Federal legalization in the USA, what does the future hold for cannabis?

Smoker's Lounge
1257

This does not even make sense.
You seem to be saying that you think sch. 3 is a great idea because home growing is not federally legal.
You may need to expand on that statement to clarify what you mean.

Please refresh my memory here.
Why do you feel …
Big pharmaceutical companies are not able to not take over a significant portion of the medical market, devastating the existing industry?
Why do you feel this way?

Why do you feel smokeable cannabis, edibles and vapes will allowed under sch. 3?

An educated opinion is not worthless as you seem to suggest here.
Here is some more opinion that matches my own.

First, reclassifying cannabis to a lower schedule within the CSA continues to misrepresent the plant’s safety relative to other controlled substances such as anabolic steroids and ketamine (Schedule III), benzodiazepines (Schedule IV), or even alcohol, which is unscheduled.

I think you stated that you thought Xanax was more dangerous than cannabis, or at least someone did.
Most people don’t agree with that, I feel that thought is in the minority.

Second, moving cannabis to Schedule III is out of step with public and cultural consensus. Americans don’t want cannabis treated like heroin, like it is now. Still, they also don’t want it treated like a Schedule III substance like ketamine, which is only legal to possess with a physician’s prescription.

Do you not see that if medical cannabis is sch.3 it is only legal to possess it with a prescription?
This is not an opinion.

Every state law that is currently in conflict with federal law today will remain in conflict with federal law going forward when or if the Administration reclassifies cannabis as a Schedule III substance.

Sch3. will not change much for the average user.
This does change things for big pharma.

NORML has called for descheduling cannabis — removing it from the Controlled Substances Act altogether.

What I am saying in a nutshell is sch.3 is not right for cannabis.
There are so many folks out there that seem to agree, but not you…LOL

Please tell us why you think sch. 3 will be so great for us all.

“Tobacco and alcohol are not in the Controlled Substances Act. Those substances are well recognized to pose far greater hazards to health than cannabis. We should treat marijuana [under the federal scheduling system] equally.”

Please tell us why you disagree with folks like me and Normal.
You keep sayin this is fearmongering.
Please tell us why you feel we have it all wrong.

1258

Please show me where I have said that, putting words in someone’s mouth does not further any sort of conversation.

1259

Ok I see you like to dance around the issue instead of having a proper debate.
If you would like to debate this topic like adults I am here.
If you choose to play childish mind games I do not have time for that shit.

Again if you wish to discuss this like an adult I am willing.
If you want to play he said she said, I did not say that, sorta games…No thank you!

1260

You’re a silly goose.

1 Like
1261

And you debate skills leave something to be desired.
You don’t back up your opinion very well and you turn to personal attacks when cornered…

Come on back when you are ready to debate like an adult not a child…LOL
I will be here.

1262

Rescheduling Won’t End The War On Cannabis, But Could Open A New Battlefront If We’re Not Careful

While rescheduling on its own would not immediately “capsize existing state markets and give way to further big business control of the industry,” there is a real and significant risk that the collective myopia and excessive self-congratulation among rescheduling advocates will blind the rest of the industry from recognizing that FDA can and will exercise its existing authority over “drugs,” “dietary supplements” and “food” (and, in fact, has already done so with respect to hemp products) unless we demand a new approach.

1263

Sir, can I call you sir?
Sir, you are saying I hold a stance I don’t, nor have I ever claimed to. So I’m not sure what debate you are having. You just fling stuff at the wall and see if any of it sticks.

1264

What?
You clearly stated you feel what I and others have said is fearmongering.
Meaning you strongly disagree.
That is your stance in case you did not know…LOL

I see you are a bit cluless but I wont hold that against you…LOL

To be clear here the debate I wish to have is…
To be clear here…
I do not feel Sch. 3 is right for cannabis.

That is your opinion and I strongly disagree.
I have given countless valid reasons why I feel the way I do but you dismiss them without reason.
If you have reasons, please feel free to state them here to clear the air.

Now is your chance to tell us all why we should be in favor of sch. 3.
Explain to me why I am misunderstanding you and why I have it all wrong.

I suspect you will use this opportunity for more tom foolery and you will not be informing us why you feel sch. 3 is a good thing.

1265

As I’ve stated before, I think you are fear mongering because, on a federal level, which scheduling is a part of, home grow is already illegal.
Schedule 1, schedule 50, doesn’t matter, it’s still illegal federally so it doesn’t mean much. You need to stop twisting people’s words if you expect people to want to converse with you about these things.

1266

Have you even read this thread? :thinking:
Folks like me want cannabis de-scheduled or at least sch. 6

Really, I don’t think that is true, please tell us why you feel this way?
Sch. 6 is a huge improvement over 3 is it not?
It would seem you have not even bothered to review the information I have provided you with.
It is always good to be educated on the topic before you decide to debate it.
Please get your facts straight if you expect people to want to converse with you about these things

DRAFT TEXT: PROPOSED Schedule VI Language

(6) Schedule VI.-

(A) The drug or other substance is listed in Schedule I.

(B) The drug or other substance is subject to some degree of abuse and has a currently accepted medical use in treatment or is restricted for Sale to Adults over the age of 21 in the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, or Puerto Rico.

(C) Drugs grown or manufactured for intrastate Commerce shall be regulated exclusively by the States. All United States Codes, Internal Revenue Codes and any federal agency rules shall be applied exclusively using this schedule for licensed producers of the drug in the States and Territories listed in (B). Licensed producers shall be defined according to the statutes or codes of the States and Territories listed in (B).

(D) Drug regulation and restriction is governed by each State or Territory listed individually in (B). If a State or Territory not listed in (B) legalizes the drug or other substance for medical use in treatment or makes it available for Sale only to adults over the age of 21, the agency regulating the drug in that State or Territory can notify the Attorney General that it is to be added to (B). The Attorney General shall add the State or Territory to (B) within ninety days of notification.

1267

Under sch.3
“Recreational use would still be problematic because that could still be considered unlawful drug trafficking,”

It is highly unlikely that the FDA would ever approve smoked, whole flower marijuana, even after rescheduling. Instead, cannabis pharmaceuticals will come in the form of tablets or liquids.

Reclassifying cannabis to a lower CSA schedule continues to misrepresent its safety relative to other controlled substances, such as alcohol.

Congress simply cannot get comfortable with federally legalizing and regulating cannabis similarly to other drugs not subject to the CSA, like alcohol and tobacco.
But should they get more comfortable? After all, the “head in the sand approach” has only allowed the black market to thrive and is simply out of touch with the public support for legalization.

Perhaps it is time to allow the industry to grow as it naturally would, unfettered and unrestricted by conflicting federal laws.

1268

These folks must be in the fearmongering business too…LOL
If it is truly possible should it really be called fearmongering?
To me being aware of what is possible is a far cry from fearmongering but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2023/11/22/marijuana-rescheduling-research-penalties/

A group of marijuana organizations raised concerns that treating marijuana as a Schedule III substance meant for medicinal purposes could upend the industry. They fear the FDA would prohibit recreational marijuana and hold therapeutic products to the high bar needed to sell medicine — requirements only large pharmaceutical companies may realistically be able to overcome — but leading experts dismiss that concern as unfounded.

Some experts argue that it is unlikely the FDA will suddenly crack down on marijuana after taking a largely hands-off approach for years, given the disruption it would cause and the resources it would take. Advocates counter that there’s no guarantee the winds won’t shift — for example, if Florida’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, wins the presidency after railing against marijuana.

“There is no way anyone could know or predict in our current political climate what the risk of FDA enforcement is,” said Shaleen Title, a former Massachusetts marijuana regulator who runs a cannabis think tank. “What I worry about is by trying to relax marijuana laws, we would inadvertently end up in a situation where we would be criminalizing existing state operators in a new way.”

Limited impact on federal pot prosecutions

Marijuana is illegal at the federal level regardless of how it’s classified, and rescheduling alone would not change penalties for major federal marijuana cases.

Rescheduling would not affect penalties for trafficking convictions

“It won’t make any difference in my neck of the woods,” Tisdale said of rescheduling.

“I don’t know if it’s worth the trade-off to be stuck in this murky middle,” said Kaliko Castille, board president of the Minority Cannabis Business Association. “You are still going to have business owners making millions of dollars and others in prison for a plant.”

1269

Schedule 3 has shortcomings and potential changes which could have a major negative impact.

Financial services for cannabis would likely remain next to nonexistent. Banking, loans, etc., would still be unavailable.

Dispensaries would still be illegal under federal law. Whaaaaat? 100%, because "the FDA would need to approve cannabis-based medicines, which would need to be prescribed by a health care practitioner and dispensed by a registered pharmacist/practitioner."

It’s a long, absurdly expensive process to gain FDA approval, which costs more than the vast majority of cannabis businesses could afford, much less navigate. You know who has the money, time and expertise to get approval? Big Pharma.

Valuable new cannabis products and therapies await fast-lane development with their resources, but end user costs and patents won’t benefit anyone but their shareholders.

The Drug Policy Alliance issued a statement reminding us that state cannabis programs will “remain federally illegal, meaning patients, consumers and workers would remain subject to federal arrest; noncitizens would remain subject to deportation simply for possessing marijuana or working in the industry. It also means that federal benefits, such as housing and nutritional assistance, will still be denied to certain people with previous marijuana convictions.”

1270

I will try and quickly make my point of posting all of this information.

The argument that seems to be playing out here is…
The feds are not gonna come after states that currently consider smokable cannabis legal.
While I feel they most likely will not, they very well could.
I feel this is much like speeding 5-10 mph over the speed limit.
The cop will most likely not pull you over.
But he could, and it is against the law to speed.
So if he chose to pull you over you very well could and would be prosecuted to the limit of the law.
My point is…
If the feds wanted to they could do so, it is a real possibility, that can not be denied.
I wonder if saying “A cop can legally pull you over and give you a ticket for doing 5 mph over the speed limit” is considered fearmongering by some folks? :thinking:

What do the folks in the Cannabis Think Tank think? :nerd_face:
Lets ask Shaleen Title, a former Massachusetts marijuana regulator who runs a cannabis think tank.

1271

My stance…
I feel cannabis is less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco and look how it is treated.
If cannabis is less dangerous why accept it as sch.3, which makes little to no sense.
From the link above…

It also is interesting to note that, while many would like to see cannabis completely descheduled as a Controlled Substance, this is not possible without Congressional Legislation. As explained by Marijuana moment, “the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 requires that all drugs with abuse potential be placed on one of five schedules. While cannabis has a low abuse potential, no reasonable scientist would argue that it has no abuse potential.” Although it can be argued that alcohol and tobacco have abuse potential but are not considered controlled substances, the Act addresses that as well in that “Congress specifically exempted distilled spirits, wine, malt beverages or tobacco”

The above statement seems to contradict itself a bit.
It seems to state that it is not possible to de-schedule cannabis because it has abuse potential.
It then goes on to give us examples of it being done for "distilled spirits, wine, malt beverages or tobacco” … :rofl:

My point here is…
It could be done if they wanted to get it done.

1272

You’ve been yelling into the internet for ~2 hours.
I took a ton of cuts to give out to people in that time.

I hope your day gets better and you get some fresh air.

4 Likes
1273

Actually, I was shopping for a truck while going back and forth with you.
I am pretty fast finding shit on the web
But, thanks for caring bro… :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:
You see I am stuck on the couch for a bit, I am a caregiver for my father-in-law and my wife is away.
So you see I am stuck here caring for him and I have time to do little else but chat on the internet ect.

Very nice…I am jealous, I am not able to grow right now, not much free time and he lives in my growing space.

I am good, but thanks for the love…LOL

1274

@shag . I see what you are saying and I agree with your assesment of the “possibilities.” No matter what “the people” do, the government tries to twist it in such a way that they can maintain complete control.

2 Likes
1275

i see what’s being said also and i am trying to figure out the agenda behind it.

1276

I am an open book, with no hidden agenda.
You guys are funny.
I know it is hard to believe that someone would stand up for a cause because it is the right thing to do when most folks today will not do anything without financial motivation, but for some folks, there does not need to be a hidden agenda.

For the record 10 years ago I said if we took the first deal given to us, corporate cannabis would take over the industry…most said it was just fearmongering and they told me I had some kind of hidden agenda back then too.

What is happening today?
Corporate cannabis has pretty much taken over the cannabis industry.

I said we would see the likes of Bayer/ Monsanto involved in the cannabis industry.
They said that was fearmongering.
What do we have today…Bayer/Monsanto involved in the cannabis industry.

I said to expect sterile clones in the future.
They said it was fearmongering.
Sterile clones are the new normal.

I said plant royalties are the wave of the future.
They said it was fearmongering.
Today, Royalties are the next big thing.

I said cannabis plant patents are coming.
They said it was fearmongering.
We have a ton of cannabis plant patents today.

I said plant counts would shrink below 12 plants.
They said it was fearmongering.
Plant counts are generally 6 plants or less, not 12 anymore.

I said phylos was a scam from the start and everybody involved knew it.
They said it was fearmongering.
Phylos was a scam and everyone knows this now.

I said the Govt. would not allow CBD to be sold at gas stations the way it has been.
They said it was fearmongering.
But as we can see that process is well under way.
Can you see a pattern here?
I could go on there is more…

Now I don’t claim to be some cannabis Nostradamus.
If you look at things the right way, it is easy to see where they are heading in the future.

If I do have an agenda, it is to help folks get their heads out of the sand, so they can see what is happening in the real world.

What is clear to me, and an obvious path toward the future, seems to be difficult for some to even imagine coming true.

My hope is to bring awareness to these issues.
I guess that is my agenda…LOL

Remember… if you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

3 Likes