My school is filled with drug addicts--who knew? [Archive]

iMacZealot

Apr 25, 2008, 02:12 AM

motulist

Apr 25, 2008, 02:20 AM

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 02:45 AM

When you say addicts do you mean coke heads?

I can't imagine your school is filled with heroin or speed addicts....

As for how people obtain drugs? it's really not difficult, you just need to socialise in the wrong circles.

bartelby

Apr 25, 2008, 02:47 AM

When you say addicts do you mean coke heads?

I can't imagine your school is filled with heroin or speed addicts....

Probably weed.

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 02:49 AM

He said addicts, don't get me wrong, I don't smoke and I hate the stuff myself but I don't consider it addictive.

dukebound85

Apr 25, 2008, 02:50 AM

He said addicts, don't get me wrong, I don't smoke and I hate the stuff myself but I don't consider it addictive.

are you really serious?

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 02:52 AM

Smoking tobacco is addictive, pot is not physically addictive.

When I was at school pretty much everyone who was anyone smoked pot at least occasionally, only a few of them were cig smokers.

iMacZealot

Apr 25, 2008, 02:53 AM

I have news for you dude, catholic school kids are usually the biggest rule breakers. It's a well known reputation and it is completely borne out in my anecdotal experience. Compared to the kids from any other type of school, Catholic school kids in general consume the most drugs, drink alcohol the most, have the most sex (i.e. are most likely to be slutty), have sex for the first time at the earliest age, smoke at the highest rate, lie to their parents and authority figures most frequently, etc. Now obviously these are generalizations and are not based on any scientific studies that I'm familiar with, but it definitely was my experience and definitely is the reputation that Catholic school kids are the most likely to do bad behaviors.

Yeah, but it's not like they're that wild. I had no idea anybody I know did drugs until they told me.

When you say addicts do you mean coke heads?

I can't imagine your school is filled with heroin or speed addicts....

Marijuana is the one I hear about the most. Cocaine is definitely possible, and the others may be, too.

As for how people obtain drugs? it's really not difficult, you just need to socialise in the wrong circles.

Something I don't do. However, I think marijuana is legal for recreation use in my state of Colorado, though I don't know where you get it besides from a medical professional.

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 02:54 AM

Yeah, but it's not like they're that wild. I had no idea anybody I know did drugs until they told me.

Marijuana is the one I hear about the most. Cocaine is definitely possible, and the others may be, too.

Something I don't do. However, I think marijuana is legal in my state of Colorado, though I don't know where you get it besides from a medical professional.

Then basically what you're saying is that your school is filled with pot heads?

ZOMG, what a surprise! who knew?

As for where to get such things, Drug dealers. People known as criminals sneak large quantities of cannabis and other drugs from where they're grown/produced inside the country then distribute them across the country to smaller drug dealers who then sell it to smaller drug dealers ect ect until it ends up in the customers hands.

I'm not sure exactly how things work in the US but that's roughly how things tend to work.

bartelby

Apr 25, 2008, 02:56 AM

Then basically what you're saying is that your school is filled with pot heads?

ZOMG, what a surprise! who knew?

That's what I was implying.

iBlue

Apr 25, 2008, 02:58 AM

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 02:58 AM

That's what I was implying.

I was being anal in an attempt to show up his miss-use of the word addict.

dukebound85

Apr 25, 2008, 03:00 AM

Something I don't do. However, I think marijuana is legal in my state of Colorado, though I don't know where you get it besides from a medical professional.

that is incorrect. when idiots like mason tvert still trying to get it passed in colorado legislation for it to be legal under the "SAFER" campaign

they claim weed is a safer alternative to drinking and that the fines should be brought down to below those of alcohol

well excuse me, i say they should harshen up the alcohol penalties...and yes i do enjoy drinking

weed is legal in denver up to an oz (in possesion and not using i bleieve) if i remember but still illegal in colorado....meaning its illegal in colorado regardless what denver rules. i assume with that, you can still get charged by colorado law but not the laws of denver if you know what i mean

what really pisses me off is this. cops dont do enough to stop the celbration of 4/20 at namely cu boulder....

also even in ft collins, the CITY CLOSED DOWN public roads for the celebration of 4/20. even though it was a block, it was an inappropriate use of resources and when i pay taxes, i want the city to keep the roads open and if closed to LEGAL causes

FYI, i live in fort collins, colorado and go to CSU. we have these pro weed guys campaign all the time on campus....makes me sick

im gonna have to make sure on my facts but im fairly sure they are correct after hearing about it so much but correct me if i happen to be wrong

SAFER's webpage http://www.safercolorado.org/pressroom

Dagless

Apr 25, 2008, 03:04 AM

My girlfriend is Catholic and went to a proper Catholic school - it was a bit rubbish. there were a few pregnancies, lots of bullies, lots of drugs. Our school wasn't religious and we did have a lot of drugs but nothing like my girlfriends place.

So just another +1 to the catholic school comment.

Like I said our place was pretty bad for it. Every toilet stunk of weed or whatever they were smoking, if you ever really needed to go you'd hold it in and sneak into the careers building (a little bungalow of a building). Saw many a good person turn to drugs too. All quite late on too, like in year 10 or 11 (the 2 final school years in England) people would just take up weed, then ecstasy, then god knows what. But it was bad enough to really change a lot of good people.

Then again this was about 5 or 6 years ago!

motulist

Apr 25, 2008, 03:07 AM

Yeah, but it's not like they're that wild.

asked...

I had no idea anybody I know did drugs until they told me.

...and answered. If you didn't know that lots of your peers were doing drugs, then you really aren't at all aware of what they they're actually up to, because although high school kids are good at hiding their bad behaviors from adults, it's usually pretty well known among the kids about what your peers are up to. Have you ever hung out in a group of your high school peers when you're well away from school, parents, and other authority figures? Because they obviously aren't gonna do any bad behaviors where an authority figure can catch them.

However, I think marijuana is legal in my state of Colorado, though I don't know where you get it besides from a medical professional.

While possessing or smoking pot may (or may not) be decriminalized in your state, it still isn't legal. Decriminalization just means you'll get a fine instead of jail time, it doesn't mean it's legal. If the cops see you doing it they WILL bust you. Regardless of it's been decriminalized, it'd still be at least as illegal for people under 18 to smoke pot as it would be to smoke cigarettes. And I'm sure that growing pot and selling pot is still very much a criminal act. If your friends are smoking pot, then they're definitely not getting it legally.

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 03:24 AM

dukebound85

Apr 25, 2008, 03:28 AM

Oh, one thing that does genuinely scare the crap out of me is the growing popularity of meth, it's horrifically addictive and destructive, I've only ever come across people doing the stuff at dodgy gothic clubs myself.

out of interest how prevalent is the stuff in US schools, no one did the stuff to my knowledge at my secondary school.

i agree

meth is scary

i remember when ecstasy was big around here circa 2000-01 time frame with raves and the like

what to do what to do.......

when i was in hs, heck even in college, weed is so prevalent youd think its legal here

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 03:42 AM

foidulus

Apr 25, 2008, 04:11 AM

When you say addicts do you mean coke heads?

