Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

As surprising as it was to see you fail to address pretty much the only outside content in this thread, provided by yours truly. Need I go back and dig up the articles I've shared? You know, particularly the one authored by someone smarter and more educated on this topic than both you and I? Surely you'll have something to say about their claims given the volume of inane shit you've spouted back at me.

What on earth is XTC? Please, if you're going to speak from a position of assumed authority and knowledge, at least use the correct terms to refer to these substances. For the sake of educating the coming generations you care oh so much for. So much so you're happy to censor their life experience.

I see you have avoided answering my questions, you must be too educated for that.

I see you have avoided answering my questions, you must be too educated for that.

I'm just trying to take the same approach as yourself. You seem pretty certain it's how you conduct yourself in a mature debate, so perhaps I'm learning something from the master of sidestepping questions.

Anyway, we agree to disagree. That's obviously as good as it's going to get here.

You actually dug up some really old memories to be honest.....but something doesn't quite seem right - didn't angsty straight-edge teenagers die out with Myspace? I mean that's pretty well the only place I've seen such a username convention used, until it finally just clicked with yours here.

You can be straight edge, that's fine. Nobody is forcing drugs on you. Just stop forcing that lifestyle on everyone else thanks. We're happy to stand by that ideal when it comes to religion, which is nothing more than a chosen belief. Believe what you wish to believe, that's your prerogative; just keep it to yourself if you're not trying to be constructive.

Edited by Trozzle
  • Like 1

Anyway, we agree to disagree. That's obviously as good as it's going to get here.

You actually dug up some really old memories to be honest.....but something doesn't quite seem right - didn't angsty straight-edge teenagers die out with Myspace? I mean that's pretty well the only place I've seen such a username convention used, until it finally just clicked with yours here.

You can be straight edge, that's fine. Nobody is forcing drugs on you. Just stop forcing that lifestyle on everyone else thanks.

dude you see those usernames on COD all the time lololol

  • Like 1

dude you see those usernames on COD all the time lololol

The instance of 13 year olds playing FPS outside school hours would be fairly high I suppose hahaha

Digressing, I wonder how many people sporting the X_whatever_X style username actually understand what they're joining in on (not that there's anything wrong with being straight edge, mind you...just not the way XGTRX is going about it)

So how do you plan on stopping people from doing dugs XGTRX? Ice, Alcohol, LSD, Tobacco, Marijuana, Ecstacy, Heroin, whatever it may be? Its impossible.

The only reason that crime/criminals benefit is because there is an underground market for it. If Alcohol and tobacco were still prohibited, they would be profiting off that also. Most likely funding more illegal activity and possibly violent crime.

How do you stop this? You take away as much of the market from them as possible. Regulate, control and tax, just like Alcohol and Tobacco.

That doesn't mean we should legalise all current illegal substances and sell them in the local corner store. No, but for a quick arguments sake lets take Marijuana: Obviously the more research on health effects the better, but at the moment i would not categorise it as any worse than Alcohol or Tobacco and It makes millions-billions of dollars for criminals. Regulation, control and tax of the drug would take away a MASSIVE source of profit for these criminal organisations, which in turn would lessen their power.

On the other hand, we have hard drugs like Ice or Heroin. I have no experience with these personally but i would say that these are NOT something that can be regulated or controlled (some might not agree?) as the health risks are far too great. In this case i believe decriminalisation would be the best course of action at the very least. Addicts need to be HELPED not to be thrown in jail. I dont know how much funding there is for methodone/rehab clinics but i think the main focus should be on helping these people. At the end of the day more successful rehabilitation means less people going back and throwing their money at drug dealers. Once again, less money = less power/crime.

Anyway those are my thoughts, curious to hear more of what others think :)


Just to add to my previous post lol - Here are some articles regarding Portugal's pretty much "blanket" decriminalisation of drugs.

Its uncharted territory so there are obviously both positives and negatives to this approach but i think the positives out weigh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal - Yes its wikipedia lol but good for a run down on what exactly they are doing.

http://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.wdYQAJc2I - 14 years later

https://mises.org/library/portugal%E2%80%99s-experiment-drug-decriminalization-has-been-success - 14 years later

^^^ that's gonna get torn to shreds with a heap of valid, yet somewhat moot points regarding an increase in use etc etc. I'll just use cannabis in my example, though the effects would be somewhat different depending on the drug in question.

IN MY OPINION:

If one DESIRES trying weed, they'd likely try it even if it were still illegal (at least here in Aus, given how available it is and how minor the repercussions if caught). If this person has an addictive personality, they'd continue their use after their trial.
If one doesn't desire trying weed but don't necessarily care for it, they may be more likely to trial it if it were decriminalised as the repercussions become negligible. There is no guarantee they'll go on to continue smoking it after they try it - they had no particular interest in the first place. It may not be their thing at all.

What I'm getting at is that in my opinion, those who're likely to pick up smoking weed and contribute to the ongoing instance of its use will likely be someone who'd try it regardless of its legality. This same person may be more likely to continue with their use after they try it if there's less chance of getting in the shit, which is where I agree with those like Anthony who believe "encouraging" use through decriminalisation will increase the instance of users. Let's say I meet you guys halfway on it, as your logic is absolutely sound, I just don't believe it would be the real world outcome.

Now, legalising cannabis for recreational use would yield a different result, likely more in line with the 'increase in users' prediction. I still feel a great many would jump on it to see what it's about (though again, many will already have done it before legalisation lol), but not all of those will continue use due to simply not being interested in the effects. While I personally enjoy the effects of cannabis, I can definitely see it is not for everyone. Similarly to alcohol intoxication, some people just hate it.

Decriminalising the possession of other substances (in quantities for personal consumption, that is) won't necessarily increase their instance of use, again for much the same reasons above. I know I'm just one individual, and my feelings will be skewed as I've got a little more understanding than the average person, but heroin for example as I've said before is something I have zero interest in. Even if it were fully legalised and available from the pharmacy, I'd still not touch it. Decriminalising the possession however will allow addicts to gain assistance without fearing stigmatised and thrown in jail for what was potentially an escape from depression or mental disorder to begin with, and it would likely also result in more successful rehabilitation programs as that would be the preferred course of action for when someone is picked up by the authorities in a bad state.

Definitely a case by case, drug by drug situation with legalisation, but decriminalisation of an amount for personal consumption is definitely needed before we can help the people we keep stigmatising.

  • Like 2

Overall i agree :) .. ahh yes ! i forgot to mention that by decriminalisation i mean quantities for personal use.

With legalisation/regulation it is definitely a drug by drug situation, like i said, i dont think every drug should be sold at the corner store. More research is needed.

The end result that needs to be achieved is to (where possible) re route funds - instead of going to drug lords, government can use tax revenue to improve our lives (hopefully lol) and to help those who have unfortunately become addicted to much harsher substances.

Sure, its possible to make the link between decriminalisation and increase in users but there are ways to combat that. Education! As mentioned previously, people are gonna do what they want, but proper education will reduce the numbers.

Legalisation is to stop money going to dealers and decriminalisation is to increase the chances of addicts being successfully rehabilitated, lessening the chance they will go back and hurt themselves/give money to criminals. I think im repeating myself a little lol

I've just heard the same argument regarding using drugs with no answer to the obvious (and repeatedly stated) issue of the unavoidable impact upon society, even speaking only financially.
99% of the people in this thread are speaking about recreational drug use, so the old medicinal use argument won't hold water.

I happen to believe in personal freedom as long as it doesn't impinge upon anyone else as it mirrors my own views on firearm ownership, something that is important to me.
No one in this thread has been able to demonstrate the benefits of recreational drug use outside of anecdotal references like "I'm too happy on MDMA to get into fights"

I've just heard the same argument regarding using drugs with no answer to the obvious (and repeatedly stated) issue of the unavoidable impact upon society, even speaking only financially.

99% of the people in this thread are speaking about recreational drug use, so the old medicinal use argument won't hold water.

I happen to believe in personal freedom as long as it doesn't impinge upon anyone else as it mirrors my own views on firearm ownership, something that is important to me.

No one in this thread has been able to demonstrate the benefits of recreational drug use outside of anecdotal references like "I'm too happy on MDMA to get into fights"

"Impact on society" isn't straight forward, nor is it the same for each drug in question here. Each drug will potentially impact only specific aspects (?) of society, in varying degrees, and not all drugs will impact the same aspects.

I've only provided responses regarding the financial impact of proposed testing booths/stalls at festivals (as that's seemingly the "big issue" flavour of the month right now, and what's triggering this discussion topic in many places).

For the most part, undesired negative impact will mostly come in the form of those who abuse the substances and end up requiring medical/mental treatment (EDIT: this isn't at all in regards to the substances I'm only for decriminalisation of like hard opiates and meth. Their impact reaches well beyond medical). AFAIK the latter would only fall on society/the taxpayer if it were on court orders (this is an assumption). The medical treatment aspect is a hard one - I'm somewhat all for the idea of the user accepting the risks and voiding their public healthcare in the event they f**k themselves up, landing them with the bill if they need treatment. This probably wouldn't work in practice, unfortunately. I highly doubt public health insurance companies will offer a "drug user" level of cover either haha, for many obvious reasons but also because not all drugs are the same.

Edited by Trozzle

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Latest Posts

    • I think the concept is highlighting the various scenarios where thicker oil helps, and thicker oil potentially doesn't help and only generates heat and costs power, in turn for safety which isn't actually any safer (unless you're going real hot). If anything this does highlight why throwing Castrol 10w-60 for your track days is always a solid, safe bet. 
    • Jason should have shown a real viscosity vs temp chart. All the grades have very little viscosity difference at full operating temperature.
    • Oops... I meant to include the connector  view... BR/W - power from fuse L/W - motor negative to fan control amp (and off to HVAC pin19) OR/B - PWM signal (from HVAC pin20) B --  ground  
    • Yep, if you are applying filler it sounds like there is something wrong with the body lol. Safe to assume there is going to be a lot of sanding going on if your still applying fillers.  Picture a perfect bare metal panel, smooth as glass. You lay down your primer, it's perfect. (why are you going to sand it?) You lay down the colour and clear, it's perfect. No sanding at all took place and you've got a perfectly finished panel.  You won't be chasing your tail, sounds like you were prepping to start laying filler. If your happy with the body after the sanding, there is some bare metal exposed and some areas with primer, no issues at all, start laying the filler. You are safe to lay filler on bare metal or primer (of course check your technical data sheet as usual for what your filler is happy to adhere to).  This isn't a 100% correct statement. There is primer that is happy to adhere to smooth bare metal. There are fillers that are happy to adhere to smooth bare metal. Just make sure you're using the right materials for the job.  Typically if you are using filler, you would go primer, colour and clear. I've never seen any instances before where someone has laid colour over body filler (maybe this happens, but I haven't seen it before). So your plan sounds pretty normal to me. 
    • I don't think there's any way someone is push starting this car.. I honestly can barely move it, and moving it and steering it is just flat out not possible. I'm sure it is, but needs a bigger man than me. I have a refurbished starter now. The starter man was quite clear and consise showing me how nothing inside a starter really should contribute to slow cranking, and turned out that for the most part... my starter was entirely fine. Still, some of the wear items were replaced and luckily it didn't show any signs of getting too hot, being unfit for use, etc. Which is 'good'. I also noticed the starter definitely sounded different, which is a bit odd considering nothing should have really changed there.... Removed and refit, and we'll pretend one of the manifold bolts didn't fully tighten up and is only "pretty" tight. GM only wants 18ft/lb anyway. I also found a way to properly get my analog wideband reading very slightly leaner than the serial wideband. There's Greg related reasons for this. The serial output is the absolute source of truth, but it is a total asshole to actually stay connected and needs a laptop. The analog input does not, and works with standalone datalogging. Previously the analog input read slightly richer, but if I am aiming at 12.7 I do not want one of the widebands to be saying 12.7 when the source of truth is 13.0. Now the source of truth will be 12.65 and the Analog Wideband will read 12.7. So when I tune to 12.7 it'll be ever so slightly safer. While messing with all of this and idling extensively I can confirm my car seems to restart better while hot now. I did add an old Skyline battery cable between the head and the body though, though now I really realise I should have chosen the frame. Maybe that's a future job. The internet would have you believe that this is caused by bad grounds. In finding out where my grounds actually were I found out the engine bay battery post actually goes to the engine, as well as a seperate one (from the post) to the body of the car. So now there's a third one making the Grounding Triangle which is now a thing. I also from extensive idling have this graph. Temperature (°C) Voltage (V) 85 1.59 80 1.74 75 1.94 70 2.1 65 2.33 60 2.56 55 2.78 50 2.98 45 3.23 40 3.51 35 3.75 30 4.00   Plotted it looks like this. Which is actually... pretty linear? I have not actually put the formula into HPTuners. I will have to re-engage brain and/or re-engage the people who wanted more data to magically do it for me. Tune should be good for the 30th!
×
×
  • Create New...