Talk:Drug paraphernalia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A mortarboard This article is part of WikiProject Drug Policy, an attempt to improve Wikipedia's coverage of drug policy. Feel free to participate by editing this article or by visiting the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Light bulbs

light bulbs? How in the world would you use a light bulb to smoke with?

Watch "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"

in general, a freebase compound in placed on the bulb, which heats the compound past its vaporization temperature, producing alkyloid smoke.

A lightbulb can be converted to a crude vaporizer, which can be used to vaporize/partially pyrolize many substances, among them amphetamines, base cocaine, and cannabis. HoldtheMayo 03:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Exactly where did you get the picture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.122.222.231 (talk) 04:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Legitimate Product?

If a product was legitimate then would it necessarily be "paraphenalia"? Also, the tobacco pipe exemption really depends on what jurisdiction you are in.

Lame Entry Alert

Almost the entire text of this PARAPHERNALIA article is a reprint of a DEA fact-sheet.

[edit] Drug (i.e. nicotine) enforcement

  • The DEA can be understood to reflect the desires of the U.S. tobacco industry, which enables the U. S. government to collect over $US30 billion per year in tobacco taxes paid by the 45,000,000 addicted slave customers. (Most other nations, such as Pakistan, are similarly "addicted" to tobacco tax revenues.)
  • The term PARAPHERNALIA (paranoia + infernal + alien, get it?) is a slander directed at any alternative smoking method instead of the hot-burning overdose nicotine cigaret format (700 mg. every time you want a "smoke") upon which the tobacco industry profit margin is based.
  • The laws against marijuana are designed to protect the tobacco industry by delaying the popularization of "paraphernalia"-- i.e. its worst nightmare is that
  • With the legalization of cannabis the rational, conservative practice of using a vaporizer-- or, failing the money, a one-hitter or minitoke utensil will be legalized, on its coattails so to speak, and be adopted by masses of hotburning-overdose slave nicotine cigaret addicts thus exterminating the industry profit margin. A quarter-inch-diameter crater with a screen in it can permit twenty-eight separate 25-mg. servings from one typical commercial 700 mg. overdose cigaret.
  • Many cannabis users, fearing arrest and prosecution if caught in possession of "paraphernalia", settle for wasteful hot-burning "joints" and "blunts" which are easier to hide and dispose of. (Would you want your $600 Volcano vaporizer confiscated?) Hot-burning-overdose methods of smoking cannabis produce health damage which can be conveniently attributed to the cannabis, thus supporting the argument for repressive laws. They also precondition youthful smokers to the overdose smoking systems favored by the tobacco industry.
  • The "tobacco pipe exemption" viewed in the above context is self-explanatory. It also guarantees overdose, in that a typical tobacco pipe accommodates up to two (2) grams of herb, i.e. a youngster using cannabis, sucking hard enough to inhale all the smoke, would burn the herb hot enough to destroy most of the THC, and suffer health damage ignorantly and/or maliciously attributed to the cannabis.
  • Mixing cannabis with tobacco (as in "blunts", widely used by youngsters concealing their cannabis in a cigar-skin) can expedite profitable nicotine addictions.
  • The U.S. government, obeying its Big Tobackgo sponsor, bullies other nations through threats and coercion (economic sanctions) into following its line on cannabis prohibition and demonizing "paraphernalia" on grounds of association with cannabis (most recently Jamaica).Tokerdesigner (talk) 21:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral?

The article is VERY USA oriented, and is obviously anti-paraphernalia.

this article is almost completely lifted from DEA website, thus the bias. User:thechosenone021

The "Counter-point" section of this article is extremely opinionated against international rules regarding drug paraphernalia. I suggest that it be edited to be more objective.

The counter-point section of the article was as opinionated as the half of the entry it was meant to oppose.

This article is way too biased for displaying on wikipedia. Immidiate remake should occur.


I added the NPOV flag. Reason: Article is politically biased ("Political bias, including bias in favor of or against a particular political party, policy or candidate.", Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view). The following sentence makes this clear: "Today, law enforcement faces another challenge. With the advent of the Internet, criminals have greatly expanded their illicit sales to a worldwide market for drug paraphernalia.". Also, as the anonymous commenter above noted, extremely USA-oriented. Almost everywhere else, paraphernalia may be sold freely. Balou 22:29, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the "sale of paraphernalia" section, businesses that sell paraphernalia in-store or online are referred to as illicit. Most of these businesses are in fact quite legitimate, and have lawyers on staff to ensure that. Silverring06 16:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] worldwide instead of POV

If the issue is that the point of view is not held by all countries, the worldwide tag is better than NPOV. Rares 22:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC)