Loaded-Gun.Com - Anti-Social.Com's Rejects!
General Category => Substance Abuse => Topic started by: DEVIANT on April 14, 2009, 08:47:35 AM
-
should be mandatory 8)
-
Fuck you, dirty crackhead. Crack is for LOSERS.
Smoke some fucking meth, man. Cheaper and lasts longer.
-
but meth is pure like crack
-
this thread is lame
-
no meth
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/ganja728/meth.jpg)
-
Hot!
-
no meth
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/ganja728/meth.jpg)
Shouldn't we shift this to the self pics thread?
-
Hot!
-
That bitch obviously doesn't know how to listen.
(http://www.backwater-productions.net/data_archive/images/funny/Bitch%20Keeps%20Falling%20on%20Doorknobs.jpg)
-
Blondie McMethfreak there would be pretty cute all cleaned up with 50 more pounds on.
Of course, the black eyes still gave me a chub.
-
the black eyes are a total turn on and she knows it.... you can see it in that smirk she has on her face
-
(http://Girl, you need to quit falling on them doorknobs...)
LOL holy fuck I missed that one...
-
What the fuck. I'd try crack once. Why not?
-
What the fuck. I'd try crack once. Why not?
I've tried it. Waste of good coke if you ask me.
-
I'm not a regular crack user, but I must say, I haven't done a drug yet that made me feel quite that good....
-
I'm not a regular crack user, but I must say, I haven't done a drug yet that made me feel quite that good....
Meth, I'm telling you dude. I'm not kidding either. I never kid about drugs.
-
I've never been happier than on MDMA, but at the same time it's a bit dopey for my tastes.
Mushrooms are probably about my favorite yet (besides the normal alcohol, weed, and coffee).
-
Meth is best described as a mix between dextroamphetamine and MDMA. I love all three.
-
What's the difference between speed and meth, anyway?
-
the s,p,m,t,d and h.
boom boom.
-
What's the difference between speed and meth, anyway?
All amphetamines are what is referred to as speed: levoamphetamine, dextroamphetamine, and dextromethamphetamine (what you know as Meth). There is also levomethamphetamine which is in Vicks inhalers and do not produce the CNS stimulation that it's stereoisomer does.
-
What's the difference between speed and meth, anyway?
All amphetamines are what is referred to as speed: levoamphetamine, dextroamphetamine, and dextromethamphetamine (what you know as Meth). There is also levomethamphetamine which is in Vicks inhalers and do not produce the CNS stimulation that it's stereoisomer does.
note to self : dont play scrabble with Dmoth.
-
Oh I fucking rape at scrabble. Best word I ever did was JEOPARDY
-
Dude, we should totally be cooking our own shit. I know these nice guys down here in one of those lovely MS13 cells, we could all be friends...
-
Oh yeah, that's smart, let's make friends with MS13.
/sarcasm
-
What's the worst that could happen?
-
Tortured to death, for one.
-
No sense of adventure?
-
Bush Gardens is adventure, fearing for the life of you and your loved ones is not.
-
Bush Gardens is adventure, fearing for the life of you and your loved ones is not.
Love, Dylan, really? Who do you love? Besides my boobs I mean.
-
What, you don't think I have family?
-
Let's leave family out of this and focus on boobs.
-
Psycho and treehugger should have a boob-off.
-
A theme park is an adventure? Damn, that's pretty lame.
-
I LIKE THE ROLLER COASTERS AND ANIMALS!!!!
-
Me too, but it ain't an adventure.
-
Me too, but it ain't an adventure.
That's not an adventure. THIS is an adventure.
-
(http://2adultflashgames.com/2afgnjk134jho1yufc/flash/Madison-Parker-takes-3-hard-cocks.jpg)
-
Fuckin a mosh!
-
What the fuck. I'd try crack once. Why not?
I've tried it. Waste of good coke if you ask me.
I remember you posting about that a million and five years ago.
