I would love to see it legalized!

But here's the thing.. In order for it to be recognized as anything other than pure evil we need to represent ourselves imaculately. Good jobs, dressed neat, not having criminal records.. we really have to push against the status quo on what the intellectually dead think of DMT users.

Let's not forget that the police and media describe DMT 'labs' to be 'highly explosive' with DMT also being 'highly explosive' and 'methlab-like'.

One other unseen consequence is once you begin campaigning against DMT federal agencies may start to become more aware of its presence, as if netflix didn't already screw that up for everybody.

Your fight will be mostly up-hill. You're advocating a chemical that tends to make people aware that there is more to life than school and work. That's not good for a modern society. Free thinkers aren't smiled upon in these modern times.

You must think of the potential backdraft of your actions; the possibility that you could do more harm than good. People ARE NOT free thinkers and the media will behave however they're told to, and likely not in our favor. This means certain laws may change making certain plants illegal, or cause for a warrant.

Think long and hard about this one mate.

I just had a scary thought after looking over these posts..

Would you really want to turn the television on and hear this ad?

---
Do YOU want to explore endless dimensions?? Unlock never-before-seen realms of consciousness?? Be able to fly through hyperspace on your lunch break at work?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then Nexus Labs has the answer for you: D-M-T! DMT stands for dimethyltryptamine, an endogenous chemical in our bodies that when ingested allows you to soar through impossible geometries and meet with unknown entities.

Here's what Ben Stiller has to say about it: 'It's so awesome. I went to places I would not have expected. I need money so I'm doing these commercials.' And who wouldn't listen to Ben Stiller??

Fortunately for you, we have the starter package available for only xx dollars. It even includes a freebase pipe and a torch lighter! And if you order in the next five minutes, we'll even throw in some oregano and directions on how to make changa!

Don't do anymore messy extractions and deal with dangerous chemicals. Let the professionals at Nexus Labs handle it all for you! Order NOW!"
---

I don't mean to be a debbie-downer (and I'm the OP anyway who was curious whether I should push for legalization...), but this is already happening with marijuana. Any vaporizer website or marijuana magazine or whatever has a bunch of crap ads, soon enough they may even be on TV. This is not the future I would like for molecules like LSD, psilocybin, and DMT, chemicals that should be utterly respected.

So maybe decriminalization/repeal is the way to go. Obviously no one should go to jail for using them; that's barbaric. But to peddle blotters and changa behind a counter at drug stores... I don't think I like it. Safety standards are a must and it would be nice knowing that what we get is quality when in the future we don't extract ourselves (if this day ever comes), just like dispensary marijuana is really high grade and creatively designed in some cases. But how do we implement these without allowing businesses access? Have a bunch of free info on extractions available online, which we already have here now?

Do we really want to have grow houses of mimosa just like there are marijuana plants? I know most of us on here adore DMT so it might be quick to answer yes, but we also say that it is something that finds you. Advertising and profiteering works against this ideal; they force you into wanting it!!

Legalization - Well we "legalized" cannabis in CO and WA there are a whole bunch of new laws on the books: amounts that can be sold and possessed and grown indoors locked up out of sight. Heavy taxes and controls, special childproof bags and warning labels, on and on. This isn't exactly what I was expecting when they said legalization.

Decriminalization - Cannabis has been decriminalized many places now, it's a traffic ticket, you can have an oz and they'll just take it away and give you a little fine, no big deal. Heaven forbid you should go over that set amount though, 29 grams and you go to big house little buddy. Still more laws on the books, no way to buy or sell it really you have to miracle it up somehow. Cartels and criminals still getting rich. Sure it makes you less likely to be put in a cage for having some herb, but this still isn't ideal.

Repeal - Now we are talking! No new laws on the books, no new regulations and controls. No set amounts or fear of unintentionally becoming a criminal for overstepping some arbitrary regulation. It's quite simply removing the current laws in place making it illegal and all of the sudden it's on the status of mint, just another plant like any other.

If I can't plant a seed in my backyard, I don't feel like I've won anything. Let's stop being silly and pretending we can regulate nature, free the plants already!

Now purified and synthetic compounds are another story altogether, I think these things are probably are best left in the hands of medical professionals. Though some may disagree and I'm a bit trepidatious about suggesting it, at the moment it seems the best structure we currently have in place have for regulating and dispensing these compounds.

Just to point out (atthe risk of beating a dead horse) that the above presentation of decrim is what decrim has looked like under prohibition. There's no reason that this is what decrim has to look like. When I say decrim, I am talking about something closer to what you are describing as "repeal."

My issue with legalization/regulation is that it inherently includes all state-sanctioned regulatory apparatus necessary for further commodification.

Agreed, I understand what you mean Snozz, I probably should have added a disclaimer to make it clear that this is the way decriminalization has been carried out thus far under prohibition and the the way the definition is most likely to be interpreted by a legislature. I feel the term repeal has much less ambiguity which is why I'm stressing that one. No more new laws in any context removal of laws is much a better approach.

I understand your feelings and agree but i think that i would rather see an advert like that than seeing a story on the news about a man or woman getting 2 years in jail for possession of class A drugs.



Snozzleberry i am with you on the decriminalisation but don"t you think that legalisation/regulation is preferable to the current situation?

I like the passion in these opinions. I wish we could activate now! Seeing news about people's lives being ruined after LEO invade their privacy is heartbreaking. I've come within inches of the same experience myself. It's inspiring though to see people stand up for each other and flip the status quo.

Take this video for example, a fan gets tackled by police for doing something that doesn't hurt anyone. And a random person runs in to help them, then another and another.:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3LVgeOTjqg

"GROUP THINK"
Group think is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an incorrect or deviant decision-making outcome. Loyalty to the group requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking.


The ignorant population is just stuck on auto pilot with whoever has the group. Politicians are forced to follow suit because they rely on the majority population. If people start bravely sticking up for themselves and their beliefs, at least it would get the discussion going where it matters, in personal areas with people that trust and listen to each other. I wanted to say more but have to go; laters.

As primates I like to think sometimes that even though we tend to advance society, there is still a lingering urge to tear down establishments and authority. Most people I meet either have a distaste for or a fear of authoritarian powers. If there is order, we want disorder. Maybe it reflects an ultimate desire for entropy hidden deep within humans, but maybe a more ordered disorder if that makes sense.

I don't like being told what to do. I don't like being manipulated into what to do. I like having all the information to make conscious decisions. And as Leary said (also see my sig), "Think for yourself and question authority." If only everyone thought for themselves and was not afraid to possibly be outcast...

Perhaps it would be best to join other organizations that are already in the process of attracting attention to the psychological benefits of psychedelic substances rather than outright legalization efforts in local legislatures. Check this site out --



This site has a great deal of factual information. Studies, concluded and on-going concerning a wide variety of substances. We should probably wait to push for the town hall approach until marijuana has been decriminalized at the federal level. Some people are talking about Michele M. Leonhart (currently the present DEA administrator) being replaced in the near future due to the momentum of support for marijuana legalization has received in recent years. Even though Colorado and Washington have fully legalized, neither President Obama nor his justice dept. have attempted to crack down on either medical or business establishments in these states regardless of the conflict between state and federal law concerning its legal status.

We need more websites like that. More websites like the Nexus. We need people to be informed. We need to push for more studies to take place at various universities. Studies like the ones being conducted at John Hopkins University. Those who are interested should consider giving periodic donations to institutions like the Heffter Research Institute who partner with the likes of JHU to conduct these types of studies. Push for more studies through your pocketbook and through legal establishments and once the scientific community has come on board, so come the regulators. Once some long term results begin to show the obvious social benefits of legalization, more states will follow. Once the US sets the trend, other nations will follow suit.

I think it should be neither legal nor decriminalized nor illegal.

Failing that, legalize it and enforce quality controls. The present situation (illegal) is morally bankrupt.

Failing that, decriminalize.


But look for instance at LSD. Would you prefer to have it decriminalized (and be sold some NBOMe instead of the real deal 9 times out of 10, depending on where you are), or having it legalized and quality-controlled?

It's a tough situation. I don't think psychs (in general) should be medicalized, we as adult sovereign individuals ought to have access to these compounds to experiment to our soul's content. In our present paradigms, I see medicalization of psychedelics as very likely should they ever become legal, and this I don't see as a good thing.


Allow people to grow their special plants and fungi. That right should have never been taken away. Most of us, I suppose, do not recognize that the state has the right to remove this right from the people.

