i found hidden drugs

FatVonD

Soubrette wrote: »

Ahh, I thought you were merely arguing that tea was less dangerous than heroin

Well, that too, obviously

Soubrette wrote: »

I think one of the things that would interest me in your argument as stated above - what classification would you use for a hard drug?

I'd say there was a sliding scale with weed at the bottom and heroin at the top (and tea a speck far off in the distance!)

Soubrette

FatVonD wrote: »

Well, that too, obviously



I'd say there was a sliding scale with weed at the bottom and heroin at the top (and tea a speck far off in the distance!)

I don't think it's tea per se, it's the caffeine in tea isn't it?

Still a smallish speck in the distance though, although probably not suitable for young children.

So where do you think the line should be drawn for illegal/legal?

Dimey

bitemebankers wrote: »

Please point out where I said that? >>>>
<<<< It shows how you've completely missed the point andand are trying to argue against a claim nobody has actually made.

Below are a few Bitemebankers quotes that make it easy to support FatVonD.

Bitemebankers , you were trying to tell me that my having a cup of tea each day meant I was as bad a drug user as someone who takes illegal drugs.

"caffeine really is a psychoactive stimulant, in the same class of chemicals as cocaineand amphetamines. And it's a drug that you take regularly, but are in denial about because you perceive it as safe."

"You use it [caffeine] sensibly, in moderation, and as a result you experience few, if anyproblems. It's the same with any other 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."

FatVonD

Soubrette wrote: »

I don't think it's tea per se, it's the caffeine in tea isn't it?

Still a smallish speck in the distance though, although probably not suitable for young children.

Absolutely not for very young children but certainly safer than recreational drugs.

Soubrette wrote: »

So where do you think the line should be drawn for illegal/legal?

You're assuming that my stance is anti drugs and that I think there should be a line drawn

My issue with this thread is the 'too cool for school' patronizing attitude a couple of posters (not you!) have displayed towards people who have no interest in dabbling in recreational drugs.

The person who rudely slapped down somebody (have no idea who any of these posters are now and too lazy too look!) who said they didn't want to take something that would make them vomit saying that 'drugs don't do that' (yes, actually they do, heroin makes you throw up when you first start using it so what do you know?) Seriously, it's like how every generation of teenagers think they invented sex :rotfl:

Sorry, that turned into a bit of a rant, have edited other stuff out but you get my gist

bitemebankers

Dimey wrote: »

Bitemebankers , you were trying to tell me that my having a cup of tea each day meant I was as bad a drug user as someone who takes illegal drugs.

1. No, I'm not.

2. I don't think taking illegal drugs is necessarily bad, so your statement makes no sense to me anyway.

bitemebankers

FatVonD wrote: »

I'm arguing against the inference that because people drink tea they have no right to be anti recreational hard drugs.

There is no such inference.

What there is is a clear statement that caffeine IS a recreational drug. It's a chemical with no nutritional value that humans consume because it's a psychoactive stimulant. How else would you define it?

Personally, I think our national policy on drugs is nonsensical, because it's based on political opinion and public suspicion, rather than science. At the root of this problem is the anti-science attitudes of swathes of the public when it comes to their own personal drug use.

Tiddlywinks

Oh for goodness sake.. talk about semantics!

Some drugs are legal, some are not. Yes, alcohol intoxicates and, yes, smoking can kill... but society has to draw the line somewhere.

If a drug is not legal then its 'recreational' use is unlawful... just because you know people that 'dabble' does not give evidence that everyone is 'at it'. Nor does it mean that society should condone the increased popularity.

Just because other 'drugs' are legal does not support the argument that all drugs should be legalised. It will not end the criminality, it will just move it into other areas of the business.

If you legalised everything from cannabis to heroin then society is saying it is OK to use them... and studies show that, for a large proportion of people, it would not be OK... it would lead to mental health problems, addiction and illness.

Arguing about tea being a drug in the same thread as someone finding something that looks like a Class A substance is just being deliberately controversial in an almost childlike way.

bitemebankers

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

but society has to draw the line somewhere.

No, there is no need for "society" to draw the line anywhere. What responsible adults put in their own bodies is their own business. End of. This has nothing to do with semantics.

just because you know people that 'dabble' does not give evidence that everyone is 'at it'. Nor does it mean that society should condone the increased popularity.

The number of people who enjoy recreational drugs is fairly well established - hearsay evidence and anecdotes are really unnecessary. Whether or not it's condoned by "society" is irrelevant.

Just because other 'drugs' are legal does not support the argument that all drugs should be legalised.

Nobody has claimed this.

It will not end the criminality, it will just move it into other areas of the business.

Nobody has claimed this either.

If you legalised everything from cannabis to heroin then society is saying it is OK to use them

As I said, it's irrelevant what "society" says is okay. Millions use drugs recreationally without reference to either the law or the opinions of others.

... and studies show that, for a large proportion of people, it would not be OK... it would lead to mental health problems, addiction and illness.

In terms of actual harm caused, there is no correlation with the legality/illegality of any given drug.

Arguing about tea being a drug in the same thread as someone finding something that looks like a Class A substance is just being deliberately controversial in an almost childlike way.

Caffeine is a drug and it harms some people. Why do you have a problem accepting that?