The Gaming Den

Sometimes I'm really boring. So then I want to talk.

So. I was wondering.

Why can we buy caffeine for personal enjoyment, and not MDMA? LSD? Why is bottled water 'drug paraphernalia'?

I understand the marijuana vs tobacco issue; the latter was more entrenched and attacked the other in a political gambit. Something that doesn't cost money and grows like a weed (it was literally, a noxious weed) endangers a paid product. But otc drugs confuse me.

-Crissa

Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1201066521[/unixtime]]Sometimes I'm really boring.

Well, you're the one who said it!

You probably meant "bored", and I'm not going to be the one to say anything rude in reply. But I *could* have. You left such an opening there.

Anyway, bottled water is drug paraphernalia? Since when?

When parties provide bottled water to the participants, this is considered "drug paraphenalia" for MDMA. Because Xstasy makes you want to dance for long periods of time and if you don't drink water during that period you'll fuck yourself up.

But of course, anyone who dances for long periods of time needs to drink water to avoid hangovers. And you don't need MDMA to get into that situation.

-Username17

That's the dumbest thing I've read all day, and considering it was competing with a thread on Mike Mearls and his decisions for 4E and a thread on CS "Multilasers" Goto...

The best thing about australias (or atleast canberras) licensing laws is that its mandatory to provide tap water free of charge at any cafe, bar, restaurant night club or anything else that wants to sell you alcohol

I think that's Australia-wide. It applies in Victoria and South Australia, too.

It's "drinkable tap water, or you seriously give away bottled water from the fridge, for free. Yes, that shit you try to pass off for $5. It's your choice." and most places choose the taps, because they're not stupid.

Not that many can afford to get drunk at the clubs I've been to, outside happy hour (where a vodka cruiser will drop from $6 to $2).

Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1201066521[/unixtime]]Sometimes I'm really boring. So then I want to talk.

So. I was wondering.

Why can we buy caffeine for personal enjoyment, and not MDMA? LSD? Why is bottled water 'drug paraphernalia'?

I understand the marijuana vs tobacco issue; the latter was more entrenched and attacked the other in a political gambit. Something that doesn't cost money and grows like a weed (it was literally, a noxious weed) endangers a paid product. But otc drugs confuse me.

-Crissa

It's all due to the fact that drug laws are, for the most part, completely arbitrary instead of being designed with safety in mind.

Wait, they're not all arbitrary, some are made to punish certain groups of people. (Like if you get caught with a small amount of crack, you're going away for a lot longer than the people carrying and distributing large amounts of cocaine. The only difference I see is that crack is smoked by poor black people and cocaine is used by rich white people.)

Edit: And on the water bottle thing: Here in VA, if someone says they are using an object to aid them in drug use, it's drug paraphernalia. If I'm at the store, and someone tells me that they're going to turn a toilet plunger they're buying into a bong, I can't sell the toilet plunger to them or else I'm going to jail. (Got into an arguement with some guy because he asked me if we sold "the cold medicines you can make crank out of" I told him not after he told me that. He then told me he was joking, I told him I still couldn't help him, and tried to explain the law to him, and he wandered off. I think he was on something when he was talking to me, he had an odd look to his eye.)

So for the drug clueless among us... wtf is MDMA?

MDMA is apparently Ecstasy.

MDMA is the actuallly name of "Ecstasy" and it is the number one drug of the Rave crowd because it is a stimulant and a hallucinogen. So you get to see colors awesome and dance all night.

MDMA has pretty mild side effects, especially if taken infrequently and in moderation. Most notable health risks are:

• MDMA inhibits the production of spinal fluid. While you produce more spinal fluid than you need and thus have a "reserve," large doses over prolonged periods of time can deplete your spinal fluid to the point where your neurons start abraiding on the bones. 24 hour party people eventually cause themselve cognitive problems and/or chronic pain.
  
  
• MDMA alters your sense of time and is a stimulant. MDMA users can and will perform extended activities and deplete their own water reserves. Long MDMA-inspired party sessions can lead to heat exhaustion without regular intake of water. Drinking water while on MDMA is highly encouraged.
  
  
• MDMA can cause involuntary muscle stimulation. Especially in high doses, users may exhibit increased muscle fatigue and jaw clenching. The "Raver Pacifier" isn't just for show - it's there because having something soft in your mouth keeps you from grinding your teeth.

All told it is a drug which I can reccommend its use infrequently and in moderation. While the side effects are not as negligible as those of LSD, it is substantially safer than many other drugs. Beats the crap out of Meth or Cocaine, for example.

-Username17

I've also heard that people under the influence of MDMA who are drinking water can lose track of how much water they've been drinking, and can suffer water intoxication and not realize it.

At least, that's what my brother says, and he's pretty knowledgable on this sort of thing.

Count_Arioch_the_28th at [unixtime wrote:1201106210[/unixtime]]It's all due to the fact that drug laws are, for the most part, completely arbitrary instead of being designed with safety in mind.

The best example of how ironic drug laws are is the invention of Coca Cola: "It was a prohibition law, enacted in Atlanta in 1886, that persuaded physician and chemist Dr. John Stith Pemberton to rename and rewrite the formula for his popular nerve tonic, stimulant and headache remedy, 'Pemberton's French Wine Coca,' sold at that time by most, if not all, of the city's druggists."

