what are yur guys opinions on drugs of all forms any experiences good or bad lets ear them

Madman: I edited your title, someone might get the wrong idea. ;)

[ 07-09-2002, 06:17 AM: Message edited by: Memnoch ]

My opinion of all drugs except for caffeine is: They're bad, don't do 'em. You can live without it.

a good point but what about the people who use them for very creative purposes i mean Salvador Dali and Picasso were both well into their opium and IMO their work positively reflects that..

Are you sure you wanna discuss this here dude ? There are young kids around here too you know, we don't wanna give em any ideas, do we ?

not at all johnny i feel as long as everyone is responsible with what they post then there will be no problems i just would like to hear others opinions , obviously shameless glamourisation woulde out of order.

In that case they had no real skills. They had to take the drugs in order to be able to do their art.

You will never HAVE to do drugs, so it's always a good idea not to.

Oh, in that case give me two grams ! :D No, seriously, i've done my share of experimenting, exept for heroine, that's just nasty. I've seen some friends go all the way down once they started using that !

i disaggree in their case i think the drugs were simply tools. Dali was known to starve himself for days in order t induce hallucinations. its all about inspiration

hmmn i havent had much experience with drugs but i know about them and i know that most kids younger than me do nowadays,so johnny theres no need to worry.drugs are ok as long as there for your own use if your sellin em to other ppl then thats just MESSED up, IMO.
Felix

In that case they had no real skills. They had to take the drugs in order to be able to do their art.
[/QUOTE]

LOL - read that again... Dali and Picasso no skills?? ROTFLMAO!!!
Riiiiiiight, Neb.

I agree that drugs aren't NECESSARY, but completely agree with Madman - they can be used as tools. Whether or not you do so is up to you, and the nature and status of drug abuse has certainly changed in recent history. In Victorian England, cigarettes were a sign of style, and absynthe was used by many authors. That doesn't mean they didn't have any skill.

I have an example for ya: a friend of mine makes drawings for a tattoo shop. He's not a real artist, but when he uses speed he'll be drawing like a maniac, and good too. He's making good money that way, but without the speed he wouldn't be able to do that. That's quite a shame, couse speed really messes you up, you can't sleep for days, you lose you're appetite, and don't even think about a little hanky panky with your girl, couse Mr Johnson shrinks quite a bit ! :D

Hmmmm drugs....been there done most, but quit them. Mighty expensive! Although I am for legalising marajuana. And I dont even smoke it. The rest are shit. Cocaine is shit. Crack is really shit. Meth (speed) is shit. And yes I have done them all and quit a long time ago.

Marihuana is legal overhere ! :D

I know johnny lol, half my friends should live there!

I think i use "beer" that is more than good for me anyway!

*cough* ;)

Well my main vices are Cigarettes and Booze. I enjoy the occassional spliff. I also used to take whizz (amphetamines) but once after a weekender I crashed real hard, the worst I've ever felt in my life - broken glass filling my head, aching jaw from grinding my teeth, sore throat from talking, disturbed sleep, flu like feeling and the worst paranoia I've ever experienced for 3 or 4 days after - and decided it wasn't worth it.

I'm in favour of legalising pot and decriminalisation of all other drugs (yes, even heroin, so that addicts can more easily get help and keep them out of the clutches of unscrupulous dealers and the criminal scene)

Epona, they help the heroine addicts overhere, they place a methadonbus near the central station every monday, but it's not a pretty sight, there's hundreds of em swarming all over the place, i think they should keep that indoors. And what are those two things you mentioned ? Amfetamine is speed, i know that, but what's the other ?

LOL - read that again... Dali and Picasso no skills?? ROTFLMAO!!!
Riiiiiiight, Neb.

I agree that drugs aren't NECESSARY, but completely agree with Madman - they can be used as tools. Whether or not you do so is up to you, and the nature and status of drug abuse has certainly changed in recent history. In Victorian England, cigarettes were a sign of style, and absynthe was used by many authors. That doesn't mean they didn't have any skill.[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]If they HAD to do the drugs in order to be able to do their work, then they had no skills. If they merely did the drugs as a recreational side-thing then they could still have had skills.

Using the drugs to get inspiration for a new painting because they had none otherwise would be like a bike rider in the Tour De France using doping to get strength for a new victory because he couldn't win otherwise. At least that's how I see it.

Oh and as for those two not having any skills, it might just be my opinion that their art sucks. Then, to me, they would have no skills. So you can't say for definite "Picasso and Dali are skilled!". In your opinion they might be, in my opinion, not.

