P and all that jazz
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="555681" data-time="1454321638"><p>
NZ is pretty much the top country for Meth apparently. Down to the fact that importing crack & heroin is REALLY hard & expensive so meth is ideal is its effectivly lo rent & you can make it in the country. So it effectivly replaces crack & heroin in the country's drug options.<br><br></p></blockquote>
<br>
P is a favorite because you can buy P Precursor legally in China and its cheap. Buy large quantities, divide into small packets, and then pack them into containers and airfreight parcels. Shotgun approach, fire enough at NZ, our Customs find plenty but plenty more gets through. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rembrandt" data-cid="555687" data-time="1454323144">
<div>
<p>CH were you the one in law enforcement? If so do you think current strategies are working? Like some others here H,Meth and Crack scare me far more than anything else out there, could there be an arguement to reduce enforcement of comparitively more minor drugs such as weed and instead focus this on the real nasties?<br><br>
I'm curious as to what the mid to long term effect of the legalisation in colarado is, maybe its a bit of a simplistic view but I'd like to see something like that but with a guaranteed percentage of the tax revenue going directly to actual drug education (not just transparent scare tactics) as well as massively bringing the smackdown on meth dealers and for users if they don't give up their dealers. People are always gping to find stuff to get messed up on it just might be better for society to funnel them to certain substances over others.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I think you will find that enforcement on weed in places like Colorado has become even higher. It is just the rules that have changed.</p>
<p>It's a good concept though (for some substances like alcohol, tobacco, weed) where the social cost is outweighed by the social gains.</p>
<p>It's not like everyone wanders around stoned or partakes in public. The rules are strictly enforced and are similar to alcohol (eg public signs of intoxication, consuming in public, licenced sales etc)</p>
<p>As you say, people will always look for substances and finding where to draw the line is the issue for society.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="555677" data-time="1454320182">
<div>
<p>Briefly, anyone that thinks weed is ok needs to spend time in a mental institute to see the real effects. P is an amazing drug. Amazing that something can be completely destructive to a human and be willingly consumed. Awful awful drug. Makes cocaine seem like nuerofen</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Bit of a generalisation here, Apparently 14% of the NZ poulation are catagorised as weed smokers. It's only a very small percentage that end up in mental institutions.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm guessing you are a bit older than me, but it's pretty normalised in society now. As mentioned above I know of plenty who use and also hold down demanding careers, young families without becoming the zombies some have suggested above.</p> -
<p>I'll add a couple of things.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's nothing to do with 'zombiness' it is about depression from prolonged use.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Not one of the people in the clinic were young, they were all 40+ who had smoked weed for years. It's accumulative.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm not trying to convince anyone about anything. I am just pointing out what I saw and what I got to hear from the therapists and psycologists. I got to spend a good couple of months there as a visitor as I was helping someone through a difficult patch. They allowed me to stay on premise in visitor quarters. Seeing these people each day was heartbreaking.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I would struggle to go through that again for someone.</p> -
<p>Are you saying that prolonged use causes depression? Or that it <em>may </em>cause depression? Or that people that are prone to depression turn to weed? Were they casual smokers or were they 24/7 stoners? Did these people drink or do any other drugs as well, or were they <em>only</em> smoking weed?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>There are far too many variables to just make a sweeping statement like "you <span>need to spend time in a mental institute to see the <em>real </em>effects of weed".</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span>In my opinion.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span>:)</span></p> -
I go with Hooroo's view. A few years ago I worked regularly with a guy who works helping people who'd had mental health issues transition back to regular (or supported) employment. He mentioned he'd had a very liberal view about pot when he was younger, but he'd found the amount of drug induced psychosis that he'd seen in his line of work a frightening eye opener. <br><br>
"But I did it and I'm fine". Lucky you. Plenty of farmers who drink raw milk say the same thing, and good luck to them, plenty of people who avoid their flu jab stay healthy too. But individual results do vary.... -
<p>Fair enough. Agree individual results do vary. I don't think the argument is "but I did it and I'm fine", it's more "the majority of people that have done it are fine".</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="555743" data-time="1454362219">
<div>
<p>Fair enough. Agree individual results do vary. I don't think the argument is "but I did it and I'm fine", it's more "the majority of people that have done it are fine".</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Exactly, and statistics back up this point of view.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So many stories on this thread start like "I know this guy who used to smoke...."</p>
<p> </p>
<p>For every one of these stories I reckon there are many more to be told of those who don't end up a complete fuckup as a result. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="SammyC" data-cid="555745" data-time="1454362863">
<div>
<p>Exactly, and statistics back up this point of view.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So many stories on this thread start like "I know this guy who used to smoke...."</p>
<p> </p>
<p>For every one of these stories I reckon there are many more to be told of those who don't end up a complete fuckup as a result. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I've yet to meet one.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As I said, I have no bother in trying to convince anyone about this. It is pointless.</p> -
<p>Well even if you haven't met one the statistics back up my point.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>14% of the population are smokers... 14% of the poulation do not end up with severe depression or psychiatric issue.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I would guess that figure is much less than 1%.</p> -
<p>And how many of those folks were solely using weed rather than weed plus x, Y, Z. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't think it's as cut and dried (oh a pun of sorts!) as use it for over X years and end up with X symptoms/issues. But at the same time people have, and will continue too, end up in bad places due to use of weed. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm with Sammy in that the numbers with weed-related mental health issues are pretty low in proportion to overall users. Not that it isn't shit for anyone dealing with that sort of stuff or the impact it has on their whanau and friends. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Good on you Hooroo, that can't have been an easy thing to do. Respect.</p> -
<p>Whilst the overall numbers may not be that startling it would be interesting to know if there was a divergence, percentage wise, between non stoners and (prolonged) stoners in regard to mental health issues. Then there is the extra risk - as what you are taking is illegal it is not regulated and you are at the mercy of the integrity of someone who is already operating outside the law. Your chances of dealing with a scrote go up exponentially with the accordant dangers. Lastly - this certainly goes for the UK, i can't say in regard to NZ or Aussie - the strength and toxicity of the weed now freely available is so much more than in my salad days. Most of that skunk shit is, well shit really. The frequency of psychotic episodes is greatly increasing according to anecdotal evidence from a few local hospitals.</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="SammyC" data-cid="555750" data-time="1454363463"><p>Well even if you haven't met one the statistics back up my point.<br>
<br>
14% of the population are smokers... 14% of the poulation do not end up with severe depression or psychiatric issue.<br>
<br>
I would guess that figure is much less than 1%.</p></blockquote>
<br>
Stats are funny things. Last time I checked the non-vaccination rate was also between 10 and 15%. <br><br>
Which certainly doesn't mean they all get polio, but I couldn't recommend non-vaccination either. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="555777" data-time="1454367642"><p>
Stats are funny things. Last time I checked the non-vaccination rate was also between 10 and 15%. <br><br>
Which certainly doesn't mean they all get polio, but I couldn't recommend non-vaccination either.</p></blockquote>
True, but herd immunity is an extra positive of vaccination that doesn't apply to weed use. <br><br>
The strongest drug I take is caffeine, but I think weed should be legalised - the negatives to society of the illegality outweigh the negatives of the drug itself. -
<p>Somewhat topical:</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
<p> </p>
<p>A warning has been issued over a potentially deadly batch of synthetic cannabis after a teenage boy died in the NSW Hunter region and two others were hospitalised.</p>
<div> </div>
<div>Dean Shield, 17, was discovered in a reserve at Rutherford on Saturday night and police have been told he took 'Kronic' in the hours before his body was found.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Superintendent Craig Jackson told reporters on Monday that police were worried there was more of the same batch available, and warned users of the substance they were taking their lives into their own hands.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>In January last year two Queensland men died after after smoking the batch of synthetic cannabis.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Australia's prohibition approach to cannabis is leading to deaths and harm to people turning to the much more dangerous synthetic version, warns an expert.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'Most doctors that I know hanker after the days in which we might have to treat somebody who is just smoking weed,' Dr David Caldicott told AAP.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The emergency consultant and senior clinical lecturer at the ANU's college of medicine was speaking after the death of the 17-year-old boy and hospitalisation of two men in NSW.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Police were told the trio had consumed a synthetic form of cannabis known as 'Kronic'.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'I think this is a tragic example of deja vue,' Dr Caldicott said.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'We need to ask ourselves what is wrong with our current approach that allows these tragedies to continue to occur.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'I don't know a practising emergency physician who would not have treated (such a case) in the last year.'</div>
<div> </div>
<div>While synthetic cannabis is marketed as a herbal or natural alternative to cannabis, 'it's anything but', being prepared in industrial labs, frequently in southwest China.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'There are absolutely hundreds of these products on the market and every time one is banned another five or 10 emerge' using different chemicals.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>This presents a challenge to the medical profession in knowing what they are dealing with.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'This is a problem of our own creation,' he said.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'The prohibition approach towards cannabis, which can be identified by sniffer dogs and identified in your urine, has resulted in the emergence of a market of far more dangerous compounds.'</div>
<div> </div>
<div>They can't be identified by dogs or in your urine, can be bought over the internet and delivered through the post as they are not detected by normal techniques, he said.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'Kronic' was a brand marketed several years ago, but Dr Caldicott said he doubted whether the recent cases involved the same product.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>'As part of our monitoring program we have clearly seen the same brands with very different chemicals inside, so the packaging and the street name is largely irrelevant as to what you are receiving.'</div>
<div> </div>
<div>- See more at: <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.skynews.com.au/news/national/2016/02/01/another-death-linked-to-synthetic-cannabis.html#sthash.R9Z4cQYq.dpuf'>http://www.skynews.com.au/news/national/2016/02/01/another-death-linked-to-synthetic-cannabis.html#sthash.R9Z4cQYq.dpuf</a></div>
</blockquote> -
<p>Interesting reading about everyone's views on puffing the old magic dragon. It's something I haven't done since the late 90s, I just didn't particularly like it and how it made me feel, I was always much more of a drinker and I've never tried anything else save for an extremely brief period of smoking to look cool to chicks which amazingly enough worked for a bit......</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It is absolutely ridiculous that it is illegal though, booze causes sooooooooo much more fucken damage to lives, property etc that it isn't funny. Weed isn't me and that's fine and I certainly don't judge those who choose to partake, I guess I'm just lucky that my vice of choice is legal.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>P? I had an extremely interesting yarn to one of our finest Senior Constables and he says the effects of that horrible drug are equal parts terrifying and heart breaking. The shit he told me over a few beers would make Breaking Bad look like Full House.....</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Godder" data-cid="555814" data-time="1454376754"><p>True, but herd immunity is an extra positive of vaccination that doesn't apply to weed use. <br>
The strongest drug I take is caffeine, but I think weed should be legalised - the negatives to society of the illegality outweigh the negatives of the drug itself.</p></blockquote>
<br>
Point being just because something is "normalised" at 14% tells you absolutely nothing about whether it's good or bad. Just that people do something. There are a number of good arguments for changes to the current legislation on drugs, but something "being normalised" is rarely one of them. <br><br>
And the advantage of herd immunity with vaccines is to protect people at high risk/low immunity/unable to be vaccinated for genuine health reasons. Not to give contemptible fucksticks a false sense of security. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="555743" data-time="1454362219"><p>
Fair enough. Agree individual results do vary. I don't think the argument is "but I did it and I'm fine", it's more "the majority of people that have done it are fine".</p></blockquote>
The majority of people can have a Mars bar and not turn diabetic instantly either, though curiously the actively pro marijuana people on my Facebook news feed want to ban me from having a Coca Cola at the same time... <br><br>
Good reasons for decriminalisation to me seem to be: <br>- Responsible informed adults can make their own life choices<br>
- Some power will be taken away from criminal gangs<br>
- Some form of tax revenue is generated for the health consequences for those whom it does affect negatively <br>
- It will be available as a form of pain relief for those it suits<br><br>
And a fringe benefit being that the 'it's a hidden cure for cancer/every disease under the sun' brigade will have to face reality for a brief moment when it does nothing of the sort. <br><br>
'Alcohol/cigarettes/sugar/fat are just as bad' falls into the "we're crap but you're worse" category of sporting chant... Satisfying at the time, but otherwise shithouse... <br><br>
(And no, I wouldn't ban any of those four - before someone starts)