The fact that his Wine Cola was loaded with cocane was trivial to the horror that it contained wine.

And that, in a nutshell, explains what has always been wrong with the drug laws.

Count_Arioch_the_28th at [unixtime wrote:1201111516[/unixtime]]I've also heard that people under the influence of MDMA who are drinking water can lose track of how much water they've been drinking, and can suffer water intoxication and not realize it.

At least, that's what my brother says, and he's pretty knowledgable on this sort of thing.

And that is why every rave should have a sno cone machine.

tzor at [unixtime wrote:1201113324[/unixtime]]
The best example of how ironic drug laws are is the invention of Coca Cola: "It was a prohibition law, enacted in Atlanta in 1886, that persuaded physician and chemist Dr. John Stith Pemberton to rename and rewrite the formula for his popular nerve tonic, stimulant and headache remedy, 'Pemberton's French Wine Coca,' sold at that time by most, if not all, of the city's druggists."

The fact that his Wine Cola was loaded with cocane was trivial to the horror that it contained wine.

And that, in a nutshell, explains what has always been wrong with the drug laws.

Am I the only who really wants to try one of the original coca colas every time he hears about them?

Supposedly, the original formula for coca-cola had about half a gram of cocaine in it. It was also served hot, not cold.

Of course, the side effects and long term damage lists for alcohol or caffeine vs MDMA or LSD is longer...

People on MDMA act like they're on a sugar high, except that they're highly sociable. If they were distractible or forgetful while drinking alcohol, they'll be that distractible but not as forgetful while on MDMA.

But yeah, the laws seem completely arbitrary. I'm not sure how arbitrary laws remain constitutional - for instance, even the conservative circuit court deemed the difference between crack and cocaine violations to be unfair, to the point of violating civil rights.

-Crissa

Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1201122773[/unixtime]]
But yeah, the laws seem completely arbitrary. I'm not sure how arbitrary laws remain constitutional - for instance, even the conservative circuit court deemed the difference between crack and cocaine violations to be unfair, to the point of violating civil rights.

-Crissa

I can explain it.

If someone tries to change the laws, their political opponents accuse them of being "soft on crime" next election, they lose the election because Americans are drooling retards that respond to buzz words instead of logic, and they replace the first guy with someone who is a thousand times worse.

If someone tries to change the laws, their political opponents accuse them of being "soft on crime" next election, they lose the election because Americans are drooling retards that respond to buzz words instead of logic, and they replace the first guy with someone who is a thousand times worse.

It's like the death penalty.

Not to sound insensitive to the massive hordes of people unfairly sentenced with this barbaric policy, but compared to seriously important battles like keeping up out of war and curtailing the military-industrial complexed it's just not worth risking your political future over.

So this is why until very, very recently people who got arrested for crack possession got much harsher sentencing than cocaine possession.

This also begs the question why (white) America cringes and shudders and wilts at the 'r' word yet as long as no one comes out and say the 'r' word supporting policies specifically designed to screw minorities is A-OK.

Goddamn, this constituency really pisses me off sometimes.

CatharzGodfoot at [unixtime wrote:1201114144[/unixtime]]
And that is why every rave should have a sno cone machine.

I put it to you that every place everywhere should have a sno cone machine. And not for drug-related reasons, but because sno cones are delicious.

I don't like snocones.

They're not very good for dehydration, either.

-Crissa

Back when I used to read Narco news there was a report of a major acquisition of several hundred tons of coca leaf by a Coke shell company thanks to the local US diplomat in the middle of an election campaign where he was rousing on the socialists for not being eager enough to burn down the peasants coca farms.

Apparently Coke still takes some sort of coca leaf derivative and adds it to their cola. They say it isn't cocaine but they aren't too forthcoming about the details.

I recall seeing an approximation of the ingredients somewhere, but I think the reason they don't explain exactly what it is is simply "And give away the secret ingredient? Are you nuts?"

For a good laugh read The unauthorized history of Coca-Cola (satire).

No the reason why the laws are as they are is that they are based more on social engineering than on safety matters. Legacy drugs remain legal even when they are far less safe and far more addictive. Drugs of the poor are targeted more than drugs of the rich because it's the rich who make these laws and besides it's a great way to get rid of the poor by throwing them into jail since poorhouses are no longer fashionable.

Here is a better timeline of Coca Cola without the satire or the sanitation of the corporate execs.

Time to jump to Wiki for a few tid bits of the inventor.

Pemberton was plagued by his morphine addiction and imbibed his cocawine and soda in an effort to control the addiction (both beverages contained coca leaf, of which cocaine is isolated. The original formula allegedly called for 8.46 mg of cocaine, while an average dose of the street drug is between 20-30 mg. However, the effects of the coca leaf is greatly compounded by the presence of caffeine from the kola nut. Coca-Cola was originally advertised as a cure for morphine and opium addictions among a multitude of other health benefits.

Note: the morphine addiction was, apparently, a result of his treatment from Civil War wounds.

I think I heard that they use(or used) some sort of decocaineated extract of the coca plant as a flavouring.