|
Terratic
"Earthstruck"

Registered: 01/27/13
Posts: 149
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
|
Licensing For Psychedelic Use
#17621889 - 01/28/13 12:58 AM (11 years, 2 days ago) |
|
|
This idea has probably been suggested countless times, but when considering all of its implications, it might be the best solution to combat misuse of these substances, while protecting those who are able to use them responsibly.
Keep in mind that this proposed system is meant to protect responsible users from current legal repercussions. It is not the solution to illegal trafficking or consumption by minors, which would probably still occur if it was implemented. Many would consider these restrictions to be discriminatory or draconian, but I think they're necessary to prevent damage resulting from the abuse of said substances. They are as follows:
Legal usage of hallucinogens would require a special license. To qualify for acquisition, you would have to be at least 18 years old, and have no history (or family history) of mental illness or behavioural instability.
During acquisition, the subject would be tested on their knowledge of psychedelics, the risks associated with usage, their effects on the brain, and they would be taught how to use them in a safe and responsible manor. If they successfully pass, they would be given a probationary license.
* Look at all the people who try Salvia Divinorum (salvinorin A) expecting it to be like cannabis. They inhale ridiculous quantities of smoke from a high potency extract and become terrified whenever they feel its effects! Know your substance. *
To maintain a license, there would be strict rules:
- You cannot be under the influence while occupying a public domain. They are only to be used in the privacy of your own (or a friend's) home, in an isolated area (forest, field, nature reserve, ect...) or certified clinic.
- You cannot drive or operate heavy machinery while under the influence.
- Without authorization, you are not allowed to redistribute these substances to anyone, even if they have their own license. They are strictly for personal use.
- You must be under the supervision of a sober individual, until you are deemed fit to use these substances independently.
* This one is kind of iffy. You should (probably) always be supervised, no matter how experienced you are. *
- You are not allowed to receive/accept these substances from illegal suppliers.
* I cannot decide whether or not people should be allowed to cultivate their own, as this could easily lead to illegal traficking. *
If any of these terms are violated, your license may be revoked.
* This would depend on how many strikes you have, how severe the offense was, if it was an accident, ect... *
As far as distribution is concerned, there would also be strict regulations involved:
- Only certified (private or public) companies would be allowed to sell these substances. They would be subject to frequent scrutiny in order to ensure the quality and purity of their products.
- They should be sold at a price that makes it difficult to earn a profit on the black market (through resale), as this would make illegal buyers prefer other sources.
- People with a license would be very limited to how much they are allowed to purchase within a certain time frame (e.g., 800 milligrams of N,N-DMT per year). Restrictions are set according to what the dosages are.
- Upon purchase, each user would be administered a receipt or prescription that is registered to them. By law, these companies would be obligated to uphold these rules.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, I am on the fence whenever it comes to certain substances being made available to new users. Safer substances with shorter durations can be available initially, of course, but the substances that have more risks associated with them should only be made available to experienced users who are in good standing. I'm thinking of substances like Bromo-dragonFLY and 5-MeO-DMT, which are very dose-sensitive and carry heavy psychological/physical risks.
I am in no way condoning the use of psychedelics, but the biggest negative risks associated with them has little to do with their physiological effects... It has to do with people being punished (by law enforcers) for using/possessing them. Many might think it would cost the government too much money to implement this licensing system, but it is costing them even more to incarcerate these "offenders".
I think this is a sound proposition, assuming that drug laws are centred around the issues the government says they are. If you have read through it all, I'd love to hear any criticisms you may have.
Edited by Terratic (01/28/13 03:03 AM)
|
Ok amoismis
metabolizer



Registered: 11/05/10
Posts: 346
Last seen: 5 years, 11 months
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Terratic]
#17622004 - 01/28/13 01:50 AM (11 years, 2 days ago) |
|
|
If the prohibition and solely negative propaganda regarding psychedelics were ever to end (they won't- at least not in America, not while America is America) then i agree that some sort of system resembling this would be the most sensible thing to implement.
Criticisms? The whole thing about excluding those having a history of psychiatric illness & especially only having a family member with psychiatric illness. Total exclusion for everyone considered to be mentally ill (by society/the medical establishment) seems kind of counter productive for the regulation of such medicines. Much mental illness is propagated by our sick society and i think psychedelics can be extremely beneficial to those afflicted. As far as genetic psychiatric problems and flat out violent psychosis, well, yes maybe there should be some restrictions at least for a personal license. I don't think those people should be banned from ever imbibing them however, since in some cases i believe they could help. Psychedelic clinics perhaps? Where they are administered in a therapeutic setting by highly trained psychologist/doctor/shaman type individuals; all sort of depending upon the patient and situation and molded to their individual needs. That way there wouldn't be any danger of unstable individuals running around with licenses for powerful chemicals yet they could still get the help they may need from these substances.
Also, in regard to specific compounds, from what i have read about it (i technically don't know...having no experience with it myself) Bromo-dragonFLY doesn't really seem to have many (or any?) useful or positive aspects to outweigh its extreme physical dangers. On the other hand, a lot of people feel that way about the NBOMe's and i personally find 25C-NBOMe to be a legitimate and useful ally when used appropriately (although it isn't notorious for life threatening vasoconstriction like the FLY). It would probably be quite difficult to decide which compounds get to be used by who & why...
|
Terratic
"Earthstruck"

