, they are going to keep using the drugs.  But this isn't the occassional toker or drinker that I'm talking about.  It's the hardcore who smoke weed like they are cigarettes, drink vodka like it's water, and pop pills like they're tylenol. 

That is why I occasionally like Cops. The guys here in Columbus seem to be taking the same approach. I have several friends that have gotten picked up for various offenses and their little stash of pot just 'disappears' and the cop doesn't say another word about it.

On the other hand, they've seriously cracked down on Meth and Prescription abuse which seems to be all the rage now in Ohio. I think that's good.

I worked with a State Trooper with a heart of gold.  She did her job, she enforced the laws, but she also was about offering hope and alternatives for young people who were obviously caught up in some rough shit. 

And you're right.  Meth and Rx drugs are the biggies right now, outside of alcohol which will always be the #1 substance abused.  Meth is pretty much nationwide except for the New England region.  I'm not saying it isn't in New England but it hasn't blanketed the drug market like it has everywhere else.  This is ONLY because the dealers haven't found a cost-effective way to get it up here from Mexico.  The feeling is they will find a way to send it in through Canada instead. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 06:05:56 PM
I worked with a State Trooper with a heart of gold.  She did her job, she enforced the laws, but she also was about offering hope and alternatives for young people who were obviously caught up in some rough shit. 

And you're right.  Meth and Rx drugs are the biggies right now, outside of alcohol which will always be the #1 substance abused.  Meth is pretty much nationwide except for the New England region.  I'm not saying it isn't in New England but it hasn't blanketed the drug market like it has everywhere else.  This is ONLY because the dealers haven't found a cost-effective way to get it up here from Mexico.  The feeling is they will find a way to send it in through Canada instead. 

Around here they're making the crap themselves... Columbus PD just recently nabbed a guy driving around from home store to home store picking up the necessary ingredients and mixing it up and selling it all in his "moblie office".

What crazy motherfuckers want to stick something made from Diesel and other household chemicals in their bodies... its as stupid as the girls they hospitalized for chewing mothballs...

MOTHBALLS for Chrissake!!!!!

Mothballs?! :eek:

Did the girls at least get high?!

Some people really amaze me with what they will do.

I'm not sure if you [Ratatosk] were on the boards when I relayed the story of young teenage girls, and boys, using alcohol by soaking tampons and inserting.  People will get very "inventive" with their chemical ingestion.

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on August 27, 2007, 07:42:30 PM
Mothballs?! :eek:

Did the girls at least get high?!

i hope not, otherwise they might try it again.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 07:43:46 PM
I'm not sure if you [Ratatosk] were on the boards when I relayed the story of young teenage girls, and boys, using alcohol by soaking tampons and inserting.  People will get very "inventive" with their chemical ingestion.

I think I was still a lurker at that point.

But oh god, my vagina hurts at that thought!

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on August 27, 2007, 07:42:30 PM
Mothballs?! :eek:

Did the girls at least get high?!

Some people really amaze me with what they will do.

Yeah, in fact, one girl spent days in the hospital with "mysterious" problems. The only way they figured out what caused them... was catching her, in the hospital, eating mothballs....

Sometimes I wonder if we shouldn't just let them do whatever drugs they're dumb enough to try... maybe just sterilize them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5219646.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5219646.stm)

It was discovered that the girls had been using the mothballs as a recreational drug when doctors found a bag of mothballs stashed in her room while she was being treated at the Hospital of Timone in Marseille.

Both girls had been "bagging" - inhaling mothball fumes - after encouragement from classmates.

The twin who was sickest had also been chewing half a mothball a day for two months.

She continued her habit in hospital because she did not think her symptoms were linked to the mothballs.


:argh!: :lulz: :argh!: :lulz:

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 07:43:46 PM
I'm not sure if you [Ratatosk] were on the boards when I relayed the story of young teenage girls, and boys, using alcohol by soaking tampons and inserting.  People will get very "inventive" with their chemical ingestion.

:lulz:

WTF? Why not just drink it?

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 27, 2007, 07:48:38 PM

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on August 27, 2007, 07:42:30 PM
Mothballs?! :eek:

Did the girls at least get high?!

Some people really amaze me with what they will do.

Yeah, in fact, one girl spent days in the hospital with "mysterious" problems. The only way they figured out what caused them... was catching her, in the hospital, eating mothballs....

