The War on the People aka The War on Drugs

[BigSmooth]

From Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: nar·cot·ic
Pronunciation: när-'kä-tik
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English narkotik, from Middle French narcotique, from narcotique, adjective, from Medieval Latin narcoticus, from Greek narkOtikos, from narkoun to benumb, from narkE numbness -- more at SNARE
Date: 14th century
1 a : a drug (as opium) that in moderate doses dulls the senses, relieves pain, and induces profound sleep but in excessive doses causes stupor, coma, or convulsions
b : a drug (as marijuana or LSD) subject to restriction similar to that of addictive narcotics whether physiologically addictive and narcotic or not
2 : something that soothes, relieves, or lulls

That is humorous to me, people incorrectly generalize and group marijuana with "narcotics" so often that it has become an accepted definition. This despite the fact that the only similarity they have is that they are "restricted". Thank you, Nancy Reagan, for making us all more ignorant.

 

[DABANSHEE]

As any doctor will tell you only opiods & synthetic opioids qualify as narcotics, whether illegal or legal (codeine is just as much a narcotic as heroin).

Well I'm from New South Wales, where 'footy' means mostly Rugby League or (if you are a toff or if you're into 'Rugger') Rugby Union, its the same in Queensland too. It's the southern states (Victoria, Tasmania, SA & WA) where footy means Aussie Rules. We Aussies on the Eastern seaboard refer to Aussie rules as 'Aerial Pingpong'. Unless you are an ethnic or what us Aussies call 'wogs' (basically post war immigrants from Central Europe & the Mediteranian), in which case 'footy' refers to soccer, just as it does in the UK. In both Sth Africa & New Zealand, where its an act of treason to play any other code of football, 'footy' refers to Rugby Union.

Confusing isnt it

 

[ICyourNipple]

Bump

 

[IBhacknU]

The reason this thread keeps dropping to the bottom is no one want to hear your sorry ass any longer.

You won nothing here. You've proved absolutly ZERO!

 

[ICyourNipple]

Reread this thread and you will realize I presented many questions that were never answers. If you think you are right, then go ahead and prove it.

 

[lpbsam]

whoever said you can overdose off of mdma(ecstacy, not XTC) needs to go do their research. the media is usually blatantly wrong when it comes to reporting rave related deaths. check out the slideshow at www.dancesafe.or(why is this a forbidden word?)g and you will see that ecstatcy is really not that bad, and i feel it should be legalized along with pot. the netherlands are currently looking in to the legalization of mdma.

 

[ICyourNipple]

Thanks to those who supported me in this thread, I truly appreciate it.

IBhacknU,

"The reason this thread keeps dropping to the bottom is no one want to hear your sorry ass any longer."

Why the personal attacks?? Why the name calling? Can't we just discuss the issue?

 

[Gandalf511]

I think, we need to narrow down the debate. On weed, I think the medical uses outweigh the risks and it's relatively safe. However anyone that says its not addictive has never tried it. From the first smell and the first puff you want more (i'm no addict but i occasionally crave a hit when passing by a lit joint). Anyway, let's drop weed. That argument won't be settled. A simple proposal for the harder drugs is to examine the medicinal uses and allow them through prescription if they prove usefull. Heroin is an example of this. I don't know of too much use for crack, and there is none for X other than energy. It will be alot more productive if we just argue the merits of these harder drugs (leaving behind alcohol, nicotine, and weed), and tone down the flaming. I'm about as middle of the road as anyone can get on this stuff, and impressionable (read underage), and from that standpoint, few of you are gaining glory with your posts.