Legalise Crystal Meth?

[carver]

Should methamphetamine (P) be legalised?
reasons for and against please?

[Steam]

Lamest troll ever on KB

[Mort]

What a stupid post - I can see a case for legalising cannabis as its effects are quite benign when compared to alcohol for instance.

But Meth is a totally different ball game. It is without doubt the most evil drug ever invented. It destroys the people to use it.

I cannot think of any reason why something which does so much damage to people should be allowed. You may as well be asking "Should we legalise murder"

How can there be ANY debate on this - it is a totally stupid and moronic question.

[carver]

What a stupid post - I can see a case for legalising cannabis as its effects are quite benign when compared to alcohol for instance.

But Meth is a totally different ball game. It is without doubt the most evil drug ever invented. It destroys the people to use it.

I cannot think of any reason why something which does so much damage to people should be allowed. You may as well be asking "Should we legalise murder"

How can there be ANY debate on this - it is a totally stupid and moronic question.

who invented it?

[Mort]

..... and your point is ?

[yod]

who invented it?

google is your friend, troll

[carver]

google is your friend, troll

so it was invented by those evil germans
gangs must love the monopoly they can run on this stuff

[sAsLEX]

You may as well be asking "Should we legalise murder"


It was self defence officer...... honest......

[Matt Bleck]

I think you're fryed dude, try getting some sleep eh... :niceone:

[janno]

Absolutely. But the gummint should make sure that each dose is a lethal dose, so those who start off "just curious" like the addicts that I have known get their curiosity satisfied once and forever.

Some might call it eugenics, but it's better than the social welfare system paying p heads to stay alive and create misery and mayhem . . .

[ManDownUnder]

no..............

[Livvy]

Oh come on Carver... What's the real reason you made this thread?

[roy.nz]

Mate P is the biggest soul and life destroyer ever,its just pure evil.
I think anyone who replied yes needs there head checked :angry2:

[Livvy]

Mate P is the biggest soul and life destroyer ever,its just pure evil.
I think anyone who replied yes needs there head checked :angry2:

It was probably Carver who chose yes... Just to be a shit stirrer...

But that's just my guess.

[oldrider]

Sorry, I have no knowledge of the subject so I can not constructively contribute to your poll or your thread. :confused:

I could of course offer a worthless opinion but would it help? :shifty: John.

[SixPackBack]

Lamest troll ever on KB


I think not.

I have long held the belief ALL drugs should be legalised. Before you start flapping your wings or call me a drug addict let me explain.

First of all I do not consume illegal drugs of any description, I occasionally take legal pain killers for a chronic neck complaint.

Drugs presently are illegal, however this does not encompass two of the most vile drugs consumed [alcohol and tobacco] the hypocrisy surrounding drugs,alcohol and tobaco make a mockery out of our current laws and seriously question the sanity of current legislation. It could easily be argued corruption must play a part at the highest level.

Alcohol and tobacco addiction is classified as an illness to be treated by the medical community. Why is drug addiction then treated as a crime?
Drug addiction should at a certain level be treated as a sickness, our jails our full of individuals whose only crime is an addictive personality [something keen motorcyclists share].

A more recent phenomonen is the 'legal' druggie, shopping at several Doctors for prescription drugs that cause every bit as much misery as meth and 'P' [cue Heath Ledger]

The system does not work, is based on American law and order and is ready for change. I advocate complete legalisation of all drugs and compounds not to please the druggies, but to highlight those that need help and cannot come forward at the moment for fear of prison time.

Drug addiction is a medical issue NOT a law and order issue

Flame away but please keep it civil.

[Mikkel]

I must say I back SPB in this one.

However, I voted no - simply because I don't think P should be legalised more than any other drug. So singling it out for legilisation would be a poor plan IMHO.

To me it's not so much a question of whether it's a medical issue as it's a matter of personal freedom. I don't think that you can consider a society free if the government can tell you what substances you're allowed to consume and which you are not.
Making hashish illegal but not tobacco and alcohol is about as random as saying you're not allowed to buy trim milk - but normal and butter are ok!

Furthermore, a lot of crime is based on the fact that providing access to restricted substances is a lucrative business. Buy making these substances legal and subjected to mild taxation (like alcohol and tobacco) the goverment would kill three birds with one stone: 1. remove one of the main foundations for organised crime, 2. strike a significant blow to the black market economy and 3. secure a considerable amount of income from taxation.

Seems a no brainer to me.
And yes, I know there are people who get their lives fucked over by drugs - but the same is true for alcohol, cigarettes, over-eating, stress, etc.

[Lauza]

Woah hold up.. without getting into an argument about whether or not alcohol and tobacco should be legal or not... why would you want other "harder" drugs to be legalised?

Seriously.. if it's legal, we would have more people hooked on it and then more people needing medical help for the addiction in the first place.. How would legalising it make it easier to help those people?

Wouldn't it be more helpful to change the way in which we deal with those who are addicts? Like for instance, treating them in a similar way to those with tobacco, alcohol, gambling addictions etc.. instead of just putting them in prison with no rehabilitation? Like the equivalent of rehab, AA meetings and home detention maybe as opposed to prison time?

But making it legal would just mean we would end up with more people needing help in the first place wouldn't it.. and whose to say they would come foward for help, even though alcohol etc are legal it doesnt mean more people are actually asking for help. There is still a definate stigma about being an addict of any kind.. maybe we also need to change societies view ie. "its okay to ask for help"...

I could be wrong on a few points, i'm not an expert on how convicted addicts are treated. But just my opinion.

[MIXONE]

FFS if you have had any experience with people sucked into this shit you wouldn't even contemplate making it easier to get.It fucks people over big time.Tobacco,booze,e,acid all mother's milk compared to this shit.

[Mikkel]

The argument that making stuff legal would make it easier to obtain and therefore more would become addited is flawed.

Honestly, is there anyone here who can seriously argue that even if they wanted to try a certain drug they would not be able to obtain it? Wouldn't know anyone who might know someone, who might be able to introduce you to people being able to dig something up for you?

I'm curious.

I'm not arguing that there's an unlimited (or even easy) access to all drugs in NZ - but you can get it. Ps popularity owes a lot to the fact you can quite easily make it in your own kitchen...

Also, noone is arguing that P is good for you. Quite actually would I argue that next to noone would be taking P if they had as easy access to proper amphetamines, coke, opiates, morphine, etc. Drugs that will not do you any favours for sure, but they're not as nasty as P.

[SixPackBack]

FFS if you have had any experience with people sucked into this shit you wouldn't even contemplate making it easier to get.It fucks people over big time.Tobacco,booze,e,acid all mother's milk compared to this shit.


To a certain extent I agree MIXONE. My brother-in law who I loved dearly, died after a two year binge on 'P'........he was 35....

Cannabis was my drug of choice for 15 years, I became a heavy user as a young man while still living at home with my parents.

Had the medical community [and not the Police] held the strings of power re: addiction, my brother-in-law would have found it far easier to get help without fear of recrimination. Similarly, if the emphasis community wide was on rehabilitation and not criminalisation help would have possibly been more forth coming for my issue.

I know 'P' sucks all to well, but putting individuals in hospital not prison is the answer.

And with respect to your comments on Tobacco, I think you will find that far out strips any other drug in terms of deaths. Because the user is not generally spinning out of control like a heavy 'P' user, does nothing to change the statistics on its use.

[Steam]

The argument that making stuff legal would make it easier to obtain and therefore more would become addited is flawed.

No, no it's not.

Tobacco.

Perfect, conclusive example.

[Jiminy]

It shouldn't be legalized. If it were legal, it would become banal and common to use it (and probably widespread) like alcohol or tobacco. And, I'm sure youngsters would turn to the next illegal thing that ought to be stronger.

Plus, we already have enough drunk drivers on our roads, let's not add people on drugs.

Should alcohol really be legal when most drugs are not? Well, I think that society has a much longer experience and tradition with alcohol than almost any drug, so social pressure creates some acceptable boundaries (although I'm revising this judgement since I've arrived in NZ). However, the laws should be targeted at the sellers and producers of illegal drugs, whereas consumers should receive help instead.


Honestly, is there anyone here who can seriously argue that even if they wanted to try a certain drug they would not be able to obtain it? Wouldn't know anyone who might know someone, who might be able to introduce you to people being able to dig something up for you?

I do. It would take me some effort and the help of other people to find any type of illegal drug, whereas I can easily find legal ones by walking into the appropriate shop.

[James Deuce]

I want paracetamol banned. It's lethal and people eat it like it's a sweety.

[Finn]

It is without doubt the most evil drug ever invented.

Wrong. Heroin was. Harlem was happy street until it arrived.

[MSTRS]

How's this for a scenario...
Make all drugs legal. Control of the trade leaves the gangs, with a serious reduction in income for them. They then have to resort to more of the other crimes - burglary, car theft, stand-over, perhaps even kidnap for ransom....
BUT of course, the govt has increased it's tax take tenfold so PAYE won't apply for the first $50,000 of your income thereby leaving you with more in your pocket - which you can spend on protecting you and your family from the aforesaid gangs.
Neat, eh?

FUCK THAT

There's KBers I'd remove from 'ignore' before I'd make something like P legal.

[riffer]

Stupid troll.

Anyone with any experience in the damage abuse of methamphetamine does to family members wouldn't even think of legalisation.

from Wikipedia:

Methamphetamine was first synthesized from ephedrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedrine) in Japan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan) in 1893 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1893) by chemist Nagayoshi Nagai (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagayoshi_Nagai).<sup id="_ref-2" class="reference">[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#_note-2)</sup> In 1919 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1919), crystallized methamphetamine was synthesized by Akira Ogata (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akira_Ogata) via reduction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction) of ephedrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedrine) using red phosphorus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorus) and iodine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine). The related compound amphetamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphetamine) was first synthesized in Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany) in 1887 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1887) by Lazăr Edeleanu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laz%C4%83r_Edeleanu).

Methamphetamine is a potent neurotoxin, shown to cause dopaminergic degeneration.<sup id="_ref-8" class="reference">[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#_note-8)</sup><sup id="_ref-9" class="reference">[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#_note-9)</sup> High doses of methamphetamine produce losses in several markers of brain dopamine and serotonin neurons. Dopamine and serotonin concentrations, dopamine and 5HT uptake sites, and tyrosine and tryptophan hydroxylase activities are reduced after the administration of methamphetamine. It has been proposed that dopamine plays a role in methamphetamine induced neurotoxicity because experiments which reduce dopamine production or block the release of dopamine decrease the toxic effects of methamphetamine administration. When dopamine breaks down it produces reactive oxygen species (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_oxygen_species) such as hydrogen peroxide. It is likely that the oxidative stress that occurs after taking methamphetamine mediates its neurotoxicity. It has been demonstrated that a high ambient temperature increases the neurotoxic effects of methamphetamine.<sup id="_ref-11" class="reference">

I can't think of how legalisation will make consumption of it less. It's not a drug people take because it's "cool"
</sup>

[RantyDave]

FFS if you have had any experience with people sucked into this shit you wouldn't even contemplate making it easier to get.
I've just PD'd this thread, and this is why. The potential to offend the crap out of anyone has as even seen someone have their lives destroyed by this drug makes (IMHO) the entire thread PD worthy. By all means debate drug legislation but, honestly, FFS.

Dave

[Coyote]

You may as well be asking "Should we legalise murder"

I think we should.

It'd get rid of 99.999999% of my problems

Bring on a pandemic I say!

[twotyred]

an interesting exercise in the effectiveness of propaganda

[carver]

an interesting exercise in the effectiveness of propaganda

what did you have in mind?

[carver]

I've just PD'd this thread, and this is why. The potential to offend the crap out of anyone has as even seen someone have their lives destroyed by this drug makes (IMHO) the entire thread PD worthy. By all means debate drug legislation but, honestly, FFS.

Dave

bit like how ppl get their lives destroyed by a family member getting killed on a "dangerous" motorbike? not the same i know, but the reasoning applies.

best not offend anyone eh?
better sweep it under the carpet

[riffer]

Still with the imbecile arguments eh Carver?

A motorcycle used as designed will not maim, kill or ruin the life of the user.

Read my previous post for the chemical effects of methamphetamine.

Totally different result.

[carver]

Still with the imbecile arguments eh Carver?

A motorcycle used as designed will not maim, kill or ruin the life of the user.

Read my previous post for the chemical effects of methamphetamine.

Totally different result.

so the germans gave it to their forces to destroy them?

[SixPackBack]

I've just PD'd this thread, and this is why. The potential to offend the crap out of anyone has as even seen someone have their lives destroyed by this drug makes (IMHO) the entire thread PD worthy. By all means debate drug legislation but, honestly, FFS.

Dave

Not a smart move Dave. As previously mentioned a close family member died from 'P' .
The fact you have trouble even considering changing legislation that is obviously flawed, and in-spite of having it people still die from OD indicates the FFS should be directed at you and your inability to even consider change.
Furthermore if people choose to get upset about a civil conversation they need a long hard look at themselves.

I would have thought a mods primary function would be to keep the peace, not to decide what is right or wrong.

Thumbs down RantyDave.:baby:

[SixPackBack]

Still with the imbecile arguments eh Carver?

A motorcycle used as designed will not maim, kill or ruin the life of the user.

Read my previous post for the chemical effects of methamphetamine.

Totally different result.

The mechanical effects of the motorcycle under the right set of circumstances have the same effect. Death.
Not all motorcyclists or drug users die, in fact just the opposite, many lead happy normal lives [including ' P' and meth users]
Sucked in by government propaganda, pity the same amount of negative bile is not published in relation to tobaco?

[Ixion]

I've just PD'd this thread, and this is why. The potential to offend the crap out of anyone has as even seen someone have their lives destroyed by this drug makes (IMHO) the entire thread PD worthy. By all means debate drug legislation but, honestly, FFS.

Dave

I'm not in favour of legalising hard core drugs.

But I'm even less in favour of censorship.

This is a flagrant abuse of a moderators position.

Just because a certain moderator has a personal opinion about anything at all, does not entitle them to determine that contrary opinions are not entitled to be discussed.

Mr Rantydave, I happen to be a Christian ,a monarchist , and a communist. Going on the basis of your declared position , I demand that you relegate to POD anything that is posted that conflicts with any of those positions. Or , is it only the opiniosn of the Heaven Born that are automaticaly "right" and cannot be debated against?

The Heaven Born have declared that they are the "leaders" of NZ motorcyclists. You have just shown the abysmal deficiency of that leadership.

Censorship based on a position of power is NEVER a substitute for logic or valid argument. You have crushed wisdom with the blatant and abusive exercise of power.

Since debate is forbidden on subjects on which you hold a personal opinion, I suggest that, in faiurness to the members, should post up what those subjects are. So that we know what is officially forbidden to discuss.

[Usarka]

I have seen a friend get so fucked up on meth that he threw his missus through a plate glass window, lost his business, and lost everything that he used to enjoy in life.

I've seen a friend get his licence, buy a cbr and get hooked on the speed and spend his weekends going hard. He met a car and died bleeding on the road.

Carvers post was a troll, but i kinda agree with some of the responses.

[riffer]

You're still not listening guys.

A motorcycle USED AS DESIGNED will not generally cause damage to the user.

Methamphetamine USED AS DESIGNED will cause damage.

BIG DIFFERENCE.

Abuse of ANYTHING will also cause problems. It's just the level of usage before abuse is so much less with meth than motorcycles.

[Bikernereid]

These two do not have benign effects compared to toher substances. The amount of people in psych units due to cannabis induced psychosis is staggering. Research in the UK by doctors has found that the psychological affects of weed and cannavis are far worse than other drugs.


What a stupid post - I can see a case for legalising cannabis as its effects are quite benign when compared to alcohol for instance.

But Meth is a totally different ball game. It is without doubt the most evil drug ever invented. It destroys the people to use it.

I cannot think of any reason why something which does so much damage to people should be allowed. You may as well be asking "Should we legalise murder"

How can there be ANY debate on this - it is a totally stupid and moronic question.

[MIXONE]

so the germans gave it to their forces to destroy them?

No but they did murder 6m jews to "purify" the world:doh:

[Dargor]

so the germans gave it to their forces to destroy them?

Heres an idea.
They gave it to their forces so they would accept their deaths and thus fight better.

Lay off the drugs dude, they mess with your head.

[Jiminy]

Not a smart move Dave. As previously mentioned a close family member died from 'P' .
The fact you have trouble even considering changing legislation that is obviously flawed, and in-spite of having it people still die from OD indicates the FFS should be directed at you and your inability to even consider change.
Furthermore if people choose to get upset about a civil conversation they need a long hard look at themselves.

I would have thought a mods primary function would be to keep the peace, not to decide what is right or wrong.

Thumbs down RantyDave.:baby:

I must fully agree with SPB here. Those who are offended can easily leave and ignore this thread. Whatever we discuss, there will always be someone offended. Let's not put our head in the sand.

[Mikkel]

Not a smart move Dave. As previously mentioned a close family member died from 'P' .
The fact you have trouble even considering changing legislation that is obviously flawed, and in-spite of having it people still die from OD indicates the FFS should be directed at you and your inability to even consider change.
Furthermore if people choose to get upset about a civil conversation they need a long hard look at themselves.

I would have thought a mods primary function would be to keep the peace, not to decide what is right or wrong.

Thumbs down RantyDave.:baby:

Again I agree with SPB - noone ever said P was good for anything but destroying the lives of yourself and your loved ones...

However, that shouldn't stop us from having a good debate on the issue of legalisation of drugs.

That's all - I won't bother posting in a thread in PD, but this particular had my interest.

[SixPackBack]

These two do not have benign effects compared to toher substances. The amount of people in psych units due to cannabis induced psychosis is staggering. Research in the UK by doctors has found that the psychological affects of weed and cannavis are far worse than other drugs.

As a previous heavy user of Cannabis I can attest to the validity of this post.

At the height of my usage well over 20grams a week was consumed, once I stopped the initial resulting [and often very confusing and frightening] mix of eupohoria and chronic want was mostly positive- I knew this was it, no more wasting hundreds of dollars a week and hopefully a far happier family life [just why my loving wife stayed with me is a head scratcher?]

6 months later I enrolled in Engineering courses. A limited degree of higher function was beginning to return and my short term memory had improved measurably.

6 months after that it was time to maximise my health and exercise my battered lungs.
I became high again [after consultation with my Doctor] I found that the THC was still present within the fat cells of my body and was now leaching out while exercising, this caused serious mental issues for me, misery for another two months while the THC left my body.

About a year after that questions arose over the strength of my marriage, after all I was smashed when I married Jackie and had been that way through virtually 15 years. Another round of mental anguish as I considered leaving her and my daughter.
That took probably 6 months to sort its self out.

6 years after giving up life is good, in fact its freekin' awesome. Being straight is the best high available.:cool:

At the height of my addiction contact with the Police would have, I am sure, resulted in criminalisation. At no point did I need the Police, what I really needed was Mental health services. I did not and could not receive that help without fear of prison time.

Thousands of fellow Kiwi's face the same dilemma under current law.

[Skyryder]

I was going to leave this one alone but as usual a shit thread turns into a half decent one but some mod does not seem to have the intellect to know the difference.

My take on this.

Theoretically I agree with SPB. But the problem is that once a drug becomes legal then it becomes a commercial product. The early history of opiates in late 19th and early 20th century is a case in point. Heroin, Laudanum were both considered benign and used as a cure all. Some concoctions were even given to children as a sedative for sleeping disorders. This was from ignorance more than anything else and today no such excuse can be given. With the marketing hype that has been associated with tobacco, the macho image for men (Marlboro) and the sophisticated image for woman (Virginia Slims etc.), I have no doubt that within a very short space of time a serious drug epidemic would be result should commercialization occur across the board for all recreational drugs. Of course the associated crime involved to maintain an elicit habit would drop. But there is a serious ethical question here. Do we as a society legalize, and with that commercialize a product knowing that it is harmful to health? We do this with tobacco why not all drugs? This is the question that those that propose that all drugs should be freely available and the removal of both the possession and distribution of drugs should not be a criminal offence. One side of me agrees with this scenario as it removes the hypocrisy of tobacco sales but this fails to take in the greater picture of societies obligation to act in a manner that is going to be of benefit to it’s members. The promotion of any substance that is knowingly harmful can not be condoned in any manner and now that the tobacco is knowingly harmful this ‘substance’ should be removed from sale if for no other reason than to remove the hypocrisy surrounding its continued commercialization. No legislation is not the answer for the drug problems….decriminalization of all drug usage is. This would allow medical treatment for users while dealers, those who sold and profited from this trade, could be prosecuted under current criminal legislation.

This of course is in the perfect world but given the state of the public health system at present where one in seven will suffer a ‘medical mishap’ (Chch Press 16-2-08) decriminalizing can not come fast enough as far as I am concerned. The Public health system due to the free market system that both National and Labour promote will take care of the drug problem by either curing the patients or killing them. :clap::clap:


Skyryder

PS I'm not voting in the pole as a protest for removing this thread to the PD.

[CaMo]

It shouldn't be legalized. If it were legal, it would become banal and common to use it (and probably widespread) like alcohol or tobacco. And, I'm sure youngsters would turn to the next illegal thing that ought to be stronger.

Plus, we already have enough drunk drivers on our roads, let's not add people on drugs.

Should alcohol really be legal when most drugs are not? Well, I think that society has a much longer experience and tradition with alcohol than almost any drug, so social pressure creates some acceptable boundaries (although I'm revising this judgement since I've arrived in NZ). However, the laws should be targeted at the sellers and producers of illegal drugs, whereas consumers should receive help instead.



I do. It would take me some effort and the help of other people to find any type of illegal drug, whereas I can easily find legal ones by walking into the appropriate shop.

I agree it shouldn't be lagalised - it is the scum of the earth....

I think people have a longer experience with cannabis than alcohol and I believe alcohol is far more harmfull than pot.

Cannabis is a great medicine and should be legal, if not for recreation as is alcohol then at least for medical reasons. I've read stories from people who have been prescribed prescription drugs for their illnesses and after a few years start feeling done over. They have reported that switching to using cannabis to treat their condition does not have this effect and gets rid of the huge amount of prescription drugs you have to take.

[DMNTD]

Meth is only a problem when abused...fact.

[SixPackBack]

Meth is only a problem when abused...fact.

Another interesting angle to the debate. I still have many friends who smoke pot, many have done so most their lives. Unlike myself they have total control over their habit-why penalise them?

Just how many folk walk a similar road with 'P' is hard to say [would you speak up and risk criminalisation], but I personally know of a hand full of people who have tried 'P', use it occasionally and similarly have total control over consumption.

Drug use is a complex issue and becomes of real concern to society when entering the 'addicted' zone. But be honest folks, to many on KB motorcycles fall squarely into the 'addicted' zone, many of us have spent money on our hobby [perhaps at the expense of our families, our health?].

I still maintain society will not solve its recreational drug issues [that includes the new fad-prescription pills] without decriminalisation. Discussion and soul searching cannot take place against a backdrop of fear and criminalisation.

[SixPackBack]

Just in from the Harold

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10493041

New Zealand's "hopelessly out of date and irrelevant" drug laws need a shake-up to fight a changing narcotics landscape.
That's the message leading drug workers will take to two high-powered conferences in Wellington this week.
At the Beyond 2008 Regional Consultation for Australasia, delegates from community organisations meet to discuss alternative answers to the drug problem.
It is the first time New Zealand groups will have the chance to influence international policy.
The delegates will push for a move away from the predominantly United States-led "war on drugs", to a more treatment-based approach.
"While we can admire their intentions, the cold hard facts tell us that the world community has largely failed in its official drug-control efforts and questions are now being asked about whether the current structures are fit for purpose,"Drug Foundation executive director Ross Bell said.

[Bikernereid]

Nice to see someone being honest about drug use and the negative side effects. So pleased that you got yourself turned around and that you managed to hold your studies and family life together.

I am not being preacy as I have been involved in the stoner and clubbing culture for most of my life and can admit that although I had an amazing time for the most part there is also a darkside to this culture.

Most people seem to think that just cos weed/cannabis isn't classified as high as say coke or heroin (UK) that it must be safer and believe me this is not the case. After working with a patient with cannabis induced psychosis who had personality disorder problems and delusions I have tried to encourage any of my friends who are hardcore weed/cannabis smokers to cut down and give up.

Any form of addiction to a substance can never be good for your health whether fags (yes I smoke), caffeine, weed, P, smack etc.



As a previous heavy user of Cannabis I can attest to the validity of this post.

At the height of my usage well over 20grams a week was consumed, once I stopped the initial resulting [and often very confusing and frightening] mix of eupohoria and chronic want was mostly positive- I knew this was it, no more wasting hundreds of dollars a week and hopefully a far happier family life [just why my loving wife stayed with me is a head scratcher?]

6 months later I enrolled in Engineering courses. A limited degree of higher function was beginning to return and my short term memory had improved measurably.

6 months after that it was time to maximise my health and exercise my battered lungs.
I became high again [after consultation with my Doctor] I found that the THC was still present within the fat cells of my body and was now leaching out while exercising, this caused serious mental issues for me, misery for another two months while the THC left my body.

About a year after that questions arose over the strength of my marriage, after all I was smashed when I married Jackie and had been that way through virtually 15 years. Another round of mental anguish as I considered leaving her and my daughter.
That took probably 6 months to sort its self out.

6 years after giving up life is good, in fact its freekin' awesome. Being straight is the best high available.:cool:

At the height of my addiction contact with the Police would have, I am sure, resulted in criminalisation. At no point did I need the Police, what I really needed was Mental health services. I did not and could not receive that help without fear of prison time.

Thousands of fellow Kiwi's face the same dilemma under current law.

[Finn]

On topics such as this, I tend to lean towards a more conservative view however, if legalising P would improve productivity and inject some enthusiasm into a rather mundane race of people, then I'm all for it.

Wake up NZ, take your P.

[kiwifruit]

The question now has to be whether smoke or snort it?
Oh and do you cut it or keep it "clean"?

either way its nasty shit
sure smoking it is far worse in that it fucks your lungs and is "more direct" but snorting the shit (cut or pure) is pretty silly too

dangerous stuff, not many people can handle it

[Ixion]

Another interesting angle to the debate. I still have many friends who smoke pot, many have done so most their lives. Unlike myself they have total control over their habit-why penalise them?

Just how many folk walk a similar road with 'P' is hard to say [would you speak up and risk criminalisation], but I personally know of a hand full of people who have tried 'P', use it occasionally and similarly have total control over consumption.

Drug use is a complex issue and becomes of real concern to society when entering the 'addicted' zone. But be honest folks, to many on KB motorcycles fall squarely into the 'addicted' zone, many of us have spent money on our hobby [perhaps at the expense of our families, our health?].

I still maintain society will not solve its recreational drug issues [that includes the new fad-prescription pills] without decriminalisation. Discussion and soul searching cannot take place against a backdrop of fear and criminalisation.

To my (lamentably ill informed) mind, this perspicious comment (use versus addiction) cuts to the heart of the matter.

It also addresses the question often raised "why ban X when alcohol and tobacco are allowed ?"

That alcohol can be an addiction is indisputable. And, those who a re addicted (alcoholics) often ruin their lives as a result. But, overall, on the complete spectrum of alcohol users, from the hopeless alky breafasting on a bottle of meths, at one end, to the little old lady who takes a glass of sherry at Christmas, at the other, the percentage of actual alcoholics is very small.

I have no figures, but I would guess that probably three quarters of NZ's population take a drink at *some* time. So, maybe 3 million. Of that the number of true alcoholics (as opposed to those who drink more than some busybody thinks they should), is very small. I have seen figures of 5%, quoted by temperance movements, who have a vested interest in the figure being as large as they can make it appear. So the actual figure is hardly likely to be more than that.Probably, much less. Maybe 0.5% ?

So, a small proportion of people suffer addiction. And a huge number enjoy a sociable and pleasant habit. There seems no justification to ban the use of a substance which gives pleasure to many because of its effect on a small minority.

A similar case can be constructed for tobacco, and probably marijuana. Probably more easily since the effects are so much less (actually, based on my own experience, the effects are zero ).

Now, the question is, does this paradigm hold for other drugs? I do not think it does for, say, heroin or cocaine (though I am very willing to be informed otherwise). It seems that once a person is involved with those, they will almost invariably become addicted.

What of P , and other more "modern" drugs? I do not know. As Mr SPB says, statistics must necessarily be most unreliable - no-one is going to admit to using them occasionally.

If they are like alcohol, large numbers of harmless recreatonal users, and a small number of (highly publicised) addicts, then perhaps they should be legalised.

If like heroin, where recreational use leads almost inevitably to addiction , then banned.

When I say that recreational use of heroin leads to addiction, I do not mean that a person cannot use it once and then not ever again. But that it is not possible to have a situation like alcohol, where someone has a regular shot (snort ? how is it taken) on Saturday night, for years , without the need for increasing doses. Of course, my understanding here may simply reflect the propaganda of the holier-than-thou brigade. It is a subject where objectivity is hard to come by. As we can see by the lcoation of this thread.

[RantyDave]

Back by popular demand and polite request.

[DMNTD]

either way its nasty shit
sure smoking it is far worse in that it fucks your lungs and is "more direct" but snorting the shit (cut or pure) is pretty silly too

dangerous stuff, not many people can handle it

Crossing the road is dangerous too mate...as is going for a walk at night in most cities including your fine city.

Mature management of intake and life is fine...just like alcohol and other so-called naughty things.

[kiwifruit]

Crossing the road is dangerous too mate...as is going for a walk at night in most cities including your fine city.


different league and a horribly flawed argument

[DMNTD]

different league and a horribly flawed argument

Yes true...you can control your drug intake but you can't control when someone is going to stab you.

I think at this point that I should add that no I do not consume P...anymore and haven't for many moons.

[kiwifruit]

Yes true...you can control your drug intake but you can't control when someone is going to stab you.

I think at this point that I should add that no I do not consume P...anymore and haven't for many moons.

You can't control its effects on your system though..... etc etc :bleh: :whocares:
i'd argue you can control when someone is going to stab you but it seems you CANT, due largely, i suspect, to "p"

[DMNTD]

You can't control its effects on your system though..... etc etc :bleh: :whocares:
i'd argue you can control when someone is going to stab you but it seems you CANT, due largely, i suspect, to "p"

Maybe so but you can control the amount of harm it has on your system by managing the amount of in take.
Hey don't get me wrong,it is not good for you however it is NOT as bad as it is made out to be....when moderated.
Abuse of P or of any other substance including coffee is not good for you system. Yes I am well aware that P is considerably worse for you than coffee...I mean come on.


No idea as to what you were referring to with your second comment re being stabbed and P. Maybe that people that stab others are on P?
Surely if that was your point then it was a piss take

[kiwifruit]

No idea as to what you were referring to with your second comment re being stabbed and P. Maybe that people that stab others are on P?
Surely if that was your point then it was a piss take

it was my point and was not a piss take
aimed (more) at "p abusers" rather than "users"

[DMNTD]

it was my point and was not a piss take
aimed (more) at "p abusers" rather than "users"

Why thank you...thank you very much! :2thumbsup
That right there is the difference and yes I know that similar statements have been made in this thread.
I could introduce you to some people that partake in the consumption of meth and you would never know. A certain couple I know have been taking it for over 6 years that I know of and it hasn't effected their lives to any obvious extent....ie they are both professionals,parents(kids have no idea) and they've never robbed gas stations or stabbed people. They are the sort of people that most should aspire to be(not referring to their drug intake).

It just gets me a bit when some people assume that because someone may take part in some recreational drug in take on occasion that they must be like "those others".
It pisses me off even more when some fuck knuckle robs,hurts or whatever and then gets a lighter sentence because he/she "wouldn't have don't it if it wasn't for the P".

[vtec]

Here's one. Cause my evil bitch ex girlfriend was drug fucked by this particular substance, after her previous boyfriend plied her with it for a couple of years and boy did I cop it. Turns people into very self focussed psychopaths, oh yeah and she had no teeth... ahhahaaha.

[Mikkel]

Here's one. Cause my evil bitch ex girlfriend was drug fucked by this particular substance, after her previous boyfriend plied her with it for a couple of years and boy did I cop it. Turns people into very self focussed psychopaths, oh yeah and she had no teeth... ahhahaaha.

Good blowjobs?

Staggering amounts of compassion - I feel fuzzy and warm. :crazy:

[CaMo]

If they are like alcohol, large numbers of harmless recreatonal users, and a small number of (highly publicised) addicts, then perhaps they should be legalised.

thats right, however there are still dick heads out there that will give anything a bad name.

Acid, mushrooms and cacti are all class A meaning harsh sentences. They are non addictive. Regular/experienced users are generally responsible and have a good time. People who just see it as another way to get "high" can be irresponsible, giving it a bad name.

I believe it is often the people who are taking the drugs that cause the problems not the drugs themselves. Drugs such as this often only appeal to certain people and there are obviously people who use these when they indeed shouldn't.

You can't have a law for certain people so they have to be banned all together. :weep:

Same goes for other drugs such as meth, coke, heroin etc etc...... There are people out there who can and do use them responsibly. However with these drugs there is a far greater chance of addiction and abuse...

If they were to legalize P then they may as well legalize all other drugs.... All drugs have the potential to harm but in the end it basically comes down to the user and how/where they are used.

What to legalise and what not is a tough one. :wacko:

[SixPackBack]

What to legalise and what not is a tough one. :wacko:

At a minimum decriminalisation of ALL drugs effective immediately. Cessation of patronising attitudes that the government seem to nurture, would also go along way to attitudinal adjustments that both its departments and the general public require.
[simply put, the government treats us like children and expects us to act like adults]

A reoccurring theme that crops up in many conversations concerning drugs is that of use/abuse. IF the public health sector dealt with drug abuse, guidelines could be set for acceptable use for virtually every compound known. Citizens would then be empowered to curb their habit or perhaps risk intervention. Furthermore a clear indication is set for a user to gauge control and effect. Naturally these guidelines would extend to popular and currently legal compounds such as tobaco.

Pouring shit loads more money into the health sector would be offset by removing current responsibility from the Police [and hence re-allocation of funds]. Added benefits to this would be [hopefully] more money in health and a more mature population responsible for their own actions.

[MIXONE]

a more mature population responsible for their own actions.

FFS back to planet earth.Were you ever a teenager?Did you ever want to try everything you could get your hands on and fuck the warnings?Make it easier to get and get more addicts I say.

[SPman]

Added benefits to this would be [hopefully] ...a more mature population responsible for their own actions.

Pshaw!

You're dreamin'.....


I agree with the reasoning though....

[SixPackBack]

It pisses me off even more when some fuck knuckle robs,hurts or whatever and then gets a lighter sentence because he/she "wouldn't have don't it if it wasn't for the P".


Agree 110%. Having been in some very sorry states in my life I can honestly say at all times my perception of 'right from wrong' was intact.

'fuck knuckles' robbing/stealing are the REAL focus of the Police. Not the hapless user hurting no one but themselves.

[CaMo]

FFS back to planet earth.Were you ever a teenager?Did you ever want to try everything you could get your hands on and fuck the warnings?Make it easier to get and get more addicts I say.

They should be educated better and not in the total bullshit way they did when I was at school. Half the facts you hear about certain drugs are just rumors spread by people who have no idea and just one opinion that - "DRUGS ARE BAD!!"

The government does treat people like kids but expect them to act like adults.

I like your views Sixpack

[SixPackBack]

FFS back to planet earth.Were you ever a teenager?Did you ever want to try everything you could get your hands on and fuck the warnings?Make it easier to get and get more addicts I say.

Abusing drugs because your a teenager is as lame as blaming drugs for stealing.
And no I didn't want to 'try everything'. I sunk into a pit of despair through lack of real knowledge, and once addicted, lack of real support.

Its easy to get some of the most questionable drugs now. Had I the desire, taking on the challenge of scoring 'P' would be an interesting exercise.

[scumdog]

To a certain extent I agree MIXONE. My brother-in law who I loved dearly, died after a two year binge on 'P'........he was 35....


[FONT=Comic Sans MS]Had the medical community [and not the Police] held the strings of power re: addiction, my brother-in-law would have found it far easier to get help without fear of recrimination.


The sill twat should never have started, he must have known it was like playing Russian roulette with one empty chamber and six loaded ones.

Sheesh!

(But then again, like a lot of the world he likely thought "it won't happen to me" when he heard of the downside, though at 35 he should have known better.)

[scumdog]

'fuck knuckles' robbing/stealing are the REAL focus of the Police. Not the hapless user hurting no one but themselves.

True - but there's a better than even chance the robber/stealer started out as a 'hapless user'.

[scumdog]

Added benefits to this would be [hopefully] more money in health and a more mature population responsible for their own actions.


Mwahahaha!

A shotload (read: majority) of my clients will NEVER take responsibilty for their own actions - and that is WITHOUT drugs, those on drugs are worse.

[scumdog]

On topics such as this, I tend to lean towards a more conservative view however, if legalising P would improve productivity and inject some enthusiasm into a rather mundane race of people, then I'm all for it.

Wake up NZ, take your P.

Fuck off.
We can't be bothered.

[scumdog]

so the germans gave it to their forces to destroy them?

As long as they killed a shitload more of the enemy they didn't care.
(well actually were unaware what the end result on their forces would be)

[Finn]

Fuck off.
We can't be bothered.

Bad day at the office?

[scumdog]

Bad day at the office?

Fuck no - didn't ya see my "Rampant Crime blah blah or how Scummy went Streaking" thread??

[Finn]

Fuck no - didn't ya see my "Rampant Crime blah blah or how Scummy went Streaking" thread??

Yeah but you of all people should know it's illegal to chase perps with a loaded weapon. Well done though.

[Mikkel]

Yeah but you of all people should know it's illegal to chase perps with a loaded weapon. Well done though.

I suspect that depends on whether you're on or off duty. If scumdog was hauling a loaded weapon - surely he must have been on duty! ;)

[scumdog]

I suspect that depends on whether you're on or off duty. If scumdog was hauling a loaded weapon - surely he must have been on duty! ;)

Bedroom duty don't count when it comes to chasing idiot wannabe car theives.....

[SixPackBack]

The sill twat should never have started, he must have known it was like playing Russian roulette with one empty chamber and six loaded ones.

Sheesh!

(But then again, like a lot of the world he likely thought "it won't happen to me" when he heard of the downside, though at 35 he should have known better.)

Nice troll scumdog. However unless you have some intelligent comment to make folk will as usual ignore you.

[SixPackBack]

Mwahahaha!

A shotload (read: majority) of my clients will NEVER take responsibilty for their own actions - and that is WITHOUT drugs, those on drugs are worse.

With an attitude like yours perhaps we will never know just how empowerment and true personal responsibilty would change the masses.

You confirm to many the true reason the police should not be responsible for drug abuse in the community.

[Usarka]

There was shitloads of violence where I went to school back when there was no P. What was the excuse back then?



The sill twat should never have started, he must have known it was like playing Russian roulette with one empty chamber and six loaded ones.


I'd suggest you get to see the all the "abuse" cases and none of the true recreational "use" ones as described by dmntd.....

But I do agree, the [many] bad cases aren't pretty.

[scumdog]

You confirm to many the true reason the police should not be responsible for drug abuse in the community.

Hey, don't blame US for the drug abuse - the losers do it to themselves, personal responsibility and all that........

[scumdog]

With an attitude like yours perhaps we will never know just how empowerment and true personal responsibilty would change the masses.

And this has ever worked where????:wait:

[DMNTD]

I'd suggest you get to see the all the "abuse" cases and none of the true recreational "use" ones as described by dmntd.....

But I do agree, the [many] bad cases aren't pretty.

The bad cases are disgusting but what annoys me is that the fuckwits blame the drug...they are the ones that CHOSE to take it to such extremes.
The weak will always be weak until they choose to sort their shit out but unfortunately most of the weak don't realise that they are,pity.

[Usarka]

Yep, and the weak "losers" are growing in number (be it drug or violence related), so maybe the current enforcement approaches aren't working.......