-
I do that a lot.
(Repeat myself, not smoke crack)
-
I smoked crack once, but I am not proud of it. Someone once put it in a blunt that was being passed around, and I was totally unaware of it. When I was told there was fucking CRACK in it, I felt like the lowest dirtiest scum on the face of the Earth. :-[
-
Haha, like chugging robo is any better?
-
You're happy to get your jollies from fucking COUGH SYRUP, yet you're somehow morally outraged at someone smoking crack? Are you fuckin' serious?
-
but people dont say EWW U DIRTY DEXTROMETHORPHAN WHORE, DEXHEAD, shit like that. I grew up learning crack is wack, and never heard any shit about dxm until i started doing it.
-
You're happy to get your jollies from fucking COUGH SYRUP, yet you're somehow morally outraged at someone smoking crack? Are you fuckin' serious?
yes I am serious. I also feel the same way about Marlboro reds and budweiser
-
-
but people dont say EWW U DIRTY DEXTROMETHORPHAN WHORE, DEXHEAD, shit like that. I grew up learning crack is wack, and never heard any shit about dxm until i started doing it.
You kidding me? Most people think it's one of the dirtiest things besides meth and crack. Not like I give a shit though, dex is my baby.
*Correction, most people I know.
IDK.. everyone around here thinks crack heroin meth and shit like that is the worst. I also dislike crack cuz i seen so many people throw their lives away for it, and I had like 3 bags of crack in my house and didnt know until my friend told me it was in his backpack.. (long story) .. crack just makes me feel.. idk not right. I don't look down on people that do it or anything, It's just my opinion..
people around here think dxm is just stupid, people think im retarded drinking bottles of cough syrup.. well its better than looking retarded smoking a glass dick.
-
Haha, true.
-
Listen, I have nothing in particular against DXM or any other way of getting high, for that matter. But some might say that at least crack is a legitimate drug. I'd say the general consensus on chugging cough syrup is that it ranks about on the same level as sniffing glue or computer duster or whatever other household products can be abused.
Again, my point isn't that crack is good or that DXM is bad - just that who fuckin' cares? I've smoked crack, you've smoked crack. Neither of us habitually smokes crack, ergo neither of us is a "crackhead". Feeling ashamed is pointless.
-
As for your first paragraph Si, that is TOTAL bullshit. Doing DXM is nothing like sniffing glue or huffing and it MOST DEFINITELY a real, legitimate drug. Just letting you know. Guess what? Codeine used to be in cough syrup OTC, is that like sniffing glue?
-
Listen, I have nothing in particular against DXM or any other way of getting high, for that matter. But some might say that at least crack is a legitimate drug. I'd say the general consensus on chugging cough syrup is that it ranks about on the same level as sniffing glue or computer duster or whatever other household products can be abused.
Again, my point isn't that crack is good or that DXM is bad - just that who fuckin' cares? I've smoked crack, you've smoked crack. Neither of us habitually smokes crack, ergo neither of us is a "crackhead". Feeling ashamed is pointless.
my point was that I never had intentions to smoke it. just something im against for MYSELF. im not against people that smoked it or do smoke it or sell it or anything. i just dont choose to do it.
-
I'd say the general consensus...
Not saying it's my opinion. As I said, I have nothing in particular against any of this stuff. We were talking about how society views things.
-
Well, okay then.
-
i know, I was just making my opinion clear, i didn't want anyone to think i look down on crack users lol
-
The general public considers things, that even they know how to obtain, being used for the purpose of getting high, is somehow ...trashy.
sniffing ; glue, petrol anything else already mentioned
drinking ; metho, cough stuff. whatever
extrem sports could also go on this list. but yeah nm.
-
Smoking crack makes you suck dick, kids.
-
my point was that I never had intentions to smoke it. just something im against for MYSELF. im not against people that smoked it or do smoke it or sell it or anything. i just dont choose to do it.