I can't imagine your school is filled with heroin or speed addicts....

My old high school is. I graduated in 1999, but even then the heroin craze was starting to catch on, and from what I have heard from younger siblings, there is a huge heroin problem there, and the school is about as rich as they come. Heroin is everywhere in that town it seems, the chief of police even died from a heroin OD....

Basically a bunch of rich kids with 0 parental supervision and lots of time and money is a drug dealers dream come true.

They cannot force drug tests on students, but they do everything but. If you want a parking space, you have to take a drug test. If you are in any sort of after school activity(including my "sport" the Academic Games) you have to take a drug test. It did kind of work out for me though, because the company I started working for right out of college demanded a drug test, and there were 2 different outlets of the company they used within a 5 mile radius....

davidjearly

Apr 25, 2008, 04:23 AM

Weed is not that big a deal.

Actually, unfortunately it is a big deal. The problem is the lack of research and the vast amount of misinformation on the topic.

Whilst the biological evidence for a link between cannabis and mental health problems is limited (mainly due to the fact that cannabis use remains illegal in most Western countries), there is strong epidemiological evidence that cannabis may precipitate psychosis (transient or otherwise) in many individuals.

Some other studies have also suggested that it can lead to the uptake of cigarette smoking in younger people who may not have regular access to cannabis.

Also, as smoking cannabis is by far the most common method, the negative impact on the respiratory system has to be considered.

So, I wouldn't say 'it's not a big deal', because the evidence we have suggests otherwise. However, we need more research to clarify this.

To the OP: It has always been my belief that private schools are no better than public schools for many things, including drug misuse. However, I wouldn't put this down to it being a Catholic school at all. Religion has nothing to do with drugs.

Dagless

Apr 25, 2008, 04:55 AM

Things never got too bad at our school. There was no heroin, although I spoke to one guy who did cocaine once. Quite a few pot heads, a few more smokers. One guy had LSD once and blew his mind out, not physically but he was just crazy afterwards. Used to go on mad shouting rages at teachers. Surprised he was never expelled! But I suppose LSD+15 year olds aren't supposed to mix.

TBH I've never even heard of a heroin incident in our town.

And is it just me or is meth not in the UK? Before I saw some US cop show a couple of years ago I didn't even know what it was. We mustn't be fans here?

furious

Apr 25, 2008, 05:00 AM

If pot use alarms you don't go to my school. :eek:

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 05:05 AM

they claim weed is a safer alternative to drinking and that the fines should be brought down to below those of alcohol

Which is correct according to the latest scientific research.

113543

This is published in the Lancet which is a well respected medical journal too (source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6474053.stm))

I'm also not a big fan of drugs personally, but people should be allowed to take them if they want as long as they are fairly safe.

Mord

Apr 25, 2008, 07:32 AM

And is it just me or is meth not in the UK? Before I saw some US cop show a couple of years ago I didn't even know what it was. We mustn't be fans here?

Speed is the equivalent (aka amphetamine/dexamphetamine) it's far less addictive and far less harmful, it's predominantly used to just make dancing a little easier as full on raves are very difficult to get through without getting extremely exhausted, quater of a gram of Ampetamine through a night just gives you enough energy to dance through the night, it's not a painkiller though so you'll still start to hurt if you overdo it.

It's not a drug you get "high" on unless you take a ton and there are far easier more pleasant ways of getting high, some people do get addicted to the stuff though it *always* leads to amphetamine psychosis if you overdo it which is why the stuff is illegal.

Meth is basically like über speed, it is starting to get more popular though anyone with a brain would not consider taking it over speed at a night out.

iJohnHenry

Apr 25, 2008, 07:49 AM

Pot grouped with LSD and solvents?? Haven't recently heard of anyone going blind because of pot. Quite the opposite, actually.

Someone needs to get a grip.

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 07:57 AM

Pot grouped with LSD and solvents?? Haven't recently heard of anyone going blind because of pot.

Isn't that a myth?

alFR

Apr 25, 2008, 08:16 AM

Pot grouped with LSD and solvents?? Haven't recently heard of anyone going blind because of pot. Quite the opposite, actually.

Someone needs to get a grip.

Yeah, those stupid scientists. All they do is review all the available evidence before coming to a conclusion, what do they know? Sheesh. :rolleyes:

iJohnHenry

Apr 25, 2008, 08:19 AM

Yeah, those stupid scientists. All they do is review all the available evidence before coming to a conclusion, what do they know? Sheesh. :rolleyes:

As they say in Wiki, citations please.

Just who are these "independent experts"?

Just because Lancet publishes a chart hardly makes it conclusive.

maxrobertson

Apr 25, 2008, 08:28 AM

good Catholic kids

good Catholic kids

good Catholic kids

I'm so sick of hearing that. You're not good just because you're Catholic and you went to a private school. In fact, most people who are Catholic and go to a private school are horrible people. Yup. This is not surprising at all and shouldn't be to anyone.

PS- Weed is really not that addictive at all, if at all. Alchohol and cigarettes are much more addictive.

...and the school is about as rich as they come...
So you're implying that because you don't go to school with poor kids that you shouldn't have any drug problems? Because saying stuff like that makes you sound like a classist moron.

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 08:34 AM

As they say in Wiki, citations please.

Well I have give a citation to the BBC, but if you want a citation to the actual article the summary is here (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673607604644/abstract). If you wish to read the actual article you will have to register with the Lancet online, and possibly pay for it, as its academic research.

iJohnHenry

Apr 25, 2008, 08:38 AM

PS- Weed is really not that addictive at all, if at all. Alchohol and cigarettes are much more addictive.

The major concern is that they believe it represent a gate-way drug, and that is the reason they want to stamp it out.

That, and loss of productivity. ;)

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 08:41 AM

The major concern is that they believe it represent a gate-way drug, and that is the reason they want to stamp it out.

As they say in Wiki, citations please. And I assume by "them" you mean scientists rather than politicians.

EDIT: I also will need a source to show people going blind from LSD and solvents otherwise I'll take it as just propaganda.

iJon

Apr 25, 2008, 08:48 AM

IMO the scariest danger of ecstacy is not overuse of MDMA but the fact that pills these days contain all sorts of crap like mCPP and meth, people even prefer these dodgy pills due to the epic tolerance they've built to MDMA through abuse, if these pills were not available they'd just have to learn to use MDMA responsibly every month or so instead of hammering it every weekend so it keeps working as they'd like it to and thus possibly get their life together during the other three weekends....

I must admit to using MDMA infrequently myself, I just never touch pills.
This the huge problem with drugs. Many drugs would be much safer if they were legal and administered in a proper fashion. Almost all Ecstasy pills are going to be laced with something, which is why many people prefer Molly (pure MDMA) if it's available. And then still, you never know how pure the Molly is when you get it. When created in a lab environment with standards and proper chemists, ecstasy can be one amazing drug and have many scientific benefits. The very same thing stands for LSD, mushrooms and cannabis.

Ecstasy can be great in marriage counseling and people who suffer from past rapes or other abuses through out their life. They've also been doing studies on people and mushrooms. People were claiming that after eating mushrooms it was in their top 5 best experiences in their life.