Registered: 01/27/13
Posts: 149
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Ok amoismis]
#17622159 - 01/28/13 03:01 AM (11 years, 2 days ago) |
|
|
Thank you for your response.
I was mainly referring to people with (latent or active) psychosis, schizophrenia, PTSD or anxiety. I should have clarified that. It is definitely an ambiguous issue.
I'm not sure what conditions should determine prohibition, but it would be for their safety. The government would also want to prevent people from being confined to psychiatric hospitals, because then they are a strain on the system.
|
Ok amoismis
metabolizer



Registered: 11/05/10
Posts: 346
Last seen: 5 years, 11 months
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Terratic]
#17629119 - 01/29/13 01:51 PM (11 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Sorry, i know its been a minute since this thread was initiated but i just wanted to put it out there that i used to (and still, to some degree) suffer from general/social anxiety and depression. However it used to approach a "neurotic" level. The psychedelics have helped to catalyze a permanent shift in my consciousness which im not really sure i would have been able to attain otherwise, at least in so short a time. I certainly agree that in some individuals psychedelics can catalyze a change in the negative direction, as they are powerful and neutral "mind enzymes" and their effects are solely determined by the brain they are metabolized by. Thats the basis of my "controlled yet relaxed clinic center type thing" idea- i think that these substances should be safely available to people suffering from these mental oppressions and dysfunctional thought patterns. Especially for depression, anxiety, and PTSD. Although there have even been successful studies giving LSD to schizophrenics with "negative symptoms" (lacking normal emotions as opposed to psychosis and hallucinations).
I think the license idea is great for healthy individuals (especially artists and inventors) who wish to expand their consciousness or initiate new ideas, i just truly believe that these drugs can also help some of the mentally ill in ways that no accepted medication or treatment can. I would hate for them to be excluded because of the possible negative consequences- their use would just have to be carefully regulated and supervised by highly trained specialists, and the patients themselves would need to be truthfully educated beforehand. Still, they are definitely not for everyone and all these systems would need to be painstakingly designed to benefit and not harm. Of course, unfortunately, almost no part of our society is willing to fund this or resilient enough against propaganda for any of this to happen in the next 100 years and so all this speculation is just sad and exhausting...
Sorry for the long post, i just think about this a lot.
|
Terratic
"Earthstruck"

Registered: 01/27/13
Posts: 149
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Ok amoismis]
#17632402 - 01/29/13 10:28 PM (11 years, 15 hours ago) |
|
|
I also believe they have legitimate clinical uses. Unfortunately, you are at the mercy of the doctors and pharmaceutical companies, as they would rather prescribe other forms of medication.
Psychedelics can have polarizing effects when used to treat psychological disorders. For some, it might greatly improve their condition, but for others, it might make it significantly worse. Liability might become an issue, so I can see why doctors might be reluctant to use these methods.
In spite of all that, people are more than free to make their own decisions; however, if it is ever to become an accepted practice, we have to consider the interests and concerns of the government.
These are still futile arguments. It's unlikely that a judicious reform will happen any time soon.
Edited by Terratic (01/29/13 10:36 PM)
|
Ok amoismis
metabolizer



Registered: 11/05/10
Posts: 346
Last seen: 5 years, 11 months
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Terratic]
#17633185 - 01/30/13 01:53 AM (11 years, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Terratic said: I also believe they have legitimate clinical uses. Unfortunately, you are at the mercy of the doctors and pharmaceutical companies, as they would rather prescribe other forms of medication.
Psychedelics can have polarizing effects when used to treat psychological disorders. For some, it might greatly improve their condition, but for others, it might make it significantly worse. Liability might become an issue, so I can see why doctors might be reluctant to use these methods.
I agree, that's why a totally different system would need to be devised and implemented for clinical use. I was thinking of some sort of voluntary system where individuals with ailments could seek out the treatment themselves, undergo psychological evaluation and be thoroughly educated about what to expect beforehand, as opposed to just being prescribed psychedelics at the discretion of a doctor ( a horrible idea). This could never work in our current (largely disgusting) profit obsessed medical system which essentially makes an industry of sick people.
Quote:
These are still futile arguments. It's unlikely that a judicious reform will happen any time soon.
Sadly i also totally agree...but as discouraging as it is i don't think the idea should be abandoned. The only thing that can really be done currently is to attempt to spread as much knowledge about the subject as possible.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Terratic]
#17736328 - 02/03/13 01:32 AM (10 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Total legalization is the only way
|
Terratic
"Earthstruck"

Registered: 01/27/13
Posts: 149
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Repertoire89]
#17736465 - 02/03/13 02:29 AM (10 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
People value safety, and as long as there are peopleQuote:
Repertoire89 said: Total legalization is the only way

I am all for freedom of choice, but I don't think that would work. Parents, politicians, law enforcers... they would definitely not want this. The public values security. Whether they're made completely legal or illegal, people seem to be damned either way. I think we must implement the least objectionable alternative, whatever that may be.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Terratic]
#17736467 - 02/03/13 02:30 AM (10 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Marijuana is legal where I live, soon enough shrooms will be.
|
Terratic
"Earthstruck"

Registered: 01/27/13
Posts: 149
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
|
Re: Licensing For Psychedelic Use [Re: Repertoire89]
#17736536 - 02/03/13 02:55 AM (10 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Marijuana is a different issue, in my opinion. I believe it should be decriminalized and regulated, but not in the same way psychedelics should be.
|
|