Fair enough, I don't mean to seem like I'm attacking you (/me tries not to scare the new people away like we always seem to do), but accidentally smoking crack ONCE ought not to lead to feeling like:
the lowest dirtiest scum on the face of the Earth. :-[
S'all I'm sayin'. I accidentally smoked a puff of a cigarette the other day. I stopped once I realized what it was, and I didn't mean to smoke it. So it doesn't even count, 'far as I'm concerned.
-
Yeah, guilt is for the birds. I have none, or that shame stuff.....or pride.
-
my point was that I never had intentions to smoke it. just something im against for MYSELF. im not against people that smoked it or do smoke it or sell it or anything. i just dont choose to do it.
Fair enough, I don't mean to seem like I'm attacking you (/me tries not to scare the new people away like we always seem to do), but accidentally smoking crack ONCE ought not to lead to feeling like:
the lowest dirtiest scum on the face of the Earth. :-[
S'all I'm sayin'. I accidentally smoked a puff of a cigarette the other day. I stopped once I realized what it was, and I didn't mean to smoke it. So it doesn't even count, 'far as I'm concerned.
well when this happened i was like 15-16, and i just had the thought in my head omg i smoked crack. maybe i didnt feel that bad, but it messed my head up for the day. i was pissed cuz i never wanted to smoke the shxt.........
I guess maybe cause i'm still young, and got all the stuff that people would say about crack in my head.. like idk about over there but around here, its one of the drugs that is looked down on the most. I guess in my head crack is still wack. any drug is. but none of them were talked about as much around here.
-
People have a lot to say about things they don't even remotely understand when it comes to drugs. You ever notice that the people who spend all of their time exhorting you not to try something also claim never to have tried it themselves? That's garbage.
I say try everything once and only once at first. You can return for a second, third, etc try as long as you do so cautiously. Nothing makes you more of a chump than addiction.
-
right, 'cause most people who are meth/crack/heroin addicts don't start out thinking, "I'll just do it this one time.."
-
Instant addiction is a myth.
If you can't resist self-indulgence then better to burn out fast and be done with it.
I still think trying something should be prerequisite to condemning it. (except when it comes to Xbox)
-
You're happy to get your jollies from fucking COUGH SYRUP, yet you're somehow morally outraged at someone smoking crack? Are you fuckin' serious?
yes I am serious. I also feel the same way about Marlboro reds and budweiser
And this simply proves she is a right thinking American. Good for you princess.
-
-
I grew up learning crack is wack, and never heard any shit about dxm until i started doing it.
So, your drug use is directed by what you've been told is bad. Sort of a black-list of substances, rather than a white-list.
-
asprin hahahahahaha
-
word substitution is fun when done correctly
-
Instant addiction is a myth.
If you can't resist self-indulgence then better to burn out fast and be done with it.
I still think trying something should be prerequisite to condemning it. (except when it comes to Xbox)
So what if it happens on the second or third "cautious" try? What then? Why even chance it, especially people with addictive personalities? I am an alcoholic. I cannot have one drink without having a second, third, fourth, etc. until I am falling down drunk and attacking my husband/assaulting police officers while they try to load me into an ambulance.
Knowing that, there is no way in hell I would cry crack or coke or meth or any other narcotic, not even once.
-
Doormouse, you speak wise words. See, that's why I like to rotate my drugs like a fucking rolodex, that way I'll never end up in an episode of Intervention. I will admit I'm moderately psychologically addicted to drugs in general, but I have the unusual super enthusiastic passion for them so that's what sets me apart from most "addicts". Besides, I can go a week without drugs and I won't be fucking flipping out. I'll just overeat instead. God, I have a lot of vices.
yeah ill over eat too but right now im not gonna eat .. im gonna have the robo
-
I still think trying something should be prerequisite to condemning it.
Sucked cock before?
Murdered someone in cold blood?
Lovingly hugged a stranger?