[scumdog]

Yep, and the weak "losers" are growing in number (be it drug or violence related), so maybe the current enforcement approaches aren't working.......

Nah, society ain't working, just look around you....problems come ...enforcement comes.....problem mainly still there....nobody has personal responsibility


Chicken or egg? - I think the problem was there first - how the politicians handle it is the problem too.

In 30 years or so we'll have high school massacres and all the other things we say 'only in America' about at the moment.

[jrandom]

In 30 years or so we'll have high school massacres and all the other things we say 'only in America' about at the moment.

Maybe, maybe not. Can't have high school massacres if kids going through sociopathic stages don't have easy access to firearms.

And a lot of the other stuff that goes on in Murka seems to be driven by their weird collective religious insanity.

I don't really see NZ society changing to that extent in just 30 years.

[SixPackBack]

And this has ever worked where????:wait:

A watered down version exists successfully in Holland. Elsewhere we have not had the opportunity to try, principally because the yanks have such a hold on drug laws.

[SixPackBack]

Nah, society ain't working, just look around you....problems come ...enforcement comes.....problem mainly still there....nobody has personal responsibility

Exactly. Government agencies attempt to be take over personal responsibility. Unsuccessfully.

Chicken or egg? - I think the problem was there first - how the politicians handle it is the problem too.

In 30 years or so we'll have high school massacres and all the other things we say 'only in America' about at the moment.

Its easy to see and understand why you would become dissilusioned with society in general. If we accept the the current 'war on drugs' is not working what do you suggest we replace it with?

[scumdog]

A watered down version exists successfully in Holland. Elsewhere we have not had the opportunity to try, principally because the yanks have such a hold on drug laws.


The Yanks have a hold on all the world except for Holland?/

(In best Al Borland voice): "I don't think so Tim".

[scumdog]

Its easy to see and understand why you would become dissilusioned with society in general. If we accept the the current 'war on drugs' is not working what do you suggest we replace it with?

Unfortunately like a lot of issues in life the 'solution' we have does not work as it should (hey, were dealing with humans, 'nuff said) but nobody has got anything that works better.

Until then we have what we have.

And I guess I am here to counter the Pollyannas of the world.

[SixPackBack]

Unfortunately like a lot of issues in life the 'solution' we have does not work as it should (hey, were dealing with humans, 'nuff said) but nobody has got anything that works better.


To carry on a 'war' when we know what the reuslt will be is insane, why do it?

How do we know nothing else will work without trying?

Its like the magic roundabout at the moment.:pinch:.......admitance drug abuse causes harm, adherance to antiquated laws that have proven ineffective and a total unwillingness to change.

[SixPackBack]

One concept that has never really been tried is Social Engineering. Now I'm not talking about some dusty gubermunt department dreamin' up a concept over cream donuts at smoko.

No sir.

PAID Professional advertising agencies given enormous amounts of money to totally change our perception of drugs and abuse, to take drugs could become so uncool only a leper would even try. Social standards could be set and cemented in the heart of the most hardend admirer.

Now I'm not saying that overnight we could magically mop up the abusers nationwide or create a collective epiphany, but given time, social engineering would make the difference the Police cannot.

[Virago]

To carry on a 'war' when we know what the reuslt will be is insane, why do it?

How do we know nothing else will work without trying?

Its like the magic roundabout at the moment.:pinch:.......admitance drug abuse causes harm, adherance to antiquated laws that have proven ineffective and a total unwillingness to change.

Declaring laws to be ineffective does not necessarily mean that the laws must be repealed, or that problems would be solved by a law change.

There is a law against murder. It could be argued that the law has proven ineffective. Should murder be made legal?

Drug laws are not meant to solve drug problems. They are a tool to help control the problems.

Suggesting that the problems could be reduced by legalisation is naive in the extreme.

[SixPackBack]

Suggesting that the problems could be reduced by legalisation is naive in the extreme.

Is it? Legislation currently controls drug use/abuse?

[Ixion]

One concept that has never really been tried is Social Engineering. Now I'm not talking about some dusty gubermunt department dreamin' up a concept over cream donuts at smoko.

No sir.

PAID Professional advertising agencies given enormous amounts of money to totally change our perception of drugs and abuse, to take drugs could become so uncool only a leper would even try. Social standards could be set and cemented in the heart of the most hardend admirer.

Now I'm not saying that overnight we could magically mop up the abusers nationwide or create a collective epiphany, but given time, social engineering would make the difference the Police cannot.

That was pretty much the position when I was young. Fading then , I think, but certainly in the 1930s and earlier, back to the 19th century, use of opium, cocaine etc (yes, they were around then), was regarded as the mark of a degenerate and a loser. Read Kipling for a social insight, sympathetic but totally scornfull.

Interestingly, gaining acceptance seemed to coincide roughly in time with the various laws banning drugs. Whether the laws became necessary because the use of the stuff became more widespread, or whether use became socially acceptable because of some perverse reaction to laws forbidding it I do not know (and I doubt anyone does).

It would be an interesting experiment to go back to the 19th century position. But enormously risky. The damage to society if it DIDN'T work could be colossal and irremediable.

[SixPackBack]

That was pretty much the position when I was young. Fading then , I think, but certainly in the 1930s and earlier, back to the 19th century, use of opium, cocaine etc (yes, they were around then), was regarded as the mark of a degenerate and a loser. Read Kipling for a social insight, sympathetic but totally scornfull.

Interestingly, gaining acceptance seemed to coincide roughly in time with the various laws banning drugs. Whether the laws became necessary because the use of the stuff became more widespread, or whether use became socially acceptable because of some perverse reaction to laws forbidding it I do not know (and I doubt anyone does).

It would be an interesting experiment to go back to the 19th century position. But enormously risky. The damage to society if it DIDN'T work could be colossal and irremediable.


WOW!

I am a descendant of Rudyard Kipling, how strange! [no shit]

And yes you are correct, should it not work excess damage could occur. But hey most laws enacted are both a reflection of societies wishes and a social experiment, and can at anytime be changed. [cue the 'party pill legislation']

Working in R&D experiments are my life. Solid change is unobtainable without them.

On the subject of use plain and simple, it should not be forgetten some of the most melodious tunes still playing every day on Hauraki are a direct result of drug use.

Its abuse that stings and control by the wrong Government agencies that are, I believe the most important matters.

[Rotor]

Some people think P in the right amount is ok
just like a hole in the head is ok

[DMNTD]

Some people think P in the right amount is ok
just like a hole in the head is ok

Great insight...want to elaborate or is that all the insight,wisdom and experience you have to share?

[Mikkel]

I was wondering if anyone has any numbers on problems with stuff like cannabis in Australia compared to New Zealand.

In most of Australia it has been decriminalised - e.g. in ACT you can have up to 25 grams or two plants without being persecuted (you may get a $100 fine though).

Just curious.

[Street Gerbil]

Excellent idea! Don't we all love mad drivers trying to run us off the road?

[SixPackBack]

Excellent idea! Don't we all love mad drivers trying to run us off the road?

After smoking pot?..............dude if they can't count the lamposts they will be shitting themselves. Pot heads are far safer than drunks on the road.

[CaMo]

Maybe, maybe not. Can't have high school massacres if kids going through sociopathic stages don't have easy access to firearms.

It aint that hard to get a gun in NZ. Give someone a few days and $123 or whatever it is and they can walk into a gun shop and buy a 8 shot semi - auto shotgun. Good for taking out 8 people at a time if your a half decent shot. Not to mention trademe is a place you could probably get one without a licence.

Not that someone from NZ would do that but it would be easy if your some psycho like from the states


Unfortunately like a lot of issues in life the 'solution' we have does not work as it should (hey, were dealing with humans, 'nuff said) but nobody has got anything that works better.

Until then we have what we have.


You don't know anything will work better until it is tried.

[SixPackBack]

I was wondering if anyone has any numbers on problems with stuff like cannabis in Australia compared to New Zealand.

In most of Australia it has been decriminalised - e.g. in ACT you can have up to 25 grams or two plants without being persecuted (you may get a $100 fine though).

Just curious.

Ozzies have one nasty habit that makes pot far worse. 'Spining it out'.........mixing it with tobaco in order to make it last longer, at first for the uninitiated this is disgusting, but once used a couple of times becomes a highly addictive mix.

The states differ markedly in their approach. Queensland is probably the worst for Police intervention. South Australia by comparison is probably the most liberal.

Nimbin (http://www.nimbinhempbar.com/) in northern NSW is a hippy town that openly sells drugs on the street, bus loads of tourists travel there from surfers to score. For some reason the cops allow this to continue, not sure why.

[carver]

meth is a tricky subject

if its so illegal to make and use, why isn't enforcemnet working?
i have know some P users, and they were ok, not crazy.
there is a term for when people make it out to be that drugs turn you into a pshyco while on them

[CaMo]

[FONT=Comic Sans MS]Nimbin (http://www.nimbinhempbar.com/) in northern NSW is a hippy town that openly sells drugs on the street, bus loads of tourists travel there from surfers to score. For some reason the cops allow this to continue, not sure why.

Bit like 420 at albert park I spose. Cops maybe there but just to ensure there is no trouble. They don't arrest anyone for smoking it

[RiderInBlack]

Sorry but after see a P addicted Dad hassling his Misses for money so he could get another hit at his Son's 4th birthday party, P has the big NO FU*KEN WAY in my books:argh:
I have also had a RN friend who's "boy friend" sucked her in ta using some (say it was something else). She got hooked. Nearly cost her her kids (which before using, where the most important things in her life). Luckily she has managed ta get of it and has been able ta be there for her kids again.
If ya using, get help and get off it. It is not doing you or those around ya any good. If ya haven't tried it, DON'T. Once maybe be once too often for you.

[Mikkel]

Ozzies have one nasty habit that makes pot far worse. 'Spining it out'.........mixing it with tobaco in order to make it last longer, at first for the uninitiated this is disgusting, but once used a couple of times becomes a highly addictive mix.

I thought that was a joint TBH. Or what do you mean by mixing? Something more complicated than just rolling a cigarette paper around some cannabis and some tobacco?



The states differ markedly in their approach. Queensland is probably the worst for Police intervention. South Australia by comparison is probably the most liberal.

I thought ACT was the most liberal...



Nimbin (http://www.nimbinhempbar.com/) in northern NSW is a hippy town that openly sells drugs on the street, bus loads of tourists travel there from surfers to score. For some reason the cops allow this to continue, not sure why.

Sounds like Christiania in Copenhagen a few years back. That's one good thing about Denmark gone though...

[RantyDave]

'Spining it out'.........mixing it with tobaco in order to make it last longer
We did this all the time in the UK. Partially because 'proper' weed is so hard to obtain and hence you end up with nasty hash shite all the time. Partially because proper weed cost a bloody fortune and smoking it pure would cost a small fortune. And like the man said I discovered, to my (very very low) cost that you do get addicted to the nicotine in there.

[scumdog]

Maybe, maybe not. Can't have high school massacres if kids going through sociopathic stages don't have easy access to firearms.

I don't really see NZ society changing to that extent in just 30 years.

A bit simplistic that first bit.

And it's not so much the access of guns - the problem is the mental state of the population - and ours is sliding....

[scumdog]

You don't know anything will work better until it is tried.

True.

Or work worse too of course....

[steveb64]

A watered down version exists successfully in Holland. Snip'd.

Must say - during our travels around Europe and parts of the world - Amsterdam was the safest feeling city to walk around at 3 in the morning. Biggest hassle I ever got was some guy coming up to me saying "Psst - hey Mister - ya wanna buy some Ecstasy?". Wasn't so keen on London at 3 in the morning. Or New York. Or Auckland for that matter.


Some people think P in the right amount is ok
just like a hole in the head is ok

Nothing wrong with a hole in the head. Does a lot of good in the right place. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trepanation


After smoking pot?..............dude if they can't count the lamposts they will be shitting themselves. Pot heads are far safer than drunks on the road.

A few years back, one of the Brit motoring programs (Top Gear, or 5th Gear IIRC) did a wee study on what was worse for drivers - Alcohol, lack of sleep, or Cannabis. They ran their 3 test drivers through a test course which involved a range of normal driving skills (parallel parking, driving, lane changes, etc.) to establish a baseline, then got one guy drunk (to just over the legal limit - and monitored him to ensure he stayed at that point or slightly higher), kept one guy awake for 24 hours, and the third got a smoke of his best weed. The interesting thing - the worst effect was the lack of sleep, next was the alcohol, and the guy who smoked the joint? He drove better (less errors) stoned, than he did straight!


We did this all the time in the UK. Partially because 'proper' weed is so hard to obtain and hence you end up with nasty hash shite all the time. Partially because proper weed cost a bloody fortune and smoking it pure would cost a small fortune. And like the man said I discovered, to my (very very low) cost that you do get addicted to the nicotine in there.

Nasty stuff nicotine. Be interesting to see if the "cocktail" culture has diminished since the cannabis decriminalisation over there.


One idea that hasn't been espoused yet - DON'T legalise drugs - just decriminalise them. Then pile on the penalties (up to life with no parole) for those caught either importing or manufacturing them. And increase the border security forces so that they CAN search EVERYTHING coming into the country. IMO that should not only markedly reduce the quantities available - but push the price up so that less people can afford the stuff in the first place... and if the ones who are manufacturing/distributing the stuff are locked up for life, then recidivism isn't going to be much of a problem either.

