Jump to content

In the loop?


glastolover19
 Share

Recommended Posts

Also - remember this. Most drug overdoses are accidental. That's a direct product of the crusade against drugs. Most people don't want to OD they just get it wrong. Imagine getting a drink and not knowing whether it was 4% or 40%? It'd be chaos. 

Edited by semmtexx
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yoghurt on a Stick said:

Hello Sawdusty,

She was indeed CCCCheese, or some such.

Checked now. Posted as CCCheese.  But was her real name Shirley Eden, senior Glastonbury Festival copper? Suspect we'll never know. Seemed sensible and sound from her posts on here and Inspector Eden seemed sound and sensible from the media reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Penrhos said:

If you want a good drugs read try.

 

Prof David Nutt.

 "drugs without the hot air".

he should know as he was sacked from the ACMD for saying horse riding was more dangerous as ecstasy (as more people die horse riding). To point out the stupidity of prohibition (as they haven't made horse riding illegal to protect us).

 

I've been to a couple of his lectures & talks and he talks a lot of sense. Think he's talked in leftfield before.

Fun fact for you. Faced with a stranger and a bowl of genuine 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine pills and a bowl of peanuts - it's safer to give them a pill rather than a peanut as more people are allergic to peanuts than MDMA or ecstasy or molly or whatever you want to call it. Again the problem comes from unknown components or variable doses. Random pills are dangerous. Young women being particularly susceptible to the effects and having idiosyncratic reactions. Which is why we need the loop. Or actually let's not have the loop because it's not actually needed - let's have sensible debate and legal control of the stuff that tons of people already do every weekend. 

Oh, but we can't. 

Hmmm that'll be the war on drugs again.

Edited by semmtexx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, semmtexx said:

Fun fact for you. Faced with a stranger and a bowl of genuine 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine pills and a bowl of peanuts - it's safer to give them a pill rather than a peanut as more people are allergic to peanuts than MDMA or ecstasy or molly or whatever you want to call it. Again the problem comes from unknown components or variable doses. Random pills are dangerous. Young women being particularly susceptible to the effects and having idiosyncratic reactions. Which is why we need the loop. Or actually let's not have the loop because it's not actually needed - let's have sensible debate and legal control of the stuff that tons of people already do every weekend. 

Oh, but we can't. 

Hmmm that'll be the war on drugs again.

Agreed. Just as getting on one's (high) horse is also more dangerous ;)  :)

 

Edited by Sawdusty Surfer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sawdusty Surfer said:

Agreed. Just as getting on one's (high) horse is also more dangerous ;)  :)

 

Yes. I may have got a bit carried away!! Don't do drugs kids, mkay! ?

Edited by semmtexx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sawdusty Surfer said:

 

And don't ride horses kids :D

Don't listen to Sawdusty, kids - he's had too much 'cake'!  When it comes to getting your thrills, just remember it's 'horses for courses'!

PS - Please don't actually take the above statement as being even remotely close to consensus reality. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sawdusty Surfer said:

It wasn't an Inspector Shirley Eden by any chance was it?

nah, was a beat copper who I've seen around the area. Guess they had some info of someone dealing, I was being asked if I'd seen a lot of coming and going at any of the nearby houses (I haven't, but I don't spend my time staring out the front window).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sawdusty Surfer said:

@semmtexx  Mate, to clarify,totally agree with everything you have said. Was just trying to be clever referencing Proff Nutt's famous quote that horse riding is more dangerous than doing MDMA.

And don't ride horses kids :D

Ahhh! Got you! Went right over my head! Blame it on that other widespread and abused drug - red wine!

☺️???

Edited by semmtexx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Yoghurt on a Stick said:

Don't listen to Sawdusty, kids - he's had too much 'cake'!  When it comes to getting your thrills, just remember it's 'horses for courses'!

PS - Please don't actually take the above statement as being even remotely close to consensus reality. 

You know that's nonce sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Northern Soul said:

8A5A5C8A-3761-4358-97B0-2627EF995030.png.e6fd2ac3339f10078b2beb8d16247b3b.png 

For anybody wanting to read THE BOOK on why drugs should be legalised, this is the one for you. It is a phenomenal read. 

This is a link to an interesting podcast with the author. It’s on YouTube but is audio-only, probably available via other outlets but this is where I can across it. Very interesting. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Interesting perspective from Reading/Leeds organisers (both FR & local council - I was in the meeting):

They confiscate and do back-of-house testing - then alert if any substances are found that are dangerously strong or not what they should be.

They don't do front-of-house (in the loop) for 2 reasons, both not related to finding bad/misrepresented stuff, but what the result is if the drug is what it says it is. If they say it is xyz, then very quickly dealers through their own network sell based on the council backed promise that xyz is safe - it's council approved. Secondly, even if it is what they test, how do they say it's ok because what's ok for a big bloke with a liver made of concrete might be really bad for some naive 16 yr old waif.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, hfuhruhurr said:

Interesting perspective from Reading/Leeds organisers (both FR & local council - I was in the meeting):

They confiscate and do back-of-house testing - then alert if any substances are found that are dangerously strong or not what they should be.

They don't do front-of-house (in the loop) for 2 reasons, both not related to finding bad/misrepresented stuff, but what the result is if the drug is what it says it is. If they say it is xyz, then very quickly dealers through their own network sell based on the council backed promise that xyz is safe - it's council approved. Secondly, even if it is what they test, how do they say it's ok because what's ok for a big bloke with a liver made of concrete might be really bad for some naive 16 yr old waif.

So basically, what you're saying is that FR and the council have fundamentally failed to understand what The Loop actually do.

The Loop never, under any circumstances, say a drug is safe or ok to take. It just doesn't happen, as that's one of their core principles. They tell people what's in the substance, and what the consequences are.

The idea that there'd be a problem created because dealers would latch onto the testing and issue some kind of "council backed promise" is just laughable. Nobody is reporting a dealer to the ASA, so they can (and do) already make all manner of claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...