Sometimes I wonder if we shouldn't just let them do whatever drugs they're dumb enough to try... maybe just sterilize them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5219646.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5219646.stm)

It was discovered that the girls had been using the mothballs as a recreational drug when doctors found a bag of mothballs stashed in her room while she was being treated at the Hospital of Timone in Marseille.

Both girls had been "bagging" - inhaling mothball fumes - after encouragement from classmates.

The twin who was sickest had also been chewing half a mothball a day for two months.

She continued her habit in hospital because she did not think her symptoms were linked to the mothballs.


:argh!: :lulz: :argh!: :lulz:

HUFF RAID!

[/Totse]

Rat, that article makes baby Jesus cry.

And me too. :cry:

Seriously? I mean, there is not really a single drug out there that I can't see the appeal of. Doesn't mean I'll try them, but I can definitely see the allure, and during some of my more depressed times, I probably would've tried just about any of them if it weren't so hard/risky to get them (good work, cops!). But mothballs?! I can't even imagine where someone gets it into their mind that it would be a good idea to do that, or that there would be any sort of redeeming value to it.

"I really love the way my grandmother's house smells... So I just wanna get as much of that smell as is fucking possible!"

How bizarre.

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 27, 2007, 07:49:15 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 07:43:46 PM
I'm not sure if you [Ratatosk] were on the boards when I relayed the story of young teenage girls, and boys, using alcohol by soaking tampons and inserting.  People will get very "inventive" with their chemical ingestion.

:lulz:

WTF? Why not just drink it?

Because the alcohol hits the bloodstream a lot faster.  It's a bloodrich area down there where the sun doesn't shine and there is less tissue to pass through for the alcohol to hit the blood.

Also, if you aren't drinking it, your breath isn't going to smell of alcohol.  So kids can go to school intoxicated without having that tell-tale sign. 

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on August 27, 2007, 07:52:56 PM
Rat, that article makes baby Jesus cry.

And me too. :cry:

Seriously? I mean, there is not really a single drug out there that I can't see the appeal of. Doesn't mean I'll try them, but I can definitely see the allure, and during some of my more depressed times, I probably would've tried just about any of them if it weren't so hard/risky to get them (good work, cops!). But mothballs?! I can't even imagine where someone gets it into their mind that it would be a good idea to do that, or that there would be any sort of redeeming value to it.

"I really love the way my grandmother's house smells... So I just wanna get as much of that smell as is fucking possible!"

How bizarre.

I have no idea why anyone would do such a thing. It seems almost Darwinian.

RWHN: Or you could just drink it through the eye, like any normal person would.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 07:59:14 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on August 27, 2007, 07:49:15 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 07:43:46 PM
I'm not sure if you [Ratatosk] were on the boards when I relayed the story of young teenage girls, and boys, using alcohol by soaking tampons and inserting.  People will get very "inventive" with their chemical ingestion.

:lulz:

WTF? Why not just drink it?

Because the alcohol hits the bloodstream a lot faster.  It's a bloodrich area down there where the sun doesn't shine and there is less tissue to pass through for the alcohol to hit the blood.

Also, if you aren't drinking it, your breath isn't going to smell of alcohol.  So kids can go to school intoxicated without having that tell-tale sign. 

Oh sure, cause it won't be obvious without the smell... the bowlegged walk though might be a clue...

Yeah, that's how the teachers found out about it.  I'm very curious as to what questions they had to ask to find out what was really going on. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 27, 2007, 08:06:21 PM
Yeah, that's how the teachers found out about it.  I'm very curious as to what questions they had to ask to find out what was really going on. 

"Have you been horseback riding?"
"Did you whore yourself out to the football team?"
"Do you cut yourself (on the taint)?"
"Did you stick an alcohol soaked tampon in your coochie?"

I see what you mean... it's a bit of a leap. ;-)

Quote from: 1Yacatismic1 on August 07, 2007, 06:09:16 PM


The driver takes a sip of coffee*, and intones the mystical phrase, "gooble gobba."

Why didn't yaca's mother get an abortion?

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 30, 2007, 04:53:30 AM

Quote from: 1Yacatismic1 on August 07, 2007, 06:09:16 PM


The driver takes a sip of coffee*, and intones the mystical phrase, "gooble gobba."

Why didn't yaca's mother get an abortion?

Prolly the same reason yours and mine didn't... they had no idea we'd turn into horrific misfits bent on fucking with the pinks and norms.

