Bluelight

Thread: US to extend "Controlled Substance Analogue Act" to Schedule III-IV drugs

Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. Collapse Details
    US to extend "Controlled Substance Analogue Act" to Schedule III-IV drugs 
    #1
    Ex-Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    443
    Post
    I lost the URL of the article stating this, but apparently the remnants of the GOP in Congress are trying to extend this act to almost all scheduled drugs. Basically this law prevents people from making a "analogue" or a chemical related to and/or designed to cause similar effects of a schedule I-II drug (mostly this occurs with MDMA and amphetamines). Currently this law does not apply to schedule III-IV drugs (meaning some benzos and barbiturates are actually legal to possess without a prescription in the US). However, the GOP is trying to shore up their chances of gaining seats in Congress by passing an extension of the law covering up this seeming loophole, and of course some Democrats are hitching a ride on this crazy wagon. It appears to have enough support to pass both the House and the Senate, and you know no one would attempt to stop this act unless they wanted to commit political suicide.

    Damn, and there was some european/russian/asian drugs that I wanted to try just because of this particular lack of legal coverage. Looks like that's out the window in 2010.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #2
    Bluelight Crew Beenhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,517
    Not ADD, but I bet its so inconceivable to think of a democrat endorsing this idea ...... anything if this sort surely must be sponsored solely by the GOP, those pure hearted liberals would never think of such a thing!
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #3
    Ex-Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by Beenhead View Post
    Not ADD, but I bet its so inconceivable to think of a democrat endorsing this idea ...... anything if this sort surely must be sponsored solely by the GOP, those pure hearted liberals would never think of such a thing!
    lol, I hope that's sarcasm. There's a lot more conservative Democrats out there in office than you think. The majority seem to be more of a local or state phenomenon that tends to have roots in the 1800s-early 1900s politics, especially southern Dems (along with the big city "machines").
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #4
    not surprising the Fascist State of Amerika is more and more looking to control everything and further destroy the core principles of the USA which is based on liberty and freedom ... this is nothing compared to more overtly un-Constitutional acts, but it is certainly par for the course
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #5
    I don't think this is true. I've searched and searched and searched, but I can't find anything indicating any veracity to the claim.

    Certainly possible, but rather unlikely.

    Besides, the majority of drugs scheduled under CI and CII have analogues in CIII-V, so most of what's an analogue of a CIII-V is already an analogue of a CI-II. Like the claims that MDPV isn't an analogue because pyrovalerone isn't a CI or II. Nonsense. It's obviously an analogue of MDMA and all the other amphetamines.

    The only real change would be including unscheduled benzodiazepines, a few oddball depressants and oddball stimulants like mazindol.

    There will be truly novel things for a long while. If it weren't for the RC industry, it wouldn't even be an issue.

    Currently this law does not apply to schedule III-IV drugs (meaning some benzos and barbiturates are actually legal to possess without a prescription in the US).
    No barbiturate is legal without a prescription. Read the CSA. It specifically includes "derivatives of barbituric acid"- not just the listed barbiturates. Primidone (Mysoline, IIRC) is probably the only barbiturate-like drug not covered by among these as it's an approved US drug but is not scheduled. And it's not even technically a barbiturate, but is metabolized to phenobarbital. Too bad there isn't a pentobarbital-prodrug.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #6
    ^ indeed such as K (CIII) analogues can be looked upon as de facto PCP (CII)analogues as they easily can stretch the meaning of analogue to do so

    still they like to restrict things and do so when they can and simply it would require the passage of the law for which i gather we would see little opposition
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #7
    Ex-Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    443
    which one of you guys are planning to write 300 letters to obama to stop it. I'm only writing 3, as it may physically hurt to write any more than that. And my handwriting is awful - you guys should hear the bad things handwriting experts say about my mental wiring after they take
    a glimpse at the written word. Good thing they're all bullshit.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #8
    It's b/c the DEA recently got ahold of some phenazepam.
    go to www.dea.gov
    search for 'microgram bulletin'
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #9
    yeah, writing letter will do what ...c'mon, this is a fascist state if you have not noticed...good luck with any such exercise in futility

    ...at best it will get ya on a list, LOL

    anyway as the the 'microgram bulletin' ...do you have a direct link as i was just curious to see this and could not find it?
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #10
    They used the chemical name. They didn't seem to have heard of phenazepam before apparently. It's a Russian drug. The pills were being hawked as Xanax, I think it said. The drug, which was only slightly misnamed, was correctly identified by the authors as uncontrolled in the US.

    If you still can't find the article after that extra bit of information, then I'll look it up for you later maybe. There is a thread about it around here on bluelight as well. I believe this was in a relatively recent Microgram issue.
    Reply With Quote
     

  11. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Yeah, I posted about the drug. It seems almost certain that it's phenazepam.