Empower people by providing quality control for psychedelics/drugs that require expert chemical knowledge to manufacture.

Allow people to manufacture their own as well, why not? DIY ethic.



I definitely share the concerns of another poster when it comes to (commercial) advertising, should we face a scenario where it's no longer illegal to do so. I think this would bring no good, and ought to be banned.

The legalization of ALL drugs should occur. THAT is True Freedom, to chose for Ourselves what We consider 'Good For Ourselves' and not let any other 'Entity' tell Us they know better than WE do.
Anyways, I'd better not get into this discussion because the 'powers that be' really piss me off with their hypocrisy. DMT is everywhere yet illegal? They KNOW it's everywhere and that it being illegal is like making Beach Sand or even DIRT illegal.
It's best to just leave it alone [ Trying to push for legalization ] and if one is caught for possession THEN one can use the "For Spiritual Uses Fight" and also pump the fact that it [[ DMT ]] is all over the place, EVEN the BRAIN and in PLANTS/GRASSES/ANIMALS so why should it be illegal? What are they going to do? Make Grass, Frogs, Umpteen Trees, plants and flowers, ALL 'Illegal'? Australia is notorious for making anything containing 'drugs' Illegal. DO we really want to bring this out into the open and then RISK a BACKFIRE of numerous Plants, Animals and whatever else contains the Spirit Molecule, becoming Illegal as a result of bringing attention to it? It's like trying to legalize air. WE ALL breath it and so it's the same with DMT. We ALL have it in Our bodies to SOME degree. What are we all? Walking/ Talking Illegal Drug Factories? The System doesn't WANT Us using ANYTHING that will 'Wake Us Up' and cause Us to "Think APART from the system". Just like Nixon's 'War on Drugs" [[ Yes, THATS who started it and coined the term 'War on Drugs' ]] and where LSD [[ Which is NOT Naturally Occurring in Nature ]] was QUICKLY made Illegal because TOO MANY PEOPLE were 'Waking Up' and thinking APART from the 'Dog-Eat-Dog', grueling, working, consuming, tax-paying day to day SYSTEM [[ Matrix anyone? ]]
To try and legalize it would only bring more unwanted attention to it, invite all kinds of People with the WRONG Intentions and Impressions of it, SURELY those who are looking for a simple 'High' will overdo it and blast their Silly-Socks off, ending up in some institution... No, I think ALL drugs should be legalized if DMT is to be. Push for THAT instead of focusing on DMT and that way it can remain the SACRED substance that it is instead of turning it into some 'Recreational Party Drug' which it is NOT [[ While it CAN be euphoric beyond description ]] but would surely become with all the greedy Drug-Thug-Pushers out there looking to get rich quick....
We don't NEED them to legalize ANYTHING just ensure 'Purity' and all that mumbo-jumbo. We have been doing it OurSELVES for How long now? It's not a substance to take lightly, either. Brining so much attention to it would destroy it's allure as a truly Sacred substance who appeals to SEEKERS of Truth more than it does to those looking to drowned out Misery, like with Alcohol and Heroin [[ Which should be legal too ! ]]
Well, I did it, I got INTO this discussion! lol! Oh well.
Anyways, I say keep it the way it is, as a 'Golden Nugget for those who sincerely are looking for Enlightenment. IF it MUST be pushed for legalization then instead cover ALL bases and legalize ALL drugs. DMT doesn't need attention from those who would bastardize it like so many other drugs have been.
IF one gets caught for possession of DMT, THEN would be the time to fight !! One would just have to HANG IN for the LONG HAUL of a FIGHT it would be and it would SURELY turn the tide to have a Jury declare " NOT ... GUILTY !! " !
The case against the person who is caught may even be dropped, rather than the 'system' risking the information getting out and being made public that it IS all over the place, in Nature and IN MANKIND themselves, broadcast on the news and in the papers.
So, I'd say just leave it be ~ Let a Sleeping Dog Lie" - You know what happens when you wake up a Old Dog from his nap? He BITES you

What can it be if not one of these 3 things?

legalized: explicitely legal
decriminalized: to remove criminal/legal penalties
illegal: not legal / criminalized


Is meditation (for instance): legal, illegal, or decriminalized?

Of course, it is none of the above, there is simply no mention of it in the laws.