-
Instant addiction is a myth.
If you can't resist self-indulgence then better to burn out fast and be done with it.
I still think trying something should be prerequisite to condemning it. (except when it comes to Xbox)
So what if it happens on the second or third "cautious" try? What then? Why even chance it, especially people with addictive personalities? I am an alcoholic. I cannot have one drink without having a second, third, fourth, etc. until I am falling down drunk and attacking my husband/assaulting police officers while they try to load me into an ambulance.
Knowing that, there is no way in hell I would cry crack or coke or meth or any other narcotic, not even once.
Know thyself. Addiction is proof of a lack of caution. Even a person with an addictive personality can try something once, but trying it a second or third time with the knowledge that you have an addictive personality is hardly cautious behavior. Anyway I'm mainly concerned with people who don't try something and yet condemn it out of hand. You have free will. You can certainly choose not to experience something (even if I think you're limiting yourself), but at least don't condemn it. Drugs don't kill people - people kill themselves.
I still think trying something should be prerequisite to condemning it.
Sucked cock before?
Murdered someone in cold blood?
Lovingly hugged a stranger?
And have I condemned any of those activities anywhere?
I mean... OK - you make a valid point with your second query. I should clarify that so long as it's only you that suffers the consequences, try everything once at least before condemning it.
-
I mean... OK - you make a valid point with your second query. I should clarify that so long as it's only you that suffers the consequences, try everything once at least before condemning it.
*boilerplate counterargument* when you do drugs, you're not the only one that suffers.
*boilerplate continuation* try suicide at least once before condemning it!
*reeal answer* I understand your point, but it takes a certain, very special type of mind to reason through everything and take themselves completely out of the equation. Most people still interact with the outside world in some way, and that's where the danger sets in.
-
"Drugs don't kill people - people kill themselves."
Now you got the purity issue. ( Just saying. )
-
There are some things that should logically be condemned, and you don't need to try them in order to do so.
Tobacco - Makes you need it, causes cancer. Does nothing good.
Crack - Makes you need it, causes poorness and death. Does nothing good.
Heroin - Ditto.
Meth - Ditto.
-
*boilerplate counterargument* when you do drugs, you're not the only one that suffers.
Huge over-generalization in all directions. First of all, not all drugs have negative side effects. But I'll assume you mean ones that do. Secondly, drug addiction and not drug use hurts those that love you. Or if you use while responsible for others like if you're tripping while driving toddlers. But mainly, my point was: "If it hurts another then don't do it." So if you're not the only one that will suffer then... don't do it.
*boilerplate continuation* try suicide at least once before condemning it!
It's last on the agenda.
*reeal answer* I understand your point, but it takes a certain, very special type of mind to reason through everything and take themselves completely out of the equation. Most people still interact with the outside world in some way, and that's where the danger sets in.
My suggestions only really work in an ideal setting. The biggest problem is that most people don't know their limitations. Addiction is a gradient. There's no one use after which point you become an addict. However if you don't constantly monitor yourself and err on the side of safety, chances are you'll slip too far down the gradient. Most people are idiots - myself included. Idealistically, though, I'll stand by my argument: The point is to have new experiences, not necessarily to enjoy them or even necessarily to return to them.
@krsna - You're mixing logos with pathos. I've tried Tobacco and Meth and I'm neither poor nor dead nor cancerous. I'm glad I tried them. Knowing what they do to a person is the good that they have given me. I'll try crack and heroin once each if given the opportunity. I've heard enough horror stories about those that I don't think I'd be stupid enough to try them again. I'm advocating cautious exploration here, not regular usage.
-
You know, even once is enough for you to OD. Drug dealers are not the most trustworthy of human beings, especially when it comes to shit like heroin or meth. Unless you make it, you don't know what you're getting, how pure it is, or if it was mixed with something you're going to have a horrible reaction to.
I mean, why chance it? Ooh, for the experience. I'd rather have the 20 bucks in my pocket and go see a movie and get something to eat. Beats having my kids find me dead or covered in puke on the bathroom floor, eh?
And we haven't even gotten to the legal/illegal part of the debate.
Whatever, we can banter back and forth on this all day. The last thing I've got to say about it is, "Please, stay the fuck away from my kids with your pro-drug propaganda."
-
@krsna - You're mixing logos with pathos. I've tried Tobacco and Meth and I'm neither poor nor dead nor cancerous. I'm glad I tried them. Knowing what they do to a person is the good that they have given me. I'll try crack and heroin once each if given the opportunity. I've heard enough horror stories about those that I don't think I'd be stupid enough to try them again. I'm advocating cautious exploration here, not regular usage.
Your line of reasoning only works in the case that you don't find something you REALLY like and continue to do even though you are fully aware that doing so is harmful to you. If you do, then you'll fully understand my line of reasoning.
Furthermore, I posit that unless your knowledge of how tobacco and meth affect a person are going to be used in some way to assist others suffering from their addiction or help prevent others from from becoming addicted that it's useless and may in fact be construed to be harmful to society as a whole since it seems to have reinforced your platform of cautious exploration (now being soapboxed in a public forum).
Rhetorical question, if someone showed you four buttons and said that pushing each button would pleasurable in a different way but that each time you pushed a button there was an unmeasureable chance that you might die or simply have your life ruined, would you seriously consider pushing them?
-
Rhetorical question, if someone showed you four buttons and said that pushing each button would pleasurable in a different way but that each time you pushed a button there was an unmeasureable chance that you might die or simply have your life ruined, would you seriously consider pushing them?
Usually I don't get too involved in these conversations because, well, they've already happened a hundred times in other parts of the internet. And they all ended up in the same place (which is why I was able to boilerplate a few arguments).
But I wanted to say, this is an interesting example! I like the way it was framed, definitely.
However, (and I'll only go find the specific experiments if you really need me to do it) it's been proven in many social and psychological experiments in the last 30 years that folks will indeed push those buttons at least a few times, especially if the unmeasureable risk was assumed or explained to be a low percentage.
-
I'm on the fence here. I don't feel like things ought to necessarily be condemned, but celebrating them or encouraging others to do them seems silly too.
Any drug use/abuse (and this absolutely includes alcohol) I have partaken in, do partake in, or will partake in in the future is my issue, first and foremost. I don't feel I need to apologise for any of it, unless I've hurt others in the process. But I also don't recommend it. Not even smoking weed, which is probably my least detrimental vice.
-
Rhetorical question, if someone showed you four buttons and said that pushing each button would pleasurable in a different way but that each time you pushed a button there was an unmeasureable chance that you might die or simply have your life ruined, would you seriously consider pushing them?
Usually I don't get too involved in these conversations because, well, they've already happened a hundred times in other parts of the internet. And they all ended up in the same place (which is why I was able to boilerplate a few arguments).
But I wanted to say, this is an interesting example! I like the way it was framed, definitely.
However, (and I'll only go find the specific experiments if you really need me to do it) it's been proven in many social and psychological experiments in the last 30 years that folks will indeed push those buttons at least a few times, especially if the unmeasureable risk was assumed or explained to be a low percentage.
It should be explained that unmeasurable doen't mean low percentage, it just means unknowable and completely random.
-
You know, even once is enough for you to OD. Drug dealers are not the most trustworthy of human beings, especially when it comes to shit like heroin or meth. Unless you make it, you don't know what you're getting, how pure it is, or if it was mixed with something you're going to have a horrible reaction to.
You've identified an area where caution must be exercised. I say exercise that caution. Know your dealer. Make it yourself. Whatever it takes. If it's very dangerous then be very cautious. Do the research before you get into anything.