If nothing else, it should save the country millions in costs related to trying to control insect pests that seem to be arriving in NZ in ever increasing numbers via the (currently) large numbers of containers that arrive at destination without proper inspection - and no doubt catch a wider range of smugglers as well.

[SixPackBack]

I thought ACT was the most liberal...


Yeah I think your right come to think of it.


We did this all the time in the UK. Partially because 'proper' weed is so hard to obtain and hence you end up with nasty hash shite all the time. Partially because proper weed cost a bloody fortune and smoking it pure would cost a small fortune. And like the man said I discovered, to my (very very low) cost that you do get addicted to the nicotine in there.

Thats it the Nicotine is as addictive as all hell. My personal hell was exacberated when I started mixing ['spining']



the problem is the mental state of the population - and ours is sliding....

Being on the frontline, why do you think the collective mental state is sliding?

[steveb64]

Yeah but you of all people should know it's illegal to chase perps with a loaded weapon. Well done though.

It wasn't loaded. Just a truncheon... :pinch:

[Mikkel]

Sorry but after see a P addicted Dad hassling his Misses for money so he could get another hit at his Son's 4th birthday party, P has the big NO FU*KEN WAY in my books:argh:
I have also had a RN friend who's "boy friend" sucked her in ta using some (say it was something else). She got hooked. Nearly cost her her kids (which before using, where the most important things in her life). Luckily she has managed ta get of it and has been able ta be there for her kids again.
If ya using, get help and get off it. It is not doing you or those around ya any good. If ya haven't tried it, DON'T. Once maybe be once too often for you.

However, let's be honest. In that regard P isn't any worse than e.g. heroin - except the physical sideeffects are nastier for P.

The scene you describe could be applied to almost any kind of addiction - alcoholism as well!


We did this all the time in the UK. Partially because 'proper' weed is so hard to obtain and hence you end up with nasty hash shite all the time. Partially because proper weed cost a bloody fortune and smoking it pure would cost a small fortune. And like the man said I discovered, to my (very very low) cost that you do get addicted to the nicotine in there.

Spinning it? Sound like what I'd call a joint. Mix some hashish, skunk or pot with some tobacco and wrap it up in a cigarette paper... Most common way of doing cannabis in Denmark I'd say.

However, the normal approach is to first heat up the tobacco on a piece of alu foil with a lighter to evaporate most of the nicotine. Not because the nicotine is addictive - but because it can give you "lungburn" when inhaling the stuff together. It's not nice!

[RiderInBlack]

However, let's be honest. In that regard P isn't any worse than e.g. heroin - except the physical sideeffects are nastier for P.

The scene you describe could be applied to almost any kind of addiction - alcoholism as well!Sorry ya point is? I feel the same way about heroin (BIG NO FU*KEN WAY), and you are saying the side-effects are worse for P:Pokey:
There is less a lot less chance of getting addicted to alcohol than P, and it's side-effects don't even come near P.
IMHO it is OK to have a mild drug with some legalisation like alcohol, but not OK for strong drugs. Dealers need to be punished (I'd have some shot). As for the user, they need ta be given rehab. If they do something illegal because of their using (bash someone, steal, kill someone in a car accident), then they need to accept the punishment for that crime with no excuse accepted that the drug made them do it.

In my life experience, rules need ta be just a bit harder than what ya would accept from people. If ya what drivers to do less than 50kph around schools, set the limit/rule/signs ta 40kpm around schools and police at 50kpm+ . People on average like ta bend the rules a bit. Legalise P, NO FU*KEN WAY. Go ta Amsterdam if that's what ya want.

[Mikkel]

Sorry ya point is? I feel the same way about heroin (BIG NO FU*KEN WAY), and you are saying the side-effects are worse for P:Pokey:
There is less a lot less chance of getting addicted to alcohol than P, and it's side-effects don't even come near P.
IMHO it is OK to have a mild drug with some legalisation like alcohol, but not OK for strong drugs. Dealers need to be punished (I'd have some shot). As for the user, they need ta be given rehab. If they do something illegal because of their using (bash someone, steal, kill someone in a car accident), then they need to accept the punishment for that crime with no excuse accepted that the drug made them do it.

Annoying font and colour so can't be bothered to disect your post...

My point is obvious. I will however explain it - the scene you described with the 4th birthday has nothing to do with the fact that the fella is addicted to P. It could have been a lot of other substances. -> It's not the substance it's how the (ab)user handles it!

I agree drug dealers (pushers is a better word) are the scum of the earth and merchants of death and misery. However, it's not the drugs fault - it's the illegal drug industry's fault.
If you legalise the stuff, but control the distribution that would also have the side-effect of killing the illegal drug industry and put the pushers out of work.

What do you think the drug barons fear the most? Legalisation - that's right!

[SixPackBack]

The thread has been going for a few days now and the result to keep the status quo is overwhelming. N.Z is obviously not ready for such radical change, and to be honest I am not sure legalisation is something I could live with at this stage in our collective development.

Has been an interesting discussion tho', and perhaps some good will come from it. If nothing else a degree of enlightenment should have taken place for the majority, I certainly learnt something.

[Unit]

What do you think the drug barons fear the most? Legalisation - that's right!
Yea cause then Aunty Helen would get their share, and the government would become the pimps instead, choice, can we get family assistance for that?

[DMNTD]

Has been an interesting discussion tho', and perhaps some good will come from it. If nothing else a degree of enlightenment should have taken place for the majority, I certainly learnt something.

Sadly there still appears the naive will still choose to be so but yes hopefully some knowledge from experienced persons has been passed on.

For the record I do NOT think P should be decriminalised but I believe pot should be and add stauncher sentences for those that break the laws.

All I've been trying to get across is that taking P in small managed doses is completely different to abusing it.

[SixPackBack]

Sadly there still appears the naive will still chose to be so but yes hopefully some knowledge from experienced persons has been passed on.

For the record I do NOT think P should be decriminalised but I believe pot should be and add stauncher sentences for those that break the laws.

All I've been trying to get across is that taking P in small managed doses is completely different to abusing it.

Its a sign of the age DMNTD...'P' is currently demonised as Heroin was before and pot before that.

An interesting analogy exists between drugs and dogs [stay with me!]. When I was a lad Rottweilers seemed to be in the press every 5 minutes for mauling or savagery, yet now seem perfectly acceptable. Pit bulls are the current bad boys, yet many owners have paid a substantial sum for their mutt and don't want it ripping the guts outa the local moggies.

Simply put, they own a problem, but manage it as well.

[RiderInBlack]

My point is obvious. I will however explain it - the scene you described with the 4th birthday has nothing to do with the fact that the fella is addicted to P. It could have been a lot of other substances. -> It's not the substance it's how the (ab)user handles it!Had every thing to do with it. I was there. You where not. P is a very powerfully addictive. It is not a substance that is easily handled by it's users (ya only have ta ask those around them to work that out).
Legalise stuff just because gangs make money off illegal stuff is a poor accuse for legalisation. Follow that line of thinking and nothing would be legal. Legalise theft. Why not? Gangs make money off it. Would save tax payers heaps. Would save on cops and jails and get tax off all sorts of activities.
But ask ya-self this:
Would ya love ta live in that world? One without law. One off Chaos. Someone smash in ta ya bike. Sweet. Just kill them. Of course their friends and family could take you out or ya family. Not worries man. Sweet as.
This is Country has already gone soft as far as I am concerned. Violence is up in schools. Why do ya think that is? The rules have gone soft. Less consequences for their actions.
So, no ya will get me ta buy that legalising hard drugs are in the best interest of this Country.

[Mikkel]

Had every thing to do with it. I was there. You where not. P is a very powerfully addictive. It is not a substance that is easily handled by it's users (ya only have ta ask those around them to work that out).
Legalise stuff just because gangs make money off illegal stuff is a poor accuse for legalisation. Follow that line of thinking and nothing would be legal. Legalise theft. Why not? Gangs make money off it. Would save tax payers heaps. Would save on cops and jails and get tax off all sorts of activities.
But ask ya-self this:
Would ya love ta live in that world? One without law. One off Chaos. Someone smash in ta ya bike. Sweet. Just kill them. Of course their friends and family could take you out or ya family. Not worries man. Sweet as.
This is Country has already gone soft as far as I am concerned. Violence is up in schools. Why do ya think that is? The rules have gone soft. Less consequences for their actions.
So, no ya will get me ta buy that legalising hard drugs are in the best interest of this Country.

As for the first bit: Yada yada yada - tell it to the left cause you ain't right.
I'm sure P addicts are generally more violent than alcoholics. There are many kinds of addictions and they can all cause a lot of misery to friends and relatives of the addict.
Sure, some things are more addictive than others.
Some addictions are physical and others are mental.

I agree that you wouldn't be likely to cause the scene you described by being addicted to Marvel comics - but I can easily see it happening for an alcoholic.


The middle part: There's a huge difference between choosing to take a substance (knowing the risks involved) and physically taking hold of another individuals possesions.
Criminalising drugs is treating people like children - removing a personal choice that may or may not affect others. It's the nanny state at play.
Take the american approach to sexual education - abstinence. You teach people that sex is wrong and you shouldn't avoid it. The problem is that when curiosity gets the better of the people being taught in this way they are ignorant of both the how-to and the possible consequences of their exploration. Same goes for drugs I'm afraid - and though a lot of people never try them there is something fascinatingly interesting about them, and that's partly because they are illegal!

The last bit: Of course I wouldn't want to live in anarchy. And I agree completely with almost everything you say after posing that question!
Democrazy was founded upon amongst others the virtue of freedom under responsibility. Problem is today that people don't appreciate the value of freedom enough to act responsibly around it.

[Bikernereid]

As somone has spent a lot of time around 'functioning' alcoholics I think the damage is all relative to the addiction.

I am helping somone who is an alcoholic and believe the damage it is doing to him; vomitting blood, falling over and breaking his nose and splitting his lip are just a couple of the lesser damages. This person is socially isolated, is frightened constantly, and has no contact with anyone except for me and the people he works with. The drink has completely ruined his life and will ruin his career and his health if the help he is finally getting doesn't work.

I have seen other acolholic friends still too drunk from the night before not being able to take thier child to hospital. The impact of alcohol doesn't just affect the alcoholic, the imapcts are far wider reaching.





[QUOTE=RiderInBlack;1435836]Sorry ya point is? I feel the same way about heroin (BIG NO FU*KEN WAY), and you are saying the side-effects are worse for P:Pokey:
There is less a lot less chance of getting addicted to alcohol than P, and it's side-effects don't even come near P.

[DingoZ]

Have a gander at this

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mEFPdNv2Ddk&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mEFPdNv2Ddk&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>


Still want to have something like this LEGAL...?

As someone else has said "BIG NO FUCKIN WAY"

There's too many other things in this life which can f..k people up. We don't need this shit

[SixPackBack]

Have a gander at this

Still want to have something like this LEGAL...?

As someone else has said "BIG NO FUCKIN WAY"

There's too many other things in this life which can f..k people up. We don't need this shit


Propganda. Exactly the same concept could be applied to alcohol and tobaco users, the only thing that would change would be the timeline and thats almost entirley due to consumption.

The real danger with adverts such as this is that the indivduals not frightened away are no wiser. Once tried even a few times the user realsies that in fact their life may not be changing significantly and the authorities are feeding them bullshit.

When I was at high school a movie was screened by the Police showing cannabis users jumping off buildings??

Excatly why the Health authorities should be far more responsible for abuse, only then would some real clarity and education exist.

[RiderInBlack]

Propganda. Exactly the same concept could be applied to alcohol and tobaco users, the only thing that would change would be the timeline and thats almost entirley due to consumption.
.....
Excatly why the Health authorities should be far more responsible for abuse, only then would some real clarity and education exist.Firstly yes it probably is, but how is that different to your own propaganda and that the dealers are trying ta sell users on. Got ta fight Propaganda with Propaganda. At least that message is trying ta encourage healthier behavior.
Just because legal substances can cause similar outcomes does not make for a good reason to legalise hard drugs, especially if the drug in concern causes that result quicker with lower consumption:doh:

As for the last bit, I agree that Health Authorities should be involved. They often are. Ask psychic nurses and rehab half way houses.

Yes it treating people like children, but then they are acting like children by not taking responsibly for their choices and the effect it has on those around them. If the human animal was a responsible animal we wouldn't need laws. But we are not and will never be that responsible.

[DMNTD]

Got ta fight Propaganda with Propaganda.

Facts with facts would make a nice change though eh...

[Steam]

I found this entertaining photo, from a school science fair in the USA.
http://www.photobasement.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/crystalmeth.jpg

[iwilde]

Ok, someone please explain to me what a user gets out of using meth? I tried all sorts of drugs when I was younger (before meth) and all gave some sort of high, altered state etc...But I've not herd someone say thats its a great party drug, or gets you realy wasted before a rock concert. All I've herd is that it can keep you awake for days on end, to do what? Working round the house and on the bike 24hrs a day? As far as blaming violent crime on a drug I think its a matter of time reguardless of meth that they will beat, rape or murder. a bad bastard is a bad bastard. But back to my original question, what does the user get out of it?

[scumdog]

The argument that just leave it to sort itself out is meaningless when it comes to P users.
Those that are dumb enough to use it will anyway - and the results are not pretty (or cheap).

One can only hope the fear of a criminal conviction will scare a few off using the crap even if seeing what it can possibly do does not.

Alcohol is bad
Nicotine is bad

Why allow the use of yet another substance that is as bad as the two above - and then some??

