Conquer Club

Much self-righteous twaddle has been written on here recently by the kind of uber-indignant daily mail-reading tards who suggest that anyone who has the odd toke is a junkie. And probably those same people have a pint of frothy self-righteous lager in their hands as they work themselves up.

What is needed is not this mob paranoia, based as it is on misinformation and misrepresentation: What is needed is the legalisation and regulation of all narcotics. The international black market in drugs caused by their illegality - estimated by some to be worth as much as the global tourism industry - puts money into the pockets of exploiters and murderers. It has no positive effects at all. I cannot BELIEVE that we did not learn our lessons during prohibition.

FACT: Heroin is, in fact, almost entirely benign. It is highly addictive, and its withdrawal symptoms can be very unpleasant, but the fact is regular users of medicinal-quality heroine suffer very few if any effects from ill-health. An excellent piece of investigative journalism showing this is here.
What damages heroin users is the black market. Product is adulterated with poisons, shared needles, high cost... the crime and ill-health associated with heroin use have the black market to blame.

FACT: Alcohol is one of the most damaging drugs in existence. Violence, addiction, ill-health, death... and this is a legally available, regulated substance. Getting shitfaced is a badge of honour; getting stoned is a one-way ticket to crack alley.
The difference between alcohol and cannabis is... legality. By accepting alcohol and decrying cannabis, or MDMA, for example, you are blithely accepting your government as your moral arbiter, and that is weak-minded and lazy.

It is the black market that hurts, not recreational drug use. Anyone who wants to take drugs, can. They are easy to get hold of. Government anti-drug policy has failed across the world. I live in london and if i wanted to, i could go out and score pretty much anything I wanted wthin a few hours. Banning drugs is full of fail. What happened to personal choice?

Legalising drugs would: create a sizeable revenue stream for the public purse; ensure users are not being poisoned, thus reducing the burden on health services; allow police resources to be driected more fruitfully elsewhere; and put some deeply unsavoury profiteers out of business.
There is no downside.

Ron Paul.

He lost.

I would support legalization of drugs if and only if semi-automatics were legalized and drugs with hallucinogenic effects were banned from public places.

You tell someone to do acid indoors.
lol.

Clearly there needs to be more education on the subject with a view to at least partial legalisation of those that are at the moment prohibited, unfortunately its one of those subjects that many simply refuse to discuss. I am always amused when somebody throws their hands up in the air at the very mention of ' drugs ' when the chances are they have a bathroom cabinet stuffed full of the damn things.

Ultimately, if they take drugs, it's a good thing, we can put massive tax on it, and profit a large amount from their stupidity.

right in many ways, wrong in a few. lets dissect a little.

prohibition bad, silly government yadda yadda - thumbs up.

alcohol one of the worst, silly sheeple on friday nights yadda yadda - thumbs up.

heroin and mdma as benign - yarharhar. no, no and no. dont be stupid enough to advance ridiculous arguments that harm your case. the opium problem in rural china for example is massive and its pure there, uncut. the odd E here and there aint gonna do you a whole world of pain but you watch someone get used to taking it to go out for a few months and you wont be telling me its harmless.

there are two poles of opinion on this subject, neither of which is entirely correct. dont subscribe blithely to the latter just because its anti-authoritarian. if you ever tried coming down real heavy you'll know its neither A nor B. sincerely, a casual partaker

(almost)

Napoleon Ier wrote:Ultimately, if they take drugs, it's a good thing, we can put massive tax on it, and profit a large amount from their stupidity.

Well yes actually your correct, just as we heavily tax alcohol , cigarettes and other lifestyle choices.

I just saw something on the news about how much tax dollars Canada is losing due to the Native smokes.

Well it's their fucking problem in the first place.
Less than 10 years ago, a pack of smokes cost 5 bucks or less. I would buy the cheapies sometimes and get 2 for 7.

Now you're very lucky to find them under 10 bucks a pack.

They can go f*ck themselves.
I'll gladly take a carton for 15 bucks.

khazalid wrote:heroin and mdma as benign - yarharhar. no, no and no. dont be stupid enough to advance ridiculous arguments that harm your case. the opium problem in rural china for example is massive and its pure there, uncut. the odd E here and there aint gonna do you a whole world of pain but you watch someone get used to taking it to go out for a few months and you wont be telling me its harmless.

Actually, HC never claimed mdma is benign. He only said that heroin is. And I'm sorry if you didn't know this, but he is completely correct. The only dangers associated with heroin are related to the lifestyle addicts have. Doctors and other experts know this.


MDMA is dangerous when used heavily, but then again so is alcohol and fat. You'll suffer damage to your brain and memory. It's not clear yet whether the effect is reversible though, or whether moderate use has any ill effects. (None discovered so far.)

All drugs are safe when used in proper moderation.
They prescribe people to take drugs everyday.

Ecstacy is the dirtiest drug.

Snorri1234 wrote:

khazalid wrote:heroin and mdma as benign - yarharhar. no, no and no. dont be stupid enough to advance ridiculous arguments that harm your case. the opium problem in rural china for example is massive and its pure there, uncut. the odd E here and there aint gonna do you a whole world of pain but you watch someone get used to taking it to go out for a few months and you wont be telling me its harmless.

Actually, HC never claimed mdma is benign. He only said that heroin is. And I'm sorry if you didn't know this, but he is completely correct. The only dangers associated with heroin are related to the lifestyle addicts have. Doctors and other experts know this.


MDMA is dangerous when used heavily, but then again so is alcohol and fat. You'll suffer damage to your brain and memory. It's not clear yet whether the effect is reversible though, or whether moderate use has any ill effects. (None discovered so far.)

to say heroin is benign in physical properties and corrupt in application is a logical fallacy characteristic of a lot of philosophy. it negates humanity.

i am for the legalising of all drugs.

just like alcohol and smokes, restrict their sale to 18 and over.

have medical staff/scientists assess the damage that those drugs do. have actuaries calculate the cost of future medical services that need to be provided because of said damage.

whack that on the price as a tax. put on a goods and services tax. charge the businesses payroll tax, income tax & workers compensation levies.

- we get a source of revenue for hospitals that should match the needs of prospective patients.
- we get many police/custom officer's hours free for other duties.
- we get research into the effects funded by the actual industry responsible.
- we get less deaths because those who are high are no longer too afraid to seek medical treatment for friends who urgently need it. (been there)

oh, and MDMA affects the spinal cord and fluid. a brief google will show you the effects it can have, paralysis probably being the nastiest of the bunch. my particular distaste for it stems from watching a bunch of people go off the rails on it when i were a lad. im not saying ive never tried it and no doubt ill give it another few goes before i hit the sack of life, but its nasty shit - no doubt about it.

The problem with drugs is that people can commit atrocities under the influence of some of the more extreme forms. I say we allow people guns to fend off the druggies, then we allow them to dope themselves into oblivion.

khazalid wrote:right in many ways, wrong in a few. lets dissect a little.

prohibition bad, silly government yadda yadda - thumbs up.

alcohol one of the worst, silly sheeple on friday nights yadda yadda - thumbs up.

heroin and mdma as benign - yarharhar. no, no and no. dont be stupid enough to advance ridiculous arguments that harm your case. the opium problem in rural china for example is massive and its pure there, uncut. the odd E here and there aint gonna do you a whole world of pain but you watch someone get used to taking it to go out for a few months and you wont be telling me its harmless.

As Snorri said, I never said MDMA was benign. You should have read my post, really. I have known a few heavy E users and they knew they weren't doing themselves any favours. But the vast majority of users I know do so ocasionally and with full knowledge and responsibility, and it hasn't harmed any of them one iota.

When you say 'the opium problem in china' what do you mean? Lots of people are addicted? Again, read my post. Heroin, in itself, is a benign drug. To suggest otherwise is wrong.

there are two poles of opinion on this subject, neither of which is entirely correct. dont subscribe blithely to the latter just because its anti-authoritarian. if you ever tried coming down real heavy you'll know its neither A nor B. sincerely, a casual partaker

I am not subscribing blithely to anything. And i can't be patronised that easily, so please do not put words or motives in my mouth.
My argument was to legalise these drugs and bring them under regulatory control. That's all. i couldn't give a f*ck about anti-authoritarianism, but I do think that taking one's moral guidance from a government is pathetic.

khazalid wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

khazalid wrote:heroin and mdma as benign - yarharhar. no, no and no. dont be stupid enough to advance ridiculous arguments that harm your case. the opium problem in rural china for example is massive and its pure there, uncut. the odd E here and there aint gonna do you a whole world of pain but you watch someone get used to taking it to go out for a few months and you wont be telling me its harmless.

Actually, HC never claimed mdma is benign. He only said that heroin is. And I'm sorry if you didn't know this, but he is completely correct. The only dangers associated with heroin are related to the lifestyle addicts have. Doctors and other experts know this.


MDMA is dangerous when used heavily, but then again so is alcohol and fat. You'll suffer damage to your brain and memory. It's not clear yet whether the effect is reversible though, or whether moderate use has any ill effects. (None discovered so far.)

to say heroin is benign in physical properties and corrupt in application is a logical fallacy characteristic of a lot of philosophy. it negates humanity.

The f*ck you blabbering about?

khazalid wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

khazalid wrote:heroin and mdma as benign - yarharhar. no, no and no. dont be stupid enough to advance ridiculous arguments that harm your case. the opium problem in rural china for example is massive and its pure there, uncut. the odd E here and there aint gonna do you a whole world of pain but you watch someone get used to taking it to go out for a few months and you wont be telling me its harmless.

Actually, HC never claimed mdma is benign. He only said that heroin is. And I'm sorry if you didn't know this, but he is completely correct. The only dangers associated with heroin are related to the lifestyle addicts have. Doctors and other experts know this.


MDMA is dangerous when used heavily, but then again so is alcohol and fat. You'll suffer damage to your brain and memory. It's not clear yet whether the effect is reversible though, or whether moderate use has any ill effects. (None discovered so far.)

to say heroin is benign in physical properties and corrupt in application is a logical fallacy

No it isn't. The black market, not the drug's application, is what causes the social problems surrounding heroin addiction.

Napoleon, you have no idea what you are talking about. None.

greenoaks wrote:
have medical staff/scientists assess the damage that those drugs do. have actuaries calculate the cost of future medical services that need to be provided because of said damage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill

Napoleon Ier wrote:The problem with drugs is that people can commit atrocities under the influence of some of the more extreme forms.

Especially when you give them guns.


Actually, I've never heard of anyone comitting any sort of major crime under influence of any drug. Except for alcohol.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:The problem with drugs is that people can commit atrocities under the influence of some of the more extreme forms.

Especially when you give them guns.


Actually, I've never heard of anyone comitting any sort of major crime under influence of any drug. Except for alcohol.

A lot of financial fraud has been committed UTI of cocaine

If you want real information, don't go to wiki.

Dekloren wrote:If you want real information, don't go to wiki.

YEAH GO TO http://WWW.911TRUTH-NWO-LIZARDWATCH.COM