I mean, why chance it? Ooh, for the experience. I'd rather have the 20 bucks in my pocket and go see a movie and get something to eat. Beats having my kids find me dead or covered in puke on the bathroom floor, eh?
Again - here you've identified an outcome which is harmful to those around you. If you're going into something very dangerous and you haven't taken the precautions necessary to remove the risk and the outcome will hurt others then don't do it.
Your line of reasoning only works in the case that you don't find something you REALLY like and continue to do even though you are fully aware that doing so is harmful to you. If you do, then you'll fully understand my line of reasoning.
Like I said earlier: if you're a self-indulgent idiot then by all means kill yourself with drugs and be done with it. If you have no self control and if you can't resist the urge to pleasure yourself again and again after one try then I have little sympathy for you. There are a lot of things I really really like that I don't do all the time. I'm not so strong-willed. If even I can handle temptation surely you (whoever) can as well.
Furthermore, I posit that unless your knowledge of how tobacco and meth affect a person are going to be used in some way to assist others suffering from their addiction or help prevent others from from becoming addicted that it's useless and may in fact be construed to be harmful to society as a whole since it seems to have reinforced your platform of cautious exploration (now being soapboxed in a public forum).
Society? I'm looking to improve myself on a personal level. By society's standards I probably watch far too little MTV and I should be shunned for adhering to an atheistic personal philosophy. Society is really a poor way to measure an activity's overall utility. I'm not opposed to doing things for the benefit of society, but it's not the standard by which I live my life. Eating delicious filet mignon doesn't help society, in fact it probably hurts society. But if I only do it once for the experience then go on and cry emo society. Nobody cares.
Rhetorical question, if someone showed you four buttons and said that pushing each button would pleasurable in a different way but that each time you pushed a button there was an unmeasureable chance that you might die or simply have your life ruined, would you seriously consider pushing them?
If by doing the research I could reduce the likelihood of death or ruination of life to a vanishingly low probability then yes. That's all I'm talking about. I would certainly push each one once if my likelihood of problems was so low.
So now, rhetorical question for rhetorical question:
If someone showed you a button that if pushed would allow you to see a new color (a color no human who hasn't pushed the button has ever seen) but that if you kept pushing it over and over again then you would die, wouldn't you push it just once? Let's even heighten the drama by saying that for some percentage of people, there is a crazy allergic reaction that will hurt you badly if you push it even once. Then you were given as much preparatory time as you needed to research the shit out of it and learn if you have this reaction and how to prevent its effects, then wouldn't you do the research required to have the new experience of seeing the new color? Wouldn't you be miffed if there were laws barring you from pushing the button even if you didn't have the allergy?
The last thing I've got to say about it is, "Please, stay the fuck away from my kids with your pro-drug propaganda."
This is supposed to be pro-experience propaganda. If the emphasis changes from pleasure to experience then there's no problem as far as I can see. People think of drugs in the wrong way. Using to feel good about yourself is self-deception and indulgence (which can be ok in some situations - like with moderate alcohol use for instance). Trying something to gain a novel experience is something wholly different.
Let's be clear - I'm not saying that repeated and unguarded use of drugs is a good thing. I'm saying that new experiences are. If you categorically exclude drugs from your pool from which to draw experiences then you are limiting yourself. Whether it's because you're unwilling to do the background research required to be safe or whether it's for some legitimate reason involving dependent children and your known inability to control your urges (not you, psycho, but anyone) then sure those limitations can be acceptable to you on a personal level. So you can exercise your free will and not experiment. By condemning new experiences in a public forum, however, you act to influence others (who may not share your personal weaknesses/responsibilities) to limit themselves. By enacting legislation outlawing these experiences you kill intellectual curiosity.
I know the reason behind it is for the good of those who are idiots about substance use. You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs and all that. Heck they even got rid of our trans fats for our own good. But, idealistically speaking, such fascistic measures are not necessary. Granted we don't live in an ideal society. I don't care. I'll still live ideally.
But I also don't recommend it.
