DEA bans Pot Like Substance

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/24/fak...ex.html?hpt=T2

Feds move to ban chemicals used to make 'fake pot'

Quote:

---

Washington (CNN) -- "Fake pot" products that give a marijuana-like high could be illegal in another month as the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration takes emergency action to ban chemicals used to make them.

"Over the past year, smokable herbal blends marketed as being 'legal' and providing a marijuana-like high, have become increasingly popular, particularly among teens and young adults," the DEA said in a news release Wednesday.

Synthetic marijuana is made of plant material coated with chemicals that mimic THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, and are sold at a variety of retail outlets, in head shops that sell drug paraphernalia and over the internet, the DEA said.

"Since 2009, DEA has received an increasing number of reports from poison centers, hospitals and law enforcement regarding these products," the DEA said.

The "fake pot," marketed under brand names including "Spice," "K2," "Blaze" and "Red X Dawn," is often labeled as "incense," White House Drug Policy Director Gil Kerlikowske said.

"Until the risks associated with ingesting these products and chemicals can be studied and understood, there is no place for them on the shelves of any legitimate business," he said.

The emergency ban will be in place for a year as federal officials study whether the products and chemicals should be permanently controlled, it said. Fifteen U.S. states have already taken action to control one or more of the five chemicals used to produce synthetic marijuana.

The ban cannot take effect until at least 30 days after the DEA notice was announced in the Federal Register, which happened Wednesday.

The chemicals, which were used in research, have not been approved for human consumption, and there is no oversight of the manufacturing process, the DEA said.

The five targeted chemicals are identified as JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47497 and cannabicyclohexanol.

---

I find it funny that DEA believes it can stop this type of behavior by banning the substance in question. This is honestly laughable. They did this with pot and what did creative businessmen decide to do? That's right they took a legal substance and turned it into a very profitable blend that mimicked the effects of marijuana. This blend is currently legal and does not show up a drug screening. So instead of attacking the root of the problem they will continue spinning in circles and wasting taxpayer money fighting a never ending war. I'm going to predict that we will see something similar to substance in question that is being banned, but using slightly altered chemicals thus making it legal. When will these morons learn? Please, pot is not the devil. It is not evil. It does not cause cancer nor does it kill brain cells. It won't make you a drug addict, and is safer that many legal drugs that accepted by society. However, what about the stuff in question? Is it bad for you? I have absolutely no idea, but by making a marijuana illegal you force people who enjoy it but,do not like the negative stigma society attaches to the drug to use untested substances like this. Making this stuff illegal will not stop babies/children/teens/adults/elderly people from getting high legally or illegally. All it will do is force them to accept society's penalties for using the drug or risk using a synthetic chemical that causes the unknown. JUST LEGALIZE THE HERB ALREADY AND CUT THIS CRAP OUT.

Thanks for listening to my rant. I really just get tired of hearing this horse crap. Instead of solving the problem, they are just making it worse. What really makes me angry is that our elected officials aren't the ones doing this. It's a bunch of unelected, law enforcement individuals who couldn't give you an honest assessment of any drug. All they are know are "Drugs are bad M'Kay".

I'd appreciate any constructive discussion or insight.

Ironically a 1-year ban to study these chemicals makes more sense than the ban on pot.

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
-- George Washington

Government is not logical, it is not rational. There are no brilliant leaders or geniuses deciding what to do. There is only the humongous apparatus of the state, moving with the inevitability of a glacier.

And when it encounters resistance, it crushes it. The government bans things reflexively, and it's response is always to search for more power.

This is why I believe no agency, no committee, no regulators should be able to ban a single thing. Only the legislature should have the power to pass a law banning something.

And it's also why we should always strive to make government smaller and give it less power.

CR

Ice you keep underestimating the dangers of smoking pot it isn't harmless, if you can't get it legally so what really, is it pragmatism or recognision you are after

Hehehe, you'd think those in power now who were brought up during the sex,drugs & give peace a chance hippie era would be a wee bit more tolerant of the younger generation's need to feed their head. You've been sold out to the Establishment, and I'm sure the ban will be just as "effective" as those that have come before it. Ironic, no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Ice you keep underestimating the dangers of smoking pot it isn't harmless

---

I'm not a fan of pot. It's detrimental effects are completely underestimated. But the cure here seems worse than the disease. Criminalising pot creates incentives to find substitutes, more dangerous than pot itself. One should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

It is better your youth smokes pot than sniffs glue. It is better an alcoholic drinks vodka than a home brew made of whatever he can find in the kitchen cleaning cabinet. It is better heroine or substitues are governmental distributed, including with medical care, than by a trilion dollar crime industry.

I'm neither a chemist nor a medic, I don't know about the substances that are banned here. Within the larger context of a pointless war on drugs, it is just another wasteful episode.

Quote:

---

What really makes me angry is that our elected officials aren't the ones doing this. It's a bunch of unelected, law enforcement individuals who couldn't give you an honest assessment of any drug. All they are know are "Drugs are bad M'Kay".

---

Each country gets the DEA it deserves. If there is a War on Drugs, in an emotional, heavily politicised atmosphere, then this is the DEA you get.

Just like the DEA might not tackle the root cause of the Drugs issue by banning substitute chemicals, so too does criticism directed at the DEA not tackle the root cause of the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
-- George Washington

Government is not logical, it is not rational. There are no brilliant leaders or geniuses deciding what to do. There is only the humongous apparatus of the state, moving with the inevitability of a glacier.

