Iwantsome

Bristol, VA

#41 Mar 22, 2012
Gibson wrote:
I would also like to add that I have spent many years at multiple college campuses, and If smoking marijuana indeed makes people stupid, then there would only be a handful of people graduating each year. Furthermore, I have noticed that the higher ones intelligence level is, the more likely they are to realize the war on drugs is unfounded. I have only met a handful of PHD level trained individuals that wouldn't advocate more sensible drug laws.
Also, there are ways of taxing it. They have found a way to tax all the other chemicals, which by the way have began killing more people than the drugs that aren't allowed in doctor controlled setting. Ie more people OD on the schedule that oxycodone falls into than do on the far more schedule that drugs like heroin and PCP fall into.
What this boils down to is that one cannot get a patent on a naturally occurring chemical, one can get a patent for a synthetic. One can't make much money if they can't prevent direct competition.
1. Maybe, just maybe, this is part of the reason why most colleges boast a four-year graduation rate of 50-60%?

2. My research wasn't done on a college campus, but in the real world. Yes, I have come across some very intelligent people who abuse drugs but they are the exception rather than the norm. Drugs users aren't necessarily stupid or of below average intelligence, but they aren't Albert Einstein either. Maybe what you should have said is the more time one spends on a college campus seeking a degree, the more liberal they are apt to become, and thus the more liberal their stance will become regarding the use of illegal drugs.

3. Taxing drugs doesn't prevent people from od'ing on them. All it does is give the government more money to spend to help take care of the people that can't stop at "high" and have to go all out to "wacked out of my f'in brain" and get themselves taken to ICU.

Philosphically, I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I do think we are all responsible for our own actions. For example, I don't think a bar owner should be held responsible for the guy who has a couple of drinks and leaves, but if a bar owner, in the interest of business and profits, serves someone alcohol until they are drunk and then allows them to leave, why shouldn't they be held responsible? Just like the drinker, they had a choice, and could have cut the person off and/or called them a taxi or DD.

The problem with the whole "I can do what I want as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else philosphy" is that invariably someone else always gets hurt, but nobody wants to take the blame for it.
curious

Bristol, VA

#42 Mar 22, 2012
so... when everyones kids get "high" on things like air duster, redi whip, etc. why are people not getting mad at food lion, kroger, office depot and the like... when something is sold to an adult with the "not for human comsumption" warning on it and said adult takes it away from the store, how is the store held liable for what is done with the product?

Since: Mar 12

Mount Holly, NC

#43 Mar 22, 2012
curious wrote:
so... when everyones kids get "high" on things like air duster, redi whip, etc. why are people not getting mad at food lion, kroger, office depot and the like... when something is sold to an adult with the "not for human comsumption" warning on it and said adult takes it away from the store, how is the store held liable for what is done with the product?
Don't be stupid. That was a "tards" argument. You're smarter than that. Stupid people will continue to do stupid things with normal products. The difference being that ALL other products you mentioned have legal/useful purpose. Stores can't help if a dumbass sucks air from a whipped cream can.

This poison has NO USEFUL purpose, other than getting high and endangering the public. It produced with neglect and reckless endangerment. Whipped cream is not produced with the intent to harm. dumbass.
Anonymous

Blountville, TN

#44 Mar 22, 2012
curious wrote:
so... when everyones kids get "high" on things like air duster, redi whip, etc. why are people not getting mad at food lion, kroger, office depot and the like... when something is sold to an adult with the "not for human comsumption" warning on it and said adult takes it away from the store, how is the store held liable for what is done with the product?
It's more what the store is dealing. These items being sold mimic illegal drugs and have no legal use other than to get high. The items you mention have a true purpose. What about gas, paint and glue? Same issues when not used for its intended purposes. A bar owner can be held liable for over serving a customer that leaves and wrecks killing someone.

I understand what you saying though. The public really can't protect or prevent someone from getting high if that's what they are wanting to do. At the same time you can't let items be sold that have not been tested and know what the long term effects are. Everybody knows the short term effects a buzz, a trip to the hospital and of course death in some cases.