I feel some of the more dangerous drugs out there is going to be alcohol, tobacco, pharmaceuticals, meth, cocaine, heroin. I have had friends who have died of all those drugs but I have never had a friend die off cannabis, LSD or mushrooms. The only one you could really die off of would be LSD and would it take an unimaginable amount to die off of it. Ecstasy deaths are rare but still very possible. I've never had a friend die off ecstasy but the people who do usually eat way too many pills, don't drink any water and go clubbing all night.

Being from Arkansas I know all about the meth epidemic. The United States can throw as much money as they want to stop meth and all other drugs but they simply can't do it. You can't stop meth cause you can go to Wal-Mart, buy the stuff and make it in your kitchen sink. You can't stop cannabis because anyone can throw a seed in the ground. You can't stop cocaine cause it comes from a plant. You can't stop heroin cause it comes from a plant. You can't stop ecstasy cause you can make it in your house. You can't stop LSD cause you can get the rye and make it yourself.

Until our government comes out of the closet and really informs us of the pro's and con's of certain drugs and not treat everyone as criminals will be the day where some changes can be made. Until then unpure, unsafe drugs will own the streets.

jon

7on

Apr 25, 2008, 09:16 AM

This the huge problem with drugs. Many drugs would be much safer if they were legal and administered in a proper fashion. Almost all Ecstasy pills are going to be laced with something, which is why many people prefer Molly (pure MDMA) if it's available. And then still, you never know how pure the Molly is when you get it. When created in a lab environment with standards and proper chemists, ecstasy can be one amazing drug and have many scientific benefits. The very same thing stands for LSD, mushrooms and cannabis.

Ecstasy can be great in marriage counseling and people who suffer from past rapes or other abuses through out their life. They've also been doing studies on people and mushrooms. People were claiming that after eating mushrooms it was in their top 5 best experiences in their life.

I feel some of the more dangerous drugs out there is going to be alcohol, tobacco, pharmaceuticals, meth, cocaine, heroin. I have had friends who have died of all those drugs but I have never had a friend die off cannabis, LSD or mushrooms. The only one you could really die off of would be LSD and would it take an unimaginable amount to die off of it. Ecstasy deaths are rare but still very possible. I've never had a friend die off ecstasy but the people who do usually eat way too many pills, don't drink any water and go clubbing all night.

Being from Arkansas I know all about the meth epidemic. The United States can throw as much money as they want to stop meth and all other drugs but they simply can't do it. You can't stop meth cause you can go to Wal-Mart, buy the stuff and make it in your kitchen sink. You can't stop cannabis because anyone can throw a seed in the ground. You can't stop cocaine cause it comes from a plant. You can't stop heroin cause it comes from a plant. You can't stop ecstasy cause you can make it in your house. You can't stop LSD cause you can get the rye and make it yourself.

Until our government comes out of the closet and really informs us of the pro's and con's of certain drugs and not treat everyone as criminals will be the day where some changes can be made. Until then unpure, unsafe drugs will own the streets.

jon

Precisely. Personally I wouldn't take drugs unless I need to from a doctor (the most extreme I get is ibuprofen, and when I get sick i saturate myself with vitamin C).

But that aside, I think if drugs were regulated then we'd be a lot safer. PLUS the government would solve their cash problem by taxation. No more recession! I've solved it! :p

LeahM

Apr 25, 2008, 09:22 AM

PS- Weed is really not that addictive at all, if at all. Alchohol and cigarettes are much more addictive.

Anything can be addictive, not to everyone but if you get a feeling of dependence from it (eg, you can't focus because your not high [sorry I don't smoke, I wouldn't know]) then your creating a bad relationship with it and are addicted to it. I mean, people are addicted to food...

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 09:28 AM

Anything can be addictive, not to everyone but if you get a feeling of dependence from it (eg, you can't focus because your not high [sorry I don't smoke, I wouldn't know]) then your creating a bad relationship with it and are addicted to it. I mean, people are addicted to food...

Sure, but all the scientists are saying the effect is less than alcohol, so to avoid hypocrisy it should be legalised.

.Andy

Apr 25, 2008, 09:46 AM

Sure, but all the scientists are saying the effect is less than alcohol, so to avoid hypocrisy it should be legalised.
Although from a public health perspective (if we're arguing form a scientist's point of view) it really should be alcohol that's further restricted, not marijuana laws that are relaxed. That would have the greatest health benefit. Of course this would never be accepted or work in practice....

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 09:47 AM

Although from a public health perspective (if we're arguing form a scientist's point of view) it really should be alcohol that's further restricted, not marijuana laws that are relaxed. That would have the greatest health benefit.

Well true.
Of course this would never be accepted or work in practice....

So we can at least not be hypocritical on the issue, and make the drugs in question safer.

leekohler

Apr 25, 2008, 09:51 AM

Although from a public health perspective (if we're arguing form a scientist's point of view) it really should be alcohol that's further restricted, not marijuana laws that are relaxed. That would have the greatest health benefit. Of course this would never be accepted or work in practice....

One of these days we'll learn that prohibition doesn't work. Until then, we'll continue to make the same mistakes and get the same stupid results.

PlaceofDis

Apr 25, 2008, 09:59 AM

my catholic high school was filled with pot heads and dealers too. this isn't surprising.

.Andy

Apr 25, 2008, 10:05 AM

So we can at least not be hypocritical on the issue, and make the drugs in question safer.
I'm not completely convinced that not being hypocritical should be a driving force in heath policy :p. It really should be what gives the maximum health benefit to the maximum number of people. Although I do somewhat agree with your second point - it would be good to understand dosing and be able regulate intake within safer limits. Although if tobacco is anything to go by it is really hard to regulate concentrations of carcinogens within smoked products.

As a related aside there was a recent paper in the New England Journal of Medicine where german dealers were lacing their weed with elemental lead to increase it's weight and rip off their customers. Not surprisingly many people got lead poisoning. Full text of the article with pictures is available here (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/358/15/1641). I think I'd have probably seen the lead and been pissed if I were a customer!

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 10:08 AM

.Andy

Apr 25, 2008, 10:18 AM

Yeah, but if it was legal there would be controls to make sure the stuff was pure (or cut with something harmless), so that wouldn't happen.
It certainly could help but I could see ways in which it wouldn't. If it was legalised I'm sure large swathes of the population would just grow it themselves or buy it from home-growing dealers rather than from shops which sell stuff that is certified and taxed. It'd certainly be much, much cheaper and I'm sure many people would smoke might still like to maintain some anonymity. Hence from a public health POV you'd be back towards square one without knowing doses of THC, carcinogens, or additives people were getting exposed to. To me I think the ease of growing marijuana makes it very different to many other recreational drugs to regulate when compared to tobacco or alcohol.

atszyman

Apr 25, 2008, 10:25 AM

This doesn't surprise me, the stigma that private schools are somehow better permeates society and I think a lot of parents think that because their child is in a private school that somehow the kids have to be better than those in public schools, so the supervision drops.

You end up with a bunch of kids, who come from some money, and also have less supervision, you're going to have issues with them rebelling/acting up, and with the parents thinking "this can't happen at a private school" it leads to them turning a blind eye to any signs of misbehavior through a false sense of security. It can get worse if the private school is a religious one in that the parents might assume that the religious education is helping to instill moral values so that the parents don't have to address certain uncomfortable issues at home.

iJon

Apr 25, 2008, 10:26 AM

As a related aside there was a recent paper in the New England Journal of Medicine where german dealers were lacing their weed with elemental lead to increase it's weight and rip off their customers. Not surprisingly many people got lead poisoning. Full text of the article with pictures is available here (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/358/15/1641). I think I'd have probably seen the lead and been pissed if I were a customer!

I've read about this happening up in Europe and forth and it's quite scary. I have never heard of anyone having a similar problem where I'm at or really anywhere else.

Now on the contrary though, many people will mix their marijuana with other substances as they roll a blunt or something of that nature. I've see people put crushed pills inside a blunt, I've seen blunts dipped in hydrocodone and many other things. People who usually do this are also buying dirt weed here in the States, which wouldn't exist in the first place if it were legal. But still, I have never seen someone add something to a sack to make it heavier that is poisonous to the human body. A truly scary thought though and another side affect to prohibition.

jon

tMac85

Apr 25, 2008, 10:34 AM

Counterfit

Apr 25, 2008, 11:00 AM

I go to a private high school, and I've been oblivious to the drug scene. Yes, I knew it existed, but I can't believe how many people do drugs or deal them. I actually know a lot of dealers, and I didn't know they dealt until now. It just really surprises me since it's a private school and we're allegedly good Catholic kids, but I've been told that our school per capita does more drugs than our arch-rival public school by a significant amount. People tell me it's because we can afford them, I guess.
I have news for you dude, catholic school kids are usually the biggest rule breakers. It's a well known reputation and it is completely borne out in my anecdotal experience. Compared to the kids from any other type of school, Catholic school kids in general consume the most drugs, drink alcohol the most, have the most sex (i.e. are most likely to be slutty), have sex for the first time at the earliest age, smoke at the highest rate, lie to their parents and authority figures most frequently, etc. Now obviously these are generalizations and are not based on any scientific studies that I'm familiar with, but it definitely was my experience and definitely is the reputation that Catholic school kids are the most likely to do bad behaviors.
Sounds like my high school exactly. :D
Heck, two guys in my class were kicked out senior year. One was arrested for having enough weed for an Intent to Distribute charge a second time, and the other had a locker full of stolen graphing calculators.
My girlfriend is Catholic and went to a proper Catholic school - it was a bit rubbish. there were a few pregnancies, lots of bullies, lots of drugs. Our school wasn't religious and we did have a lot of drugs but nothing like my girlfriends place.
We didn't really have any bullies. At least, not in my class. Although prior to my class, there had been 2 pregnancies in 4 years, and then two in my class.
Saw many a good person turn to drugs too. All quite late on too, like in year 10 or 11 (the 2 final school years in England) people would just take up weed, then ecstasy, then god knows what. But it was bad enough to really change a lot of good people.
There were a few guys in my class that started smoking in junior year. They were douchebags beforehand. and after, they were douchebags that were high. I wanted to punch them.
i remember when ecstasy was big around here circa 2000-01 time frame with raves and the like

Some guy in my school OD'd on ecstasy while in class around that time. He was kinda dumb anyway :rolleyes:

At least our fine arts were well funded.

glocke12

Apr 25, 2008, 11:20 AM

I think all schools have different cliques that are into different drugs. In my school we had the hardcore dope smokers, the speed freaks, coke heads, etc..

A little bit of weed (and I mean a little bit), never hurt anybody, but your better off staying away all together from the hardcore partying/drug user crowd. Things usually catch up to these people and you dont want to be around when they do. Hang out with the more motivated people who are doing well in school and want to succeed at something in life.

Im 40, and when in high school was known as one the biggest stoners.
It took years for me to get my act together and get to college. I ended up with a very lucrative job. I recently reconnected with some people from my high school days who partied with me, and never stopped. To a person, every single one of them is not doing that well. some got caught dealing drugs or growing weed and are now convicted felons, others just never amounted to anything and are still partying like they were 20, and working really crappy jobs...

As far as weed in general goes, I still use it to unwind after work and to deal with the stress I have as an eldercare giver. I use it in moderation, and respsonsibly. I dont really care for alcohol, it majes me nauseous.

fridgeymonster3

Apr 25, 2008, 03:57 PM

maxrobertson

Apr 25, 2008, 04:34 PM

The major concern is that they believe it represent a gate-way drug, and that is the reason they want to stamp it out.

That, and loss of productivity. ;)

Yeah, I but I think most sane people (that's not an insult directed at you, I can see you get it) know that that's a really stupid reason.. alcohol is a gateway drug, so are cigarettes. So where do we draw the line? At pot? Why? Especially since it's much better than alcohol for you.

By the way, I haven't smoked more than a few times, so I think I'm pretty impartial about it.

zap2

Apr 25, 2008, 04:36 PM

I just never knew that drugs were bigger problems in private than public schools.

I question if thats a hard fact.

It changes from case to case. But no school is "drug" proof, rich people do drugs just like poor people.

Phat_Pat

Apr 25, 2008, 04:50 PM

if you think potheads at a Catholic school are bad... wait until you live in the dorms your freshman year in college...

Hawkeye411

Apr 25, 2008, 04:58 PM

Marijuana is addictive. The addiction has similar characteristics to alcohol, tobacco, coffee (caffeine). Marijuana does not lead to the same hangover systems that alcohol produces. People often use this fact as an argument to legalize marijuana. Withdrawal systems, when trying to quit after heavy/prolonged marijuana use, are as bad as withdrawal symptoms when trying to quit smoking cigarettes after heavy/prolonged use.

Instead of legalizing marijuana, why not make tobacco illegal? Or perhaps we should make alcohol illegal? Both tobacco and alcohol are detrimental to your health in various ways and increase the cost of medical care which every citizen ultimately pays for in one way or another. Marijuana is also bad for your health (increases your chances for many types of cancer).

It's a complicated set of issues. However, stating that marijuana does not produce the same hangover systems that alcohol does is obviously not a good enough argument for legalizing marijuana. This kind of logic is often used by people who are stoned. :D

Cheers.
:):apple:

Antares

Apr 25, 2008, 05:01 PM

This doesn't surprise me, the stigma that private schools are somehow better permeates society and I think a lot of parents think that because their child is in a private school that somehow the kids have to be better than those in public schools, so the supervision drops.

It's not that.

Any environment, society, school, etc. that forces it's population to behave a certain way, restrict them heavily from specific behaviors and limit freedoms will result in a higher tendency for people, within that population, to want to revolt from that "oppression." Catholic/private schools are much more strict and regulated than public schools. That is why students at a Catholic/private school will have more of an inclination to engage in rebellious/taboo behaviors (drinking, drugs, smoking, sex, etc.) than students at a public school.

Keep in mind that this may be extremely simplistic. However, it applies to some of the most basic psychological tendencies of human beings.

Dustman

Apr 25, 2008, 05:08 PM

Weed is not that big a deal. I was expecting you to say you caught a bunch of people snorting lines or shooting up in the bathroom or something... which isn't far from my own experience with high school.

p.s. I agree with the sentiment of addiction and weed. It may be something you crave mentally "damn I wish I had a J on me" but not something you go into withdrawal symptoms over.

You, Are very wrong. Think about alcohol for a minute. It isnt addictive right? Yet heavy drinkers can die if they just stop drinking, and go through severe withdrawl. I usually smoke about 4 joints a day (usually one or 2 a day at school) and let me tell you, to go a day without a joint is harder for me than to go a day without a cigarette.

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 05:13 PM

Instead of legalizing marijuana, why not make tobacco illegal? Or perhaps we should make alcohol illegal?

Well since Alcohol is the 5th most dangerous drug so maybe we should. However the problem is that it didn't work so well last time. If in the UK they banned alcohol they'd have 30 million people outside the houses of parliament protesting.

Even with Heroin the number of addicts in the 1950's numbered less than 100, when you could get in on prescription, now its thousands of people.

Prohibition doesn't work.

iMacZealot

Apr 25, 2008, 05:28 PM

I'm so sick of hearing that. You're not good just because you're Catholic and you went to a private school. In fact, most people who are Catholic and go to a private school are horrible people. Yup. This is not surprising at all and shouldn't be to anyone.

I was using "good" semi-sarcastically, but you needn't generalize. Not all groups are good, and not all groups are bad.

~~~~~~~~~~

I actually quite agree with davidjearly, and I like his avatar:

Actually, unfortunately it is a big deal. The problem is the lack of research and the vast amount of misinformation on the topic.

Whilst the biological evidence for a link between cannabis and mental health problems is limited (mainly due to the fact that cannabis use remains illegal in most Western countries), there is strong epidemiological evidence that cannabis may precipitate psychosis (transient or otherwise) in many individuals.

Some other studies have also suggested that it can lead to the uptake of cigarette smoking in younger people who may not have regular access to cannabis.

Also, as smoking cannabis is by far the most common method, the negative impact on the respiratory system has to be considered.

So, I wouldn't say 'it's not a big deal', because the evidence we have suggests otherwise. However, we need more research to clarify this.

To the OP: It has always been my belief that private schools are no better than public schools for many things, including drug misuse. However, I wouldn't put this down to it being a Catholic school at all. Religion has nothing to do with drugs.

It's hard to determine what sort of effect it has on someone, as researchers and professionals are still working on this topic, but it does have an effect on someone. I actually wouldn't mind adults smoking marijuana as they can also go to the liquor store at any hour and overdo it, but I'm very concerned about fifteen year old high school freshmen overdoing any substance, as that basically guarantees problems later, and also shows that they aren't taking their education seriously, whether it be costing their parents $9000 or nothing.

sorta off topic, but you are a good writer. I'm not sure how old you are, but nice two paragraphs, and word choice. You seem smart, and therefore Im sure sure you wont give in to the drugs that surround you at school. Anyway, random I know, but you composed your post well.

Thanks!

.Andy

Apr 25, 2008, 05:29 PM

Even with Heroin the number of addicts in the 1950's numbered less than 100, when you could get in on prescription, now its thousands of people.
Where did you get these numbers?

And I'm glad I found this - I used to have the paper but can' find it on my hard drive. Thank goodness for wikipedia. I've been wanting to post it up in every thread to save the not addictive vs addictive arguments. It shows the relative dependence and harm of common recreational drugs. <1 = no harm/dependence, >1 = harm/dependence.

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3407/380pxrationalscaletoassmn9.png

Nutt D, King LA, Saulsbury W, Blakemore C (2007). "Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse". Lancet 369 (9566): 1047–53.

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 05:32 PM

I'm very concerned about fifteen year old high school freshmen overdoing any substance,

All the talk about legalisation applies to >18's. Where I believe (from reading New Scientist) that the effects of psychosis are less severe.

Where did you get these numbers?

Originally from one of my friends doing a Phd in Psychology (specifically drugs) at Oxford, so it should be sound. But I'll try and find a written source.

EDIT: This (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1964059.stm) is a written source, but isn't much better.

EDIT 2: Here's a better source (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=539406).

iMacZealot

Apr 25, 2008, 05:34 PM

All the talk about legalisation applies to >18's. Where I believe (from reading New Scientist) that the effects of psychosis are less severe.

I know that, but my point is that drugs are a big deal, contrary to what iBlue has to say.

zap2

Apr 25, 2008, 05:39 PM

Marijuana is addictive. T

Yes, but in the same way porn, video games, reading a good book, play a nice game of basketball,Macrumors etc. Its pleasurable, its a mental addiction

. The addiction has similar characteristics to alcohol, tobacco, coffee (caffeine).
No, those things have physical addictions. Pot and the other things I named are all mental. Still an addiction, but a different type.

why not make tobacco illegal? Or perhaps we should make alcohol illegal?:
Because it doesn't work.

Because we waste billions of dollars, on these ineffective ways of stopping these things. People need to want to stop doing these things, but no law will ever force them. Education is key here, giving people the chance at succeding is big too. If we out law these things, demand will not go away, but control over them will move from the government to drug lords. I trust the government over drug lords, do you?

. Marijuana is also bad for your health (increases your chances for many types of cancer).

No hard facts to prove that, I'm sure you can find a study that support thats, but I can find one that doesn't.

It's a complicated set of issues. However, stating that marijuana does not produce the same hangover systems that alcohol does is obviously not a good enough argument for legalizing marijuana. This kind of logic is often used by people who are stoned. :D

I've never heard of that reason, as a reason for the legalization of pot. Also sly attack on drug users there. We need to help them up, not make sarcastic remarks as we push them back down.

Eraserhead

Apr 25, 2008, 05:43 PM

And I'm glad I found this - I used to have the paper but can' find it on my hard drive.

Here's the paper (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673607604644/abstract), I linked to it earlier. Here is the BBC's summary (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6474053.stm)

I know that, but my point is that drugs are a big deal, contrary to what iBlue has to say.

It depends if they are used in moderation or not. Every day usage yes, but to be honest smoking weed at a party (as long as it doesn't contain lead :rolleyes:) once in a while won't hurt you. Though the younger you are the more at risk you are from adverse affects.

iMacZealot

Apr 25, 2008, 05:51 PM

It depends if they are used in moderation or not. Every day usage yes, but to be honest smoking weed at a party (as long as it doesn't contain lead :rolleyes:) once in a while won't hurt you. Though the younger you are the more at risk you are from adverse affects.

That is my point. There is risk involved, and adults have self control whereas teens do not.

xodonniedarko

Apr 25, 2008, 05:52 PM

That's because in Catholicism, you just go to the confessional booth and everything is 'okay'.

Or that's what I've been told.
Like a 'get out of sin free' ticket.

I have news for you dude, catholic school kids are usually the biggest rule breakers. It's a well known reputation and it is completely borne out in my anecdotal experience. Compared to the kids from any other type of school, Catholic school kids in general consume the most drugs, drink alcohol the most, have the most sex (i.e. are most likely to be slutty), have sex for the first time at the earliest age, smoke at the highest rate, lie to their parents and authority figures most frequently, etc. Now obviously these are generalizations and are not based on any scientific studies that I'm familiar with, but it definitely was my experience and definitely is the reputation that Catholic school kids are the most likely to do bad behaviors.

iMacZealot

Apr 25, 2008, 05:53 PM

That's because in Catholicism, you just go to the confessional booth and everything is 'okay'.

Or that's what I've been told.
Like a 'get out of sin free' ticket.

That's not it at all. Even if you go to reconciliation, if you're not truly remorseful, it's still an unforgiven sin.

zap2

Apr 25, 2008, 05:56 PM

I'm so sick of hearing that.

Indeed!

You're not good just because you're Catholic and you went to a private school.

Indeed, despite what people like to think

In fact, most people who are Catholic and go to a private school are horrible people..
And thats were you are wrong. You call this person out for group Catholics school kids, and then do the same.

Here it is, you can't sum up everyone in a certain type of school

Because saying stuff like that makes you sound like a classist moron.
And by saying stuff like "Catholic school kids"(which = rich kids for the example) makes you the same.

Yea, rich people can be jerks, but that doesn't mean that the poor, who want things better, get to be classist too. Rich and poor can be good, can be classist

fridgeymonster3

Apr 25, 2008, 08:44 PM

the reason drugs are more prevalent at boarding schools or private schools is because, in general, the students are from wealthier families; therefore, the drugs they can acquire are of better quality, they can afford greater amounts, and the students feel partially invincible since money has usually gotten them (or their friends) out of trouble before. Parents who can afford to donate large sums to the private schools do so to keep their kids there after they have screwed up.

iJon

Apr 25, 2008, 10:10 PM

Yes, but in the same way porn, video games, reading a good book, play a nice game of basketball,Macrumors etc. Its pleasurable, its a mental addiction

No, those things have physical addictions. Pot and the other things I named are all mental. Still an addiction, but a different type.

Because it doesn't work.

Because we waste billions of dollars, on these ineffective ways of stopping these things. People need to want to stop doing these things, but no law will ever force them. Education is key here, giving people the chance at succeding is big too. If we out law these things, demand will not go away, but control over them will move from the government to drug lords. I trust the government over drug lords, do you?

No hard facts to prove that, I'm sure you can find a study that support thats, but I can find one that doesn't.

I've never heard of that reason, as a reason for the legalization of pot. Also sly attack on drug users there. We need to help them up, not make sarcastic remarks as we push them back down.

I was about to respond to those comments but you did such a nice job of answering them. Great post.

Marijuana being as addictive and similar withdrawals to cigarettes and alcohol, give me a break. Go watch an episode of A&E's Intervention and find me a marijuana addict on that show.

jon

glocke12

Apr 26, 2008, 05:37 AM

I was about to respond to those comments but you did such a nice job of answering them. Great post.

Marijuana being as addictive and similar withdrawals to cigarettes and alcohol, give me a break. Go watch an episode of A&E's Intervention and find me a marijuana addict on that show.

jon

Marijuana is addicitive to a certain extent, but I dont think to the same extent as cigarettes and alcohol. During periods of my life when I would smoke alot, I would get cravings for it if I went a day or so without.

motulist

Apr 26, 2008, 07:33 AM

Marijuana is addicitive to a certain extent, but I dont think to the same extent as cigarettes and alcohol. During periods of my life when I would smoke alot, I would get cravings for it if I went a day or so without.

Cigarettes are MUCH more addictive than pot. There is no debate about that fact by any respected science group. Just ask anyone who's used both on a regular basis and then tried to quit both, you'll get an almost unanimous response that quitting tobacco is MUCH harder than quitting pot.

Mord

Apr 26, 2008, 07:40 AM

All the talk about legalisation applies to >18's. Where I believe (from reading New Scientist) that the effects of psychosis are less severe.

I did a ton of things I probably shouldn't age 14-17 and can't say i'm much worse the wear for it, I know a bunch of others who did too at that age, I've been told my doctors that as the brain is changing so quickly at that age it can recover fairly quickly however once you reach a certain age your mind sets and the damage you do to it remains much longer, I certainly could not go back to my old ways.

solvs

Apr 27, 2008, 12:37 AM

http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/atod/marijuana.htm

While marijuana is nowhere near as addictive as alcohol, and yes alcohol is addictive, is does have addictive properties, especially for the chronic user. Also has negative long term effects. But the same could be said for some things that are perfectly legal. Sometimes even worse than mj, even in smaller quantities. So yeah, it does seem hypocritical, but it's pretty arbitrary what's legal and what isn't. Put it in pill form, stamp a label on it, sell it for a ridiculous amount of money, and it just may be legal. :rolleyes:

Anyway, as for the OP, I love my Niece to death, but there's a reason why my Sister sent her to Catholic school. I know that's not the only reason kids are sent there, but it's a biggie. Add in the richer kids who think they can get away with it (and do) and those rebelling against it, and there's you reasoning. I went to a small town high school, extremely religious people, and we had a ton of sex and drugs. Not as much rock and roll though. That would have been better.

iMacZealot

Apr 27, 2008, 03:10 AM

Anyway, as for the OP, I love my Niece to death, but there's a reason why my Sister sent her to Catholic school. I know that's not the only reason kids are sent there, but it's a biggie. Add in the richer kids who think they can get away with it (and do) and those rebelling against it, and there's you reasoning. I went to a small town high school, extremely religious people, and we had a ton of sex and drugs. Not as much rock and roll though. That would have been better.

Yeah, I suppose you'll get the druggies, the promiscuous, the insane, the inane, the suicidal, the you name it anywhere. I do, however, really appreciate the $9000 my parents are spending for what I think is a better education.

Peterkro

Apr 27, 2008, 07:14 AM

Where did you get these numbers?

And I'm glad I found this - I used to have the paper but can' find it on my hard drive. Thank goodness for wikipedia. I've been wanting to post it up in every thread to save the not addictive vs addictive arguments. It shows the relative dependence and harm of common recreational drugs. <1 = no harm/dependence, >1 = harm/dependence.

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3407/380pxrationalscaletoassmn9.png

Nutt D, King LA, Saulsbury W, Blakemore C (2007). "Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse". Lancet 369 (9566): 1047–53.

What exactly is Street Methadone? and Cocaine more addictive (physically) than Barbs? I don't think so I'd even debate that Cocaine is physically addictive at all.People die from sudden withdrawal from barbiturates and alcohol,cocaine and heroin I've never heard of a documented case.

P.S. The numbers of registered addicts in the UK was miniscule when doctors could prescribe Heroin but due to the media drug scare in the late sixties it was stopped leading to the present huge and growing problem,most medical professionals in the drug rehab field, I think you will find, want to revert to legal heroin prescribing.

Dustman

Apr 27, 2008, 02:51 PM

That is my point. There is risk involved, and adults have self control whereas teens do not.

...Are you serious? Teens are the occasional users. It's the adults that can afford to feed the addiction. I know of a hell of a lot more addicts that are over 30 than I do teenagers.

iMacZealot

Apr 27, 2008, 07:10 PM

...Are you serious? Teens are the occasional users. It's the adults that can afford to feed the addiction. I know of a hell of a lot more addicts that are over 30 than I do teenagers.

In general, teens don't. Car accidents are the leading cause of death among teens, but they aren't in adults, and that's because we have very little self-control.

Mammoth

Apr 28, 2008, 01:04 AM

I have news for you dude, catholic school kids are usually the biggest rule breakers. It's a well known reputation and it is completely borne out in my anecdotal experience. Compared to the kids from any other type of school, Catholic school kids in general consume the most drugs, drink alcohol the most, have the most sex (i.e. are most likely to be slutty), have sex for the first time at the earliest age, smoke at the highest rate, lie to their parents and authority figures most frequently, etc. Now obviously these are generalizations and are not based on any scientific studies that I'm familiar with, but it definitely was my experience and definitely is the reputation that Catholic school kids are the most likely to do bad behaviors.

Sounds true to me. I went to a Catholic public school for elementary and now I'm in a private school. Loads of my friends from the Catholic school do drugs now, and it's clearly just as bad as any other public school. Now at the private school there doesn't seem to be much happening, but I'm 100% sure stuff goes on that nobody hears about..

iMacZealot

Apr 28, 2008, 01:07 AM

Sounds true to me. I went to a Catholic public school for elementary and now I'm in a private school. Loads of my friends from the Catholic school do drugs now, and it's clearly just as bad as any other public school. Now at the private school there doesn't seem to be much happening, but I'm 100% sure stuff goes on that nobody hears about..

...and all French people wear berets and striped shirts. :rolleyes:

Zwhaler

Apr 28, 2008, 01:33 AM

I have news for you dude, catholic school kids are usually the biggest rule breakers. It's a well known reputation and it is completely borne out in my anecdotal experience. Compared to the kids from any other type of school, Catholic school kids in general consume the most drugs, drink alcohol the most, have the most sex (i.e. are most likely to be slutty), have sex for the first time at the earliest age, smoke at the highest rate, lie to their parents and authority figures most frequently, etc. Now obviously these are generalizations and are not based on any scientific studies that I'm familiar with, but it definitely was my experience and definitely is the reputation that Catholic school kids are the most likely to do bad behaviors.

Very true, the kids that are shielded from information about drugs, alcohol, and sex, almost always end up doing them. There is a private christian school near my house and I know several people from there and they are all stoners and druggies.

Mord

Apr 28, 2008, 03:30 AM

...and all French people wear berets and striped shirts. :rolleyes:

There's a difference between an observation and a generalisation, that post was firmly the former.

You admit yourself that your catholic school is filled with druggies. If have any evidence that nation wide catholic schools are any less filled with druggies than state schools I'd like to hear it.

Badandy

Apr 28, 2008, 03:39 AM

You admit yourself that your catholic school is filled with druggies. If have any evidence that nation wide catholic schools are any less filled with druggies than state schools I'd like to hear it.

And if you have any evidence that Catholic schools nation-wide are any more filled with druggies, I'd like to hear it. Anecdotal evidence doesn't cut it.

Mord

Apr 28, 2008, 03:43 AM

And if you have any evidence that Catholic schools nation-wide are any more filled with druggies, I'd like to hear it. Anecdotal evidence doesn't cut it.

So people are now banned from stating their experience in a thread unless they have a nationwide study conducted to back it up?

iMacZealot

Apr 28, 2008, 04:09 AM

So people are now banned from stating their experience in a thread unless they have a nationwide study conducted to back it up?

Well, if you're going to generalise, you should have some factual basis for it. That makes sense, right?

Mord

Apr 28, 2008, 04:17 AM

but they were not generalising, they were just stating their experience.

iMacZealot

Apr 28, 2008, 04:24 AM

but they were not generalising, they were just stating their experience.

I have news for you dude, catholic school kids are usually the biggest rule breakers. It's a well known reputation and it is completely borne out in my anecdotal experience. Compared to the kids from any other type of school, Catholic school kids in general consume the most drugs, drink alcohol the most, have the most sex (i.e. are most likely to be slutty), have sex for the first time at the earliest age, smoke at the highest rate, lie to their parents and authority figures most frequently, etc. Now obviously these are generalizations and are not based on any scientific studies that I'm familiar with, but it definitely was my experience and definitely is the reputation that Catholic school kids are the most likely to do bad behaviors.

===

skunk

Apr 28, 2008, 04:26 AM

That is a generalised observation, obviously. Do try to keep up.

Mord

Apr 28, 2008, 04:29 AM

That is not the fellow you quoted in the first place.

Even if you had quoted the first guy he admitted he was making a generalisation, generalisations are not to be taken to an extreme, if I say most ravers take drugs that's a generalisation but not every raver does take drugs. His post was not a dig at you personally.

Eraserhead

Apr 28, 2008, 04:33 AM

I did a ton of things I probably shouldn't age 14-17 and can't say i'm much worse the wear for it, I know a bunch of others who did too at that age, I've been told my doctors that as the brain is changing so quickly at that age it can recover fairly quickly however once you reach a certain age your mind sets and the damage you do to it remains much longer, I certainly could not go back to my old ways.

You may be right about some drugs, how the psychosis caused by cannabis mostly occurs when people under the age of 18 (source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4052963.stm)).

In general, teens don't. Car accidents are the leading cause of death among teens, but they aren't in adults, and that's because we have very little self-control.

That is only because teenagers don't die of other things as they are too young. Also many of the deaths are undoubtedly caused by speeding. Even if they are taking drugs and driving that should obviously be illegal like drink-driving.

iMacZealot

Apr 28, 2008, 04:36 AM

Ok, fair enough.

Mord

Apr 28, 2008, 04:38 AM

You may be right about some drugs, how the psychosis caused by cannabis mostly occurs when people under the age of 18 (source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4052963.stm)).

I don't contest this, I won't touch the stuff, only have a handful of times I don't see where being a useless scatterbrained 'tard gets fun. It takes me longer to get my head back together after a spliff than it does after a reasonably strong acid trip.

iBlue

Apr 28, 2008, 04:41 AM

LeahM

Apr 28, 2008, 11:01 AM

Man, some of you peeps gotta chiiiiiiiill, go smoke a bowl or something. :p

http://upc.edesignuk.com/uploads/smilies/spliff.gif

Yeah, that's right, I don't think weed is that big of a deal and some of you think it is. That's a fundamental problem of opinions. I can't be arsed to debate it either. Maybe my indifference is unsurprising.

I agree I don't think its a huge deal but I can't stand the smell so I don't take part, plus I like to abide by the law, call me a square.. actually don't its annoying. :)

glocke12

Apr 28, 2008, 11:28 AM

I agree I don't think its a huge deal but I can't stand the smell so I don't take part, plus I like to abide by the law, call me a square.. actually don't its annoying. :)

You probably just havent had a chance to smell anything really good...

LeahM

May 1, 2008, 10:05 AM

You probably just havent had a chance to smell anything really good...

Believe me, I have. Now because I don't do it, doesn't mean I didn't hang out with people who did it. Plus I once made the mistake of taking a babysitting job for a family going to Florida who would pay for all my expenses and anything I wanted. Yea, they were dealers :o, I only know because I accidentally caught the buyer telling the guy it was the best... there is. Because it came from Canada? If that give it any credibility.

iMacZealot

May 1, 2008, 04:28 PM

Apparently, marijuana is the tip of the iceberg. The drugs used escalate in danger year by year, so the seniors are apparently the most stoned.

I actually did something today at school :eek:, but it was a Provigil (my dad's a doc, it's okay) and I was up late all last night for a project.

I also cut gym class, and I think my teacher might have caught me. I got more exercise walking around campus because I didn't bring my permission slip to do the activity, so I would've had to sit on a bench for 70 minutes.

iJohnHenry

May 1, 2008, 04:29 PM

Slippery slope.

The more you "get away with", the more you will try.

Buckle down.

iMacZealot

May 1, 2008, 04:39 PM

Slippery slope.

The more you "get away with", the more you will try.

Buckle down.

That's true, but the circumstances are different. The drug was administered by a doctor. As for cutting class, it was a one-time chance, as there were 70 kids in the gym as opposed to the usual 15, and I wasn't the only one doing it.

And I'm one of the cream of the crop. They have bigger fish to fry.

solvs

May 1, 2008, 04:48 PM

Provigil is legal, and hey, who didn't cut gym once in awhile? :p

iJohnHenry

May 1, 2008, 04:57 PM

I could never climb a rope to save my life. http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/Smilies/super1hero.gif

iMacZealot

May 1, 2008, 05:11 PM

I guess I lucked out with my gym class (formally called "Health & Fitness") since it's in the classroom 4 days a week with a teacher who likes me, and the fifth day is a gym day where we run a few laps then check our pulses before playing frisbee-- no rope climbing or a fat guy screaming at you to run faster. I don't really mind those kinds of gym days (though I will "forget" my gym clothes if I can afford the lost points and if I have homework in the class), but today, all of the Health and Fitness classes at that period were pooled into one, and we were supposed to do "street-surfing" (http://www.streetsurfing.com/home.php), which was essentially watered-down skateboarding, and I forgot my parents' permission slip, so I figured cutting class and walking around campus would've gotten me more exercise than sitting and watching.

What I did with that time is a story for another thread...

iJohnHenry

May 1, 2008, 05:18 PM

What I did with that time is a story for another thread...

Trolling for queers?? http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/Smilies/gay.gif

Sorry, humour got the better of me.

:rolleyes:

iMacZealot

May 1, 2008, 05:22 PM

Trolling for queers?? http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/Smilies/gay.gif

Sorry, humour got the better of me.

:rolleyes:

Haha, no, I just don't want this thread to get off topic, which it already has...:p

EDIT: Yes! I'm listed as present for Health today online! I heard she caught two people from my class, and I thought one of them was me, but I know who those two are. They don't know the art of stealth.

iJohnHenry

May 1, 2008, 05:36 PM

"The art of stealth." http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/Smilies/terical.gif

I see a bright future for you with the CIA.

skunk

May 1, 2008, 05:38 PM

"The art of stealth." http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/Smilies/terical.gif

I see a bright future for you with the CIA.I see a great future with Lockheed.

iJohnHenry

May 1, 2008, 05:39 PM

http://www.benbarrack.com/Images/Military/3_AirForce/StealthBomber.jpg

Eric Piercey

May 1, 2008, 05:46 PM

The only one you could really die off of would be LSD and would it take an unimaginable amount to die off of it.

The LD50 of LSD is unknown in humans. In monkey's the LD100 is 5 mg/kg. Put it this way, there are very few if no documented cases of lethal OD on LSD in humans. One should also note, there is a saturation threshold of effect so taking more than a certain amount has no additional pharmaceutical effect. (~500 to 1000ug) Basically taking more than 10 hits is just jackassedness. LSD is probably the least toxic of all the drugs here in terms of direct effect. This isn't to say it's necessarily the safest, but in terms of OD it likely is the safest. In other words just because you won't OD per say, if you're on 3 hits and the entire world is a cartoon it's probably not wise to walk over large highway suspension bridges in Loiusville KY at 2am when the bars are letting out, or to drive a car for that matter.

One of these days we'll learn that prohibition doesn't work. Until then, we'll continue to make the same mistakes and get the same stupid results.

Prohibition typically not only doesn't prevent use, but increases overall crime.

You, Are very wrong. Think about alcohol for a minute. It isnt addictive right? Yet heavy drinkers can die if they just stop drinking, and go through severe withdrawl. I usually smoke about 4 joints a day (usually one or 2 a day at school) and let me tell you, to go a day without a joint is harder for me than to go a day without a cigarette.

Alcohol not addictive? What?? I agree though, pot is addictive. I've known many addicts. Not physically addictive? I'm not so sure of that. The terms "physically" and "mentally" are tossed around loosely. The term "addiction" is also quite loosely used.

Here's my take... kids of high school age are at a critical transitional phase in their development and drugs during this time are particularly influential in determining the course of their lives. I'm not talking about brain chemistry resilience or anything complicated, just in terms of the juxtaposition of natural human development and artificially altered experience.

This is common sense I hope. They're forming ideas about the way the world works and making necessary mistakes in order to become independent functional adults. Put a lot of drugs into the mix and aside from toxicological, criminal justice, and drug-seeking pitfalls you've got aberrant sensory and emotional information to boot.

College is better I think, but I watched more than a few college age young adults wig-out on various substances, some permanently. Granted it's more likely that recreational drugs act more as a catalysts for predisposed problems to surface than as direct causes, but I think people stand a better chance of having a "growing" or "learning" experience when their old enough to have more of an established baseline of who they are and what they want. In contrast HS age kids are more likely to view all drugs as either escape mechanisms or forms of rebellion.

Cliff's notes version: All rules and laws and social norms aside, respect and know all substances you're putting into your bodies, whether its whippets from the grocery store or rock star energy drink or whatever.

I didn't do a lot of drugs in HS, mostly drank -and almost killed some friends and myself doing it. Drinking and driving is very deadly, don't kid yourself. A lot of adults think it's fine to go out to the bar and then drive home ripped and it's so not. Society is set up to accommodate this behavior the way we depend on automobiles to get around, and that can make it "seem" justified. "How else am I supposed to get home?" I digress I know, but I'm just saying legal or not has little to do with what substances can either kill or help get you killed. Respect them all.

iMacZealot

May 1, 2008, 06:14 PM

Haha it's true though. Every single person on the faculty likes me (well, almost) and thinks that I'm a good kid 24/7, so there isn't a teacher's eye on me all the time, and they hardly notice me. I haven't been compliant with the dress code at all since Thanksgiving. While I left, I nonchalantly went to the library to finish an essay for next period and surfed the web while these guys left to play basketball in the other gym and conspicuously and unnecessarily returned to class through the giant doors right next to the three gym teachers.

~*~*~*~*~Back to topic~*~*~*~

Well-said Eric Piercey. I agree with that. The responsibility of the individual is more important, and in general, high school students aren't that responsible.