I honestly didn't think this was going to happen for another 10 years minimum, well after there were only two or three holdout states where it wasn't legal in any form.
https://apnews.com/article/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8
WOW - 16Yr old me and my tye dyed Phish T-Shirt is amazed.
While I really don't care about the drug itself, I am a little..... concerned.... about another gov't agency, not elected or with any real oversight making blanket changes without congressional approval.
Mr_Asa said:I honestly didn't think this was going to happen for another 10 years minimum, well after there were only two or three holdout states where it wasn't legal in any form.
https://apnews.com/article/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8
12 states still held cannabis as illegal. That's more than 2 or 3.
In reply to bobzilla :
I worded that poorly.
10 years and/or until only 2-3 states were holding out.
Hey, just in time for it to be 10 times more powerful than it used to be and maybe almost deserving it's schedule 1 classification!
bobzilla said:While I really don't care about the drug itself, I am a little..... concerned.... about another gov't agency, not elected or with any real oversight making blanket changes without congressional approval.
The DEA was always responsible for classifying the "schedule" of drugs, with the assistance of the FDA. It was never the responsibility of congress. The DEA is under the Executive branch.
As noted, this does not *legalize* marijuana. That remains a legislative issue.
In reply to bobzilla :
I have no real dog in the mj fight either, but I actually think it is a good thing that non-elected officials actually run stuff.
Imagine how much the armed forces wouldn't get done if all the decisions makers acted and decided based on 1 of 2 opposing views divided down some political lines? Or the army corp of engineers, or the IRS, etc etc etc.
There is some stuff that should be done by elected folks and some that shouldn't. Maybe there is an argument here that this specific thing is being done by the wrong group?
Beer Baron 🍺 said:bobzilla said:While I really don't care about the drug itself, I am a little..... concerned.... about another gov't agency, not elected or with any real oversight making blanket changes without congressional approval.
The DEA was always responsible for classifying the "schedule" of drugs, with the assistance of the FDA. It was never the responsibility of congress. The DEA is under the Executive branch.
As noted, this does not *legalize* marijuana. That remains a legislative issue.
Not always, only since the creation of the DEA in 1973. There is a lot of history and tradition that precedes these alphabet agencies.
aircooled said:Hey, just in time for it to be 10 times more powerful than it used to be and maybe almost deserving it's schedule 1 classification!
Schedule 1, for most dangerous drugs considered to have no "medical value" and therefore forbidding the same studies people have demanded to make changes to the laws for decades?
While meth and cocaine are still schedule 2?
While pain docs are still passing out fentanyl patches and lollipops like candy?
Schedule 3 is an interesting choice. This could actually do more harm than good to the legitimate medical industry in the near to mid term timelines.
For reference (realistically, marijuana, in it's current form, might even rank as a schedule II):
Schedule I
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote.
Schedule II
Schedule II drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a high potential for abuse, with use potentially leading to severe psychological or physical dependence. These drugs are also considered dangerous. Some examples of Schedule II drugs are: combination products with less than 15 milligrams of hydrocodone per dosage unit (Vicodin), cocaine, methamphetamine, methadone, hydromorphone (Dilaudid), meperidine (Demerol), oxycodone (OxyContin), fentanyl, Dexedrine, Adderall, and Ritalin
Schedule III
Schedule III drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence. Schedule III drugs abuse potential is less than Schedule I and Schedule II drugs but more than Schedule IV. Some examples of Schedule III drugs are: products containing less than 90 milligrams of codeine per dosage unit (Tylenol with codeine), ketamine, anabolic steroids, testosterone
Schedule IV
Schedule IV drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a low potential for abuse and low risk of dependence. Some examples of Schedule IV drugs are: Xanax, Soma, Darvon, Darvocet, Valium, Ativan, Talwin, Ambien, Tramadol
Schedule V
Schedule V drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with lower potential for abuse than Schedule IV and consist of preparations containing limited quantities of certain narcotics. Schedule V drugs are generally used for antidiarrheal, antitussive, and analgesic purposes. Some examples of Schedule V drugs are: cough preparations with less than 200 milligrams of codeine or per 100 milliliters (Robitussin AC), Lomotil, Motofen, Lyrica, Parepectolin
"Happy birthday, Willie!"
aircooled said:For reference (realistically, marijuana, in it's current form, might even rank as a schedule II):
Schedule I
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote.
Schedule II
Schedule II drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a high potential for abuse, with use potentially leading to severe psychological or physical dependence. These drugs are also considered dangerous. Some examples of Schedule II drugs are: combination products with less than 15 milligrams of hydrocodone per dosage unit (Vicodin), cocaine, methamphetamine, methadone, hydromorphone (Dilaudid), meperidine (Demerol), oxycodone (OxyContin), fentanyl, Dexedrine, Adderall, and Ritalin
Schedule III
Schedule III drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence. Schedule III drugs abuse potential is less than Schedule I and Schedule II drugs but more than Schedule IV. Some examples of Schedule III drugs are: products containing less than 90 milligrams of codeine per dosage unit (Tylenol with codeine), ketamine, anabolic steroids, testosterone
Schedule IV
Schedule IV drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a low potential for abuse and low risk of dependence. Some examples of Schedule IV drugs are: Xanax, Soma, Darvon, Darvocet, Valium, Ativan, Talwin, Ambien, Tramadol
Schedule V
Schedule V drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with lower potential for abuse than Schedule IV and consist of preparations containing limited quantities of certain narcotics. Schedule V drugs are generally used for antidiarrheal, antitussive, and analgesic purposes. Some examples of Schedule V drugs are: cough preparations with less than 200 milligrams of codeine or per 100 milliliters (Robitussin AC), Lomotil, Motofen, Lyrica, Parepectolin
Know what stands out to me? In that link, and the two US Codes linked to on the page, none of them really list what "abuse" is.
It seems the definition is left as an exercise to the reader.
I've never been a user, nor do i pick a side on the politics of drug legislation, but I do agree with this sentiment: “Criminal records for marijuana use and possession have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities ... Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana."
According to internet sources, American police make over over 1 million drug possession arrests each year, many of which lead to prison sentences. The USA holds about 20% of the world's prison population (1.9 million people) at a system-wide cost of at least $182 billion each year.
nderwater said:I've never been a user, nor do i pick a side on the politics of drug legislation, but I do agree with this sentiment: “Criminal records for marijuana use and possession have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities ... Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana."
According to internet sources, American police make over over 1 million drug possession arrests each year, many of which lead to prison sentences. The USA holds about 20% of the world's prison population (1.9 million people) at a system-wide cost of at least $182 billion each year.
Hrm. I'm gonna listen to some S.O.A.D. on the drive home, I think
Good job and about time. I don't necessarily want Mary Jane made legal like cigarettes or booze and sold at the local 7-11 but decriminalized so that each of us can just buy seeds and grow our own to consume in the privacy of our own homes and be left alone.
I'm not sure where I stand on this any more.
As a (mostly) non-user I've always been supportive of legalization. I don't care what people do recreationally in their leisure time.
As a person who interacts with quite a few people who use MJ regularly both at work and in my social circles, I also know that it's not harmless. It impacts both the users and the people around them.
I recognize the medicinal value, but I know very few people who use it for medical reasons.
I'm not sure where I stand any more. I know it helps my dog.
That would explain why that stupid pot stock I never got around to selling is up 40% today (so far). Still underwater, but it's a start.
In reply to bobzilla :
Congress can use the review act codified at 5 U.S.C. §§801- 808 if they want to overturn the action by the DEA. That will make it impossible to reclassify in the future without passing a law.
It's a non-issue and always has been when it comes to regulating agencies because all it takes is a simple majority vote by congress.
As for changing the schedule, it's probably overall a good thing given what John Ehrlichman, under Nixon, explicitly said about why it was a schedule 1 substance to begin with. It still needs to be regulated, obviously, but not as schedule 1.
In reply to The0retical :
To clarify, you are saying that Congress can easily block this by action, not that it requires action to make it happen, right?
I ask because, recently at least, Congress is super good at having things happen by in-action and really bad at getting things to happen by action.
LOL at schedule 4 "low risk of abuse and dependence like Xanax, Ambien, and Valium"
Where's Adderall? Maybe that's sold as a health food vitamin now?
Good. Not a user, but it is insane that it is classified higher than cocaine or heroin.
I hope they pass the related banking legislation so that marijuana businesses following all the rules and paying their taxes (at the state level, anyway) have access to commercial finance options like any other business.
nderwater said:I've never been a user, nor do i pick a side on the politics of drug legislation, but I do agree with this sentiment: “Criminal records for marijuana use and possession have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities ... Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana."
According to internet sources, American police make over over 1 million drug possession arrests each year, many of which lead to prison sentences. The USA holds about 20% of the world's prison population (1.9 million people) at a system-wide cost of at least $182 billion each year.
Those numbers are for all drug possession charges, crack/meth/cocaine/mj etc.
From the chart on your link:
1.9M total in jails. 861,000 Violent criminals, so assaults, murder, rape, sexual assault etc. 260,000 for theft/burglary. 362,000 incarcerated for drugs. How many states no longer prosecute for drug possession? I think it's 16-20 that either do not prosecute or they are fined misdemeanors. So while there are 1 million arrests, there aren't nearly that many convictions resulting in jail time, so it's a little misleading.
aircooled said:In reply to The0retical :
To clarify, you are saying that Congress can easily block this by action, not that it requires action to make it happen, right?
I ask because, recently at least, Congress is super good at having things happen by in-action and really bad at getting things to happen by action.
Honestly inaction by congress is the same as an action by congress IMO. They did not wholly divest their rule making power in 5 USC to executive branch agencies, so they can reign them in, or dissolve them, at any time should they wish to do so.
I'm rather of the opinion that they don't want to, since the only way that the modern government and economy keeps running is by regulatory agency. Agencies are simply convenient scapegoats for whichever side is in office. Congresscritters just neglect to mention the part about how they have oversight and veto power in sound bites.
Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:LOL at schedule 4 "low risk of abuse and dependence like Xanax, Ambien, and Valium"
Where's Adderall? Maybe that's sold as a health food vitamin now?
I can tell you Tramadol is absolutely worthless for post surgery pain. Might as well take an aspirin and call it a day.
Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:LOL at schedule 4 "low risk of abuse and dependence like Xanax, Ambien, and Valium"
Where's Adderall? Maybe that's sold as a health food vitamin now?
Adderall is a schedule 2 substance, same as cocaine, meth, and heroin. Which just tells you how insane weed was as schedule 1.
You'll need to log in to post.