[scumdog]

Facts with facts would make a nice change though eh...

OK wise guy, give us the facts on using 'P' - you know, the ones that say how harmless, cheap and non-adictive it is???????:crazy:

[DMNTD]

OK wise guy, give us the facts on using 'P' - you know, the ones that say how harmless, cheap and non-addictive it is???????:crazy:

If you read my posts you'd see that I'm not claiming that it is harmless at all,P is not a "friendly harmless" drug...all I'm stating is that not all users of P have been completely screwed up by their intake/use of it but it is reported that it'll screw ANYONE that tries it completely up.

I do see BOTH sides of the story. :yes: I also put it to you that you'd probably only see the mongrel side of it which is shocking I know.

P is not cheap but not all users are on the dole as you well know.

P is addictive to an extent however it's extremely addictive to the weak minded.

How do I know this...because I used to be a HEAVY P user and have learnt from my experiences both good and bad.

I personally do not see a problem in people having the "occasional" in the privacy of their own home as long as it doesn't affect anyone else...same with pot. However where that becomes a problem is that it creates an illicit income for criminal types which I don't agree with.

I should also point out that I've helped more than 20 people get off the stuff as I well know how bad it can affect some people.

I do NOT advocate its use at all,I'm simply stating my findings through real life experience on several levels(extreme high use to occasional) of the "P lifestyle".

[MIXONE]

Scumdog you being a :Police: and me not there is probable not too many things we would agree on however this p shit is one.Watching the propagander video on the changing faces reminds me of a good friend who went from being a 110 kg truckie with business,house,wife and kid to a 75 kg gang member with no life outside of the gang.It is bad shit and if anybody is contemplating trying it DO NOT TOUCH IT!!!

[Mikkel]

At least regular consumption of P would improve the general state of NZ driving:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kegLdHfUsoY

[spudchucka]

Have a gander at this

I love the last one. Most of those are actually pretty mild examples, I have seen some far worse examples than that.

It is also quite an eye opener to see a P addict scratching away at the insects under their skin and just keep on scratching through the flesh as they open themselves up.

I think its a very sad indictment on society that there are people who actually think there is an issue to be debated here.

[Mikkel]

I think its a very sad indictment on society that there are people who actually think there is an issue to be debated here.

Yes, let's just deny and ignore the problem and it'll go away by itself! That always works... :clap: :clap:

:rolleyes:

[Edbear]

Yes, let's just deny and ignore the problem and it'll go away by itself! That always works... :clap: :clap:

:rolleyes:


I doubt that was what he meant. I think he means that the evidence makes it beyond debate. Those who believe it is harmless, or causes inconsequential harm, are simply ignoring the facts.

Like gambling, there is a persistent "head in the sand" attitude by many.

[Mikkel]

Yes, let's just deny and ignore the problem and it'll go away by itself! That always works... :clap: :clap:

:rolleyes:


He is right

No he isn't - he is just speaking his opinion. You agree with him - but that doesn't mean he's got a patent on the truth!

You can't make existing problems disappear by not being willing to consider, debate and react to them in a rational and open minded manner.

Anyone who's not a complete fuckwit realises this.
Those who don't should take their PC touchy-feely bullshit and move somewhere nice and sunny where issues of a social nature are not addressed at all and see how they like that.

[Mikkel]

I doubt that was what he meant. I think he means that the evidence makes it beyond debate. Those who believe it is harmless, or causes inconsequential harm, are simply ignoring the facts.

Like gambling, there is a persistent "head in the sand" attitude by many.

Indeed - there haven't been (m)any posts in this thread preaching the blessings of P. Quite the contrary - people just say there's need to face the fact that there is a problem and criminalisation is only going to estrange the addicts to a point where they feel they can not get help with their problem.

And yes, it's a bit like gambling. And what I was advocating is exactly that the "head in the sand" attitude is not going to get us anywhere in trying to solve the problem.

[Edbear]

Indeed - there haven't been (m)any posts in this thread preaching the blessings of P. Quite the contrary - people just say there's need to face the fact that there is a problem and criminalisation is only going to estrange the addicts to a point where they feel they can not get help with their problem.

And yes, it's a bit like gambling. And what I was advocating is exactly that the "head in the sand" attitude is not going to get us anywhere in trying to solve the problem.


There's a difference between legalising and decriminalising a substance, and it is a problem as to how you handle such drugs. There is no doubt 'P' causes a huge amount of harm, but as with all addictions, including gambling, the only really effective answer is education from childhood.

I'm not sure that addicts are put off by the fact that the substance is illegal, driving them into secrecy. If an addict recognises they need help, that help is available, be it drugs, alcohol or gambling, but they first need to accept they are addicted and needing help.

The big difference with Methamphetamine is the effect it has on the person. Complete paranoia and a propensity to uncontrolled violence, by "uncontrolled" I mean uncontrollable either by themselves or anyone trying to intervene. The one high on 'P' is simply beyond reason and physically subduing him is the only way to stop him. The sheer violence of the person makes this a hazardous endeavour for the Police and why it often ends in tragedy.

Too often it is argued that it is an individual's personal choice to take drugs or gamble and therefore it is an infringement of their rights to legislate against such. However, it is also indisputable that such persons cost society a huge amount of money, time and grief in dealing with the consequences. The sad and often tragic results impinge on the right of the general populace to live in safety and security, and those who protest most loudly about their "rights", need to think about the rights of those who's lives they affect.

[Mr. Peanut]

The problem is, drugs like these tend to appeal to people with pre-existing personality disorders. Level headed people may be able to use these occasionally without harm, but are less likely to use in the first place.

Perhaps a license, or supervised environment could satisfy the curious? I'll admit I'd like to find out some of the effects some controlled substances have. But I'm not willing to trust the pharmaceutical skills of a backyard chemist.

[carver]

this thread is more about personal responsibility, tolerance, and understanding than just saying "we dont want this shit" cause guess what
despite legalisation or not, its most likely here to stay

[doc]

this thread is more about personal responsibility, tolerance, and understanding than just saying "we dont want this shit" cause guess what
despite legalisation or not, its most likely here to stay

How the fuck can you be responsible, tolerant, and understanding under the influence of this timebomb that those in the know are waiting to go off. Your not tryin to defend a habit are ya ?

[carver]

How the fuck can you be responsible, tolerant, and understanding under the influence of this timebomb that those in the know are waiting to go off. Your not tryin to defend a habit are ya ?

nope, but i have known several ex users, and they are fine now.
the debate is interesting
does P really make you loose all self control and turn into a pshyco

[spudchucka]

Yes, let's just deny and ignore the problem and it'll go away by itself! That always works... :clap: :clap:

:rolleyes:

Who's ignoring it, the astounding thing is that there are people who think the stuff should legalised.

[doc]

nope, but i have known several ex users, and they are fine now.
the debate is interesting
does P really make you loose all self control and turn into a pshyco

Yeah while you are under the influence.

Why the fuck do you think the Police are asking for more firepower.

How long is an ex user and ex user ?


You only get one brain this shit causes the most damage so far , part of the evolution cycle. The next one will be more adictive and more of a problem.

[carver]

i just wonder if its as bad as its made out to be-courtesy of the media and antonie dixion

i used to work with someone who tried it once, and she didn't know what all the fuss was about.
but im guessing she didn't do a massive dose

[Titanium]

A major issue with a "P", ICE, Crystal Meth addiction is that there is CURRENTLY no know substitue to assist addicts with getting off the stuff.

With opiates, at least there is methadone, suboxone and bupomorphine as synthetic substitues to help treat the addicition.

Cold turkey and addressing drug use drivers are the only know ways to treat a "P" users addiction.

"P" is meant to stand for Pure Methamphetamine Hydrachloride, but it is anything but pure. It contains paint stripper, Isopropyl Alcohol, lighter fluid, caustic soda, draino, thinners etc .......

I deal daily with females, (currently approx 150 people) which have drug use related isssues, 20 + year olds that look 60 years old (after 18 months daily use of "P"), who have scratched their torso and arms raw to the flesh, then pic the scabs and eat them, as the myth is that you get a "second high" from the toxins in the scabs. They show no emotion and stare blankly into space, as the repeated use has killed off the natural dopamine production in the brain. It is not pretty!

http://www.druginfo.adf.org.au/article.asp?ContentID=ice_crystal_methamphetamine_ hy

10 years of meth use http://www.methwatchwa.com/images/new.jpg

45 minute short film on ICE use in Australia ...http://www.journeyman.tv/?lid=56164

Early 30's first photo, 1 year of use, second photo 1.5 years later ....http://images.scotsman.com/2007/05/21/en21methb.jpg

"Meth Mouth" ..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Suspectedmethmouth09-19-05.jpg
"Meth Mouth" ...... http://www.ada.org/public/topics/methmouth_popup_photo01.asp


Make it legal? I don't think so!

[carver]

A major issue with a "P", ICE, Crystal Meth addiction is that there is CURRENTLY no know substitue to assist addicts with getting off the stuff.

With opiates, at least there is methadone, suboxone and bupomorphine as synthetic substitues to help treat the addicition.

Cold turkey and addressing drug use drivers are the only know ways to treat a "P" users addiction.

"P" is meant to stand for Pure Methamphetamine Hydrachloride, but it is anything but pure. It contains paint stripper, Isopropyl Alcohol, lighter fluid, caustic soda, draino, thinners etc .......

I deal daily with females, (currently approx 150 people) which have drug use related isssues, 20 + year olds that look 60 years old (after 18 months daily use of "P"), who have scratched their torso and arms raw to the flesh, then pic the scabs and eat them, as the myth is that you get a "second high" from the toxins in the scabs. They show no emotion and stare blankly into space, as the repeated use has killed off the natural dopamine production in the brain. It is not pretty!

http://www.druginfo.adf.org.au/article.asp?ContentID=ice_crystal_methamphetamine_ hy

10 years of meth use http://www.methwatchwa.com/images/new.jpg

Make it legal? I don't think so!

here is a interesting question

if it was made legal, could you make actual pure meth?
could it be refined to make it lesas harmfull, a bit like a more pure grade of heroin gives you a smoother trip?
i do know its nasty stuff, i have seen the effects, we had one of the biggest dealers a few houses away, and users down the street a little way.
it was chilling shit, but bear in mind, all this happened while it was very illegal.
so as we all know, current laws do not stop meth, so what can be done?

[doc]

here is a interesting question

if it was made legal, could you make actual pure meth?
could it be refined to make it lesas harmfull, a bit like a more pure grade of heroin gives you a smoother trip?
i do know its nasty stuff, i have seen the effects, we had one of the biggest dealers a few houses away, and users down the street a little way.
it was chilling shit, but bear in mind, all this happened while it was very illegal.
so as we all know, current laws do not stop meth, so what can be done?

Cut out the middle man and just put the resources into suicide booths. Save the pain for the families.

[carver]

Cut out the middle man and just put the resources into suicide booths. Save the pain for the families.

your not reading what im saying

consider it

[scrivy]

Fuck the lab drugs. :no:
I get my highs from doing 200+ km wheelies!! Who wants a dose with me?? :eek:
I guess they too are illegal. Oh fu@k, how am I s'posed to get me high legally?? :oi-grr:
I guess if I keep it up, I'll be going to jail too!!!

Buggar!

[doc]

your not reading what im saying

consider it

The purer the substance the quicker the addiction the bigger the damage.
Tobacco is legal, how may Dairies get robbed for just the Tobacco

[doc]

Fuck the lab drugs. :no:
I get my highs from doing 200+ km wheelies!! Who wants a dose with me?? :eek:
I guess they too are illegal. Oh fu@k, how am I s'posed to get me high legally?? :oi-grr:
I guess if I keep it up, I'll be going to jail too!!!

Buggar!

Yep they are after you to have you heard of OSH

[BIHB@0610]

Oh fu@k, how am I s'posed to get me high legally?? :oi-grr:


Buggar!

Um ...... well some people try having sex, Scrivy. With a female........:bleh:

[SixPackBack]

Why the fuck do you think the Police are asking for more firepower.


Escalation. Yeah right, that always works. Proof positive the issue is not under control.

[doc]

Escalation. Yeah right, that always works. Proof positive the issue is not under control.

Isn't it just like Evolution ?

Neither is the public, Greens and the Liberals . Bring back Muldoon

Cmon you must feel safer.

[scrivy]

Yep they are after you to have you heard of OSH

Can't I hurt myself without having OSH tell me I can't?? Abit like this thread eh?! :Oi:


Um ...... well some people try having sex, Scrivy. With a female........:bleh:

Try to have sex??? Try??? Trying to have sex with a female - you mean two females???????? :buggerd: Now i'd pay to see that!! Oh shit, is that illegal yet???

[Mikkel]

A major issue with a "P", ICE, Crystal Meth addiction is that there is CURRENTLY no know substitue to assist addicts with getting off the stuff.

With opiates, at least there is methadone, suboxone and bupomorphine as synthetic substitues to help treat the addicition.

Cold turkey and addressing drug use drivers are the only know ways to treat a "P" users addiction.

"P" is meant to stand for Pure Methamphetamine Hydrachloride, but it is anything but pure. It contains paint stripper, Isopropyl Alcohol, lighter fluid, caustic soda, draino, thinners etc .......

I deal daily with females, (currently approx 150 people) which have drug use related isssues, 20 + year olds that look 60 years old (after 18 months daily use of "P"), who have scratched their torso and arms raw to the flesh, then pic the scabs and eat them, as the myth is that you get a "second high" from the toxins in the scabs. They show no emotion and stare blankly into space, as the repeated use has killed off the natural dopamine production in the brain. It is not pretty!

http://www.druginfo.adf.org.au/article.asp?ContentID=ice_crystal_methamphetamine_ hy

10 years of meth use http://www.methwatchwa.com/images/new.jpg

45 minute short film on ICE use in Australia ...http://www.journeyman.tv/?lid=56164

Early 30's first photo, 1 year of use, second photo 1.5 years later ....http://images.scotsman.com/2007/05/21/en21methb.jpg

"Meth Mouth" ..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Suspectedmethmouth09-19-05.jpg
"Meth Mouth" ...... http://www.ada.org/public/topics/methmouth_popup_photo01.asp


Make it legal? I don't think so!


here is a interesting question

if it was made legal, could you make actual pure meth?
could it be refined to make it lesas harmfull, a bit like a more pure grade of heroin gives you a smoother trip?
i do know its nasty stuff, i have seen the effects, we had one of the biggest dealers a few houses away, and users down the street a little way.
it was chilling shit, but bear in mind, all this happened while it was very illegal.
so as we all know, current laws do not stop meth, so what can be done?

Indeed - what a lot of people forget is that the price of pure drugs drives people out on the edge economically, they turn criminal to fund their habit and have to settle for impure drugs in order to keep the habit going.

Truth be told, all the crap that goes in there to stretch, cut or whatever you might call it has a worse effect on the body than the drug itself.

Sure, the pure stuff will get you hooked faster - but it won't fuck your body as bad as acetone, paint stripper, you fucking name it.

A lot of peoples lives, physically, mentally, professionally, permanently get destroyed by drug addiction. But remember, it's not just the drug addiction - it also has a lot to do with all the things that comes with that.

Just consider for a moment - really stop and consider it for 10 seconds - what if we could some how minimise the impact of those side effects by accepting that drug addiction is a real and persistent problem - and then acting upon that?

[Gubb]

Worst. Troll. Ever.

I'm surprised it has gone on for 11 pages now.

[scumdog]

Just consider for a moment - really stop and consider it for 10 seconds - what if we could some how minimise the impact of those side effects by accepting that drug addiction is a real and persistent problem - and then acting upon that?


Just consider for a minute: How about those with the loser gene didn't bother taking the effin shit just for a start, they would be ahead right from the get-go.....

[Mikkel]

Just consider for a minute: How about those with the loser gene didn't bother taking the effin shit just for a start, they would be ahead right from the get-go.....

Hey I resent that! :angry2: According to goverment policy we're all created equal - there is no such thing as a loser gene and suggesting that there is constitutes harassment, discrimination and downright treason! :rolleyes:

Would be nice if you could do a gene test for the loser gene though :yes:

"You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later."

[Slicksta]

this thread is more about personal responsibility, tolerance, and understanding than just saying "we dont want this shit" cause guess what
despite legalisation or not, its most likely here to stay

I have known people who have done P for 2 years and have gotten off it and they are not messed up in the head in anyway what so ever... Our good friends in the media over do P to a large extent.. yes people do get addicted yes it does ruin people lives but so dose alcohol.. Its not the drug its the user!

[SixPackBack]

Isn't it just like Evolution ?

Neither is the public, Greens and the Liberals . Bring back Muldoon

Cmon you must feel safer.

Are you insane? As a reflection of society the Police will always have some exceptionally dodgy members within it, [cue the "baton" and subsequent report slamming Police culture].

What we are experiencing with current drug laws, tasers etc is in fact devolution. Back to the rule of the gun and the biggest bully ruling the block.

The police are simply the countries biggest state sanctioned gang. Ruling by fear and shear arrogance. The very last organisation who should have any contact with public health issues.

[Edbear]

here is a interesting question...so as we all know, current laws do not stop meth, so what can be done?


Current laws don't actually stop anything, much, be it drug use, burglary, murder or car accidents. Decriminilising or legalising these won't help either. The law can only hope to minimize and control the damage caused and provide some form of discipline to those who break them. Society needs law and consensus by the majority to function, otherwise you have uncontrolled anarchy. It can only be education from birth, that makes the real difference.



Just consider for a minute: How about those with the loser gene didn't bother taking the effin shit just for a start, they would be ahead right from the get-go.....


Exactly my point about education. Getting into these families and understanding why they choose to take these drugs is the first step to guiding them away from them. Unfortunately that takes a lot of time and resources. Personally I don't feel the need to artificially engineer a good time. I love parties, but don't drink too much as getting drunk spoils my good time. I get a high on life!

[scumdog]

[FONT=Comic Sans MS]What we are experiencing with current drug laws, tasers etc is in fact devolution. Back to the rule of the gun and the biggest bully ruling the block.

The police are simply the countries biggest state sanctioned gang. Ruling by fear and shear arrogance. The very last organisation who should have any contact with public health issues.

And loving it - AND you, the public pay us to be the above.

AND loser can't join - mwahahaha!

[RiderInBlack]

Someone was telling me yesterday that ya only get done for possession or selling of a restricted drug, not the using. What is the actual Law?

[scumdog]

Someone was telling me yesterday that ya only get done for possession or selling of a restricted drug, not the using. What is the actual Law?

Using = possession anyway.

[RiderInBlack]

Using = possession anyway.So if ya off ya tree from having taken the drug but have none of it on ya body (it's all in ya blood), you are still in possession??

[scumdog]

So if ya off ya tree from having taken the drug but have none of it on ya body (it's all in ya blood), you are still in possession??

Good point - I was thinking more of a guy who is stoned and has drugs on him.

Being wasted is like being drunk - no offence as such unless you're 'misbehaving' or driving or the like.

[DMNTD]

- no offence as such unless you're 'misbehaving' or driving or the like.

So basically you're "allowed" to be wired off your face as long as you're not driving/riding or causing a public nuisance?

Must be frustrating from the Police's side of things then

[RiderInBlack]

Good point - I was thinking more of a guy who is stoned and has drugs on him.

Being wasted is like being drunk - no offence as such unless you're 'misbehaving' or driving or the like.
So there is no reason why an addict should fear getting help, even if they are high, as long as they don't have the drug on them. Would that be right?
Because if that is the case then legalising the drug would do little to make it easier for an addict to get treatment.

[SixPackBack]

And loving it - AND you, the public pay us to be the above.

AND loser can't join - mwahahaha!

I dunno Scumdog, Brad Shpton and the rapist crew got in. Hell one 'loser' became deputy police commisioner.

[DMNTD]

So there is no reason why an addict should fear getting help, even if they are high, as long as they don't have the drug on them. Would that be right?
Because if that is the case then legalising the drug would do little to make it easier of an addict to get treatment.

There are MANY places for an addict of any substance to get help/advice without fear of being prosecuted.

[DMNTD]

I dunno Scumdog, Brad Shpton and the rapist crew got in. Hell one 'loser' became deputy police commissioner.

Could intro you to a dozen plus others too...serious crim's

[scumdog]

I dunno Scumdog, Brad Shpton and the rapist crew got in. Hell one 'loser' became deputy police commisioner.

I guess they turned into losers as opposed to (as I said) JOINED as losers......

[RiderInBlack]

There are MANY places for an addict of any substance to get help/advice without fear of being prosecuted.
So that just re-enforces that legalisation would do little to improve this.

criminalisation is only going to estrange the addicts to a point where they feel they can not get help with their problem.Making this statement less than true.

[Mikkel]

So that just re-enforces that legalisation would do little to improve this.
Making this statement less than true.

Not really mate. The fact that you can GET help doesn't mean you're likely to SEEK help.

I hope you can understand that little "subtlety".

Otherwise I can't see why not everyone who's getting their life ruined by this shit doesn't just HTFU, do a turkey and get it over with... Funnily enough it's mostly the people who retain their dignity and self-esteem who ever manage that feat!

[nodrog]

have you guys made it legal yet? if so, can i get it at Pak n Save tonight with my Groceries?

i kind of like the idea of only 3 sleeps until Christmas.

[MIXONE]

have you guys made it legal yet? if so, can i get it at Pak n Save tonight with my Groceries?

i kind of like the idea of only 3 sleeps until Christmas.

Smoke P and then you have 3 days without sleep until Xmas.

[DMNTD]

i kind of like the idea of only 3 sleeps until Christmas.

......2011

[nodrog]

......2011

a space odyssey?

[DMNTD]

a space odyssey?

Meth Factor 9!

[nodrog]

Meth Factor 9!
__________________

[Disco Dan]

Come down to my work one day... take a look at all my clients with mental illness ...80% of them are due to drug use. When you see what happens if your brain does not take too kindly to the stuff you wont want to touch it!!

[Finn]

Smoke P and then you have 3 days without sleep until Xmas.

We've got a bright spark onboard.

[DMNTD]

Come down to my work one day... take a look at all my clients with mental illness ...80% of them are due to drug use. When you see what happens if your brain does not take too kindly to the stuff you wont want to touch it!!

Sure but the people that end up being a client of yours due to drug in take are far from recreational users.

[nodrog]

Come down to my work one day... take a look at all my clients with mental illness ...80% of them are due to drug use. When you see what happens if your brain does not take too kindly to the stuff you wont want to touch it!!

fark i probably know 1/2 of them.

[Disco Dan]

Sure but the people that end up being a client of yours due to drug in take are far from recreational users.

Yes and no.

There are some people that only have to try pot for example once and that sparks off all sorts of symptoms. Most people have been regular pot smokers then developed MI later in life.

The MH system has not really begun to see the long term effects of P just yet!! but it is happening...

[DMNTD]

MI....MH....please explain

[Disco Dan]

im off to work..

...need to remind one guy that I am not in fact God. Another that I am not 'his sexy beast' and convince our newest client that her cat did not die and turn into a mango but in fact is living happily with her parents. *sigh*

[Finn]

fark i probably know 1/2 of them.

Get out of the TV room then and meet the other half.

[Disco Dan]

MI....MH....please explain

MI - Mental Illness
MH - Mental Health

[Finn]

MI....MH....please explain

At a guess I would say Mental Illness and Mental Health.

[Mikkel]

At a guess I would say Mental Illness and Mental Health.

And we have a winner!

You've won a guided tour through the cookoo's nest.

[nodrog]

Get out of the TV room then and meet them.

i cant, im waiting for my medication, to cure my mental illness, that was caused by drugs.

i feel an alanis morissette song coming on.

[DMNTD]

At a guess I would say Mental Illness and Mental Health.

I blame the P!

[SixPackBack]

I guess they turned into losers as opposed to (as I said) JOINED as losers......

.............As a result of their exposure to Police culture?

[RiderInBlack]

Not really mate. The fact that you can GET help doesn't mean you're likely to SEEK help.

I hope you can understand that little "subtlety".
Yes I do. To seek help ya first need ta recognize ya have a problem. IMHO and experience, ya have to be ready to change before you can change. Doesn't matter if ya talking about seeking counseling or trying ta kick a habit. This still does not prove that legalising a drug would increase the likelihood of an addict seeking help. I would put it to you that an addict is more likely to seek help after they start having major problems in their lives due to their habit. Getting in trouble with the law being one of those.
Has freeing up our gambling laws helped gambling addicts<_<

[carver]

well, what about dealers??
are they just "businessmen" doing a risky business, with big returns
or hardcore crims

[jrandom]

well, what about dealers??

So can I score some off you then bro?

:sunny:

[Mikkel]

Yes I do. To seek help ya first need ta recognize ya have a problem. IMHO and experience, ya have to be ready to change before you can change. Doesn't matter if ya talking about seeking counseling or trying ta kick a habit. This still does not prove that legalising a drug would increase the likelihood of an addict seeking help. I would put it to you that an addict is more likely to seek help after they start having major problems in their lives due to their habit. Getting in trouble with the law being one of those.
Has freeing up our gambling laws helped gambling addicts<_<

I totally agree. You can lead a horse to the water but you can't make it drink!

All I am saying is that if we instead of taking the hardline approach (which has shown itself not to prevent people from becoming addicts anyway) - at least engage in a discussion on the subject and approach the manner in a rational way we might be able to help more people accept and realise they have a problem but there's help to be had - which in turn could increase their chances of getting their addiction under control.

Just for the record - I voted "No" in the poll because if we were to make an exception to the current substance restrictions P wouldn't be my choice - cannabis would.
However, and this is my own philosophical stand point and therefore not open for debate, I don't think there should be any restrictions upon what substances you were allowed to consume - but then again I'm ultra liberal and do realise that such an approach probably wouldn't work for a lot of people. But hey, it's ideology - it's not meant to be realistic!
I've noted that a lot of people on here has a standard response of "Fuck off!" if anyone tries to tell them what they can and can not do in regards to their own lives - for me, this is exactly the same!

For what it's worth I don't do any drugs besides alcohol and a small amount of weed on rare occasions. I'm not arguing this view because I hope that I might legalise my own behaviour - hell if that was the case I'd argue against speed limits, but then again I actually wouldn't...


I don't know about the gambling - but question is, has it made the problem of gambling worse?

[carver]

So can I score some off you then bro?

:sunny:

that wouldnt be responsible
plus i dont touch that shit

[jrandom]

that wouldnt be responsible
plus i dont touch that shit

:laugh:

Sweet, I'll call you back then.

[nodrog]

:laugh:

Sweet, I'll call you back then.

0800 80 P 80 P 80 P

[doc]

im off to work..

...need to remind one guy that I am not in fact God. Another that I am not 'his sexy beast' and convince our newest client that her cat did not die and turn into a mango but in fact is living happily with her parents. *sigh*

Fair enough all this. I'm still tryin to figure out where you are coming from. What is your expertise ? You offer advice, yet you mentioned in one post you dont have a bank account. I know for a fact that Health haven't paid cash in decades. Your right about most your comments tho.

[doc]

At a guess I would say Mental Illness and Mental Health.
And you know this how ?????

[Disco Dan]

Fair enough all this. I'm still tryin to figure out where you are coming from. What is your expertise ? You offer advice, yet you mentioned in one post you dont have a bank account. I know for a fact that Health haven't paid cash in decades. Your right about most your comments tho.

Every employer by law has to pay their employees how they choose!!! (within reason, obviously). They pay me in cash. How does that affect my expertise in the area??

[doc]

They pay me in cash. How does that affect my expertise in the area??

It effects your credibility, no DHB has paid cash for decades.

[Disco Dan]

It effects your credibility, no DHB has paid cash for decades.

I dispute that!!! ...would you like to see a photocopy of everysingle CASH cheque that I have had since August last year sonny-jim???

FYI - we are funded by DHB not the 'actual' DHB. Not sure where you got that part from.

[doc]

I dispute that!!! ...would you like to see a photocopy of everysingle CASH cheque that I have had since August last year sonny-jim???

FYI - we are funded by DHB not the 'actual' DHB. Not sure where you got that part from.
So you work for a NGO then ?

WTF do you think a DHB is ?

[Ixion]

It effects your credibility, no DHB has paid cash for decades.

The law is clear. An employer MUST if required pay wages in cash. many will bleat , but if pushed they have no choice. Mr Dan no doubt has his reasons for preferring cash (strictly , he could demand to be paid in banknotes, not by cheque). They are his business.

[doc]

The law is clear. An employer MUST if required pay wages in cash. many will bleat , but if pushed they have no choice. Mr Dan no doubt has his reasons for preferring cash (strictly , he could demand to be paid in banknotes, not by cheque). They are his business.

Real employers don't employ idots.

[Steam]

Mr Dan no doubt has his reasons for preferring cash...
Because he's a paranoid with a panopticon urban fortress?

[Ixion]

Possibly. Who knows, and who cares. It is his business, no-one elses , and if he so chooses,whatsoever hsi reasons may be, and has that right, who is to gainsay him?

[doc]

The law is clear. An employer MUST if required pay wages in cash. many will bleat , but if pushed they have no choice. Mr Dan no doubt has his reasons for preferring cash (strictly , he could demand to be paid in banknotes, not by cheque). They are his business.

For god sake man where is he going to go to get his cash . They dont have facitlities to give it to him. At this level they have plenty of choice of non trained idiots. Why would they choose one that is being difficult. Start a thread of how many large employers pay in cash anymore.

[Disco Dan]

Possibly. Who knows, and who cares. It is his business, no-one elses , and if he so chooses,whatsoever hsi reasons may be, and has that right, who is to gainsay him?

Thank you Ixion, your exactly right. I could demand bank notes, but for the purposes of not creating a huge hassle for my employer I settled for a cash cheque. My reasons, which I dont mind saying online... heck google me, its no secret... is that in August last year I made myself bankcrupt - one of the side effects of which is that I am unable to have a bank account in which to have my wages paid. I was already in employement during that time, and my employers had no problem paying me by cheque - it is more of a hassle for me having to go to the head office every pay day to pick it up than it is too write out a cheque!!!

FYI - I work for a community organisation that is funded by the DHB.

[doc]

I dispute that!!! ...would you like to see a photocopy of everysingle CASH cheque that I have had since August last year sonny-jim???

FYI - we are funded by DHB not the 'actual' DHB. Not sure where you got that part from.

OK pal what is your offical title everyone in Health has one ? NGO and DHB what is it, some examples RN, CSW, Caregiver, OT, SW, as examples whats yours ? If your not sure check your job description. Its on your payslip. Everyone gets one. Dont know about the "Cash " Ones you might have to look under the table.

Shame really because SOME of what you say is quite reasonable

[Disco Dan]

OK pal what is your offical title everyone in Health has one ? NGO and DHB what is it, some examples RN, CSW, Caregiver, OT, SW, as examples whats yours ? If your not sure check your job description. Its on your payslip. Everyone gets one. Dont know about the "Cash " Ones you might have to look under the table.

Shame really because SOME of what you say is quite reasonable

Why is this such an issue for you??? Seems odd to me.

Support worker, which may I add requires at least a certificate in mental health or a diploma in order even get into.

[Disco Dan]

Because he's a paranoid with a panopticon urban fortress?

Paranoid? Maybe. Suprised you did not google me. A simple google search of my name would bring up the answer... complete with name address, phone number, employer etc etc ...its out of date and virtually useless now... but meh.

http://www.insolvency.govt.nz/cms/customer-support/ask-a-question/how-do-i-search-for-a-bankrupt-or-someone-subject-to-a-nap



You lot flipping happy now????????

[Finn]

Real employers don't employ idots.

We're talking a DHB here...

[doc]

Why is this such an issue for you??? Seems odd to me.

Support worker, which may I add requires at least a certificate in mental health or a diploma in order even get into.

So you have no qualifications since you have only been paid since August your are not in a DHB, Your arguing with a Masters in Mental health 37 yrs front line experience and teaches certificate courses and above. Well thats what she reckons anyway. Ive always thought a little knowledge can be dangerous. But don't set yourself up as an expert. Bikes are more fun don't bring work experiences to KB'r, and we will get on fine.

[Disco Dan]

We're talking a DHB here...

Yes, but not an idiot.

Do you have an in-depth clinical knowledge of mental health? or at the very least personal experience? Do you have empathy for others? An ability to develop an understanding of a persons illness and support them through their recovery regardless of the judgments made by others 'not so enlightened' in the community??

...dont think so... you my friend would be the idiot if you applied for this job.

[doc]

We're talking a DHB here...
True, but only at management level, there being an idot is mandatoryl

[Finn]

Why is this such an issue for you??? Seems odd to me.

Seems like you finally lost your virginity. Doc fucked you over well and true.

[Ixion]

For god sake man where is he going to go to get his cash . They dont have facitlities to give it to him. At this level they have plenty of choice of non trained idiots. Why would they choose one that is being difficult. Start a thread of how many large employers pay in cash anymore.
That's their problem. I've had this argument with more than one employer. Always win, the law is quite clear. They all find a way. As they must. No employer is above the law.

[Disco Dan]

So you have no qualifications since you have only been paid since August your are not in a DHB, Your arguing with a Masters in Mental health 37 yrs front line experience and teaches certificate courses and above. Well thats what she reckons anyway. Ive always thought a little knowledge can be dangerous. But don't set yourself up as an expert. Bikes are more fun don't bring work experiences to KB'r, and we will get on fine.

ahhhhhhh I see where your coming from. :cool:

Hey, im no expert... not by a long shot. I asssume your reffering to a thread that I started on the subject? Can we not discuss MH issues with the help of qualified professionals???

Surely your not another person in the field that is making the industry worse by not freely sharing your knowledge with others.. no matter how insignificant that knowledge may be?? :Pokey:

[doc]

Yes, but not an idiot.

Do you have an in-depth clinical knowledge of mental health? or at the very least personal experience? Do you have empathy for others? An ability to develop an understanding of a persons illness and support them through their recovery regardless of the judgments made by others 'not so enlightened' in the community??

...dont think so... you my friend would be the idiot if you applied for this job.

But Finn is not looking for the job . I do believe however he get back to you in due course.

[Finn]

Do you have an in-depth clinical knowledge of mental health? or at the very least personal experience? Do you have empathy for others? An ability to develop an understanding of a persons illness and support them through their recovery regardless of the judgments made by others 'not so enlightened' in the community??

...dont think so... you my friend would be the idiot if you applied for this job.

And yet no mention of money. Nope, not for me.

[Disco Dan]

And yet no mention of money. Nope, not for me.

Ha ! ...if i did this job for the money I would have left a long time ago!!!!


There is more to a job than money Finn.

[DMNTD]

Puff puff pass.... :sunny:

[Finn]

There is more to a job than money Finn.

I wouldn't know. Haven't been employed for 15 years.

[Disco Dan]

I wouldn't know. Have been employed for 15 years.

Try "job satisfaction" - having worked closely with another person that has an illness then helping that person 're-join' the community getting back their independance.

Nothing like that feeling.

[Steam]

Paranoid? Maybe. Suprised you did not google me. A simple google search of my name would bring up the answer...

No sorry, I was just joking about the Paranoid bit. As for googling your name Disco Dan (http://www.discodanthealienman.com/dd2movies.htm)

Disco Dan the Alien Man!
http://www.discodanthealienman.com/ddpublicityshot2.jpg

[doc]

? Can we not discuss MH issues with the help of qualified professionals???

Surely your not another person in the field that is making the industry worse by not freely sharing your knowledge with others.. no matter how insignificant that knowledge may be?? :Pokey:

Where are the qualified professionals, in this discussion apart from my source who is defined as an expert and has evidence to support it.

So we are talking about opinion not expertise , as long as we are clear.

[Finn]

Try "job satisfaction" - having worked closely with another person that has an illness then helping that person 're-join' the community getting back their independance.

Nothing like that feeling.

Then waking up in the morning to find your patient has killed his ex wife. Well done Dan.

And I get plenty of satisfaction from what I do except I don't call it a job.

[DMNTD]

Then waking up in the morning to find your patient has killed his ex wife. Well done Dan.

Really? Dan...we should talk :whistle:

[doc]

And yet no mention of money. Nope, not for me.
Cmon Finn you know the story you pay peanuts you get monkeys.start scratching.

[Steam]

You guys should practise not being Cunts

[Finn]

You guys should practise not being Cunts

Coming from a socialist, you're a vaginal wart.

[Disco Dan]

Where are the qualified professionals, in this discussion apart from my source who is defined as an expert and has evidence to support it.

So we are talking about opinion not expertise , as long as we are clear.

You never bothered to ask what qualifications I had... :cool:
Experience is what matters in this line of work - as im sure you would know. The amount of noobs I get coming fresh out of uni with fancy bits of paper that have not got a flipping clue how to even interact with others is astounding...



Then waking up in the morning to find your patient has killed his ex wife. Well done Dan.

And I get plenty of satisfaction from what I do except I don't call it a job.

Not sure where you got that from.


Really? Dan...we should talk :whistle:

Yeah dont get your hopes up dude.

[scumdog]

.............As a result of their exposure to Police culture?

Yeah, that part of the culture that says we have to deal with 'the public' and it's miriad of mental, physical and financial woes.....


The sludge-trap for society, that's us.

[doc]

[QUOTE=Disco Dan;1441237]You never bothered to ask what qualifications I had... :cool:
Experience is what matters in this line of work - as im sure you would know. The amount of noobs I get coming fresh out of uni with fancy bits of paper that have not got a flipping clue how to even interact with others isastounding...

I have asked for for your specifics, you haven't given them I have given the specifics of my source, 37 years , FRONTLINE, experience, a Masters Degree, Teaching all the above, including now. All this clinical experience is current. What are your qualifications including experience ? It is possible to be extremely qualified and clinical, if you have only been doing it since August, you have nothing to be superior about. And if you have why aren't you getting some qualifications to demonstrate to prove what you say. A certificate is the minimum credibility, do you have it. It's all about evidence.

[Disco Dan]

[QUOTE=Disco Dan;1441237]You never bothered to ask what qualifications I had... :cool:
Experience is what matters in this line of work - as im sure you would know. The amount of noobs I get coming fresh out of uni with fancy bits of paper that have not got a flipping clue how to even interact with others isastounding...

I have asked for for your specifics, you haven't given them I have given the specifics of my source, 37 years , FRONTLINE, experience, a Masters Degree, Teaching all the above, including now. All this clinical experience is current. What are your qualifications including experience ? It is possible to be extremely qualified and clinical, if you have only been doing it since August, you have nothing to be superior about. And if you have why aren't you getting some qualifications to demonstrate to prove what you say. A certificate is the minimum credibility, do you have it. It's all about evidence.

If you read my post properlly before posting... you would see I made myself bankrupt in August. I have been working in this field for just over 7 years, with teaching experience also i went to teachers college as well as being a teachers aide in two different special needs schools. Im currently beginning my diploma in mental health after having specialised in Autistic spectrum disorder while teaching.

[Disco Dan]

No sorry, I was just joking about the Paranoid bit. As for googling your name Disco Dan (http://www.discodanthealienman.com/dd2movies.htm)

Disco Dan the Alien Man!

Follow the link (http://www.insolvency.govt.nz/cms/customer-support/ask-a-question/how-do-i-search-for-a-bankrupt-or-someone-subject-to-a-nap) and type in my real name (http://homepages.xnet.co.nz/~dsoutham/Site/Welcome.html).

Pretty easy...

[doc]

[QUOTE=doc;1441257]

If you read my post properlly before posting... you would see I made myself bankrupt in August. I have been working in this field for just over 7 years, with teaching experience also i went to teachers college as well as being a teachers aide in two different special needs schools. Im currently beginning my diploma in mental health after having specialised in Autistic spectrum disorder while teaching.

October is the start of exams. Starting in August means semister has pretty much finished 2008 hasn't started. Autistic spectrum disorder is a developmental problem not a mental health issue as you describe it. Your credibility remains low, be honest. Good luck with your studies. And you have teaching experience in what ???? The consumer doesn't want to know what you think you are capable of , they want evidence.