Some critics argue the DEA shouldn’t change course on marijuana, saying rescheduling isn’t necessary and could lead to harmful side effects.
I wonder who those fuckheads are and how much of their portfolio is invested in for profit prisons.
That's the harmful side effect. They'll make less money.
Frfr, they always say harmful side effects but never mention side effects for whom lol
The only thing that proves those worries wrong is every single place where marijuana has been legalized and regulated has less crime and more taxes collected through regulated legal sales. So, just reality.
Never let reality interfere with your politics.
/s...obvs
It seems so out of touch when people make these arguments these days as they pretend like marijuana is some mystery drug that's barely used when in reality it's already medically legal in 4/5ths of the country and recreationally legal in 1/2 the country.
Our founding fathers grew and used hemp. For decades, the cotton industry was famously the largest lobbying agent against its legalization. It’s gotten a bad rap for centuries.
And big pharma.
The DEA’s proposal, which still must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, would recognize the medical uses of cannabis and acknowledge it has less potential for abuse than some of the nation’s most dangerous drugs. However, it would not legalize marijuana outright for recreational use.
I am really sorry for those of you who use it recreationally, because it deserves to be legal for you too, but as a medical user in a non-legal state, this is amazing news.
I am really sorry for those of you who use it recreationally, because it deserves to be legal for you too, but as a medical user in a non-legal state, this is amazing news.
One step closer, IMO id rather medical people get it first ASAP anyways. Us recreational users have fun with it and it's far better than say alcohol for a good time, but at the end of the day I don't need it.
Congrats to you!! Hopefully your ability to get ur medicine becomes easier/safer, but either way at least itll be legal for u!
tl;dr: DEA moving cannabis, ketamine, and some other stuff to schedule III; first it goes to OMB for approval, then they have a comment period, then they issue their final ruling.
Better a couple decades late than never, I suppose, but they should really just take it off entirely. Psilocybin too.
The idea that something you can just grow yourself like a plant of a fungus is illegal is ridiculous on the face of it.
Yeah. It doesn’t make a whole lotta sense does it? lol
ketamine
wasn't ketamine schedule III already?
Yeah I think they misread that part. Cannabis was moved to schedule 3 which, for example, contains ketamine.
Just a reminder that if trump is elected, he will reverse this immediately only because Biden did it.
That's not speculation. That's a godamn fact.
Seriously fuck the fact that Marijuana is still illegal, broken ass racist bullshit system while alcohol is legal and marijuana is not.
Still makes me sick to think of all of those cunt fucking cops who sent people to prison for this shit.
Absolutely, and the DEA is a fucking failure, we have an opioid epidemic and they've done absolutely nothing to help the US. Complete fucking bullshit agency that does NOTHING to help the American people.
If Alcohol isn't scheduled, why is marijuana?
Because they used it as a tool to hunt down and arrest civil rights groups and Vietnam protestors.
The down voter should read Nixon quotes
"I want a goddam strong statement... one that just tears the ass out of" cannabis supporters.
Marijuana was considered a black person drug. If you didn't know, the US kinda hates black people, statistically speaking. It's pretty fucked up!
According to the available information, there is no direct mention of the percentage of black people who used marijuana in the 1960s and 1970s. However, we can infer some information from the provided snippets.
In the 1970s, marijuana use became more widespread among the general population. According to Gallup’s trend by age, widespread experimentation with marijuana first occurred among adults aged 18 to 29 between 1969 and 1973, rising from 8% to 35%. It then continued to mount, reaching 56% by 1977, and remained at that level in 1985.
It is important to note that the available information does not provide specific data on the percentage of black people who used marijuana during this time period. However, we can infer that marijuana use was more prevalent among younger adults, particularly those in the 18-29 age range, during the 1970s.
In terms of the potency of marijuana during this time period, reports suggest that pot in the 1970s had THC levels of around 1%. In contrast, today, the herb you’re smoking has a lot more THC, with levels averaging more than 6-8%. Some specially grown plants can contain THC levels as high as 51%.
It is also worth noting that a 2022 analysis of marijuana possession arrests in Texas for the years 2017 to 2019 reported that African Americans comprised 30.2 percent of all possession arrests, yet Black people comprised only 12.9 percent of the state’s population. This suggests that there may be racial disparities in marijuana use and arrest rates, but the available information does not provide specific data on the percentage of black people who used marijuana in the 1960s and 1970s.
Edit: The above is kind of incorrect, the herb I smoke brags ~25%, though sources say those #s vary greatly.
Marijuana was considered a black person drug. If you didn’t know, the US kinda hates black people, statistically speaking. It’s pretty fucked up!
John Ehrlichman, Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs under President Richard Nixon said the following:
“You want to know what this [war on drugs] was really all about? 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.”
Before that, it was a Mexican person drug, which is why it's called marijuana to many people. It was a scare tactic. "These Mexicans smoke MARIJUANA!" And why I will only call it things like 'cannabis' and 'weed.'
They tried banning alcohol. There was enough popular pushback they had no choice but to un-ban it.
There was less popular demand for marijuana. It seems like it's moving in the same direction, just more slowly.
i wish that they would also reschedule lsd and psilocybin to schedule III, but at least some progress is better than no progress
Seriously. There have to be more people who die from ketamine than LSD every year. It all seems so arbitrary.
And MDMA? It shows a lot of promise in therapeutic use. Schedule 1 is for substances with “no currently accepted medical treatment use”.
I'm sure all the "stroke of a pen" trolls are going to be here to apologize any second, right?
Disband the DEA
Better idea, make them enforce regulations on pharmaceutical companies instead of people. They wouldn’t even have to change the signage!
What's the likelihood of this happening before the election?
I know Biden tasked the FDA to investigate reclassifying it, which should be a win, but until the FDA actually finishes the reclassification it won't show in the polls. If the bureaucracy can move fast enough for this to get done before the election, it could mean a decent little bump for Biden.
DEA. The FDA makes the recommendations, then then DEA decides if they want to follow it or not.
This should be fixed. DEA are cops, not medical experts, and shouldn't be making this decision.
The reactionaries in the GOP will immediately start trying to prevent this from happening, of course.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.