Sensible drug laws for psychedelics

[Kartikay]

burnt responded to this issue in another thread, but it deserves its own thread, outside of the Nursery.

I wanted to gauge everyone's opinions on what they believe the most appropriate direction for sensible drug laws is. So, what are your opinions? After I gather enough responses, I'll make a poll featuring the popular ideas.


To start it off, my personal opinion:

The only laws that we can hope for are ones that allow people to use entheogens for genuine spiritual purposes. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act has already been adopted, but courts have not applied it favorably. We need precedent in our favor to change that.

and burnt's response:

I disagree. Science can show that psychedelics can be used safely and for therapuetic benefit. THis alone is enough to change their status. More importantly though it should be viewed as a personal rights issue and not a religious/spiritual issue. I've personally benefited enormously from psychedelics and am not a spiritual or religious person at all.

I wish that scientific research was enough to convince people that the drugs are safe. Maybe our generation will listen to rational logic based on the scientific method, but even the average physician and new generation of psychiatrists have little understanding of the drugs. While eventually (and inevitably), reason will pull through, this process of getting all related parties to a mutual understanding of the safety of these substances will take decades. The following quotes are from Stassman's "DMT: The Spirit Molecule."

Many of today's most respected North American and European psychiatric researchers, in both academics and industry, now chairmen of major university departments and presidents of national psychiatric organizations, began their professional lives investigating psychedelic drugs. The most powerful members of their profession discovered that science, data, and reason were incapable of defending their research against the enactment of repressive laws fueled by opinion, emotion, and the media.

It is common for physicians-in-training to learn about previously popular theories and techniques, even if they no longer are in favor. The psychedelic drugs, however, seemed to have dropped out of all psychiatric dialogue.

This is why I believe the first move towards (hopefully) full legalization, is to allow the drug for personal religious use. You may not consider yourself a spiritual person, burnt, but do you believe that psychedelics have changed your understanding of reality? Have they affected your beliefs at all? At their core, religions are only a belief system. I hated the term "religious" and "spiritual" too. Hell, I was atheist for a time. But now, after using psychedelics, the terms have become much more ambiguous. I'm still not a god-fearing man, nor a believer in spirits, but I happily consider myself a spiritual person. What are your definitions of "spiritual" and "religious"?

 

[soulfood]

I disagree. Science can show that psychedelics can be used safely and for therapuetic benefit. THis alone is enough to change their status. More importantly though it should be viewed as a personal rights issue and not a religious/spiritual issue. I've personally benefited enormously from psychedelics and am not a spiritual or religious person at all.

It would seem that Science has proven this already. However the issue is not one of a scientific nature. It's a political/social issue.

 

[elphologist1]

I feel that psychedelics are very powerful substances. Like other powerful things such as cars, power tools, etc., they can be be very useful or very harmful depending how they are used. Here in the US, we require education and passing a driving test prior to letting people drive. I would not be adverse to having to pass similar tests in order to legally purchase and use psychedelics. Maybe even have some sort of "learner's permit" at first where you have to take your first few trips in a controlled setting with experienced trippers.

elphologist

 

[Skizm]

All drugs should be legalized and used at one's own discretion. Fatal doses are solely the user's problem and no one elses'. People should be properly educated about the pros and cons of each narcotic and not scared into believing fallacies about them. People of all ages will continue to use drugs of their choice regardless of what the law is. Putting them in prison for experimentation is not the way to solve society's ills.

As having to get a permit to take etheogens? I'm going to have to disagree with that one. For personal use there should not be a permit required. However, if you are going to administer the drug then I might agree with it. Remember, this is a personal choice, not a government matter.

What I do with my own mind is my business. Not the government's business, not society's business, not anyone's business 8)

 

[soulfood]

Fatal doses are solely the user's problem and no one elses'.

I think people who are closely related to the user may disagree.

 

[Skizm]

Fatal doses are solely the user's problem and no one elses'.

I think people who are closely related to the user may disagree.

People who are closely related to those who get an abortion may disagree. Does that make it their business? When does personal responsibility enter the equation? People need to take responsibility for their actions and stop expecting the government to hold their hand for everything.

I would expect a family to express discontent at a user's choice. In fact, I do it all the time when I see my brother smoking cigarettes. However, smoking is my brother's choice. Personal responsibility comes from education. The education about drugs in the United States right now is pitiful. It amounts to "Don't do drugs or you'll go to jail and be gang-raped." True education about them is what we need. Not the scare-tactics.

 

[soulfood]

hmm...

I highly disagree. I DO agree that use/posession of a substance should not be an offense punished by incarceration or a financial penalty. Though I do believe some substances be safeguarded with a little more caution than "you be careful with that, son"

I also think that using certain substances in certain situations i.e drunk driving, is also something that needs very careful consideration. However I also believe that just because someone is caught in a situation like driving under the influence, it's not worth ruining their life over.

It's not as simple as legal/illegal as far as I'm concerned. You have to appreciate the grey area of the human condition.

 

[Skizm]

hmm...

I highly disagree. I DO agree that use/posession of a substance should not be an offense punished by incarceration or a financial penalty. Though I do believe some substances be safeguarded with a little more caution than "you be careful with that, son"

I also think that using certain substances in certain situations i.e drunk driving, is also something that needs very careful consideration. However I also believe that just because someone is caught in a situation like driving under the influence, it's not worth ruining their life over.

It's not as simple as legal/illegal as far as I'm concerned. You have to appreciate the grey area of the human condition.

That is true, I just tend to believe that true education eliminates the misconduct that we see with drug use today and that the government should have no part in what I put my body through. Now, when other people become involved in the equation (i.e. drunk driving) it becomes a different problem; one that I do not have the answer too

 

[amrilir]

I feel that psychedelics are very powerful substances. Like other powerful things such as cars, power tools, etc., they can be be very useful or very harmful depending how they are used. Here in the US, we require education and passing a driving test prior to letting people drive. I would not be adverse to having to pass similar tests in order to legally purchase and use psychedelics. Maybe even have some sort of "learner's permit" at first where you have to take your first few trips in a controlled setting with experienced trippers.

This sounds like an adequate system (after all, Tim Leary had been advocating something of the sort since the 60's). I like the idea of a "learner's permit." Maybe we could require people to take a few trips with a licensed sitter (sort of like driving with your parents, to use the same analogy).
However, in practice, how would you effectively enforce this kind of regulatory system? After all, driving licenses work because they are routinely checked for in traffic stops. Someone who's growing their own mushrooms could be tripping their whole life without a license, because under no circumstances would anyone ask for it.

 

[Cheeto]

I've always thought all drugs should be treated like alcohol, illegal until age of 21. Education on them is very important like stated, but allowing kids to experiment with drugs is a very bad idea, only mature adults should be able to take a chance at fucking there life up. for the most only adults can way in the cons and pros for drug use, when do kids give much thought of drugs they use? All they see it as is fun, thinking nothing of health or education, also kid drug use for the most renders kids education, too concerned with a party to learn("Why study when we can party").

Human rights is the angle in my view, the science needs to be done as well, but not much of that happens because its illegal and they think it has no use, they feel if it has no medical use and has the potential to be abused they have the right to ban use even on a personal level. Basically they feel they know whats best for you, you are being robbed of your personal choice as an adult. Its a politacal problem 100%, not scientific.

I think all drugs should be legal, but the right to sell the should not be. Allowed to grow a reasonable limit of drugs, not growing bulk for obvious intent to sell to others. All materials should be legal to sell, just not the drugs extracted from them, excluding MJ because its already ready. Seeds should be availble to sell though, in my opinion.

 

[Ayawasqero]

burnt responded to this issue in another thread, but it deserves its own thread, outside of the Nursery.

I wanted to gauge everyone's opinions on what they believe the most appropriate direction for sensible drug laws is. So, what are your opinions? After I gather enough responses, I'll make a poll featuring the popular ideas.


To start it off, my personal opinion:

The only laws that we can hope for are ones that allow people to use entheogens for genuine spiritual purposes. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act has already been adopted, but courts have not applied it favorably. We need precedent in our favor to change that.

and burnt's response:

I disagree. Science can show that psychedelics can be used safely and for therapuetic benefit. THis alone is enough to change their status. More importantly though it should be viewed as a personal rights issue and not a religious/spiritual issue. I've personally benefited enormously from psychedelics and am not a spiritual or religious person at all.

I wish that scientific research was enough to convince people that the drugs are safe. Maybe our generation will listen to rational logic based on the scientific method, but even the average physician and new generation of psychiatrists have little understanding of the drugs. While eventually (and inevitably), reason will pull through, this process of getting all related parties to a mutual understanding of the safety of these substances will take decades. The following quotes are from Stassman's "DMT: The Spirit Molecule."

Many of today's most respected North American and European psychiatric researchers, in both academics and industry, now chairmen of major university departments and presidents of national psychiatric organizations, began their professional lives investigating psychedelic drugs. The most powerful members of their profession discovered that science, data, and reason were incapable of defending their research against the enactment of repressive laws fueled by opinion, emotion, and the media.

It is common for physicians-in-training to learn about previously popular theories and techniques, even if they no longer are in favor. The psychedelic drugs, however, seemed to have dropped out of all psychiatric dialogue.

This is why I believe the first move towards (hopefully) full legalization, is to allow the drug for personal religious use. You may not consider yourself a spiritual person, burnt, but do you believe that psychedelics have changed your understanding of reality? Have they affected your beliefs at all? At their core, religions are only a belief system. I hated the term "religious" and "spiritual" too. Hell, I was atheist for a time. But now, after using psychedelics, the terms have become much more ambiguous. I'm still not a god-fearing man, nor a believer in spirits, but I happily consider myself a spiritual person. What are your definitions of "spiritual" and "religious"?

Didn´t read through the whole post, just read the most important. 1 objection: drugs aren´t safe. The psychedelics aren´t safe. To take any drug is to play with fire. Either you´ll get busted by possessing , or you´ll destroy yourself by using the inproper drug. The hallucinogens, from the delta - 9 -tetrahydrocannabinole up to the 5 - methoxy - dimethyltryptamine are the golden middle way. Way to jail.

On the MAPS page, between the links, is the group called Students for sensible drug policy. Highly recommend to anyone involved in the improvement of the drug policy and/or legislature towards free entheogenic use.

Peace.

 

[obliguhl]

It would seem that Science has proven this already. However the issue is not one of a scientific nature. It's a political/social issue.

Science is at least a language understood and accepted by many in our culture.
The real problem is, that a language has to be accepted.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Good points Flashy, I agree with just about everything you said. Public safety my ass! Can you imagine what Thomas Jefferson would have to say about the War on Drugs????

It would seem that Science has proven this already. However the issue is not one of a scientific nature. It's a political/social issue.

Science is at least a language understood and accepted by many in our culture.
The real problem is, that a language has to be accepted.

The real problem is that you can't have even, say 30%, of your society using psychedelics without a shift in consciousness that would endanger the current system. Politicians and those with money and power are aware of this, at least enough to keep them illegal.

For example, in my recent life I've heard a lot of people saying that Avatar's story was cliche. Can you imagine getting that reaction from a society where anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 the people are experienced, or at least familiar with ayahuasca? Psychedelics are true catalysts for change. I have experienced more personal/spiritual growth in the several years since I began to discover entheogens than any other time in my life.

Psychedelics will only become legal when the current social paradigm is dissolved, or at least heavily modified and in all honesty, seeing the way ayahuasca and DMT are beginning to enter the public consciousness, they may play a role in dissolving the paradigm we currently find ourselves in. Either way, this is not going to happen passively. MAPS is making leaps and bounds, other countries are expanding psychedelic experiments, we must play an active role. There have always been psychedelic individuals in high places (no pun intended) look at Steve Jobs. Now it's time for all of us in our own lives to begin to work to change the status quo. This must be done through proper, respectful, and mature approaches to the psychedelic experience and the entheogens themselves.

Science by itself will not change anything...how long have we been aware, scientifically speaking, that time is not linear? Aaaand, in what school curriculum is that presented? None. Psychedelics are the same way. We know many things about them, but the social memory of the 60s and 70s still has people scared or not taking them seriously (oh, arent mushrooms those drugs that take you into a cartoon world and everyones doing flips and shit, yea I heard those were nuts). It is up to the younger generations, as the old geezer staunch anti-drug activists die, to present a rational, reasonable case for psychedelics in more mainstream life.

We can do this...look how quickly cannabis laws have begun to change. Looks like they were wrong about the Domino effect in relation to communism, but it sure seems real in the arena of Cannabis laws.