    But I doubt that it's just that- or that that actually has anything to do with it at all. If this were true, it wouldn't have been because some Republican is really concerned about phenazepam showing up in one seizure.

    It'd have to be all of the other analogues being sold openly as if they weren't analogues (or for human consumption). MDPV, Methylone, Butylone, etc.
    Reply With Quote
     

  12. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    I am sure this has been bandied about for quite some time and may now be headed to fruition...
    Reply With Quote
     

  13. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Well, so far we have one person's claim. I keep looking, but can't find anything to support it.

    It'd be nice to know the truth.
    Reply With Quote
     

  14. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    whether it is in their sights right now or not though I am sure it has been discussed in some circles where they have the influence to try to push it through if they so deemed it is worth bothering, but yes for now we have not seen any substantiation for that to occur anytime soon
    Reply With Quote
     

  15. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    Shouldn't this be in basic drug discussion? Since when do any of the choices the US federal government makes regarding substance legal status remotely qualify themselves as being advanced? I think they are primitive at best. =(
    Reply With Quote
     

  16. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    ^ Agreed, conversations between the DEA and legislators belong in Advanced Dunce Discussion.
    Reply With Quote
     

  17. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Well, if and when this becomes law, it will be published in the Federal Register. We went through this same debate with 2ct7.

    moved to Legal Discussion?
    Reply With Quote
     

  18. Collapse Details
    2ce (iii) 
    #18
    I am from Pennsylvania - I am going to court right now over 2C-E (2,5-dimethoxy-4-ethylphenethylamine)(iii) a drug that is unscheduled in the United States, could be considered a analog, I had my court hearing postponed due to my public defender!...Got reed of her to get a lawyer and it isn't until sept 22nd. I was pulled over and searched they found 3 pills in my back pocket and I told them that they where old, "Which they where old had them for about 1month thought i lost them someone gave them to me and told me what there name was, So I looked them up and then couldnt find them so when i said they where old I as not lying! its in the police report. In the analog it says if I was not going to sale them or take them that they are not considered a analog!!!! I want to know how to fight this?
    Thanks any help will do!!!!
    [/I][/B]
    Reply With Quote
     

  19. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    No, that's not how the analogue act works.

    If they're not for human consumption they're not considered an analogue.

    Since they were in pill form, and I doubt you have any involvement with academia, you're screwed.

    There's literally no way you could argue that they're not analogues. DOET is Schedule I, and this is just the phenethylamine homologue of that.
    Reply With Quote
     

  20. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    ^^
    lesson for everyone, if LE asks don't identify what things are, especially if there is a chance of them being analogues, if you say they are vitamin pills or natural mineral supplements and they turn out to be analogues then so what. No Mens Rea. If you say they are 2-ce and they are in a form intended for consumption you are pretty much fucked.
    If in doubt say absolutely nothing.
    Another minor point even if you forget you had them you still are in possession of them, because you knew you had them at one point.

    the only angle to play is that you were given them for analysis and that you didn't get around to arranging analysis, of course this depends on how much you said earlier.

    Disclaimer.......
    the above is not legal advice, neither should it be considered as such. Vecktor knows shit about the law and if you are dumb enough to take the above advice as being legal valid do not whinge when you get sent to jail to share a cell with a big hairy guy called bubba. If you want legal advice get a lawyer.
    Reply With Quote
     

  21. Collapse Details
     
    #21
    Actually, a large constituency of the remaining GOP are small-government Libertarians from out West (Nevada, Arizona, etc). Many of them want to abolish the DEA and the CSA.

    Moderate Republicans (and big city Republicans) allied with conservative Democrats are usually the culprits behind drug legislation- they use it as a "Bi-Partisan" political stepping stone to higher office.

    Not too long ago John McCain authored/sponsored a bill that would ban Federal and State funding of Methadone Maintenance.

    People like him (and his Democratic counterparts) are much more dangerous with regards to social policy than those who are considered right-wing crackpots/extremists like Ron Paul (who personally wrote a letter to Congress seeking an end to the War On Doctors, i.e. the DEA busting doctors who prescribe OxyContin/CII analgesics to their patients).

    Searching for evidence of this would be futile until it comes closer to vote time. It's probably buried in a health care funding proposal or something. You won't hear about it until a dozen guys in all black riot gear, Kevlar with three-letter patches on their chests storm into your house with assault rifles and demand to see your 'motherfucking godless commie' hands for that half a gram of Phenazepam you ordered.
    Reply With Quote
     

  22. Collapse Details
     
    #22
    ^ very small so don;t hold your breath as IMO if anything things will continue to become more Draconian
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •