"Inside LSD" on National Geographic Channel (Tues., Nov. 3 10pm)

Again, you are only considering this issue from your own personal lifestyle and outlook. It is much bigger than just what you want.

You just totally missed the point that regardless of all the positive research, personal experiences and success stories using LSD to treat things like alcoholism, all it takes is for some asshole being careless with their dosed teddy grahams and THAT is what will hit the headlines.
Why?
Because it would sell more papers than 1000 positive reports on LSD.
Don't you get that? Thats what I mean by working with the system.
Why give the opposition ammunition?

You are taking everything I say as some sort of personal attack and getting all belligerent and defensive about it.
Fuck!
All I am saying is that if the laws are going to change then those of us who want them to change need to practice a little more foresight and sense with these issues.
I'm sorry, but putting a substance like LSD on candy which regardless of what you think, every little kid will try to eat it , is shortsighted and naive.
You will get just as high from it if it is on a blotter or a pill form, something a lot of kids won't automatically eat, as you will if it's on candy!

Damn, grow up would you!

 

Oh , and just to set the record straight, I really wouldn't be any more impressed by Alan Watts talking about it. Actually those who talk all spiritual and mystical about LSD and psychedelics really do very little to help the cause of legalization and research. First impressions, remember.

I would much rather see a professional in a shirt and tie using scientific and medical terminology to describe LSD than some one using flowery, mystical references to being one with the universe and all that.
They will reach a much larger audience of those opposed to this research than Alan Watts did or could.

If you are going to debate a topic you need to use language and terminology that your audience can understand and doesn't raise a negative stereotype in their minds as soon as you open your mouth.
I have seen some proponents of legalization who just by their appearance do more harm to the cause than good.

I am not saying to "bend to their rules" I am saying use their rules against them. If that means looking, dressing and speaking a certain way then so be it as long as the message gets through to them.

 

you know i read the research being done with acid back in the day---like they gave priests LSD to see if they were more prone to having a religious experience---a classic try to read---THE VARIETIES OF PSYCHEDELIC EXPERIENCE---all the trips were legal and done for research---yeah we need it back--LSD research i mean

 

I started my own LSD research.

 

i agree with you completely.

that's what i loved about the fact that Leary and Ram Dass and all these Harvard level researchers were looking into this stuff... that means so much more as a whole than some stoned looking hippie trying to convince everyone "LSD is great stuff". even if they're both trying to send the same message, it's all about where you're coming from.

it's hard to deny someones legitimacy when they're the one who gave them a respected title.

 

Yeah, it really is too bad that Leary became so irresponsible. Things may be completely different today if he had used the "system" to get the word out rather than acting the fool.
Don't get me wrong, the man was genius, but he really did hurt the legitimate study of LSD and he is one of the reasons legitimate study was killed.

 

yeah for sure, the beginning was where it had potential. though i do think Leary still had some REALLY progressive ideas for his time the entire way through.

oh Huxley was another one, he wasn't as "scientific" but you (or anyone who wants to respond) ever read the Doors of Perception?

 

Somebody record it and put it somewhere to download....I don't get National Geographic Channel.

 

His ideas were not the issue, it was his delivery and methodology of sharing his ideas that fucked him up and subsequently the publics impression of LSD. The intent of his "mantra" Turn on, Tune in and Drop out was understood by those close to him and those experienced with LSD. But the wider audience of ma and pa American were lost by it and scared by the implications of the literal meaning of the words, and the shit hit the fan.

That is the idea I have tried to convey to geprodis in this thread. The way and manner in which you communicate your ideas has as much and even more influence on your intended audience than the actual message itself.

I can garunfuckintee you that ma and pa America watching that show the other day may have tuned in with an open mind, but seeing her drop LSD onto candy probably gasped and thought "What if some child gets a hold of it". Possibly that one scene turned some undecided about it against it because of the seemingly irresponsibleness of dosing candy.
It really doesn't matter if any kids get a hold of dosed candy, it's the impression that gives the average joe concerning it.

And like I tell my kids when they don't want to use their seat belts cause I have never been in an accident "It only has to happen once."

Oh I did read it many many moons ago, I should revisit it.

 

"all it takes is for some asshole being careless with their dosed teddy grahams and THAT is what will hit the headlines."

my point is you can't stop what is in the headlines...there was plenty of positive trip reports in the 60's but they were never in the papers...because yes....there just has to be one negative LSD story and they will want to show that, not anything positive. I am just disagreeing with you it doesn't make me immature to disagree.

"why give the opposition ammunition?"

they can get ammunition from thin air if they want...I am saying putting LSD on candies is not a danger to kids because it isn't..and just because you "know kids" does not mean you have a valid argument. I am not being bellicose or defensive...I'm just saying I disagree and that you make a poor argument.

to follow your logic....if I want my dealer to give me doses on gummy candy I'm an asshole, right? I still think you are just pissed at the girl for being casual with a sacred substance..because your point about kids eating LSD candy is not strong.

Honestly, if my parents were watching the thing on LSD they would flip the channel out of boredom. I don't think ma and pa America would ever approve of LSD..no matter how positive a story someone tried to make it.

On Leary..when he said "drop out" he did mean drop out of school..I have heard him give a speech saying "drop out of high school, college, grad school" - Leary started out well but his "tune in, turn on, drop out" message was stupid.
I do agree with Leary when he said LSD should not just be for the elite psychiatrists it should be for the masses - and that is the overall point PB Smith seems to be arguing against.
Yes PB, I do think LSD should be handed out at festivals...yes I do think it should flow like a river in the underground. I don't think it should be only in the hands of elites like you seem to.

 

No, not at all. It's just the manner in which you are disgreeing with me thats immature.

Well it is a potential danger and if you can not see that then that just leaves me .
And actually my argument is rather sound.

:smilielol5:
You make a very wrong assumption that I consider LSD or any other psychedelic substance as a "sacred" substance. I don't, and my history of posting here would attest to that. They are chemical substances that can elicit certain responses in humans that some have interpreted as being spiritual in nature. Sacredness lies within the individual, not what they consume.

:rofl:

Again, where in the hell did you get that idea? I'm about as far from an elitist as they come.
I am just opposed to the uninformed, reckless use of psychedelics. I am definitely not against everyone using them by along shot. I think the vast majority would benefit from psychedelics.
But it does require education about them, proper preparation and proper set/setting.

It is exactly that type of immature attitude that will prevent them from being legalized.
Not because that is how I feel, but rather because that is how those opposed to drugs feels. Seriously what is so hard to understand about that?

PB Smith, elitist :smilielol5:

 

If LSD wasn't around in the underground then neither of us would have used it. The girl who you call a stupid bitch is one of the links in the chain..back when you were doing cid you probably received some indirectly from a similar burnout. These people exist and have helped us take many trips. So you are pissed that these people exist or that NetGeo chose her instead of a more wholesome character middle America wouldn't be afraid of who was selling tabs instead of dosed candy?

No one is forced to take LSD (I do have a story of a friend who was dosed without consent but it turned out well).

You are naive to think LSD will be legalized in the foreseeable future - go back to my post about waiting 40 years and going through red tape for 1 hit.

I have said all I am going to say...you think putting LSD on candy is atrocious..and I think it is fine. Call me crazy..I call you silly. You think the uniformed reckless use of psychedelics is bad - I say who is to decide what is reckless and who is ready for LSD? I think you are judging here when you shouldn't. You think handing out LSD at festivals is immature..I think it is spreading the good news.

 

Why do you keep going back to that girl and think I am pissed about her?
All I really ever said was that I feel that dosing candy is irresponsible.
You can't argue that the potential for some kid to accidentally take it doesn't exist. Some kid could chew up a sheet of Hoffmans too, but it is more likely to happen with candy than paper. What I said about the impression dosing candy could give had not adamn thing to do with that girl. But for certain showing someone laying sheets does give a different impression than dosing candy does. An automatic response by grandma isn't going to be "Oh my, what if a child gets a hold of that".

I don't think LSD will be legalized anytime soon for sure, but the restrictions on are on the way to being losened and it may eventually be rescheduled for medicinal uses. Then a lot of the stigma surrounding it will also go.

When did I say you were crazy? I said your attitudes are immature, but never questioned your sanity.
Please don't put words into my mouth.

I'm done with this conversation as well. In the future please read what people actually post before responding. It just makes it easier for all concerned.

 

I thought:

"Well it is a potential danger and if you can not see that then that just leaves me (sad face with question marks above head)." was implying that you thought someone who thinks dosing candy is ok is crazy. Also when I say "call me crazy" I mean if you choose to call me crazy..so calm down.

I read everything you posted, including your immature insults =)

 

Oh I see, the means confused.
I was saying that if you can not at least acknowledge that it is a potential danger that it leaves ME confused as to why you don't see it as such.
Never said you were crazy.
I agree to disagree about this point.
Welcome to the hip forums :cheers2:

 

We could continue this discussion but that would just be :beatdeadhorse5:

 

It should be up on Hulu.com soon.

 

:cheers2:

 

PBsmith, just becuase acid is put on candy does not mean kids are gonna eat it up. adults are allowed to eat candy too...

 

I don't think you any of you understand what PB is saying; if we have ANY hopes of ever making this substance legal, putting it on candies and handing it out at festivals will entirely destroy that chance. And publicizing that people actually do that, well fucking forget it, it's a total disrespect to people like you and me who take this substance seriously. I'm not saying that I think it's wrong, it's totally fine in my opinion, but it is a huge hinderance on people taking it seriously. Whether you agree with that or not, it's a fact.

Just try to put yourself in the shoes of somebody who hates the substance, who thinks only "dirty hippies" use it. That is most of the population by the way. If you were to see the show start off with a girl dosing little candies and gummies with a drug that you already think is awful, wouldn't that only reinforce your opinion? Wouldn't you say to yourself "hmm this girl just wants to get high and will put it on something that a child could possibly get ahold of!!" I can hardly picture anybody (who has a negative view of the substance) seeing that scene and saying "oh, maybe this stuff is legitimate after all!" It's not whether you think it's a big deal or not, it's about what society thinks. Like it or not, we're going to have to start playing the game if there are any hopes of legalizing LSD. PB is totally right and you guys just aren't even trying to look at it the way the rest of society does.

And as a side point, yes, if people who have children had candies dosed with LSD, I can guarantee that something terrible would happen. Don't you remember your childhood? There were entire days I would devote to trying to find my mom's hidden candy stash!