Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I would also add "Repeal Section 1" to this list. Let Philip Morris, Phizer, and their ilk deal with the problem. The cartels think they have power, they have no idea.
Never heard of this, do you have more information on this section 1?
I'm going to search it up myself, but if you have a good source, please share a link.
I meant schedule 1. My brain is much today. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538457/
Ah gotcha, makes sense, and I absolutely agree, however we still need some form of control on the sale and distribution (like what we have on alcohol for example), as well as a system to be able to help addicts with the medical help they need to get out of addiction.
Wtf is Section 1??? That's not specific enough.
Ah, my bad. Feeling like crap today. Schedule 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538457/
No worries.
I think you're referring to the Controlled Substances Act, which details all the shit.
Fun fact, all the links I found at the top of a search about this law seem to have "DEA" in the URL, rather than any regular link to actual legislation. It's almost as if they're monitoring them. Most of them were broken lmao.
The thing is, a law needs to exist, it just needs to be written by people who don't chew crayons. I'm not talking about those tasty ones the Marines gnaw on, but the dodgy import ones that the DEA think make them look classy.
In all seriousness, we don't need to remove the law (which has a pretty solid name) we just need to reclassify all the drugs and change the penalties to be appropriate for the good of society. Possession of anything in general should not be a crime, except for possession of a significant amount of a potentially fatal drug, as such possession could only reasonably point to intent to supply. Supply of fatal drugs (eg fentanyl, maybe certain bath salts or whatever) should remain illegal. Beyond that, recreational drugs would be better legitimised such that any issues with them can be faced in daylight, instead of dark alleyways. Even the worst of the major recreational drugs wouldn't be all that harmful if people had support around them - certainly no more harmful than alcohol.
However drug policing is literally the DEA's bread and butter, they're not going to give up their job for the greater good.