[ 07-07-2002, 08:31 PM: Message edited by: Neb ]

Neb, i suppose next you're gonna say Maradonna was a lousy footballplayer if it wasn't for his daily dosis of coke, right ? :D

what about the newborns addicted at birth? what about the guys that rob and murder in order to pay for their "fix"? what about the fact that not only are they illegal (for a reason) they are just dumb. they do NOTHING except BAD things to your body, and yet people do them. i know that it is "cool" to do drugs nowadays, at least thats what most seem to think. that is until they are broke, sick, and a shadow of their former selves, because their whole life was consumed by the lifestyle. i have done my share of drugs. the effects were indeed cool, but the outcome is bad. i wasted my money on a cheap thrill, and i wish that i didnt. i have seen friends use drugs, get hooked, and are now DEAD because of overdose, murder, and accidental death, all due to the drugs that were so "cool". i just wish the law would allow vigilante's against drug dealers, because i know of a few in my area. maybe i'll just make an anonymous tip to the police, and take the scum from the street. DRUGS= STUPIDITY, PRISON, BANKRUPTCY, or DEATH!!! dont do them, they arent worth it.

It's possible [img]tongue.gif[/img]

so even drawing, he has no money. he is spending it all on drugs so he can keep drawing, to make money for drugs. its an endless cycle.

In my opinion all drugs should be legalized. But there should be no help getting off of them again. That'd discourage people more, then there'd be no "safety net" and they'd see what happened to those who fell.

so even drawing, he has no money. he is spending it all on drugs so he can keep drawing, to make money for drugs. its an endless cycle.</font>[/QUOTE]He uses about a gram per day, in US Dollars that's about 10 bucks, so i don't think that's his worst problem. His worst problem is that he thinks he can't function normally without that crap !

http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

Abusing drugs is certainly a poor decision, but after 30 years of failure, it seems the drug war is a poor decision as well.

Look at all the money wasted and people arrested in the link above. We have created a penal culture in the ghettos and it wont end until the lure of money caused by the Illegality of drugs ends. We Americans can learn alot from our short-lived alcohol prohibition.

Decriminalise.
Educate.
Educate.
Educate.

= smokes pot on a weekly basis with family.

Are you related to earthdog [img]graemlins/question.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

I agree

Cool family ! :D

LOL - read that again... Dali and Picasso no skills?? ROTFLMAO!!!
Riiiiiiight, Neb.

I agree that drugs aren't NECESSARY, but completely agree with Madman - they can be used as tools. Whether or not you do so is up to you, and the nature and status of drug abuse has certainly changed in recent history. In Victorian England, cigarettes were a sign of style, and absynthe was used by many authors. That doesn't mean they didn't have any skill.</font>[/QUOTE]If they HAD to do the drugs in order to be able to do their work, then they had no skills. If they merely did the drugs as a recreational side-thing then they could still have had skills.

Using the drugs to get inspiration for a new painting because they had none otherwise would be like a bike rider in the Tour De France using doping to get strength for a new victory because he couldn't win otherwise. At least that's how I see it.

Oh and as for those two not having any skills, it might just be my opinion that their art sucks. Then, to me, they would have no skills. So you can't say for definite "Picasso and Dali are skilled!". In your opinion they might be, in my opinion, not.[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]oooooookaaay... picasso and dali not skilled. you learn something new every day. :rolleyes:

OK, I find this a little bit disturbing. If people think that certain drugs should be legalised, then that's fine with me. But informing other younger members of this forum that you a) take drugs and suggest that other people should experiment and b) think it's really really cool, and increases your ability to succeed, is another thing altogether.

I suggest if you want to talk about drugs like this, that you take it away from IW. I know I'm being a party-pooper, but I happen to be heavily opposed to drug taking. I've seen it go wrong far too many times. And every time, it happens to people who say "I don't take much! Not enough to harm anyone! And I'd never do hard drugs!"

One thing always leads to another! Isn't it hard enough to educate people as it is, without giving them positive drug advertisements?

LOL Norom! ;)

Neb, whatever. You obviously don't know the difference between liking and disliking an artist and considering them skilled. Dali's paintings may be surreal but he does start out with very realistic looking objects. To paint realistically, you need technical skill.
I may not like a certain style of music or art, but I would never deny that this is because there are no skilled artists to be found in the genre. That's quite arrogant. I'm not a huge fan of Picasso, but saying he's unskilled is just laughable. Saying you think his paintings suck is fine - that's a matter of taste. But one can objectively judge technical skill and emotional skill of an artist without making a pronouncement about your feelings on his/her work as a whole.

Aviendha, good point. Unfortunately kids will find out about drugs anyway, so I don't think that talking about your own experiences is going to make a difference. Sooner or later, someone will tell them about drugs in a positive way anyway... But I don't think there has been actual glamourisation going on so far... just people giving their own experiences.
I'm as much opposed to drug abuse as you, but I don't think it can be stopped in all cases...

[ 07-08-2002, 05:10 AM: Message edited by: Melusine ]

This is a favourite of mine [img]smile.gif[/img]

http://ossr.phpwebhosting.com/forumpics/notcrack.gif

That's a good point Melusine, but I guess the main thing that concerns me, is that certain IW members look up to and respect others. When they see that those particular people take drugs, and that they have no concerns about it, they may begin to think that drugs are OK.

I know that we can't stop people from hearing about drugs, but surely we shouldn't allow glorifications of any sort at IW.

Avi.

LOL Norom! ;)

Neb, whatever. You obviously don't know the difference between liking and disliking an artist and considering them skilled. Dali's paintings may be surreal but he does start out with very realistic looking objects. To paint realistically, you need technical skill.
I may not like a certain style of music or art, but I would never deny that this is because there are no skilled artists to be found in the genre. That's quite arrogant. I'm not a huge fan of Picasso, but saying he's unskilled is just laughable. Saying you think his paintings suck is fine - that's a matter of taste. But one can objectively judge technical skill and emotional skill of an artist without making a pronouncement about your feelings on his/her work as a whole.
</font>[/QUOTE]Melusine, if you think that what a painter paints sucks, would you call him skilled? I wouldn't. Others would, because they like his style of art. At least that's how I see it. And there's no way of accurately juding an artist's skill from any non-biased scale since everyone has different ideas on what's "good" in art.

In sports, however, it's different. There we have a clear winner based on something non-biased. Like who got to the finish line first. Or who threw the ball through the hoop enough times.

And, as always, I state that I have little respect for people who do drugs. They obviously need to alter the way their mind reacts in order to succeed.

Well, most artcritics would disagree with you. Have you read up on the subject or are you just saying that? I'll give you that there can be no clear, conclusive, all-encompassing definition of art (which is quite logical, since art makes you look at old things in new ways, art is renewal - if it were defined to the letter, there could be no new art...) but one can certainly objectively point out artistic skill. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one, but I think you might want to think about it some more...

i agree. plus, neb, would you call the beatles unskilled (or not talented). well, most of their music in the 60s was heavily influenced by their experimentation with marijuana and lsd. does that mean that nsync or britneyspears are better or more skilled cause they dont need to alter their minds in order to succed...?

[ 07-08-2002, 06:28 AM: Message edited by: norompanlasolas ]

wow guys just came back on thanks for the response!

I'm all for legalizing marijuana. Three years ago, I was smoking so much any other drug, including alcohol, would have killed me. At least, i'd have severe sequels.

Mmm... is there anything better than a small joint with your morning coffee? And followed by another and another? Oops, it's already supper time, think i'll roll myself a gig. Woo! nice meal, now how about a spliff to relax? ... I was so zombie my dealer refused to sell to me anymore. Good thing someone rang the alarm.

So there goes the moral of the story: educate.

The great things about pot that make them VERY different from the other drugs:

-If you're down, you'll be downer if you smoke. So it's no miracle cure to personal failure, sorrow, etc... (as is coke, crack, heroine, extasy, acid or almost any other drug). If you're a looser, smoke a joint and you'll be a stoned looser, not some disco prince.

-It brings another state of mind in which it is easier for you to focus on yourself, reducing stress, tension and that loonie voice in your head talking to you right now (uncontroled, it does provoke paranoia though [img]smile.gif[/img] ). And unlike some other, harder natural drugs, the trees are not talking to you when achieve this state of relaxation.
THIS AIN'T MAGIC: it's good to realize that you can focus yourself, meditate, to calm your body. Some people, mostly urban people never take time to take a deep breath, so a little joint might be a good starter to learn to relax and let all go. But continuing to smoke for this purpose is like doing the tour de france with the small wheels still on your bike.

-Pot smokers are much less prone to violent behavior than any other drug users, including alcohol (obviously).