Since: Mar 12

Washington, DC

#45 Mar 28, 2012
I would just like to know wer I can buy sum crystal or sumtin similar. I don't care wat anyone thinks about it either cause the way I c it is that I do me n u do u but leave me out of it please. Message me if anyone knows wer I can get wat I need. Thanks!
Logic

Johnson City, TN

#46 Mar 28, 2012
leecountyman2012 wrote:
I would just like to know wer I can buy sum crystal or sumtin similar. I don't care wat anyone thinks about it either cause the way I c it is that I do me n u do u but leave me out of it please. Message me if anyone knows wer I can get wat I need. Thanks!
I'd like to know as well, it sucks going without because a couple of morons couldn't handle it and had to ruin it for the rest of us.
Jared

Johnson City, TN

#47 Mar 29, 2012
Who the f*** are any of you to tell a grown man or woman whether they can get high or not? If someone wants to put something into their own bodies that's their own damn business. Drugs DO NOT force people to commit crimes to support a habit. That's a choice that is NOT relevant to the aforementioned choice.

Plus the fact that SOME of the substances that are being seized are not controlled substances under state or federal levels is grounds for lawsuit against the LE agencies involved.
Whatabunchoftard s

Bristol, VA

#48 Mar 29, 2012
Jared wrote:
Who the f*** are any of you to tell a grown man or woman whether they can get high or not? If someone wants to put something into their own bodies that's their own damn business. Drugs DO NOT force people to commit crimes to support a habit. That's a choice that is NOT relevant to the aforementioned choice.
Plus the fact that SOME of the substances that are being seized are not controlled substances under state or federal levels is grounds for lawsuit against the LE agencies involved.
Jared, they will be filing those lawsuits from jail. In order to get a search warrant, the applying officer had to have probable cause that a law was being broken or the warrant wouldn't have been issued. Think about that for a minute before you run off at the mouth about something you know nothing about.

Also, just an FYI, but I don't think the issue here is what some grown adult does or does do with their own body. The issue here is someone making a proffitt off something that has no earthly purpose other than to get people high. You wanna catch a buzz? Grow you some weed in your basement and smoke all you want. Truth is, if you can keep your trap shut nobody will probably ever know. Problem is, most dopers can't keep their traps shut, or worse yet, they go out in public stoned out of their gourds, or even worse yet, they get behind the wheel of a vehicle and drive.

There are probably hundreds of thousands of people who use drugs and nobody knows about them because they don't openly break the law and they are smart enough to use, but not abuse, the substances they are taking. Just like some people drink a beer after work, but some people have to have 1/2 a case. We know most of the ones that have to have the 1/2 case, but we never realize many of the ones who stop at one beer.

I could get behind the legalization of marijuana but for the idiots who would then use that to start lobbying for cocaine, ecstacy, heroin, etc... We have enough legal stuff that will kill you already, why add more to the list.
Jared

Johnson City, TN

#49 Mar 30, 2012
Whatabunchoftards wrote:
<quoted text>
Jared, they will be filing those lawsuits from jail. In order to get a search warrant, the applying officer had to have probable cause that a law was being broken or the warrant wouldn't have been issued. Think about that for a minute before you run off at the mouth about something you know nothing about.
Also, just an FYI, but I don't think the issue here is what some grown adult does or does do with their own body. The issue here is someone making a proffitt off something that has no earthly purpose other than to get people high. You wanna catch a buzz? Grow you some weed in your basement and smoke all you want. Truth is, if you can keep your trap shut nobody will probably ever know. Problem is, most dopers can't keep their traps shut, or worse yet, they go out in public stoned out of their gourds, or even worse yet, they get behind the wheel of a vehicle and drive.
There are probably hundreds of thousands of people who use drugs and nobody knows about them because they don't openly break the law and they are smart enough to use, but not abuse, the substances they are taking. Just like some people drink a beer after work, but some people have to have 1/2 a case. We know most of the ones that have to have the 1/2 case, but we never realize many of the ones who stop at one beer.
I could get behind the legalization of marijuana but for the idiots who would then use that to start lobbying for cocaine, ecstacy, heroin, etc... We have enough legal stuff that will kill you already, why add more to the list.
Probable cause or not, they can't legally seize substances that are not illegal. I'm quite informed on the subjects that I engage in. Although, I agree with you on one aspect. Too many people choose to get intoxicated and run a muck. Most users don't have the common sense to get high at home, stay out of trouble, and don't drive.

Also, the 'war on drugs' does more harm than good. Portugal decriminalized all drugs 10 years ago, and drug usage rates are down more than 50%. Back in the U.S., organized crime is at an all time high. Taxpayers have spent over $1 billion on the war on drugs. If anything, supply and demand have increased. 1,638,846 people were arrested in the U.S. in 2010 for NON-VIOLENT drug offenses. Not to mention the thousands of innocent people that die every year from collateral damage done by the cartels. Plus the political corruption in Mexico and the United States.