This, I believe, would be the ideal state for psychedelics, though explicit legalization does bring some proeminent advantages (mainly quality assurance)

It's more complicated than that. The official story is that anything that severely alters consciousness is dangerous and therefore to protect the people from themselves, it must be declared illegal.

Naturally, this is nonsense (and has strong ties to the social changes catalyzed by such compounds back in the 60's), but my point is that it's not like an exception is being made for DMT specifically because 'it is everywhere'.

Rather, it seems to me that DMT just fits the category of being a substance that alters perception/consciousness, and is therefore illegal.

Of course it's more complicated but it doesn't need to be. Thats why it shouldn't be brought up UNTIL someone who is brave enough to challenge the system, is caught. I edited [[ added to ]] My previous statement to clarify my opinion.
Another point is that many of the [Past/Present]'Scientists' and 'Socialites' who are Popular and well known in 'High Society', use[d] these substances and it is WELL KNOWN amongst them. They have even published articles in well known magazines yet THEY escaped prosecution? [[ Terence McKenna, Timothy Leary to name a couple ]] Those are the ones who used Psychedelics freely and openly and then you have the Others in the 'System' and those who are 'Rich' who use indiscriminately, escaping prosecution. Much of what is used by the 'System' is not something as Wonderful as DMT but instead it is usually coke, heroin,pills...whatever the case, it is hypocrisy for them to say WE cannot use mind altering substances while they THEMSELVES do it behind Our backs. The [Ex] Mayor of Washington D.C. got CAUGHT smoking crack, did time, then got RE-ELECTED years later ! Okay FINE but LEGALIZE COKE and let US decide whether or not to use it, instead of flaunting such hypocrisy and unequallity in Our Faces!! " We can do it but YOU?!? YOU can NOT!!"
MY step-father was a Cop. He used drugs and drank as soon as he was off the clock, drinking and driving. I know all about corruption.He was ALSO in the Military and an Armored Truck Guard...
I've seen MANY cops who have the attitude of being 'above the law' so they literally do whatever they want with impunity yet, WE CANNOT?
So, to ME, bringing something as Sacred like DMT into the mix would only damage it's Reputation and after the fight is over, it wouldn't be a 'Utopia on Earth' with throngs of People changing for the better because of DMT. The History of Mankind repeats itself infinitely and are we for the BETTER? Look at Us now?
No, DMT isn't for Everyone.
They SAY Manson and His Family murdered while on LSD. However I believe that to be pure Bullcrap ! There are many research papers showing that Psychedelics as powerful as DMT and LSD steer People AWAY from such kinds of acts, not lead them INTO doing them. It is ALMOST impossible to commit such heinous crimes on Pyschedelics. Therefore, I believe that all to be LIES to DISCOURAGE the use of Psychedelics. Look at those propaganda films 'Reefer Madness' and now look at the FACTS. See what I'm saying?
DMT would only suffer from the Publicity, just like LSD has. Bring it out into the open and sure enough, probably sooner than later, to SQUASH DMT's reputation, you'll see on the news some maniac who supposedly killed his whole family while on DMT [[ Which will be BULL, of course ]]
The establishment does not WANT 'free thinkers', like Psychedelics bring out. They want mindless drones who pay taxes, drink alcohol and keep their mouths shut while remaining the puppets to the system that we all are to some degree or another.
Aww man. I'm sorry for the ranting. I SAID I better not get into this and I Did !
Theses are all just my passionate opinions. Nothing more.
I'm just sick of the bullsh!t system telling Us that they know BETTER than Us what is good for Us when it is quite obvious in so many ways that..they do NOT
Okay. thats it for me.
I'm finished.
Thanks everyone.
Peace,Love and many Blessings to you All.

Drugs are not just a crime. Drugs are a sin, m'kay?

You can argue reasonably with reasonable people.

You can't reason with unreasonable people.

If you try, it only makes them more unreasonable.

I should caveat my post with the fact I haven't yet tried dmt but from what I have read on here I don't think that people are ready for this to be legalised. Well, maybe not so much legalised but definitely not popularised.
We're only just making progress with cannabis and you know what attitudes to that are still like in some quarters. Imagine the puritanical Daily Mail brigade getting hold of stories about people using dmt! Especially when the wrong people started to use it. As in people who disrespect it.
I believe that any attempt to legalise dmt at the moment would just put it in the public eye and lead to knee jerk demonisation and stronger legislation against it. Just like what happened with mushrooms in the UK back in 2007.

nexalizer,

I like this view a lot; this is actually something I have considered before (having no mention of a particular thing in the lawbooks). However there are possible problems that arise...

