i found hidden drugs

duchy

The very definition of an addict (of anything be it legal or illegal substances, sex,computer games whatever) is someone who doesn't care what anyone else says or does so long as they get their fix.

The dysfunctional already are far more vulnerable to addiction anyway-I'm a little tired of people assuming it's black and white -that X drug is good or bad -an awful lot of addiction is linked to existing issues be they poverty, mental heath issues , self esteem etc. It's like preying on the unfortunate.

I don't understand our society that is horrified at pot smoking - whilst downing several units of alcohol and driving home. If we're going to say we want to protect the population and stop them self-harming -why do we ignore the biggest problem of all alcohol ?

System

The very definition of an addict (of anything be it legal or illegal substances, sex,computer games whatever) is someone who doesn't care what anyone else says or does so long as they get their fix.

..............and the trail of destruction they leave behind.

Dimey

bitemebankers wrote: »

That's exactly what it is. Caffeine is a drug.

Pointing out your flat denial about your own drug use is hardly grasping at straws. On the contrary, it drives to the heart of the issue here, namely that people tend to view the drugs they're most familiar with as safe, and any other less familiar drugs as dangerous.

Your inability to understand the difference between a legal cup of tea made with tea bags from a supermarket and an illegal sachet of heroin from a lad on the street or off a website is astonishing to me.

If I drink 20 cups of tea in one go, its not going to kill me but if I drink 20 bottles of scotch or take 20 sachets of heroin, it will.

If I drink a cup of tea every day for 10 years it won't kill me or injure my insides. A bottle of booze a day will and so will a sachet of heroin.

You really are barking up the wrong tree and encouraging mrs angry's husband to believe his activities are as innocuous as shopping at the supermarket.

bitemebankers

Judi wrote: »

So that makes it right does it?

Makes what right?

Certainly not your assumption that the Misuse of Drugs Act is relevant to recreational drug users today.

You should worry less about "sending messages" and more about which practical measures will reduce the impact of recreational drug use.

bitemebankers

Dimey wrote: »

Your inability to understand the difference between a legal cup of tea made with tea bags from a supermarket and an illegal sachet of heroin from a lad on the street or off a website is astonishing to me.

The legality of those substances is arbitrary, and irrelevant when assessing the relative risks. More fundamentally though, you don't seem to grasp the fact that caffeine really is a psychoactive stimulant, in the same class of chemicals as cocaine and amphetamines. And it's a drug that you take regularly, but are in denial about because you perceive it as safe.

If I drink 20 cups of tea in one go, its not going to kill me but if I drink 20 bottles of scotch or take 20 sachets of heroin, it will.

Mmm, so if you take a massive dose of one drug it's less likely to harm you than a moderate dose of another drug.

That's profound.

You really are barking up the wrong tree and encouraging mrs angry's husband to believe his activities are as innocuous as shopping at the supermarket.

I very much doubt Mrs Angry's husband could care less what anyone on here thinks - you're sadly deluded if you do. And, actually, his activities are pretty innocuous. The real issue is that he's not trustworthy, which is far more fundamental than someone's choice of recreational drug.

System

You should worry less about "sending messages" and more about which practical measures will reduce the impact of recreational drug use.

Whats me 'sending messages' got to do with the subject in hand?

bitemebankers

Judi wrote: »

Whats me 'sending messages' got to do with the subject in hand?

That's what I'm asking. Try to keep up.

Dimey

bitemebankers wrote: »

The legality of those substances is arbitrary, and irrelevant when assessing the relative risks. More fundamentally though, you don't seem to grasp the fact that caffeine really is a psychoactive stimulant, in the same class of chemicals as cocaine and amphetamines. And it's a drug that you take regularly, but are in denial about because you perceive it as safe.
>>>
.

Well I've heard it all now.

I started on this thread as a regular little old lady who enjoys a visit to a tea shop on a Sunday afternoon.
And I've ended up a drug addict in denial.

I must mention it to my doctor !

System

bitemebankers wrote: »

That's what I'm asking. Try to keep up.

I am keeping up thanks. Try not to be so rude.

FatVonD

TopQuark wrote: »

I'd rather that they took a periodic ecstasy pill at a party than became smokers. Of course, I'd not want them to become heroin addicts just like I'd not want them to become alcoholics. I'd be more worried about the risk of the latter becoming reality however.

Would you be happy for them to start taking ecstacy at the same age they drink their first cup of tea?