|
|
|
Wont make a bit of difference. I spoke to a head shop guy that said that the infrastructure had already been established and that he would be selling it underground for as long as he could get it. Prohibition didn't work I don't think this will either. Even if it is stamped out in a matter of months something new will be put on the market. If you don't sin, Jesus died for nothing.
|
|
|
Nod.
Not only are there literally thousands of pounds of these compounds floating around the states, a good number of them are not going to be covered.
JWH-250 is a great example of one of the compounds already on the market and not covered by the ban
There are literally hundreds of cannibinoids that can be synthesized that are not banned and also are not close enough in structure to any banned chemical to be covered by the analogue act.
Stomping out *all* cannibinoids isn't going to happen.
Its funny because these chemicals literally wouldn't even exist if cannabis was legal. They were originally made by Nichols to help map the way cannabis works in the brain.
|
|
|
aloneits wrote:They were originally made by Nichols to help map the way cannabis works in the brain. no, they were originally developed by John W. Huffman he studies the CB receptors, Nichols' lab is primarily involved with 5HT2a research. "Nothing is true, everything is permitted." ~ hassan i sabbah "Experiments are the only means of attaining knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." -Max Planck
|
|
|
Yeah - I knew Huffman made them, I'm a little cannibinoided myself My bad
|
|
|
This is more of a token gesture as a result of the outcry of K2. Lately the news has been reporting in my area about K2 every day it's a hot topic. The big issue is this isn't something that is being sold only in head shops where you have to be 18 to enter it is popping up in gas stations as well so underage kids are getting their hands on it easily. The Govt is just trying to look like it is doing something about it even if it's actions are essentially ineffective. If you don't sin, Jesus died for nothing.
|
|
|
Banning these synthetic cannabinoids isn't the smartest thing.The smart thing to do would be for the company's that produce those smoking blends;to tell exactly how much synthetic cannabinoids there is,what amount to start with and what amount is dangerous. Knowledge is key to success. Swim is a figment of your imagination and he's a compulsive liar,thus everything he says is pure lies !
|
|
|
It would be wise also for them to only be allowed to be sold in places that require you to be 18 or older to enter as well. If you don't sin, Jesus died for nothing.
|
|
|
You don't need a huge amount of them to suply a small town..unlike with cocaine.
I don't know much about chemistry, but if they're easy to manufacture, then organised crime is gonna be very pleased with this ban.
|
|
|
or people will just buy weed. blooooooOOOOOooP fzzzzzzhm KAPOW! This is shit-brained, this kind of thinking. Grow a plant or something and meditate on that
|
|
|
or legal herb companies will just use one of the MANY other legal cannabiods. blooooooOOOOOooP fzzzzzzhm KAPOW! This is shit-brained, this kind of thinking. Grow a plant or something and meditate on that
|
|
|
I'm curious how much the police are going to be encouraged to enforce this. Hypothetically say someone gets pulled over with an unmarked bag of herbal incense and perhaps a pipe with resin. Neither of which alert to the presence of THC after a field test is administered. Since they don't have field tests for synthetic cannabinoids on whom will the burden of proof fall? Could someone theoretically be arrested for being in possession of what an officer thinks may be an herbal substrate laced with what might be an illegal synthetic compound?
It's scary to think possibly such a thing could happen. I tend to think, as someone else mentioned, it's just the government/DEA making itself look useful. Anyway I'm all for keeping synthetic cannabinoids out of the hands of the uniformed and inexperienced. Of course this isn't the most rational way to go about it but whoever said government was supposed to be rational.
|
|
|
Can the DEA just decide for itself wich substance is scheduled and wich not?
|
|
|
polytrip wrote:Can the DEA just decide for itself wich substance is scheduled and wich not? It sure seems like it. I won't pretend to know what all goes into their decisions for emergency schedulings but it doesn't make much sense. Take Ibogaine, another compound "emergency" scheduled, for example and other compounds that continue to be of great scientific value both in our understanding of the mind and how it works and in easing the varied sufferings of man. In past emergency schedulings the DEA has completely ignored the pleas from the scientific community, especially when it comes to the CI. Anyway at the end of the temporary one year apparently with a possible six month extension then they will decide if it needs scheduling at all and if so at which level.
|