If there is no mention, then any type of drug could be sold in a gas station/convenience store. People of any age, background, felony status, etc. are able to purchase things at the gas station (except for cigarettes, lighters, and alcohol which are generally prohibited by law for underage people). As much as we might like to think that the guy behind the counter won't sell something like LSD or MXE or what have you to a small child, it will happen in some places where the owner doesn't care and is just looking to make a buck.

While something as tame as marijuana should be totally allowed for anyone (maybe restrictions for people 14 and younger or something of that sort), LSD has the ability to severely destroy someone's ego for long periods of time. If the person does not know what they are in for this could be very dangerous.

I suppose one could make the argument "Well people who use psychedelics will use them regardless of legality" but I find that to be a fallacy. There are many rule-followers around who are only against certain things because of either the laws surrounding them or the cultural acceptance (and generally legality reflects a certain level of social acceptance). When I was clearly a weed smoking teenager, my father was only concerned with the fact that it was illegal - he was looking out for my safety in a tough society. He encouraged the consciousness-expanding and relaxing aspects.

Classic psychedelics pose such a problem because of the possible extremes faced by users. There is a chance for complete and total enlightenment and fulfillment, but also arguably on something like LSD or mushrooms you could lose your mind and go running naked through the neighborhood, potentially inflicting self-harm or inadvertently harming others or their property.

So what do we do? Outlaw it altogether and pray that the problems of our world will go away (which clearly hasn't worked)? Legalize them completely and accept the downsides? Take all mention of them out of the lawbooks and allow drug markets to run wild?

Personally I think the best option, but maybe the hardest to implement, would be to only allow people 18 or older who have taken a special certification course to purchase psychedelics of their choosing. I say this is the hardest because designing the class, teaching it properly, and implementing this around the country would be extremely difficult. But informing people about all of the potential risks and rewards before they delve into such a deep and potentially life-altering adventure would be very helpful.

You could teach people the importance of trip sitters at extremely high doses. Also things like "how to reverse a bad trip" and "what drugs might do to your mind and ego" could be mentioned. Once someone passes the class and gets the certification they can purchase psychs from specially designated stores.

This would be so hard to implement and would require a previously unseen degree of social acceptance, but one day I think this will be the solution. This is very similar to what people in the US have to undergo to get a CPL license for concealed carrying of a pistol.

People should most likely be certified to handle such powerful things.

The fight (for lack of better term) to legalise psych's is well under way and any extra people protesting it the better IMO.

Just look at the crowd funding campaign that just ended today https://www.indiegogo.co...zing-psychedelic-therapy
they had a goal of 50k and smashed it and made over 130k, so its happening and is moving!

Its an exciting time and science will recognise psych's very soon and ethnobotanists will no longer be laughed at in the scientific industry (exaggeration).

I am attending the entheogenesis Australia psychedelic symposium in Melb Aust. which will be the tenth anniversary of the conference.

So there is many hundreds of thousands of pro psychedelic people in the world who are actively taking part in bringing the information to the wider community to help get the government regulations to allow science to conduct studies and therefore allow the medical industry to use them as the many cultures have for thousands of years.

All you have to do is decide
Do I want to take part in the movement or not?
Because its happening with of without you!

But please I strongly suggest if you have the passion for it then,
("the more the merrier" More exposure and support, the more chance we have!

^^^ science has recognized psychedelics a long time ago.


I'm divided on this. We are basically in no better position than the generation of the 60's. Most people are not open to these ideas and public opinion remains just as easy (maybe easier) to manipulate.

Cannabis legalization is changing perceptions, but these things take time. I think it would be wise to tread carefully and keep amassing scientific data, now that research is once again tolerated (in some places, it even thrives).

The general public's opinion of (illegal) drug use is not positive at all. If we get out of the closet too early, we get crushed.


We live in a time of great change and increasing power grabs by major bankrupt western governments. Austerity, fatca/gatca & the end of bank secrecy, wealth confiscation, capital controls, mass surveillance and more wars.


Accepting something that has the power to dissolve the present status quo won't, I think, be simply accepted by those in power.

I could be wrong.