Don't Take the Synthetic Hallucinogen "N-Bomb," County Cops Warn

Categories: Crime
25I legal acid.jpg
Image via
This is "N-Bomb," aka 25-I
St. Louis County cops are warning you: The synthetic hallucinogen "N-Bomb" -- a.k.a. "legal acid" and "25-I" -- is available here. And it could kill you. 

Their warning comes after undercover detectives from the county were able to purchase some in the area recently. (Can't tell from their e-mail whether or not it was an over-the-counter purchase; we'll update this post when they call us back).

It also comes after a report from KTVI Fox2 that a freshman student from Ursuline Academy took it on New Year's and it almost killed her.

The drug (chemical name: 2C-I-NBOMe) has already been banned in Virginia and Louisiana, but deaths have occurred in those two states as well as in Minnesota, California and North Dakota.

According to police, "N-bomb" is:
a derivative of mescaline, but is much more potent and deadly than similar predecessors. N-Bomb is a liquid that most commonly is soaked into blotter paper, which users put on their tongue.

What happens to some users, reportedly, is that they have seizures or start thrashing around violently, then die.

Here's an account of one death as reported by the Houston Chronicle:

Kevin Anthony Schoolmeyer was driving home to Friendswood from a party in June when the 21-year-old started to hit his friend sitting in the passenger seat. Suddenly, his limbs began to flail around, he punched the console and started ripping accessories from the vehicle's interior, according to an autopsy report. Shortly after that, he died.

And here's how a 24-year-old user in Louisana described to the Times-Picayune how it felt to take the drug at a music festival:

"It disorients you very, very quickly. Within 20 minutes, the lights from a stage at the other side of the festival are fully starting to take over your vision. It's very, very strong to the point of not wanting to move and you start panicking."



My Voice Nation Help
10 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
DrugsAreBadMMkay
DrugsAreBadMMkay

"Every time she would open her eyes she would see bright lights, so she had to keep her eyes closed," Alves said. "Her perception of sound changed. She thought she was whispering, but she was told she was screaming. She also had uncontrollable body movements and then she also had—which is the scariest part—difficulty breathing."

Have you ever thought about your blinking, and then you have to then think to blink or you won't?  Not much different from how it sounds, then this girls experience.

Roughly 1 person A DAY dies EVERY YEAR from gun deaths in Missouri and we shrug and call it tradition.  A teenage girl has a bad trip and its an epidemic.  Our lawmakers are sure to spring into action to thwart this public menace, but remember, DRUGS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!

12judges
12judges

There is absolutely no connection to what this article is referring to and gun violence and your argument is assinine.  For starters, taking drugs, any drugs, is not a freedom enshrined anywhere in the constitution.  Second, interstate and national sale, consumption, and liability for drugs is most definitely a power granted congress under their ability to regulate interstate commerce which incidentally is something they do to firearms as well through the FFL licensing and background check process.  Third, it is impossible for a gun to be misused, fire, or harm anyone without the direct action and responsibility of an individual.  Drugs produce a phramacological response free from choice once taken while most firearms will literally sit, undisturbed for hundreds of years, harming no one and being mostly used to punch holes in paper.

DrugsAreBadMMkay
DrugsAreBadMMkay

@12judges There is no connection between your comments and mine, you seem to have gone on a tangent.  I didn't mention the constitution and I didn't mention nor do I doubt the power of the legislature to regulate.  

The only connection to gun deaths and this article is our ASININE (spelled correctly) governmental belief that TOOLS FOR MURDER represents freedom, and substances that PEOPLE DECIDE to put into THEIR bodies is a crime.  

DRUGS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!

12judges
12judges

You're not wrong.  However the difference is I stated it implicitly whereas drugsarebadmmkay hints at it subly using coded language and analogy in every response by using "shrug and call it tradition", "lawmakers are sure to spring into action", "drugs don't kill people...etc..", and "tools for murder represents freedom".  Drugsarebadmmkay's points are littered with negativity regarding guns and drawing analogies between drug abuse and gun ownership as connected issues.  He/she has a right to feel negatively about guns, but the one issue has nothing to do with the other...the original point I made.

12judges
12judges

Congratulations on spelling correctly.  I hope that trading critical thinking for impeccable spelling skills has been worthwhile.

12judges
12judges

That was not all you said and you know it.  I do respect your views despite them being wrong and my argument with you is not a sign of disrespect.  If you take them that way you are the one who is unreasonable.  I am not a republican and party affiliation has nothing to do with this...your statements are full of assumptions.  We can agree on one thing, people die every day in this country mostly with a firearm.  You blame the gun, I blame the person.  Taking away firearms will not solve the epidemic of accepted violence on US streets.  Cutlural change is the only thing that can do that.

DrugsAreBadMMkay
DrugsAreBadMMkay

@12judges All I said that seemed to get you started was that 1 person dies everyday in Missouri from the wrong end of a gun.  You don't seem to want to respect that people may disagree with you, which is sad and indicative of Republican politics of today.

DRUGS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!


12judges
12judges

Sure...I'm the one that went off on tangent (insert sarcasm here).  And you're wrong, there is a significant difference between the two.  The decision to take drugs is free will, the garaunteed phramacological response they receive after they take them is not.  The decision to own a gun is free will, what people do with guns after they have them is still free will.  Unlike drugs the ownership of a gun does not predicate someone becoming unpredictable or surrendering their free will to a pharmacological response.  I suppose people could own drugs just so long as they didn't take them...but we both know that won't happen.  The connection your trying to make is pointless.  The freedom to own weapons and the freedom to take drugs are completely different.

Now Trending

St. Louis Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...