So, how about YOU think before YOU run off at the mouth, because you have no idea what you're talking about.
salt lover

United States

#50 Mar 31, 2012
I think its funny how everyone is all pro synth ban but will pass someone comming out of a gas station with a pack of smoked and a six pack and never think twice but will rabble rabble at a synth drug forum for fucks sake i need not big bro dictating everything i do. if kids are doin it they are breaking the law just as if there drnking alcohol
Whatabunchoftard s

Bristol, VA

#51 Mar 31, 2012
salt lover wrote:
I think its funny how everyone is all pro synth ban but will pass someone comming out of a gas station with a pack of smoked and a six pack and never think twice but will rabble rabble at a synth drug forum for fucks sake i need not big bro dictating everything i do. if kids are doin it they are breaking the law just as if there drnking alcohol
Okay, tell me, how are they breaking the law? The stuff is marketed "Not for Human Consumption" and sold as bath salts. If you go to Wal-Mart to buy bath salts do they card you and refuse to sell the stuff to you if you aren't 21? In order for them to be breaking the law, the stuff has to be illegal. Just because the store chooses not to sell it to anyone under the age of 21 doesn't mean the state says they have to. If you want to screw up your life, go ahead. Order the stuff off the internet, stay in the privacy of your own home, and get as screwed up in the head as you want to get. Make sure and pin a note on your chest that says, I did this stuff to myself and want to be left alone, so when someone comes and finds you slobbering all over yourself and foaming at the mouth they just leave you there to enjoy the buzz. If you die, and your parents try and sue, we will remind them that you din't want big bro messing in your life and telling you what to do.
Whatabunchoftard s

Bristol, VA

#52 Mar 31, 2012
Jared wrote:
<quoted text>
Probable cause or not, they can't legally seize substances that are not illegal. I'm quite informed on the subjects that I engage in. Although, I agree with you on one aspect. Too many people choose to get intoxicated and run a muck. Most users don't have the common sense to get high at home, stay out of trouble, and don't drive.
Also, the 'war on drugs' does more harm than good. Portugal decriminalized all drugs 10 years ago, and drug usage rates are down more than 50%. Back in the U.S., organized crime is at an all time high. Taxpayers have spent over $1 billion on the war on drugs. If anything, supply and demand have increased. 1,638,846 people were arrested in the U.S. in 2010 for NON-VIOLENT drug offenses. Not to mention the thousands of innocent people that die every year from collateral damage done by the cartels. Plus the political corruption in Mexico and the United States.
So, how about YOU think before YOU run off at the mouth, because you have no idea what you're talking about.
Point is, the sustances ARE illegal or they wouldn't have been able to secure the search warrants.

As for decriminlization in Portugal, REPORTED drug usage did decline, and it is touted as successful by its proponents. But read between the lines in this article: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,859...

Notice how the number of people being treated with methadone rose from 6,040 to 14,877. That is almost a 250% increase. Yes, it costs less to treat them than it does to incarcerate them. However, anyone that knows anything about methadone or suboxone replacement therapy is that it usually takes years to get these folks drug free, if they ever become drug free at all. The rates of abuse are extremely high, and because many of these clinics are operated for profit they do not test for abuse like they should.

Personally, I don't think you can take five years worth of data and make your case. Drug usage rates fluctuate anyway, and read what it says in this article, Portugal had some of the highest, if not the highest usage rates in Europe prior to the changes.

In addition, the one category they tout the most, which is decrease in marijuana usage in the under 12 age group, doesn't tell the whole story either. Portugal's population is around 10mil, and less that 2mil of those are under the age of 14. The US had more than 60mil kids under the age of 14. So if 10% of the kids in Portugal in 2001 reported they used pot (180,000 is an approximation), and only 170,000 reported they used pot in 2006, that would be a drop of roughly 6%, which would be statistically significant even accounting for errors in reporting, etc...

It would take a change of roughly 360,000 to make that same percentage difference in the US, and because of the number of kids we are talking about, the higher percentage of reporting errors, etc... it wouldn't really be considered significant. Like the old saying goes, there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies and statistics.
altersolneeded

Church Hill, VA

#53 Mar 31, 2012
I must say that I agree that its a bit crazy to put these things in your body, but I also must say, it is pure insanity that people are bitching so much about the unknown side effects they may or may not encounter later on in life, when you can go in a store and buy pure poison, that is well known by all to have bad consequences (DEATH!) to your health and to our economy that the government makes a killing off of through their taxation of said products. It is a double standard approach our government takes towards this so-called, and failed, non-winnable joke "war on drugs" battle that has cost more money than is comprehensible to most. I, for one, am tired of my money going into such a failed, political program that politicians use, through misinformation and out right lies, to get votes so they can hold on to power, period! How do these jokers continue to get voted in gov't, when the problem has mostly worsened during their terms. It's the only platform in where the problem gets worse, such as crime statistics in relation to drugs, and gets used to win votes. Or, I should say, for example, I know a county in which the prosecutor keeps winning office based on the platform of each year more and more are put in prison by them, showing how hard they are working to fix the problem of drug abuse and the things that go with it. It only shows to me, that whatever their doing, backed by numbers, is a total failure and tells me that they don't want to solve the problem, cause if they do, they will not be re-elected. If the murder or robbery rates increased each year while someone holds office, I bet they would lose office next election. Its a money pit, to fill the pockets of the real criminals and so that they may maintain their power. I want my money to be used on programs that actually go towards helping the problem, and because it will always be a part of our societies, we must find a solution to keep it a manageable problem. The, "lets lock em' all up!" ploy of many is not a solution and never was meant to fix things, as greed prevails and is bankrupting our system monetarily and spiritually as the foundation of our country, family that is, erodes away as our humanity and ideas of helping our fellow man which in return is good for use all is fading away more and more. Making something illegal, in no way solves anything, it only brings in much more negative variables that continues us in this never ending circle of failure. Use my money for something that has been proven to be more effective in getting this sad situation under a manageable control we all can live with. Now, all you people go buy your cigarettes and alcohol so the gov't gets their share of bounty. What the hell's different. If you really want to be safer an more insulated from these things, let the gov't control and regulate certain drugs, many proven to be much less damaging to the user and society than what is regulated by them already. When a product (with such demand) is made illegal, it creates a huge black market where costs become astronomical and therefore creates what we now have, a situation of violence not seen before (ie. Mexico), creating, with the huge amounts of money being generated, a more and more corrupted situation that, to me, is much more scary than these synthetic drugs. Its basic economics and sorry to say, with this technology and information age were going through, you will never be able to stop it. In the end, if we outlaw one thing, someone will create something to replace it the next day or it will just go into the black market where many want it to be. We are supposed to learn from our mistakes over time, but it seems to me, most have forgotten about the lessons learned during the era of prohibition not that long ago or just flat out ignore it, mainly for self serving purposes.
Common sense

Bowie, MD

#54 Apr 17, 2012
Drugs are going to be sold and bought reguard less of their legalality. By supporting the unwinnable drug war, you are putting money into the black market. Not to mention our over crowded jails and prisons letting rapist and murders go to make room for someone smoking a joint in their bathroom. Drug dealers support keeping drugs like marijuana illegal because that's how the survive. Make drugs legal, tax them, and regulate them safely and there are no more drug dealers, no more selling to kids, and certainly no more synthetic drugs. Right now a kid can get illegal drugs easier than they can alcohol, just because drug dealers dont check ids. Regulated and controled they would have to provide an id, just like purchasing alcohol. Please parents stop blaming synthetic drugs, the fault is in your child, not the drug. It is his or her fault, punish them and blame them. I had no problem growing up saying no to drugs. The real enforcement for not using drugs should come from families and friends, not our government. Be smart, support liberty, and support the end of the failed war on drugs!
Jared

Johnson City, TN

#55 Apr 17, 2012
Whatabunchoftards wrote:
<quoted text>
Point is, the sustances ARE illegal or they wouldn't have been able to secure the search warrants.
As for decriminlization in Portugal, REPORTED drug usage did decline, and it is touted as successful by its proponents. But read between the lines in this article: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,859...
Notice how the number of people being treated with methadone rose from 6,040 to 14,877. That is almost a 250% increase. Yes, it costs less to treat them than it does to incarcerate them. However, anyone that knows anything about methadone or suboxone replacement therapy is that it usually takes years to get these folks drug free, if they ever become drug free at all. The rates of abuse are extremely high, and because many of these clinics are operated for profit they do not test for abuse like they should.
Personally, I don't think you can take five years worth of data and make your case. Drug usage rates fluctuate anyway, and read what it says in this article, Portugal had some of the highest, if not the highest usage rates in Europe prior to the changes.
In addition, the one category they tout the most, which is decrease in marijuana usage in the under 12 age group, doesn't tell the whole story either. Portugal's population is around 10mil, and less that 2mil of those are under the age of 14. The US had more than 60mil kids under the age of 14. So if 10% of the kids in Portugal in 2001 reported they used pot (180,000 is an approximation), and only 170,000 reported they used pot in 2006, that would be a drop of roughly 6%, which would be statistically significant even accounting for errors in reporting, etc...
It would take a change of roughly 360,000 to make that same percentage difference in the US, and because of the number of kids we are talking about, the higher percentage of reporting errors, etc... it wouldn't really be considered significant. Like the old saying goes, there are three kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies and statistics.
As to the requirement of illegal product to attain a search warrant; that's not necessarily true. With the implementation of the Patriot Act, a warrant is no longer needed. However, to keep the people from noticing the publicity of warrants not being issued at all, warrants are sometimes issued without probable cause. Only if said warrant is challenged will they make the admission of not needing one in the first place.

Secondly, in regards to this:

"Drug usage rates fluctuate anyway, and read what it says in this article, Portugal had some of the highest, if not the highest usage rates in Europe prior to the changes."

From what I can see, that makes the statistic stating usage rate dropping %50 even more powerful.

Coming at you from a different direction. I highly suggest you read the following. It's a study done by the current Harvard professor of economics stating that legalization would save taxpayers $7.7 billion annually. And that's not even bringing up the abundant profit to be made from taxation and licensing.$7.7 billion is JUST what we would save from not wasting LE resources chasing a plant.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/17/econ...

http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/mironreport.h...
StillGettinHigh

Cleveland, OH

#56 Apr 18, 2012
Plenty of incense available in Asheville NC folks. If you want it, go get it and do it.

Here's my question: Now that the salts are illegal, who is responsible for the treatment of the addicts? You are, Mr. Taxpayer.

All of this will go away soon enough and these sheep will move on to their next Topix pasture.

Keep Smokin...
Big Daddy Dick

Bristol, VA

#57 Apr 21, 2012
You can still order the stuff in the mail. It's reformulated to be legal.
salt lover

Blountville, TN

#58 Apr 27, 2012
Whatabunchoftards wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, tell me, how are they breaking the law? The stuff is marketed "Not for Human Consumption" and sold as bath salts. If you go to Wal-Mart to buy bath salts do they card you and refuse to sell the stuff to you if you aren't 21? In order for them to be breaking the law, the stuff has to be illegal. Just because the store chooses not to sell it to anyone under the age of 21 doesn't mean the state says they have to. If you want to screw up your life, go ahead. Order the stuff off the internet, stay in the privacy of your own home, and get as screwed up in the head as you want to get. Make sure and pin a note on your chest that says, I did this stuff to myself and want to be left alone, so when someone comes and finds you slobbering all over yourself and foaming at the mouth they just leave you there to enjoy the buzz. If you die, and your parents try and sue, we will remind them that you din't want big bro messing in your life and telling you what to do.
Fair enough. I wish everyone that blames the fall of modern man on bath salts felt the same as you do my man. By the way i was ordering off the internet until they busted that broad with that massive load so there that went out the window.
U must B crazy

Blountville, TN

#59 Apr 28, 2012
salt lover wrote:
<quoted text> Fair enough. I wish everyone that blames the fall of modern man on bath salts felt the same as you do my man. By the way i was ordering off the internet until they busted that broad with that massive load so there that went out the window.
I don't use the crap but "TO EACH THEIR OWN". As for ordering through the mail that would still be your best answer IN TENNESSEE. She had two problems with her process.#1 She was telling people and got ratted out.#2 She was ordering way to much. If you order for personal use it will be fine.
MyView

Bristol, VA

#62 Apr 30, 2012
As of Friday week this stuff will be illegal in Tennessee.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bristol Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Who else thinks Tennessee SUCKS? (Sep '06) 17 hr corrupt 1,799
News Child abuse, neglect allegations investigated a... Fri Concerned parent 11
Hott blonde/red camaro Fri fellow jeeper 9
massage Fri looking 1
tony blair (May '14) Thu RKC2000 2
Register of Deeds Wed Enter Username 4
Since Dr Bible retired where do you get your me... Apr 21 Needing to know 1
More from around the web

Bristol People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]