|
On January 20 2013 20:48 anycolourfloyd wrote:
honestly, who the fuck cares. that is one of the most pointless arguments i have ever seen.
drug is one of the most abused words in the english language. in almost every context i hear it used it, there is a less general word that should have been used. right or wrong (generally wrong), everybody seems to have their own definition of what a 'drug' is and associations attached to it. which is maybe how politicians have managed to baselessly resist research for so long.
Drugs are only a way to manipulate chemicals.
|
On January 20 2013 20:48 anycolourfloyd wrote:
honestly, who the fuck cares. that is one of the most pointless arguments i have ever seen.
drug is one of the most abused words in the english language. in almost every context i hear it used it, there is a less general word that should have been used. right or wrong (generally wrong), everybody seems to have their own definition of what a 'drug' is and associations attached to it. which is maybe how politicians have managed to baselessly resist research for so long.
I care, and the dude I quoted cares. You don't. There's a clear point in defining at what point a plant or fungus becomes a drug because it has to do with legality in modern society. Especially when you can get locked up in federal prison for it.
Basically every drug that we can synthesize nowadays is based on a chemical structure that we have extracted from a natural source. At what point did the drug become separate from the plant? When we refined it or extracted it. Before that point, it was a flower or a leaf or some kind of secretion (or root or fungus or whatever).
I mean, yes, I'm providing my own definition here, but it's not like the dictionary definition existed when the universe was created. We made it up in the first place and we can change it. That's how language evolves.
Also, mine is much more clear and functional.
|
I don't really like the term synthetic cannabis. It reminds me of all those scare stories where the media would brand a drug 'legal lsd' or 'legal pot' even if the effects or dangers are nothing like it, and consequently giving these existing drugs a bad name. If I see a term like 'synthetic cannabis' I would immediately assume it is talking about synthesized THC in a pill.
|
On January 20 2013 21:08 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2013 20:48 anycolourfloyd wrote:
honestly, who the fuck cares. that is one of the most pointless arguments i have ever seen.
drug is one of the most abused words in the english language. in almost every context i hear it used it, there is a less general word that should have been used. right or wrong (generally wrong), everybody seems to have their own definition of what a 'drug' is and associations attached to it. which is maybe how politicians have managed to baselessly resist research for so long. I care, and the dude I quoted cares. You don't. There's a clear point in defining at what point a plant or fungus becomes a drug because it has to do with legality in modern society. Especially when you can get locked up in federal prison for it. Basically every drug that we can synthesize nowadays is based on a chemical structure that we have extracted from a natural source. At what point did the drug become separate from the plant? When we refined it or extracted it. Before that point, it was a flower or a leaf or some kind of secretion (or root or fungus or whatever). I mean, yes, I'm providing my own definition here, but it's not like the dictionary definition existed when the universe was created. We made it up in the first place and we can change it. That's how language evolves. Also, mine is much more clear and functional.
Thank you for clarifying your definition. I thought it might be something like that where by refining you also meant extracting the chemical, but I wasn't entirely sure from your previous posts. I do think the definitions are a little too loose and let almost anything fall into them, and probably need some updating.
|
Zerg, here's how I see it: If you use something to alter your brain chemistry for recreational or medical use, it's a drug.
Because there's no other word that "marijuana" and "meth" both fit. But they're clearly in the same category of usage. They have different effects, but they're used for the same reason (to get high). There has to be some word that generally means "things you use to get buzzed or high" and that word happens to be "drug." I think you're just making things more difficult when you try to put different mind-altering substances into their own categories, instead of having a term that fits all of them.
Of course, people abuse this by saying shit like "marijuana is a drug, so it's dangerous," but just because those people are fuckwits doesn't mean we should have to change our vocabulary.
|
Like most drugs, this is how I see it; don't do them, just don't. The benefits are heavily outweighed by the costs. The costs of not doing weed are 0 (except for the possible lack of a high, but that can be gotten in other ways), the costs of doing are monetary, time, and a lack of initiative in some cases, as THC causes one to be heavily over-content with where one is in life. Synthetics are even worse about it and have been shown to do serious harm to the body, or cause psychosis like a previous poster said about his godfather in korea. Being honest here, it is a life choice, but doing synthetic weed is just a bad idea. The benefits vs costs of doing weed are much higher than the benefits vs costs of doing synthetics. You have added dangers with synthetics and even if the synthetics are legal, that doesn't make them not shady. I'm biased because I don't do drugs, but synthetics just seem like a really bad idea to do.
|
Please no one take Synthetic anything. If you wanna smoke something smoke actual weed. My brother was put in the hospital a few months back from artificial stuff. It is not safe 
|
On January 21 2013 12:04 docvoc wrote:
THC causes one to be heavily over-content with where one is in life.
