Controversy about funshops with recreational drugs in Poland

Randal 1 | 577

23 Mar 2009 / #31

Well, your statement sounded as if you wanted drug-maker executives to be the guinea pigs in drug tests because they make money from the medications. And that is silly. It also had a distinct anti-capitalism ring to it.

Maybe they should take advantage of all the “rich diversity” and use immigrants as the testers? ;) “Welcome to our country. Roll up your sleeve.” This is no more silly that what you implied.

ragtime27 1 | 146

23 Mar 2009 / #32

ragtime27:
it takes a long time to verify every substance,so it's very lengthy process.

are you two kidding or something? what recreational drugs have not been studied in pretty in-depth? mj? heroine? coca? acid? ... which ones??

Be honest with me,without checking it on internet,what do you know about Khat leaves?

this is one example of many

.

ragtime27:
the problem who's going to pay or sponsor the research.
you may be surprised some politicians are happy with the situation.

it makes financial sense.. before you waste money fighting it to no avail why not figure out a different way.. study, usa's war on drugs, study holland's relaxed attitude on things, and study the in between english way... from what i know, the latter two are better then the first way..

by the look of it you do smoke cannabis,hence you drifted from the subject,we're talking about new substance which are classified as legal without any study,my point wasn't about Holland's relaxed attitude on cannabis.

ragtime27:
believe me i've seen what cannabis can do

tell me all about it.. i am curious. thanks.

What is your point!!!!??

plk123 8 | 4119

23 Mar 2009 / #33

What is your point!!!!??

are you high or something? the point was pretty clear but i'll repeat it since you somehow didn't get it: i want to know what you have seen.

ragtime27 1 | 146

23 Mar 2009 / #34

i want to know what you have seen.

It's classified patient's data protection act 1998.

Seanus 15 | 19666

23 Mar 2009 / #35

What I meant, Randal, was that drug pushers should test the illegal drugs with a high-risk factor. Not commercially sold drugs.

niejestemcapita 2 | 561

23 Mar 2009 / #36

drug pushers should test the illegal drugs with a high-risk factor

its all tested in Naples on junkies.

Seanus 15 | 19666

23 Mar 2009 / #37

Well, I'm not sure of the authenticity of that claim but ok ;)

niejestemcapita 2 | 561

23 Mar 2009 / #38

for real, have a read of Gomorrah by Roberto Saviano. Well at least read a bit of it before you drop it to the ground in horror.:)

plk123 8 | 4119

23 Mar 2009 / #39

It's classified patient's data protection act 1998.

of course.. should have know it that you'd pull that.. oh well..

btw. no body asked you for names or any other private info but you can hide behind this or any other law you choose but that basically discredits you completely.

Randal 1 | 577

23 Mar 2009 / #40

What I meant, Randal, was that drug pushers should test the illegal drugs with a high-risk factor. Not commercially sold drugs.

I’ve never heard of illegal drug pushers using animals for testing. Do they even test?

Aren’t most (many?) pushers also users themselves already?

Seanus 15 | 19666

23 Mar 2009 / #41

They try out all sorts of compounds on unsuspecting people, thinking they are getting pure MDMA. I'd never buy any of that nonsense.

I meant that they should try the compound first. Many pushers are users, yes. Still, they know their drugs better than many users.

ragtime27 1 | 146

23 Mar 2009 / #42

ragtime27:
It's classified patient's data protection act 1998.

of course.. should have know it that you'd pull that.. oh well..

btw. no body asked you for names or any other private info but you can hide behind this or any other law you choose but that basically discredits you completely.

Somehow you don't get it too,that was my sarcasm,no one need to tell anyone what cannabis can do.
I'm not claiming that i have seen things no one saw I'm not a messiah,if you're that curious google it out.

Randal 1 | 577

24 Mar 2009 / #43

What exactly is your position, RT? You’re against such government meddling or you’re for it?

Giles

24 Mar 2009 / #44

I live in Tri City, If I get the wrong stuff the dealer soon finds out

ragtime27 1 | 146

24 Mar 2009 / #45

What exactly is your position, RT? You’re against such government meddling or you’re for it?

yes to certain extent I'm happy government sort out the harmful substances if that what you meant.

I agree Testing on animals if to save human life(if there's no other alternative).

I'm against testing on animals purely for cosmetic products.

Randal 1 | 577

24 Mar 2009 / #46

Well then it looks like we agree on this topic. Although I am cautious about nannying governments overreaching in an effort to control social behavior, as we’re seeing more and more over here. But so long as they are truly acting in the interest of public health then I have no problem with it.

ragtime27 1 | 146

24 Mar 2009 / #47

Most governments wont illegalised substance lightly,because they have to enforce the law that comes with it and that cost money.

livalg - | 3

12 Sep 2009 / #48

So, has anything changed since you opened this topic, in Spring? What's the status of 'legal drugs' shops now? Are they banned or are they still running?

SzwedwPolsce 11 | 1589

12 Sep 2009 / #49

People can make their own choices about risks. But I don't want to be one of the tax-payers who pay their medical treatment when their kidneys/liver aren't working properly.

OP pawian 221 | 24981

12 Sep 2009 / #50

So, has anything changed since you opened this topic, in Spring? What's the status of 'legal drugs' shops now? Are they banned or are they still running?

They are still operational. :):) A few days ago I heard that municipal authorities here and there have started another harrassment campaign, e.g., by sending tax -evasion hunters to the shops.

I also heard they are cooking a new law in the parliament which is going to make those "boosters" illegal.

For the time being, shops are doing well.