I only do on chat boards and the like. I strike a firm anti-drug stance with my family and friends. Not because I don't believe what I'm saying above, but because I'm cynical and, who knows, maybe my family and friends are incautious self-indulgent fools in the end. I love them regardless and don't want them to risk it.
As a compromise I tend to explain the effects clearly to them so they can see that there's nothing magical about it. Rather than just spouting anti-drug catch phrases, and perpetuating the ridiculous notion of instant addiction I hope that by explaining things as they truly are I can earn their respect enough to listen to my advice that it's not all that. But I speak from personal experience and not from some hand-wringing society-conscious perspective. If I've never done it before and can't give an account of the experience then I don't condemn it. Let's say one of my friends tells me he's going to try heroin and asks if he should. I would tell him that it was his decision, but to be fucking careful because that stuff is well-known to be very dangerous. I'd tell him he can reach a non-judgmental friend if he needs any help during or after the experience. I wouldn't tell him not to though. In fact I'm kind of jealous because he'll be seeing colors I couldn't even dream of. I'd probably recommend against it to my family but for purely selfish reasons I assure you.
Ultimately I think a hardline "Drugs are bad, hmmkay?" stance does way more hard than good unless the person who's telling you not to try the drugs has already done them and tells you the truth. All it takes is one curious dick to try it anyway and when he learns that this instant addiction warned of is horseshit, then all of the drug advice is disregarded. There are problems and dangers associated with drugs and shooting straight with kids will probably be the best way to educate them of these harms. Let's not make drugs a forbidden fruit. Kids are idiots, but they are also anxious to learn - even if they have to do it themselves. Once they find out you were taking them for a ride, they lose all respect for all of your advice.
-
I have come to the conclusion that Doormouse is smarter than all of you. Ditto on everything, couldn't have said it better. Fact is I agree but if I was being questioned than I'd be way too lazy an inarticulate to answer as well as you did. Thanks for doing the work for me.
-
whatever, everyone knows you think in wingdings
Thread:
I refuse to use any hard chemical drugs. I don't fucking care if they'll broaden my horizons I'm not putting that stuff into my body.
-
I don't give two shits of anyone else does drugs and I don't recommend others use drugs unless you know exactly what you're getting yourself into. Most people DON'T. If you're not 100% positive that you can handle a drug, you shouldn't do it. If you aren't willing to fully educate yourself on a drug that you want to put into your body, you shouldn't do it, and if you do than you are an idiot that deserves to die. If you've been abused as a child or gone through very traumatic experiences, than for the love of god do NOT even think about doing drugs because you are the one that is most likely to be on the next episode of intervention, you dumb fuck.
I change my mind, EVERYONE should do drugs to induce social darwinism for the idiots of the world.
-
Eh. We'll see who's smarter when my kids all become crack addicts after listening to some internet wiseacre.
I was mainly just playing advocate to a devilish whim.
I like the argument conceptually. But on a day-to-day basis, and in real life, I think my suggestion to try everything only works for a slim minority of people. In most parts of my life I generally stick to safety rather than risking sorrow even if it limits my options. I wish I were bolder.
-
I do a lot of stuff and plan after, but hard drugs are off the list.
-
Eh. We'll see who's smarter when my kids all become crack addicts after listening to some internet wiseacre.
I was mainly just playing advocate to a devilish whim.
I like the argument conceptually. But on a day-to-day basis, and in real life, I think my suggestion to try everything only works for a slim minority of people. In most parts of my life I generally stick to safety rather than risking sorrow even if it limits my options. I wish I were bolder.
I think your advice alone is flawed, but combine it with my last post (minus the sarcasm of course) and it becomes valid.
-
You're all drugfucked.
Every last one of you!
-
I have come to the conclusion that Doormouse is smarter than all of you. Ditto on everything, couldn't have said it better. Fact is I agree but if I was being questioned than I'd be way too lazy an inarticulate to answer as well as you did. Thanks for doing the work for me.