Quote from: Ratatosk on October 05, 2007, 10:03:56 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 30, 2007, 04:53:30 AM

Quote from: 1Yacatismic1 on August 07, 2007, 06:09:16 PM


The driver takes a sip of coffee*, and intones the mystical phrase, "gooble gobba."

Why didn't yaca's mother get an abortion?

Prolly the same reason yours and mine didn't... they had no idea we'd turn into horrific misfits bent on fucking with the pinks and norms.

Naw.  Because Yaca doesn't do that.  He just acts like a retard.

Quote from: A Fucking Vulture on August 24, 2007, 01:50:25 PM

Quote from: Netaungrot on August 24, 2007, 01:11:29 AM
That's probably true that most cannabis users mix it with other substances, but I've rarely had my pot cut with anything. That's a paranoid scare tactic that doesn't happen often in the real world. And it's not a particularly effective one if your target audience is angsty adolescents. I was fucking stoked to have MOAR dRuGz in my dRuGz when I was still a 16 year old full of self-pity and venom. I didn't give a flying fuck what it was either.

If you're going to make a case against pot, don't use a weak argument and a shitty source. That site ADMITS to speculation and genuinely appears to be ignorant of the historical and global contexts that make many of their claims utterly ridiculous. Gateway bullshit, medically questionable bullshit, "hallucination" bullshit (mild at best), and all sorts of decontextualized OH NOES crap.

And that's what pisses me off.

These anti-drug shits that your source is iconic of need to stop cutting their arguments with lies because a lot of kids will find out half the line being towed is a giant crock of turds. The entire set of arguments get called into question, even the legitimate parts when they do that. It's much more dangerous than just sticking with the unassailable truth. Which is pot is unlikely to hurt you much. But your pot-enhanced stupidity easily could.

To be honest, I just googled and posted what I saw.  I'm on vacation so I don't have my materials handy, but I do know that there is research and studies that at least suggest that pot smoking can affect reaction time.  Even if it's only "possible" that it will have that affect, my point is that even the "possibility" is reason enough to not encourage someone to drive a car after smoking. 

As far as making a case against pot, I fully realize that is a tall order.  In fact, in all seriousness, when it comes to illicit drugs and drug abuse prevention, marijuana is on the bottom of the list.  Because, even within the prevention community there is not agreement on whether or not it should be illegal.  Me personally, I don't give a fuck either way.  I don't use it, and I don't care if others use it.  I would only care if someone who was under the influence ran over my kid and/or wife.  But beyond that, I know that kids are gonna smoke it.  It is easier for them to get than alcohol.  I personally would rather focus on alcohol and the rapid increase in prescription drug abuse.  Those two categories of substances, especially in combination, are a much bigger threat to young people than marijuana.

HAR HAR!

2007, I hadn't been in that job all that long, and since then I've done a lot more research, plus we've had MMJ come on line and I've seen how that has impacted numbers.  And now the legalization bill.


If I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have made that statement. 

Quote from: A Fucking Vulture on April 02, 2013, 04:09:14 AM
2007, I hadn't been in that job all that long, and since then I've done a lot more research, plus we've had MMJ come on line and I've seen how that has impacted numbers.  And now the legalization bill.


If I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have made that statement.

Well, that's one solution.  But I know a couple of substance abuse counselors here in Tucson, and they agree with your initial statement.

So I'm suggesting that you may have also become a fanatic since the initial post.

"...MAY have also become a fanatic.."?  :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 02, 2013, 04:25:12 AM

Quote from: A Fucking Vulture on April 02, 2013, 04:09:14 AM
2007, I hadn't been in that job all that long, and since then I've done a lot more research, plus we've had MMJ come on line and I've seen how that has impacted numbers.  And now the legalization bill.


If I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have made that statement.

Well, that's one solution.  But I know a couple of substance abuse counselors here in Tucson, and they agree with your initial statement.

So I'm suggesting that you may have also become a fanatic since the initial post.

Given the change in tone and debate tactics, I am sadly inclined to agree...  :(

C'mon, just because Net, and Stelz, and TGRR, and Nigel get all wound up and frothy during these debates, I wouldn't call them fanatics.  ;)

:bacon:

Oh, sorry, I left you out of the list, it was accidental.  ;)

:bacon:

I'll try to explain that one to you using small words:

the "bacon" smiley was historically used to mock someone whose entire contribution to a thread (or indeed a forum) could be summarized as "LOOK AT ME, I'M SAYING THINGS!"

"historically" means "in a time before now"

"summarized" means "taking something long and making it short but still getting the main point across"