PoiSoNeD_CaNdY's Profile - Community Messages |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Apr 26, 2006 @ 5:33am. Posted in Never Go Horney Again!. |
 Coolness: 91765 | WTF!!!! THAT IS SICK! U PEOPLE DISGUST ME!!11 (ps. is shipping included?) |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sun Apr 23, 2006 @ 4:24pm. Posted in What are you thinking about now?. |
| Coolness: 91765 | how [ rave.ca ] makes an excellent procrastination tool. long live the seductive powers of the internet, and fuck school and exams. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sun Apr 23, 2006 @ 2:02pm. Posted in Do Meth / Shoot 12 nails into your head. |
| Coolness: 91765 | the moral of the story is: next time u shoot yourself in the head with a nailgun, have a bottle of advil handy. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sat Apr 22, 2006 @ 6:13am. Posted in Word Association Game. |
| Coolness: 91765 | sugardaddy |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Fri Apr 21, 2006 @ 5:51am. Posted in Marry/Fuck/Kill. |
| Coolness: 91765 | noam chomsky // condy rice (in the ass) // michael moore |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Apr 19, 2006 @ 11:18pm. Posted in work sucks. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Yah, theres enough fat in an obese American women to feed an entire African village for a month. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Apr 19, 2006 @ 6:28am. Posted in work sucks. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Originally posted by DJNEOFORM... Originally posted by PoiSoNeD CaNdY... Amen. While there are a lucky few people who genuinely enjoy their work, the vast majority of jobs suck. In quebec, it seems surprisingly easy to go on welfare, sell some pot / work under the table, and live fairly decently without asking "would u like fries with that" 235612436 times per day. if everyone did that.. there would be no welfare.. Working is a choice, not a neccesity. If you want to work, you get more money to purchase consumer junk. If you choose not to work, you learn to live without consumer junk. Its that simple. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Apr 19, 2006 @ 5:49am. Posted in thread. |
| Coolness: 91765 | bwhahahaha. I think I just coughed up a lung |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Apr 19, 2006 @ 4:30am. Posted in Rewire!. |
| Coolness: 91765 | I wasn't here for the first Rewire, so i wasn't sure what to expect.... but I was hella impressed to see an all-out, underground rave with 400+ people going absolutely insane! Very professionally organized what with the top-notch venue, BIG lazers, cool projections, and DJ's dropping the dopest tunes. Two very different vibes in the two rooms - nice mix of dnb, electro, etc in the laid back 2nd room, and all out RAVE in the steaming-hot, sweaty, packed main room. The crowd was a nice mix of oldschoolerz and fresh, candified newbies. Lots of glowstick action in the main room, some really good poi performances were on display. big up to vince, the dj's, and of course to everyone who let loose on the dancefloor and made this party as fun 4 everyone as it was. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Apr 17, 2006 @ 3:45am. Posted in work sucks. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Amen. While there are a lucky few people who genuinely enjoy their work, the vast majority of jobs suck. In quebec, it seems surprisingly easy to go on welfare, sell some pot / work under the table, and live fairly decently without asking "would u like fries with that" 235612436 times per day. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Thu Apr 13, 2006 @ 3:06am. Posted in Y do u think Alcohol , tobacco .... |
| Coolness: 91765 | Originally posted by MDC... Originally posted by PoiSoNeD CaNdY... Originally posted by MDC... ugh... think about what you're going to write before writing it please. im tired of reading ridiculous posts to reiterate my last post for those french-deficient readers: it's because they are legal that alcohol and cigarettes have probelms associated to them. if pot or e were legal, their consumption would be much greater and teh problems associated to them would be just as great (if not greater) than those associated with alcohol and cigs. everyone has access to alcohol and cigs and gambling, if everyone had access to hard drugs, there would certainly be more problems associated with these. You're making two huge assumptions here, which may very well be false. Assumption #1 - Making pot or E legal would increase their consumption This isn't neccesarily true. People have many other reasons why they choose to use or not use a substance other than its legality. In fact, making something illegal might cause its use to rise since people could do it as a form of rebellion or do make a badass image for themselves. Nowdays, more young people are trying pot than cigarretes, DESPITE the fact that pot is illegal and more expensive. Furthermore, studies have shown that kids binge drink more often at the ages of 16-17 when alcohol is less available to them, than they do at ages 18+ when its legal to drink. Finally, even though pot is quasi-legal and widely available in Amserdam, the prevalance of use is not greater there than in a culturally similar American city. So your assumption that legalization = increased use just doesn't hold up. Assumption #2: Cigarettes and alchohol are safer than illegal drugs, its only b/c they are more widely used that their are more problems Despite the overwhelming proportion of all substance-related deaths that are a result of drinking and smoking, you do have a point that obviously you have to adjust for the number of people that drink or smoke vs. the number that use other drugs. Even adjusting for this number, however, you'll likely find that of all the drugs that one can possibly use, legal or illegal, alcohol and tobacco are among the worst: - tobacco is the most addictive substance known to man, more so than heroin, crystal meth, or cocaine - alcohol is about as addictive than cocaine, and four times more addictive than LSD, ecstasy, or pot - trying to stop heavy drinking can result in withdrawal symptoms leading to death, one of the few drugs for which this is true So, your second assumption is false as well - the reason why alcohol and tobacco cause so many deaths is not only because they are widely used, but because they are all also two of the very worst drugs available, both legal or otherwise. a few quick points. Tobacco... not addictive. Nicotine is. But that was probably a quick-typing error. Next, the binge drinking when you're younger thing. Yeah, that holds when you do, indeed, gain access to alcohol at a younger age. I have plenty of friends who refused to drink until they were well over 18 and it is only once they began to drink that the binge drinking would commence. The age isn't the factor, but the time elapsed from the beginning of your drinking life. As for weed being tried more than tobacco. You have to look at the cultural and evironmental reasons behind this. Tobacco, a widely used drug, has been getting a bad rep. lately (rightfully). And therefore, there are thousands of ad campaigns against their use. (as much as you would like to refute that ads have an effect on you they do if youre bombarded with them from a young age) So kids are quickly turned away from tobacco. Even at a young age. Weed, on the other hand, has been given a positive spin as of late due to people wanting its legalisation. And it is also very prevalent in contemporary (deemed) cool things. Such as music, videogames, movies, television. More songs now refer to smoking weed now than ever before. My 8 year old cousin sings songs about being high and he doesn't even know what that means yet (or does he?). So the cultural influences play a HUGE part in that. Moving along. You're claiming that even if an adjustment was made for the (much) more widespread use of drugs, the negative effects of these would still pale in comparison to cigs or alcohol? I highly doubt that. Assuming all other things equal, if you were to assume that the same number of people smoked as took e (and as often, the amount consumed has to be taken into consideration too, cigarettes are a SLOW killer), I am fairly certain there would many more deaths from so called "hard" drugs as alcohol and cigs. People driving drunk is bad. Imagine driving on e?? anyway. these are all just my speculations. in no way are these things fact. At least you acknowledge that what you're claiming are only speculations. More to the point, have you considered that perhaps the reason why you think illegal drugs are worse than legal ones has nothing to do with the reality of the situation, and everything to do with the fact the Canadian and American governments spend BILLIONS of dollars in trying to convince people of the harm of illegal drugs - through scientifically dubious studies, one-sided messages, and so-called "education" campaigns. The fact is that even in places where ecstasy use is rampant, such as the U.K. where its not uncommon to down a couple of E's with your pint at any pub, the number of ecstasy-related deaths pale in comparison with those caused by nicotine and alcohol. And the fact that you suggest that someone driving on E is worse than someone driving drunk just shows your lack of information regarding drugs. Anyone who's tried both knows that its far, far safer to drive on ecstasy (which increases alertness and sensitivity) than alcohol (which induces confusion, slows reaction times, and increases agressiveness). |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Thu Apr 13, 2006 @ 2:55am. Posted in Happy Birfday Kafwin!!!!111. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Happy birthday! May u get sloshed and see twenty one stars |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Thu Apr 13, 2006 @ 2:50am. Posted in How would you describe paranoia ?. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Paranoia involves excessive and irrational fears. Like beleiving that your friends are plotting against you behind your back, or that strangers are staring at you on the street. Fear can be a useful emotion, because it alerts you to dangers and warns you to avoid them, but out of whack brain chemistry can cause you to perceive danger where none exists - kind of like a smoke alarm that goes off every time you burn a piece of toast. One last thing kids.... its not paranoia if they really are out to get you! |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Tue Apr 11, 2006 @ 9:16pm. Posted in Y do u think Alcohol , tobacco .... |
| Coolness: 91765 | Originally posted by MDC... ugh... think about what you're going to write before writing it please. im tired of reading ridiculous posts to reiterate my last post for those french-deficient readers: it's because they are legal that alcohol and cigarettes have probelms associated to them. if pot or e were legal, their consumption would be much greater and teh problems associated to them would be just as great (if not greater) than those associated with alcohol and cigs. everyone has access to alcohol and cigs and gambling, if everyone had access to hard drugs, there would certainly be more problems associated with these. You're making two huge assumptions here, which may very well be false. Assumption #1 - Making pot or E legal would increase their consumption This isn't neccesarily true. People have many other reasons why they choose to use or not use a substance other than its legality. In fact, making something illegal might cause its use to rise since people could do it as a form of rebellion or do make a badass image for themselves. Nowdays, more young people are trying pot than cigarretes, DESPITE the fact that pot is illegal and more expensive. Furthermore, studies have shown that kids binge drink more often at the ages of 16-17 when alcohol is less available to them, than they do at ages 18+ when its legal to drink. Finally, even though pot is quasi-legal and widely available in Amserdam, the prevalance of use is not greater there than in a culturally similar American city. So your assumption that legalization = increased use just doesn't hold up. Assumption #2: Cigarettes and alchohol are safer than illegal drugs, its only b/c they are more widely used that their are more problems Despite the overwhelming proportion of all substance-related deaths that are a result of drinking and smoking, you do have a point that obviously you have to adjust for the number of people that drink or smoke vs. the number that use other drugs. Even adjusting for this number, however, you'll likely find that of all the drugs that one can possibly use, legal or illegal, alcohol and tobacco are among the worst: - tobacco is the most addictive substance known to man, more so than heroin, crystal meth, or cocaine - alcohol is about as addictive than cocaine, and four times more addictive than LSD, ecstasy, or pot - trying to stop heavy drinking can result in withdrawal symptoms leading to death, one of the few drugs for which this is true So, your second assumption is false as well - the reason why alcohol and tobacco cause so many deaths is not only because they are widely used, but because they are all also two of the very worst drugs available, both legal or otherwise. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Apr 10, 2006 @ 11:39pm. Posted in WTF? is this true. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Originally posted by DMTIO... I OD'ed on 2 pills, they were about 30 mg 2c-I each. No fucking shit, 60mg of 2c-I is an insane dose. Next time it might not be a bad idea to do a little research beforehand, especially when trying research chemicals. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Tue Apr 4, 2006 @ 3:06pm. Posted in A Very Lalla Birthday. |
| Coolness: 91765 | happy bday you ole fart! |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sun Mar 26, 2006 @ 3:06pm. Posted in 2C-B drug Report. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Bring it on! |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Fri Mar 17, 2006 @ 3:25pm. Posted in Protest Against Police Brutality. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Originally posted by DJNEOFORM... Instead of protesting violence in the street by starting riots.. why not actually try lobbying the government to have stricter rules enforced on officers? This is a typically naive responce to the matter of police brutality, but is flawed in several important ways. First of all, many of the typical police actions that the protesters are demonstrating against (such as racial profiling, violence towards street kids, etc) are already against the rules of what police are allowed to do...but who exactly do you complain to if you are the target of police criminality? the Police?!??! They obviously have an interest in protecting their own. Maybe a lawyer or reporter that is the victim of police abuse might generate the neccesary publicity to force the police to examine their own ranks, but what about society's marginilized? What chance do you think that a criminal investigation would be opened by the police against one of their members, based on the word of a street kid, a squeegee punk, or a sex worker? Therefore, police KNOW that in dealing with society's marginalized, they have all the power and the victims of their abuse are utterly powerless, liberating the police to pour out all their hostility, violence, and contempt onto the poor and disadvantaged (whether in practices legal or not) without any consequences or accountability. So that is what the protest was about. By trashing cars, yelling slogans, and vandalizing corporate businesses, protesters gained the ability to have their voice heard and to symbolically destroy symbols of upper-middle class (bourgoise) indulgence, which comes at the expense of the vast majority of people, supporting the power structure which enable the police to protect the assets of the wealthy, while brutalizing and harassing the marginalized, poor and disadvantaged. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Thu Mar 16, 2006 @ 5:12pm. Posted in Protest Against Police Brutality. |
| Coolness: 91765 | As long as you look, act, and dress "respectively", you'll probably never have problems with the Montreal police....but those that (for whatever reason) choose to dress alternatively, hand out on street corners, or engage in other non-normative behaviours are frequently targeted for harassment by the pigs. There have also been a few suspicious deaths involving the police. I think that everyone, even if they are not the subject of police harassment, should consider how the marginalized of society are dealt with by the police, and should stand up for them when the police overstep their boundaries. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Thu Mar 16, 2006 @ 4:57pm. Posted in Protest Against Police Brutality. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Was anyone else from this site there? Cars were trashed, bottles broken, beer and spirits guzzled, police taunted, garbage lit aflame, pedestrians terrified, rocks were thrown, pepper sprayed, arrests made.... basically, it was one hell of a good time! |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Mar 15, 2006 @ 9:49pm. Posted in New in town, need advice. |
| Coolness: 91765 | |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Mar 13, 2006 @ 3:15pm. Posted in i went. |
| Coolness: 91765 | theres no E in PLUR!@ |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Mar 13, 2006 @ 3:13pm. Posted in Fuck, can anyone help me?. |
| Coolness: 91765 | way to de-select the stupid genes from our human gene pool!!11 |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Mar 13, 2006 @ 3:05pm. Posted in The Battle of the fat. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Originally posted by PURPLE LEE... Or is that our deit does not reflect how our bodies are made: Long time ago we had to fight for our food. Humans are genetically hard-wired to enjoy the taste of rich, fatty foods....the reason is that during the hunter-gatherer era, high-protein, high-fat foods (like animal meat) were hard to come by, so whenever you'd be lucky enough to run into some juicy fresh animal meat, you'd be damned sure to eat it. of course, the problem is that nowadays rich, fatty foods are EVERYWHERE, and because our genes make us enjoy the taste of such foods, we eat way more of it then we should....enter corporations that know that people like the taste of fat, thereby designing their food products accordingly, and you have a recipe for massively expanding wastelines, blood clots, heart disease, fat jokes, ophra winfrey diet books, etc etc |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Mar 13, 2006 @ 2:56pm. Posted in The Great K Debate.... |
| Coolness: 91765 | jeez, high dose ketamine is crazy enough without the addition of an anticholinergic. any word on whether the amount of the anticholinergic in ketalar is sufficient to cause delerium in a thereputic dose (say, 100mg IM) of K? i've had some pretty delerious K trips, but never thought that it was caused by another substance. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Mar 13, 2006 @ 2:47pm. Posted in ShyFx @ The Foundry. |
| Coolness: 91765 | much RESPECT to hustler, corey and co. for bringin in a major headliner and doing an awesome job on the promotion. seriously, it seemed as if every blank concrete surface on the entire montreal island had that familiar ALL ABOARD post plastered on it, and it showed in the large and diverse crowd that turned up. was funny watching dnb newbs trying to bump'n'grind to shyfx, but maybe they'll get hooked and be like, so where can i hear some more of this dnb shizness?!! thumbs way up on the large, spacy and airy venue, shame it had to shut down so early tho. at this moment my palms are sweaty just pondering what future events might be hatched up in the diabolically ambitions minds of afterdark etcetera, who could imagine that T.dot headz would be flocking to montreal for a dnb event? |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Mar 8, 2006 @ 3:20pm. Posted in Ghb. |
| Coolness: 91765 | i want some too |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Tue Mar 7, 2006 @ 4:22pm. Posted in My Crash- warning nasty pics. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Dayum, that looks painful. Hope the recovery is going well and that you'll get rich off that ontarian bastard. I remember u telling me how being a bike courier is one of the top 10 most dangerous jobs around, you're a true warrior for braving those streets day in and day out. peace! |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Fri Mar 3, 2006 @ 6:33pm. Posted in Hypocrite.... |
| Coolness: 91765 | beer in one hand + joint in the other = bliss |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Fri Feb 24, 2006 @ 10:20am. Posted in Anne and greg got Married??. |
| Coolness: 91765 | wise words, sam. i don't know u that well, but loosing someone you love has got to be one of the toughest moments, its something that can make pretty much anyone crazy. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Fri Feb 24, 2006 @ 10:17am. Posted in b0nne fete GEN!!!!!!!!!!!1!!1!. |
| Coolness: 91765 | happy bday gen! keep on spreadin' the love xoxoxoxo |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Tue Feb 21, 2006 @ 2:43am. Posted in the Digital Playhouse. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Wow...i'm literally in a state of fuckin AWE just contemplating the spirit and generousity that went into making this party happen. Seriously, u guys have restored my FAITH in the human species. Great industrial venue, and there was even a trampoline! Shout outs to all the oldskool ravewave crew that came out for this night, and for all the new people that added a fresh vibe. This night will be remembered. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Thu Feb 9, 2006 @ 5:37am. Posted in In Loving Memory. |
| Coolness: 91765 | Mike was truly a larger-than-life guy. Its sad that he still isn't here with us, but just reading this thread is a testament to how many people loved him, and how many lives he was able to touch during the time he was here. Through our love and memories, he continues to live on. RIP Mike |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Jan 30, 2006 @ 1:55pm. Posted in twisted wave. |
| Coolness: 91765 | I was kinda sceptical at first about the idea of mixing so many genres of music...but RaveDave proved me flat wrong. Honestly, this was the best rave I've been to in months, and I emphasize the word RAVE...glowsticks, candy bracelets, pillz, goo, sweat, love, E-massages, cracked out mornings, exactly as it should be. One of the most friendly vibes I've felt in a long time. The night went flew by in a frantic blur of furious beats, swirling hallucinations, intimate conversations, and new friendships. Peace, love, unity, and respect, there aint no irony here. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Jan 4, 2006 @ 4:41pm. Posted in Expand your mind... |
| Coolness: 91765 | Whoa....way many bright colors. Do not click on that link unless you are wearing sunglasses. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Jan 4, 2006 @ 4:36pm. Posted in On star.....est-ce normal?. |
| Coolness: 91765 | I don't understand french so I have no clue what this thread is about, but this kind of speed has made me actually see shit that wasn't there. Walking down an allyway, I saw, out of the corner of my eye, a cat jumping up to a chain link fence. Turned out to be a plastic bag blowing in the wind. tTrippyy... |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Wed Dec 7, 2005 @ 2:04am. Posted in Are you suffering from homosexuality?. |
| Coolness: 91765 | pretty funny shit, its obviously a joke |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Fri Nov 25, 2005 @ 5:15pm. Posted in The Great K Debate.... |
| Coolness: 91765 | Uppers and downers are classifications of drugs, and classifications are just labels used to simplify the world. Every drug is different, but some are relatively similar to each other in terms of effects and how they work on the brain. For example, speed and coke both give a sense of alertness, confidence, and energy, and work by releasing dopamine in the brain. So it makes sense to come up with a classification like "uppers" or "stimulants" to describe those and similar drugs. But trying to group all drugs as either uppers or downers is pretty useless since (a) many drugs don't fall neatly into either category and (b) you would add up having drugs in the same category that have NOTHING in common with each other, which defeats the purpose of classification in the first place. K can be stimulating - do small bumps over the course of a party and you'll be dancing all night - but a large dose will knock you out. So, obviously, K doesn't clearly fit into either uppers or downers. In addition, any classification system that puts K in the same category as H (if you put it with the downers) or coke (if you put it with the uppers) is pretty useless, since K is totally different from either H or coke. So maybe we need more specific classifications - I think some reasonable categories are: stimulants ex coke, speed, meth opiates ex heroin, opium, morphine, various pharmecuticals tryptamine psychedelics ex mushrooms, LSD, DMT phenylthymine psychedelics ex mescaline, 2c-b, 2ct7 psychedelic amphetamines ex MDMA, MDA dissociative anesthetics ex PCP, K, DXM barbituates ex valium, xanax |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Mon Nov 21, 2005 @ 11:02am. Posted in The Great K Debate.... |
| Coolness: 91765 | Originally posted by DEMEZRIEL... Hmm yes I guess there could be potential addiction with K, but not to the degree of coke or downers. I agree with the rest of your post, but some people can get really addicted to K. Like you said, its a feeling of floating beyond the physical world, and for people who want to escape from something, K might be just a lil bit too good. |
| » PoiSoNeD_CaNdY replied on Sun Nov 13, 2005 @ 10:15pm. Posted in 5-meo-DMT: Doors Best Left Closed. |
| Coolness: 91765 | i read it; theres some interesting speculation in it, and its an interesting read, but the research done so far is not nearly enough to seriously begin to answer some of the questions that are raised if i can dig up my copy, i'd be willing to lend it |
PoiSoNeD_CaNdY's Profile - Community Messages | [ Top Of Page ] |