Doormouse, this illustrates the flaw in your viewpoint more than I could ever hope to.
-
I have come to the conclusion that Doormouse is smarter than all of you. Ditto on everything, couldn't have said it better. Fact is I agree but if I was being questioned than I'd be way too lazy an inarticulate to answer as well as you did. Thanks for doing the work for me.
Doormouse, this illustrates the flaw in your viewpoint more than I could ever hope to.
haha, i think he realized that and quit.
-
Assholes.
-
Yeah, because the unemployed kid living with his parents, robo tripping, eating nasal inhalers, and trying to figure out how to steal his own medication from his parents obviously has a healthy outlook on drug use.
-
Drugs don't cause my problems, my problems are a cause for drugs!!! If you don't believe me, than fuck off.
-
"then"
-
Nazi.
-
Ya.
-
I just got bored. Things seemed to be getting tense. I think people don't realize I'm just fucking around most of the time. I play straight-man too well. Like about a month ago I posted something about how I'm always right about everything. I was really just kidding. Heck I'm not even more often right than wrong. In general whenever I'm saying stuff is absolutely one way or another that's a good sign I'm half just fucking around.
-
So you're pretty much saying that we shouldn't listen to anything you say because we can never know when you are serious or joking? Well that's good to know. So I guess you're dead to all of us now.
-
No. What I'm saying is that I'm usually not as absolutist about issues as I say I am. I'm more middle of the road about things than I come off. Mainly I don't care how other people want to live their life. When I start throwing around absolute terms that's usually a good sign that you shouldn't be taking me seriously. Ah fuck it. Whatever. Yeah sure I'll be dead to you. I've got shit to do anyway.
-
Mainly I don't care how other people want to live their life.
Well it sure as hell doesn't seem that way by the amount that you post.
-
That's why I explained it in plain English. The hope was that even the dullest among us would understand. I see I've failed.
-
Meh.
-
That's why I explained it in plain English. The hope was that even the dullest among us would understand. I see I've failed.
Tom Backhand - 1, Danzig - 0
-
I just got bored. Things seemed to be getting tense. I think people don't realize I'm just fucking around most of the time. I play straight-man too well. Like about a month ago I posted something about how I'm always right about everything. I was really just kidding. Heck I'm not even more often right than wrong. In general whenever I'm saying stuff is absolutely one way or another that's a good sign I'm half just fucking around.
Which half of this is fucking around. ha.
-
top or bottom? Right or left?
-
It's okay, I didn't notice the microtext.
-
I just got bored. Things seemed to be getting tense. I think people don't realize I'm just fucking around most of the time. I play straight-man too well. Like about a month ago I posted something about how I'm always right about everything. I was really just kidding. Heck I'm not even more often right than wrong. In general whenever I'm saying stuff is absolutely one way or another that's a good sign I'm half just fucking around.
Which half of this is fucking around. ha.
No it's not a matter of top or bottom, left or right. It's all mixed up together. Here, I'll make it easy for you. See below:
I just got bored. Things seemed to be getting tense. I think people don't realize I'm just fucking around most of the time. I play straight-man too well. Like about a month ago I posted something about how I'm always right about everything. I was really just kidding. Heck I'm not even more often right than wrong. In general whenever I'm saying stuff is absolutely one way or another that's a good sign I'm half just fucking around.
-
what
-
He said he likes fucking straight men and some gay's kids.
-
Yeah. Hojo asked which half was me just fucking around. That's it.
-
No. What I'm saying is that I'm usually not as absolutist about issues as I say I am. I'm more middle of the road about things than I come off.
What he's saying is:
LOADED-GUN.COM IS FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY.
-
is it?
Cool, disclaimer!
-
t-shirt slogan ?
-
perhaps
-
oh, and two hetero points for having that Baldrick avatar
-
woohoo I am asexual !!