• 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


want to stock up a little on benzos before the ban - advice please
#31
(25-01-2016, 09:33 AM)Xochipilli Wrote: Yeah as I recall the banning of plant products was mentioned in parliament but the scope of the bill is so wide and complex it really is unclear how it will work in practise.

As for medicines Nif - that's interesting in that it seems to suggest on the face of it any psychoactive plant or chem fall in the catagory of medicine if presented as such and the bill is essentially worthless! That would be nice. I simply don't have any legal understanding to see how it pans out (in fact if loopholes exist they need playing out and qualifying over time) but if something looks too good to be true it probably is

Well these are the same regulations that govern supplement products today. Perhaps it's why Holland & Barrett aren't too concerned. The reason they don't have to slap "NOT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION" on valerian root is because of those regulations.

The issue will come when things like kratom come into into question. If this ever went to court it'd be a very interesting case to follow. On one hand, kratom has a long history of traditional medical use. On the other hand, it's hard to deny it has recreational effects too. It would be in limbo between the psychoactive substances bill and the medicines regulations.

Even if kratom was mentioned in the debates they still won't name it specifically in legislation because that'd defeat the purpose of a blanket ban, so regardless this would still stand.
Who the fuck is Psychoactive Substances Bill and why is he taking all my drugs?
Reply
#32
(25-01-2016, 09:33 AM)Xochipilli Wrote: Yeah as I recall the banning of plant products was mentioned in parliament but the scope of the bill is so wide and complex it really is unclear how it will work in practise.

As for medicines Nif - that's interesting in that it seems to suggest on the face of it any psychoactive plant or chem fall in the catagory of medicine if presented as such and the bill is essentially worthless! That would be nice. I simply don't have any legal understanding to see how it pans out (in fact if loopholes exist they need playing out and qualifying over time) but if something looks too good to be true it probably is

It's one of many fundamental problems with the bill. The government think it unlikely as a defence because a vendor would still be in contravention of the Medicines Act (up to 2 years imprisonment), but import for personal use is exempted from any licencing requirements, so would not hit the same obstacle. I don't think they've actually thought any of this through.

(25-01-2016, 09:44 AM)WeAreScientists Wrote:
(25-01-2016, 09:33 AM)Xochipilli Wrote: Yeah as I recall the banning of plant products was mentioned in parliament but the scope of the bill is so wide and complex it really is unclear how it will work in practise.

As for medicines Nif - that's interesting in that it seems to suggest on the face of it any psychoactive plant or chem fall in the catagory of medicine if presented as such and the bill is essentially worthless! That would be nice. I simply don't have any legal understanding to see how it pans out (in fact if loopholes exist they need playing out and qualifying over time) but if something looks too good to be true it probably is

Well these are the same regulations that govern supplement products today. Perhaps it's why Holland & Barrett aren't too concerned. The reason they don't have to slap "NOT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION" on valerian root is because of those regulations.

The issue will come when things like kratom come into into question. If this ever went to court it'd be a very interesting case to follow. On one hand, kratom has a long history of traditional medical use. On the other hand, it's hard to deny it has recreational effects too. It would be in limbo between the psychoactive substances bill and the medicines regulations.

Even if kratom was mentioned in the debates they still won't name it specifically in legislation because that'd defeat the purpose of a blanket ban, so regardless this would still stand.

Yes - they removed an earlier exemption for herbal products as it's covered under the much wider medicines exemption in the bill as it now stands. Recreational effects don't bar something from being considered a medicine (anything not in schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations can be used on a patient medicinally by an appropriately licensed medical professional, including substances such as cocaine, heroin and PCP). The stance that the EU ruling takes is that a substance which can only be used as an intoxicant cannot be considered a medicine under the regulations.
Reply
#33
To be fair, nif, their only real goal is to make it difficult enough for vendors that they'll move out the UK. This bill will do that. Already Perfect Kratom is talking about closing down for the ban even though kratom is a grey area.

Realistically they know no one is going to put the required time and money into fighting the government to keep any of this stuff legal. And they also know that even if anyone tried they could just use TCDOs and the MoDA to specifically ban particular chems by name as they do now.

It's pointless trying to fight this, much better to wait until this thing inevitably falls on its face and hard enough that it's repealed. Northern Ireland's version didn't do shit and now they're moving towards full scale decriminalisation. The same will happen here, it'll be slow but it'll happen.
Who the fuck is Psychoactive Substances Bill and why is he taking all my drugs?
Reply
#34
(25-01-2016, 12:22 PM)WeAreScientists Wrote: To be fair, nif, their only real goal is to make it difficult enough for vendors that they'll move out the UK. This bill will do that. Already Perfect Kratom is talking about closing down for the ban even though kratom is a grey area.

Realistically they know no one is going to put the required time and money into fighting the government to keep any of this stuff legal. And they also know that even if anyone tried they could just use TCDOs and the MoDA to specifically ban particular chems by name as they do now.

It's pointless trying to fight this, much better to wait until this thing inevitably falls on its face and hard enough that it's repealed. Northern Ireland's version didn't do shit and now they're moving towards full scale decriminalisation. The same will happen here, it'll be slow but it'll happen.

Beyond its immediate effects on the industry, there's various aspects to the bill that should worry every retailer. With the repeal of the intoxicating substances act, solvents are also part of the bill. Spray cream contains nitrous oxide as a propellent. Various spices can be used for psychoactive effect. Garden centres carry any number of plants that can be used in that way. How exactly can any of them protect themselves legally? If someone ends up in hospital after eating brugmansia bought from a garden centre, are the police going to come calling to check if the garden centre was reckless in selling it? Retailers don't like uncertainty around what they can legally sell.
Reply
#35
That's a good argument, it'd be interesting to see if it's challenged from that end of things.
Who the fuck is Psychoactive Substances Bill and why is he taking all my drugs?
Reply
#36
(24-01-2016, 10:03 AM)WeAreScientists Wrote: Maybe 4NRX should sell Etizest. They'd make a killing.

They used to - it's where I was buying it before it became readily available in the UK. Unfortunately, it got controlled or regulated wherever they're based, Hong Kong I believe. As did zopiclone.

To the best of my knowledge, they don't presently sell anything that is a controlled substance in the UK, so I have left the reference to them intact.
Reply
#37
Yes 4nrx don't carry anything controlled. But still there is interesting stuff like Baclofen and Pregabalin and its dirt cheap. baclofen and Phenibut will be interesting. Will it be OK to import them for personal use, the 90 day rule. The legislation may be poorly thought out but am pretty sue no UK vendor will risk a court appearance. Its depressing.
Reply
#38
well I'm done


250 meclonazepam

250 pyrazolam

100 clonazolam

200 2mg diclazepam


Still have all of the benzos listed in my first post as I haven't taken any since posted. That is a lifetime supply of both functional and recreational for me.
Reply
#39
fuck , i need to stock up too , but i dont have the funds , if  i known earlier i would have done it.

It seems the goverment plays the same role as with cannabis , banning some possible useful medicines and letting crapshit like alcohol and tobacco legal.  But yea the least they had to do is regulate it somehow , aka not letting ulltra strong chems to be sold,low doses allowed only and stuff like that.
Reply
#40
Quote:Meaning of “psychoactive substance” 
(1) In this Act “psychoactive substance” means any substance which— 
(a) is capable of producing a psychoactive effect in a person who consumes it, and 
(b) is not an exempted substance (see section 3). 
(2)For the purposes of this Act a substance produces a psychoactive effect in a person if, by stimulating or depressing the person’s central nervous system, it affects the person’s mental functioning or emotional state; and references to a substance’s psychoactive effects are to be read accordingly.
(3)For the purposes of this Act a person consumes a substance if the person causes or allows the substance, or fumes given off by the substance, to enter the person’s body in any way.


Quote:SCHEDULE 1
Section 3 EXEMPTED SUBSTANCES

Controlled drugs
1 Controlled drugs (within the meaning of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971).
Medicinal products
2 Medicinal products for which either of the following is in force—
(a) a marketing authorisation;
(b) an Article 126a authorisation.
Terms used in this paragraph and in the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (S.I. 2012/1916) have the same meaning in this paragraph as they have in those Regulations.
3 Investigational medicinal products. “Investigational medicinal product” has the same meaning as in the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004 (S.I. 2004/1031) (see regulation 2 of those Regulations).
4 Homoeopathic medicinal products. “Homoeopathic medicinal product” has the same meaning as in the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (see regulation 8 of those Regulations).
5 Traditional herbal medicinal products. “Traditional herbal medicinal product” has the same meaning as in the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (see regulation 8 of those Regulations).

Alcohol
6 Alcohol or alcoholic products. In this paragraph— “alcohol” means ethyl alcohol, and “alcoholic product” means any product which— (a) contains alcohol, and (b) does not contain any psychoactive substance.
Nicotine and tobacco products
7 Nicotine.
8 Tobacco products. In this paragraph “tobacco product” means—
(a) anything which is a tobacco product within the meaning of the Tobacco Products Duty Act 1979 (see section 1 of that Act), and
(b) any other product which—
(i) contains nicotine, and
(ii) does not contain any psychoactive substance.
Caffeine
9 Caffeine or caffeine products.
In this paragraph “caffeine product” means any product which—
(a) contains caffeine, and
(b) does not contain any psychoactive substance.
Food
10 Any substance which—
(a) is ordinarily consumed as food, and
(b) does not contain a prohibited ingredient.
In this paragraph—
“food” includes drink;
“prohibited ingredient”, in relation to a substance, means any psychoactive substance—
(a) which is not naturally occurring in the substance, and
(b) the use of which in or on food is not authorised by an EU instrument.

This law is a mess. It will be illegal to sell many plants that are used for decoration but never used as food. For example theres many plants that contain tropane alkaloids or thujone which are definitely active. Theres also many alkaloids, glucosides or terpenes which are mildly psychoactive but would still fall under the definition of this law. Almost all plants contain some trace amount of beta-carboline / tryptamine all of which are undeniably active.

If this becomes enactet possession of almost any plant will be illegal.
Reply

Reddit   Facebook   Twitter  




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

   
DISCLAIMER
Any views or opinions posted by members are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the UKCR staff team.