And when it encounters resistance, it crushes it. The government bans things reflexively, and it's response is always to search for more power.

This is why I believe no agency, no committee, no regulators should be able to ban a single thing. Only the legislature should have the power to pass a law banning something.

And it's also why we should always strive to make government smaller and give it less power.

CR

---

All decisions are inherently made by individuals who operate within the structure that is the government. The institution itself does not make the decision itself it is merely the tool of incompetent people to enact foolish policies. While limiting this tool does limit the damage of the incompetent it limits the benefit of the modern day philosopher kings (congressmen I should probably say) who do strive to make things better for all of us. It would seem most beneficial to limit the government only to the degree where disaster cannot be implemented by a moronic person in charge and strive towards putting people with a brain in those positions in the first place.

@Louis, wouldn't you agree that legalising it is more worse a cure? So many traps, so little change. All you will ultimately do is admitting that pot-smokers aren't evil. Just relax things a bit, shade of grey would do lovely

The main job of the DEA is to increase in size and reach. If things are legalised they have less to do. If they can have a new department that can research new things to ban well, they're making work for themselves for years to come!

By describing it as a war, the DEA has vastly more powers than if it were viewed as a social problem and led by medics or social workers for example.

~:smoking:

But drugs are mere currency, can't just change that. Legalising it could bite you in the butt really hard, flooding of the market with much much worse. Just accept there is such a thing as a shadow-economy, can't fight it

I disagree with that argument.

If there are already most of the things that people want in a pure, controlled form then why push for something else?

During prohibition, people wanted the things they had had before, and when prohibition ended they continued drinking it, not immediately went onto the next illegal substance.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I disagree with that argument.

If there are already most of the things that people want in a pure, controlled form then why push for something else?

During prohibition, people wanted the things they had had before, and when prohibition ended they continued drinking it, not immediately went onto the next illegal substance.

~:smoking:

---

Sure but if you take what is, and compare it to what could happen, why do it. Because you get to say it's legal? It's really more trouble than it's worth, almost every male American smoked it, and at least one didn't enhale it, it's fine as it is.

I think that having laws that are not enforced is a lot of confusion for everyone: what if a police officer arrests everyone who possesses it as he disagrees with it? It is a crime after all. Is there a limit on the amount someone has? It's illegal, so unless dealers return home after every few grams they might get busted. Can children smoke / eat it? It's illegal for everyone so difficult to draw lines. Purity varies, but how does one enforce if it's all illegal?

Better to get all this and more sorted out once so everyone knows where they stand. There might be a cost to the bill, but when reallocation of officers and tax on businesses seling the substances are factored in, it'd make money very quickly.

~:smoking:

This stuff put me on my ass the one time I smoked space/k2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I think that having laws that are not enforced is a lot of confusion for everyone: what if a police officer arrests everyone who possesses it as he disagrees with it? It is a crime after all. Is there a limit on the amount someone has? It's illegal, so unless dealers return home after every few grams they might get busted. Can children smoke / eat it? It's illegal for everyone so difficult to draw lines. Purity varies, but how does one enforce if it's all illegal?

Better to get all this and more sorted out once so everyone knows where they stand. There might be a cost to the bill, but when reallocation of officers and tax on businesses seling the substances are factored in, it'd make money very quickly.

~:smoking:

---

But laws are just ignored all the time, if getting caught doesn't mean all that much it's pretty much legalised, without all the complications.

The ban wont work as these substances are made in China and the like and are imported as things like "weed killer" and "pesticide" this gets around any ban.

A huge amount of legal shops setup here selling these products and the Guards could do nothing about it so the government banned the stuff. About 4 or 5 hours later an entirely new range of products was for sale in these shops not covered by the ban. In order to eventually ban them fully the Guards were given powers to confiscate substances they felt were banned and check them out while the shop would be shut for the duration, basically the Guards were given power to shut a shop even if they were not selling illegal substances in an effort to drive them out of business.

That is too far a power for the civil authorities to have even if it is for your health the ability to apply it to something else would worry me. Biggest laugh of the lot the drug dealers now offer the stuff cos people got a taste for it and because it is not an actual drug your not as in trouble when caught.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Ice you keep underestimating the dangers of smoking pot it isn't harmless, if you can't get it legally so what really, is it pragmatism or recognision you are after

---

Honestly, you keep overstating the dangers. Every time I hear an argument like this I think "Maybe they are right... maybe I am being naive". I then dig deeper and my overall conclusion is that I am indeed correct. I am then mocked by people who either don't understand or who have not done their homework. This thread isn't about that though. So if you disagree that pot is harmless, wouldn't a better alternative be legalizing and regulating it in comparison to our current system? A black market not only has vast negative effects which are well known, but also leads to substances like the one in question being produced to skirt the ban.

To answer your question I'm looking for both pragmatism and recognition. Society would benefit and those who chose to smoke would not be considered lazy, unproductive criminals and harassed.

Quote:

---

This stuff put me on my ass the one time I smoked space/k2

---

What you just said is the reason why it is being banned. 14 year olds would ingest so much of they would think they are dying and be sent to hospital when it reality they just had a bit too much! (think of one beer too many) The drug then gains publicity and now all I hear is "We need to save the children!" "Would somebody please think of the children!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

More lies are formed, and thus a ban occurs.

I have smoked a time or two, but like my relationship with alcohol, I just prefer having that sense of "self control" and so choose to abstain. I don't have any moral qualms about what other people decide to do with their lives, however.