And capitalist ideology causes one to be heavily under-content with where one is in life. Pick your poison I suppose.
|
On January 17 2013 07:31 Amityville wrote:
The thread is about the synthentic marijuana that is bought at a gas station. Not hard to figure out bro.
So they are actually selling this shit at gas stations ?
|
I'd like to see people to be forced be more sensible, educated and considerate in developed countries. Right now pretty much everywhere it's governments duty to patronize citizens which obviously leads to running over people, restraining and to niche problems such as getting illegal drugs because legal drugs won't fit for personal usage.
Might not work in countries where education is already a problem. Oh, I wish education was prioritized better, especially society studies and how propaganda works.
Btw, anyone know how design drugs work in northern countries?
off: maybe some posters should use terms 'illegal drug' , 'intoxicant', more actively.
|
On January 22 2013 01:15 HeatEXTEND wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 07:31 Amityville wrote:
The thread is about the synthentic marijuana that is bought at a gas station. Not hard to figure out bro. So they are actually selling this shit at gas stations ?
Yeah I didn't understand that either.
If it is illegal why would they take the chance selling it at a gas station?
|
Don't do designer drugs, they are inherently risky. If you want to get high that bad, just smoke the good old-fashioned wonder drug with well-known safety. Legal is not always good, and illegal is not always bad.
|
On January 22 2013 01:47 KAB00000000M wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 01:15 HeatEXTEND wrote:On January 17 2013 07:31 Amityville wrote:
The thread is about the synthentic marijuana that is bought at a gas station. Not hard to figure out bro. So they are actually selling this shit at gas stations ? Yeah I didn't understand that either. If it is illegal why would they take the chance selling it at a gas station?
It's perfectly legal. When they outlaw one of the chemicals, a new one is released instantly.
|
It's pretty fucked up even if it's legal to sell this shit at the gas station.
From the reasoning that who the heck wants to sell this :o
|
I don't want to spoil the party here, but just to remind you guys, synthetic weed is still illegal.
|
dude this stuff is awful, AWFUL. daily pot smoker for life and started getting drug tested same as you. well i loved it at first but then i ended up being TOTALLLY HOOKED needing to smoke all day or else id get HORRIBLE withdrawal anxiety. please quit now man i probably sound like im crazy but please i smoked this stuff daily from 2009-2011 and it is just as bad as oxy contin or any drug like that which i have done plenty of too and was never even as hooked as i was on this stuff. i know its tempting but please dude this stuff while ruin your life and completely take away your motivation
its nothing like weed, 1000x stronger
|
I'm sorry, but do they actually sell this shit at gas-stations ? A straight yes no answer will do :p.
|
Yes, they sell them at gas stations.
|
On January 21 2013 11:53 Bahku wrote:
Zerg, here's how I see it: If you use something to alter your brain chemistry for recreational or medical use, it's a drug.
Because there's no other word that "marijuana" and "meth" both fit. But they're clearly in the same category of usage. They have different effects, but they're used for the same reason (to get high). There has to be some word that generally means "things you use to get buzzed or high" and that word happens to be "drug." I think you're just making things more difficult when you try to put different mind-altering substances into their own categories, instead of having a term that fits all of them.
Of course, people abuse this by saying shit like "marijuana is a drug, so it's dangerous," but just because those people are fuckwits doesn't mean we should have to change our vocabulary.
Bahku, do you realize that sugar does what you're talking about? That food does what you're talking about? That money does what you're talking about? (http://blogs.hbr.org/schwartz/2010/10/dopes-and-dopamine-the-problem.html) Computer games and facebook do this, too.
There's clearly a difference between types of drugs, as well. An amphetamine does not have anywhere near the same effect as an opiate/narcotic. A psychedelic doesn't do anything like a barbiturate. A tricyclic antidepressant doesn't work anything like caffeine. THC* is totally different from other drugs in a qualitative sense, as well.
I'm just saying that it's really important to be very specific as to what we're talking about for the purposes of discussion. That's just the social scientist in me. I like to start out by clearly defining what I'm talking about so that everyone can be on the same page.
|
bahhh this documentary reeks of sensationalism.
Yes they are bad for you but give me a break.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
