I'm not trolling. My cousin's friend did exactly this. She was on off her face on Ecstasy and wondering straight into oncoming traffic in front of all her friends whilst having a big smile on her face.

I see tourists wondering into oncoming traffic every day in Amsterdam, and most of them are not even high.

Seriously, if you take anything that inhibits your natural sense of danger and alertness, you should not be out on the streets. This kind of idiotic behavior by tourists is the excuse a conservative government in the Netherlands has abused to crack down on psychedelics, where previously there was absolutely no problem at all.

If irresponsible behavior is a reason to ban stuff, why don't we just ban alcohol, cars, electricity and sharp objects, all of which "cause" more harm than XTC.

Is that enough to make a national policy change and prohibit Ecstasy?

Here's someone who died because of walking into traffic while wearing an iPod: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1091715/Girl-14-kill... . Should we prohibit listening to music while walking?

Personally, I think both indicate that we should change social policy to reduce the number of cars, have strictly enforced speed limits, and place primary responsibility for such incidents on the driver of the vehicle.

The Dutch road traffic engineer Hans Monderman is famous for his "shared space" urban design, where he would "walk backwards into dense traffic to demonstrate that drivers would be sufficiently human not to run him over."

Why shouldn't we draw that conclusion, instead of prohibiting Ecstasy?

Ecstacy is not considered to be a classic psychedelic and does not fall under the category discussed in the article. Too bad for your cousin's friend but it's not a valid counterargument.

Is ecstasy really a psychedelic? It's not very similar to LSD or shrooms.

You might not be trolling, but you sound willfully ignorant.

Isn't there a law that says that anything reported as happening to anyone twice removed (friend of a friend) is always false?