A list of puns related to "Controlled Substances Act"
The CSA of 1970 is basically the law in the US that makes drugs illegal. All drugs listed on the CSA are subject to various restrictions based on the schedule they're placed in:
Abuse in this case is defined as when you use a drug in a way that harms yourself or others.
In general, the higher a drug's schedule is, the fewer people are allowed the access it and the harsher the penalties are for getting caught with it.
That first point is crucial because it essentially blocks all independent research of higher scheduled drugs, which is harmful for a variety of reasons.
The classifications are also notoriously bullshit: marijuana, LSD, and psilocybin mushrooms are all schedule 1, yet have very slim to no addiction potential, and have no known overdose (you cannot overdose on any of these three drugs AFAIK). Meanwhile cocaine and meth (both highly addictive and notoriously deadly stimulants) are both in schedule 2, even though cocaine is very rarely used in the medical scene these days and meth is usually passed on in favor of Adderall and Ritalin.
It's time for this law to be abolished once and for all. Having a blanket law covering all drugs is stupid. It'd be better if each drug just had it's own individual law, or even if they separated medical drugs from recreational drugs (that is, essentially making two different laws for each group of drugs).
Here's how I'd do it. Instead of blanket prohibition, each drug would be individually researched and evaluated to see the effects of the drug on both users and the people around them.
If it's decided that the drug and/or the majority of its users cause no overall harm to society, it will be legally available as a recreational substance. Laws regarding amounts you can posess/sell, who's allowed to manufacture it, what age you can buy/use it, where you're allowed to use it, etc, would be tailored to the specific drug in question. This is what I believe would happen to drugs like weed, LSD, psilocybin mushrooms, and to a lesser extent MDMA and (maybe) cocaine.
If it's decided that the drug and/or the majorit
... keep reading on reddit ➡Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) to remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act.
What do you think each drug would be in for?
What would daily life in this prison be like?
Who would the gangs be?
If a drug was released, what do you think it would do to celebrate?
I'm writing a research paper on the history of cannabis prohibition in the United States as well as the possible pros and cons to nationwide legalization for my English class, and this thought just occurred to me. This is much different than what I learned in civics, as the way I understand it is if something is federally outlawed, states no longer could decriminalize it within their state. Is state legislative control of cannabis and THC allowed to happen simply due to apathy from the federal government, as cannabis prohibition was started by California to begin with in 1913?
Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. David Cicilline [D-RI1]
This bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and House Committee on the Judiciary which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.
Rep. David Cicilline [D-RI1] is a member of the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In an interview with author Dan Baum, former Nixon aide and watergate conspirator said the following:
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
So that’s it. You have a government that created a fear, an irrational fear of hippies and blacks, to protect their power. 50 years later, look what it has evolved into to. That alone should be enough for the bureaucrats in charge to review current drug policy. But now that the war on drugs along with the treatment industry have become such money magnets, I don’t know that things will ever change... In my lifetime at least.
One more thing. Is it not the least bit ironic that the president who initiated the whole “war on drugs” principal is also the one who opened up China to the west? Do I even need to add where all of the illicit fentanyl originates?
Edit: Geez. Just realized I left out who the quote was actually from. It was said by White House aide John Ehrlichman during an interview with the aforementioned Dan Baum.
Happy 4/20. I figured it's a timely conversation to have. It's been interesting for me to watch the disparate micro economies that have popped up around the country to enable the manufacture and sale of marijuana in specific states.
To my mind people are gonna do what people do, and lots of people smoke the reefer - myself included (though I prefer to ingest it honestly.) The law will not change that. But I am also interested in the practical effects that descheduling marijuana might have.
My brother actually works in the MJ industry in California these days. He's pretty decidedly against federal marijuana legalization for purely selfish reasons. I disagree on principle, but I also understand that federal legalization/production will disrupt a lot of the economies that have sprung up over the years.
In a world where alcohol is not a scheduled substance, I personally see no reason for marijuana to be scheduled either. I would be fine with it being regulated in much the same way. 21 years of age to purchase (I suppose some states may say 18?), (state) penalties for supplying to minors, etc. Though I would prefer people be able to grow their own, even if they have kids; similar to how I can have alcohol in my home even if I have kids. Either way, these regulations would be imposed and enforced by the state, county, or city; not the federal government.
