BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Random bollocks, geek chic, highbrow debate, pretentious tosh. You'll find it all on a good day.

BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby cilla_black » 23 Nov 2012, 15:39

The BBC is making a documentary on legal highs and wants to hear from users. What’s good, what’s bad – worst and best moments?

Whether you’ve had the night of your life on them, or a terrible experience – we want to hear from you.

Police and MPs are having their say – so what do you think? If you’d like to talk more please get in touch by phone 0207 765 1210 or email Julia.ross@bbc.co.uk

If you’d just like to put a succinct totally anonymous viewpoint – just call this mobile number and leave us a phone message we can use in the film. We’ll make no attempt to contact or follow up on that call. We just want your viewpoint. You can leave that message on 07442 454 081.
cilla_black
Newbie - please be gentle
Newbie - please be gentle
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 23 Nov 2012, 13:16
Sorted out: 0 time
Sorted in: 0 time

Re: BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby sim667 » 25 Nov 2012, 16:57

cilla_black wrote:The BBC is making a documentary on legal highs and wants to hear from users. What’s good, what’s bad – worst and best moments?

Whether you’ve had the night of your life on them, or a terrible experience – we want to hear from you.

Police and MPs are having their say – so what do you think? If you’d like to talk more please get in touch by phone 0207 765 1210 or email Julia.ross@bbc.co.uk

If you’d just like to put a succinct totally anonymous viewpoint – just call this mobile number and leave us a phone message we can use in the film. We’ll make no attempt to contact or follow up on that call. We just want your viewpoint. You can leave that message on 07442 454 081.


Sorry, id quite like to helpd you out, but it wont be happening via phone or email. No-where near anonymous enough for me im afraid.
sim667
Friend of Ravetalk
Friend of Ravetalk
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: 15 Sep 2009, 12:51
Sorted out: 34 times
Sorted in: 45 times

Re: BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby PaulX » 25 Nov 2012, 23:24

sim667 wrote:
cilla_black wrote:The BBC is making a documentary on legal highs and wants to hear from users. What’s good, what’s bad – worst and best moments?

Whether you’ve had the night of your life on them, or a terrible experience – we want to hear from you.

Police and MPs are having their say – so what do you think? If you’d like to talk more please get in touch by phone 0207 765 1210 or email Julia.ross@bbc.co.uk

If you’d just like to put a succinct totally anonymous viewpoint – just call this mobile number and leave us a phone message we can use in the film. We’ll make no attempt to contact or follow up on that call. We just want your viewpoint. You can leave that message on 07442 454 081.


Sorry, id quite like to helpd you out, but it wont be happening via phone or email. No-where near anonymous enough for me im afraid.


I'm not sure that I understand why anonymity is such a big deal for people where talking about legal highs is concerned. They are, by definition, legal... at least until they are banned. But still, it's your choice Sim.
Top one. Nice one. Get sorted.
User avatar
PaulX
resident geek
resident geek
 
Posts: 12276
Joined: 22 Oct 2005, 03:14
Location: somewhat north of the river
Sorted out: 46 times
Sorted in: 63 times
Motto: Mostly harmless

Re: BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby Dave Skywalker » 26 Nov 2012, 16:15

Legal or not, they still have the "drug" stigma attached to them. It's legal to frequent sex shops, but that doesn't mean people might want annonimity if they were going to talk about going to them. Not that I'm insinuating sim is going to sex shops :D

From what I've seen, and IMO of course:

1. They're pretty dangerous. Perhaps an over-dramatic statement but even if you've done the research, no-one knows what the long term effects are, even less so than with other "street" drugs. You can buy the 1mg scales and marquis test kits, surf erowid and bluelight until the cows come home, but at the end of the day you may just be putting your faith in a book Shulgin wrote and some chinese chemistry labs.

2. MOST people don't do the research.

3. You're even less likely to know the owner of a head shop website than you are a street dealer (and with websites popping up and down like anyone's business, "official 5" marketing, forum rants, shilling testamonials and anti-testamonials all the like, this goes in with number 2).

4. From what I've seen, they do work, and a lot of the time they can be stronger than the street equivalent they're attempting to replicate (in the cases of amphetamines especially). Going again in conjunction with number 2 and 3, I personally know of people who have ordered stuff from websites and got the wrong thing delivered with potentially disastrous consequences.

5. I can see why people take them. The quality of street drugs, although not as bad as it was a few years ago, is pretty dire, and with hefty penalties. These offer a similar (in some cases stronger) experience, at a similar or cheaper price, and stay on the right side of the law. People are always going to want to experiment with their perception (not the most eloquent of explanations, granted) so I'm not sure how to "fix" the situation. I wouldn't be surprised if the government just puts a blanket ban across the whole thing; introduce an analogue act in a similar vein to other countries. I'm surprised they haven't already.
By the time you've read this message it's too late to stop reading it.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Dave-Skyw ... 8010427836
http://www.daveskywalker.com
User avatar
Dave Skywalker
Friend of Ravetalk
Friend of Ravetalk
 
Posts: 842
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 12:23
Location: Milton Keynes
Sorted out: 2 times
Sorted in: 19 times
Motto: He knows just how much it is tweed boy.

BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby sim667 » 27 Nov 2012, 16:51

PaulX wrote:
sim667 wrote:
Sorry, id quite like to helpd you out, but it wont be happening via phone or email. No-where near anonymous enough for me im afraid.


I'm not sure that I understand why anonymity is such a big deal for people where talking about legal highs is concerned. They are, by definition, legal... at least until they are banned. But still, it's your choice Sim.


Because we all know that journalists are capable of twisting what you say to suit their own purposes.

"A long term user of legal highs,<insert name> says ....... Blah bla blah" and that type of thing

"Someone who used the now illegal mephodrone"

I'm not particularly worried about the beeb, it's more when the daily mail reprint it.
sim667
Friend of Ravetalk
Friend of Ravetalk
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: 15 Sep 2009, 12:51
Sorted out: 34 times
Sorted in: 45 times

BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby sim667 » 27 Nov 2012, 17:09

I will point out though that its simply not logical to keep banning all the different types of legal highs, all needs is one changes to the compound, and theoretically it's legal again, there's thousands of ways you can replicate a legal high with a marginally different compound.

The criminalisation of new compounds will do nothing but to push users to try new chemical structures, with no research, and even less background knowledge on the medical side effects. We can see that with the sudden popularity of MXE over the festival season in 2011, when there was a clampdown on the illegal drug k. Working at festivals that year, at one of them I personally put more people in ambulances that at all of the 5-6 festivals I'd work at in previous years (up until that point I'd once help get an ambulance to a man with a heart attack and carried a lad who broken an ankle to the local hospital because there was no onsite hospital). K clampdown comes, MXE becomes a legal alternative, and I put at least 7-8 people who had been knocked unconscious by it and alcohol mixed.

However whilst we have a government who thinks that they have a right to dictate how people use and what people do to their own bodies, the responsibility of deaths from illegal highs falls firmly on their doorstep IMHO.
sim667
Friend of Ravetalk
Friend of Ravetalk
 
Posts: 1145
Joined: 15 Sep 2009, 12:51
Sorted out: 34 times
Sorted in: 45 times

Re: BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby Beatmonkey » 27 Nov 2012, 21:46

They're not as good as the illegal ones.
Massive hippycrit.
User avatar
Beatmonkey
Too tight to get five stars ;-)
Too tight to get five stars ;-)
 
Posts: 3286
Joined: 16 Apr 2007, 02:45
Sorted out: 11 times
Sorted in: 8 times

Re: BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby Beatmonkey » 27 Nov 2012, 21:51

I just had to come back to this page as I thought I'd used the wrong 'they're' and wanted to correct it. Now that's a demonstration of short term memory loss, autism, narcissism, and OCD. Don't do drugs kids.
Massive hippycrit.
User avatar
Beatmonkey
Too tight to get five stars ;-)
Too tight to get five stars ;-)
 
Posts: 3286
Joined: 16 Apr 2007, 02:45
Sorted out: 11 times
Sorted in: 8 times

Re: BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby Darchigan » 28 Nov 2012, 21:48

:( I can't post the comment that I wanted to without getting a "forbidden request" error page.
I'm off, Goodbye :)
Darchigan
Incorrigible Post Whore
Incorrigible Post Whore
 
Posts: 925
Joined: 30 Dec 2010, 15:23
Sorted out: 75 times
Sorted in: 9 times

Re: BBC: Highs & Lows on Legal highs?

Postby PaulX » 29 Nov 2012, 06:17

Darchigan wrote::( I can't post the comment that I wanted to without getting a "forbidden request" error page.


???

Try again, seeing as the above one was successful?
Top one. Nice one. Get sorted.
User avatar
PaulX
resident geek
resident geek
 
Posts: 12276
Joined: 22 Oct 2005, 03:14
Location: somewhat north of the river
Sorted out: 46 times
Sorted in: 63 times
Motto: Mostly harmless

Next

Return to Life, the Universe and Everything

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron