Friday, February 01, 2008

Schedule 1 Drug Definition

The United States defines a Schedule 1 drug as (hat tip: wikipedia)....

(A) The drug or other substance has high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.


People, besides the stoners I know, feel that this should not apply to marijuana. Marijuana does have a history of doing the rescheduling dance. I think in a bit by bit breakdown, it can be abused like nicotine or alcohol but is there any specific side effect beyond the risks posed by smoking regular cigarettes? No one gets addicted to weed. No one. if you told a stoner tomorrow they had to quit or you'd kill them, they could stop. Heroin users can't say the same thing. The drug can be used for medical purposes. It can for AIDS patients and glaucoma as it does relieve pain, or it does cause food cravings which help cancer and AIDS patients bulk up. There are obvious pharmaceutical drugs out there that do a better job, and the nation's MDs are happy to prescribe them for your use. Lack of safety involved with use of the drug? What? How can anyone think of marijuana use and consider these stoners a danger? These people can barely get out of their own way. They do not have motivation to do anything, especially things that involve coordination or physical exertion.

It seems obvious to me that cannibas should be rescheduled. I am a firm believer in legalization and regulation. Give it a low barrier to entry so smaller farmers can grow it. Make licensing subject to the same laws as liquor licensing. It is doable. I think a big push against legalization is because if it were legalized and no horrible societal side effects came about, people might not see it as so bad, which would completely erode the moral argument against it. This would make people question the moral side to their other arguments in law and society and make them uncomfortable. No one gets addicted to marijuana, so the damage to your body is akin to smoking cigarettes.

I feel like I go through this every year. I feel like I look around and see more and more hypocrisy in our laws, and it upsets me. The cops in my hometown would tell us say no to drugs, and they installed a cop in my high school to cut down on drug use. It did work as the hallucinogen use did drop off a cliff, but they still did not nab the drug dealers in my town. We all knew them, so why were they not arrested? On top of that, we have prozac, lithium and zoloft to make us feel happy, which is what marijuana does to a lot of people. One is legal, the other is banned. A doctor could suggest therapy and diet alterations to improve your mood, but they will probably give you a prescription for an antidepressant. A bartender can pour you a cold one and listen to your problems and make a profit. A drug dealer can get you a bag of weed for the same escapism, but he's going to jail if caught.

I'm not going to touch on how ecstasy was sold at nutrition stores into the '90s.

No comments: