• NGC2346@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    They are now seeing how profitable the plant is, so they want to change the narrative. Don’t be fooled.

    Edit: The reclassification will just put the plant in its due place, before its reputation was tarnished by the war on drugs.

  • treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    10 months ago

    If we’re actually following the scheduling guidelines, can we do psychedelics next?

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I mean, they probably will. They’ve got to offer fucking something other than “I’m not a literal fascist who will black bag and torture you like Trump.” It’s not particularly effective to be like “I know your lives are fucking terrible out there, but I’m not gonna do a god damned thing to really improve them, because why should I have to, my opponent is fucking bonkers and I’m going to hold him over your head abusively, dangling him as a threat that you’ll be punished under unless you vote for me.

      Far easier to threaten us with the spectre of fascism than actually fucking do anything to improve things or, you know, stop fascism. However, enough folks in the Democratic party are waking up to the public not actually responding well to this abuse, and see that they’re enabling fascism to be able to lean on it as a danger that only they can thwart. So they gotta start giving something, and drugs are an easy one.

    • toasteecup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I forgot the exact details but that’s slowly becoming a reality in the states. I think the FDA was re reviewing mushrooms for use fighting against PTSD

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    10 months ago

    DEA: Ok, it’s reclassified.

    Indiana: Cool. We’ll make it 5 years in prison for smoking a joint.

    I hate this state.

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    Can the DEA even reclassify drugs? All the DEA could do, in theory, is decriminalise and not prosecute - which they’re kind of doing already.

    It’s up to Congress to write laws. Maybe the FDA, in this case.

  • Bitflip@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Criminalization is a multi-million dollar industry and greed is more powerful than our laws.

  • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s really bizarre the cops and bureaucrats apparently get to decide law to this extent.

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Well get used to it as the Supreme Court has begun to lay down the precedent needed to completely do away with Chevron deference.

      In other words, they’re doing away with the authority that gives federal regulatory agencies their purview to set regulations. You know, the public servants who have dedicated their lives/educations/careers/etc. to a field of study?

      They’re replacing those decisions with ones made by judges and politicians.

      I much prefer “bureaucrats” (literally just another word for those public servants) make those decisions rather than billionaires and politicians.

      • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        good. Enforcement should not decide law. that is a clear conflict of interest, in their favor. For an extreme example, you absolutely don’t want a police officer deciding citizen’s rights.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I’m guessing they mean the DEA shouldn’t both decide drug classification and enforce those same classifications.

            That can be fixed by other means, though, such as by giving the FDA classification rights that the DEA then enforces. Killing Chevron deference would only make things worse; the court now gets to decide and enforce.

            The flip side is that more progressive judges can also second guess decisions. EPA says that PFAS is fine and we’re not going to regulate it? The court could step in on that. FCC says net neutrality doesn’t need to exist? The court could step in on that.

            Killing Chevron only makes sense for conservatives if they think they will own the courts indefinitely. They probably thought they would during the Trump Administration, but he lost the last election, and the Supreme Court massively overstepped with abortion rights and caused their side a whole bunch of new problems. They may not be so sure of their ability to capture the judicial system as they were a few years back. A lot depends on how the next election pans out.

    • Space_Racer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      It has some trade-offs, the same rules allow the DEA and ATF to make rules but also allows things like the EPA to function. It really is a double edged sword.

      • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        Your comparison is EPA, so for drugs, a health issue, it should be a health agency. DEA is law enforcement. It’s letting cops decide policy when it should be an agency of subject matter experts writing evidenced-based policy.

        • Space_Racer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m just saying it’s the same rules that give them the power to decide on enforcement. Also all of them are enforcement agencies. The EPA does have federal agents that have the power to arrest. The EPA decided to have less cops in their agency because it is not the nature of their agency. The DEA and ATF decided to have more cops in their agencies because it is the nature of their agency.

          • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Sounds like a problem with their specific implementations rather than the rules that allow them to exist. I wonder if competent legislation could fix that.

      • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah the main trade off is federal organizations have become so determinate that pretty soon, and it’s come close already, they’re just gonna support a dictator enable their internal politics.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          This just isn’t true. Federal agencies are made up of regular people who work a regular job for mediocre pay, and a dictator is much more likely to do away with that job (or even worse, as we’ve seen historically. Purges aren’t just a fun way of saying “vacation”).

          Republicans have even said in the recent past (Rick Perry comes to mind, but pretty sure Trump has said similar) that they will do away with major regulatory agencies if they’re elected (such as FDA, EPA, DOE, etc). What do you think happens to all of those workers when a Republican decides to shut down their agency? They’re out of a job.

          So no, they don’t support it. They just don’t really have any say in it either way.

              • Sagifurius@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Doesn’t matter, that was just an example. People get “institutionalized” in both government and corporate positions, the difference is the corporate ones have little power over the general public, next thing you know you have government representatives running around trying to make peoples lives hell for making clotted cream. If that sounds like a weird example, it is, definitely.

            • prole@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I don’t give a fuck about cops.

              The federal government is the largest employer in the US. What % of those do you think are cops?

  • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Hey if this happens does anyone know how this will affect drug testing for work? Employers are private entities obviously but a lot only drug test due to federal regulation or contract compliance.

    • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I assume that companies would still drug test for weed. It’s still a controlled substance with reclassification. They may be less likely to do so, but this wouldn’t stop it from occurring.

      This is why it’s also important to ensure doctors can prescribed weed as a medicine. It forces companies to accept weed as a medical accommodation for most positions.

      • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Even so, but for most non critical jobs, it really shouldn’t be a problem if an employee smokes off the clock or not. They don’t say shit when every office worker is sloshed from 5:30 onward.

    • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      The DEA has basically ignored cannabis for years now. Opioids will keep them employed, don’t worry.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Exactly. They’re basically asking them to do something the DEA can’t do - change the law. What the DEA can do is prioritise what they’re prosecuting and decriminalise weed, which they more or less unofficially have been doing for a few years now.

  • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Abolish the DEA, legalize all drugs, and put education/treatment programs in place to help people. Repair lives instead of destroying them. That should always be the goal.