Just checking in on the topic. I know reddit is very pro-marijuana in general, but I suspect there might be some dissenting voices as well. I have not followed the fight to legalize it for at least a decade, so I'm pretty behind on the details of what's what these days. Still waiting for my state of New Hampshire (Live free or die, indeed) to legalize it, though we have (fairly restricted) medical usage and have largely decriminalized possession.
Random thoughts:
Even if federally descheduled, can't states still have laws regulating it? Is legalizing marijuana a conservative win in this regard? It gives the power back to the states.
If descheduled, places that grow and sell marijuana can have access to proper banking. My understanding is the reason they cannot process bank card transactions is due to federal scheduling? They all have workarounds anyway in terms of POS purchases, but not sure how it effects companies 'behind the scenes'.
Should marijuana be covered by health insurance?
Even if legalized, employers are still presumably able to screen for it and deny employment
Introduced: Sponsor: Sen. Edward “Ed” Markey [D-MA]
This bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions which will consider it before sending it to the Senate floor for consideration.
1 cosponsor is on that committee.
Context: The CSA was signed into law by Nixon in 1970 and serves as the basis for US federal policy on the possession, use, and transportation of illegal drugs, as well as the avenue for defining what drugs are illegal under federal law. The CSA has come into conflict with state laws legalizing the possession and intrastate distribution of marijuana. While still illegal under federal law, this has largely gone unenforced by the federal government where it contradicts applicable state laws.
Should the CSA be maintained, and if so, should it be enforced in contradiction to state laws? Should it be repealed, effectively delegating regulation of controlled substances to the states? Or should it be amended in some way that does neither fully?
Submission statement: This is the second post attempting to center debate on a particular public policy, in an attempt to focus discussion on policy rather than broad paradigms.
Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) to remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act.
The CSA of 1970 is basically the law in the US that makes drugs illegal. All drugs listed on the CSA are subject to various restrictions based on the schedule they're placed in:
Abuse in this case is defined as when you use a drug in a way that harms yourself or others.
In general, the higher a drug's schedule is, the fewer people are allowed the access it and the harsher the penalties are for getting caught with it.
That first point is crucial because it essentially blocks all independent research of higher scheduled drugs, which is harmful for a variety of reasons.
The classifications are also notoriously bullshit: marijuana, LSD, and psilocybin mushrooms are all schedule 1, yet have very slim to no addiction potential, and have no known overdose (you cannot overdose on any of these three drugs AFAIK). Meanwhile cocaine and meth (both highly addictive and notoriously deadly stimulants) are both in schedule 2, even though cocaine is very rarely used in the medical scene these days and meth is usually passed on in favor of Adderall and Ritalin.
It's time for this law to be abolished once and for all. Having a blanket law covering all drugs is stupid. It'd be better if each drug just had it's own individual law, or even if they separated medical drugs from recreational drugs (that is, essentially making two different laws for each group of drugs).
Here's how I'd do it. Instead of blanket prohibition, each drug would be individually researched and evaluated to see the effects of the drug on both users and the people around them.
If it's decided that the drug and/or the majority of its users cause no overall harm to society, it will be legally available as a recreational substance. Laws regarding amounts you can posess/sell, who's allowed to manufacture it, what age you can buy/use it, where you're allowed to use it, etc, would be tailored to the specific drug in question. This is what I believe would happen to drugs like weed, LSD, psilocybin mushrooms, and to a lesser extent MDMA and (maybe) cocaine.
If it's decided that the drug and/or the majorit
... keep reading on reddit ➡Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) to remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act.
Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. Nancy Mace [R-SC1]
This bill was referred to the House Committee on Agriculture, House Committee on Armed Services, and 10 other committees which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.
Rep. Nancy Mace [R-SC1] is a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. Rep. Nancy Mace [R-SC1] is a member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Rep. Nancy Mace [R-SC1] is a member of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR3]
This bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, House Committee on the Budget, and one other committee which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.
4 cosponsors are on those committees.
Introduced: Sponsor: Sen. Charles “Chuck” Grassley [R-IA]
This bill was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary which will consider it before sending it to the Senate floor for consideration.
Sen. Charles “Chuck” Grassley [R-IA] is the ranking member of the committee.
Please note that this site uses cookies to personalise content and adverts, to provide social media features, and to analyse web traffic. Click here for more information.