The feds will still go after it as an illegal drug when presented as recreational and the will keep the stigma going on forever. Furthermore it will keep a lot of talented people out of good job opportunities for smoking a joint after work instead of having a glass of wine.

  • ShunkW@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    8 months ago

    What blows my mind is how benzos are listed as schedule iv: low risk of abuse or dependence. Except that many, many people abuse and get hooked on them, and along with alcohol, the withdrawal can directly kill you.

    • Dandroid@dandroid.app
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      My wife was on benzos after a stint of panic attacks in the emergency room. That shit was fucking awful for her to get off of. Luckily she’s extremely strong-willed. She went from 3 Xanax a day to none in a month. Her psychiatrist laid out a plan to get her off of them. She told her what time she should take each pill and at what doses. She actually went ahead of schedule. There were a few screaming fits from the withdrawal symptoms, but she did it. It took about 3 months for her to return to normal after her last pill. It was very difficult, but she did it.

    • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Withdrawal can be lethal sure, but you can just overdose on them, like alcohol. They have a very simily mechanism of action to alcohol. It’s also why they’re so dangerous combined. The scheduling system has little relationship to medical reality.

  • CaptObvious@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’ll get rescheduled when Big Pharma comes up with a potion that does a better job and that they can sell for $10k per dose. So long as cannabis works better than anything they can monetize, they’ll fight to keep it illegal. And they have very deep pockets.

    • Nougat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      The only reason cannabis is Schedule I is to “felonize” people who are more likely to vote against Republicans, so their right to vote can be taken away. Pharmceutical companies would frankly love for it to be descheduled, so they can research and develop it for prescription uses.

    • zacher_glachl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      A better job at what, getting you high? Pretty sure they already have that, and while it doesn’t net them 10k per dose the Sacklers would have liked that very much no doubt.

        • jasory@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think people need to actually research THC and cannabinoids. The handful of studies that have been done on them show that it’s no better than OTC medication in all but the very rarest cases.

          Medical marijuana is a complete hoax, it was always about making money and getting high.

            • jasory@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Nope. It’s been 2-3 years, but I read every single research paper on the subject.

              You’re confusing blog posts with actual academic papers. Just a heads up the the effects of medicines are no where near as clearcut as people think. Cannabiniods have fairly weak evidence for efficacy.

              Imagine thinking that journalists have the capacity to analyze papers. Try getting a degree or atleast taking some classes on biostatistics.

                • jasory@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  No there is not. There is a few hundred, and most of then don’t even cover efficacy in vivo which is the subject matter.

                  Keep LARPing as an academic, lets see how stupid you really are.

    • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      While true, an inch foreword is better than a mile backwards. And any movement whatsoever from the federal government is a sign that there are finally cracks forming in the dam.

  • pan_troglodytes@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    the key bit will be whatever federal legislation allows headshops/bodegas to use the banking systems like a normal business would.

  • Nougat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    The feds have already made it perfectly clear that they’re not going to interfere with legal cannabis sales at the state level - even while it’s Schedule I - as evidenced by ::gestures widely::. As long as there’s no interstate transportation, rescheduling it isn’t going to change anything.

    • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      The current state of affairs is the justification employers use for continuing to test and discipline folks for usage even in legal or medically legal states. It’s also the justification banks use for not allowing dispensaries to use their services.

      • jasory@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        “The justification”

        They don’t legally need a justification. The reality is that drug tests just like felony checks are very good filters for bad employees. If a company actually needs employees they won’t do them, or lower the standards so low that anyone that isn’t actively injecting or murdering someone would pass.

        • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The moment there isn’t federal law to lean on, I hope for and expect court cases predicated on the fact that there’s no basis for an employer to care more about whether someone has smoked cannabis in the past thirty days than they do about whether that same employee gets blackout drunk every Friday and Saturday night.

          Neither of those details of their lives speaks to someone’s sobriety at work, and the basis for considering marijuana usage as somehow “worse” is rooted directly in the racist basis for policies enacted at the very start of cannabis prohibition.

          The reality is that drug tests just like felony checks are very good filters for bad employees.

          If this is true, drug testing should start at the CEO.

          Edit2: Hanging onto this for 2 months before replying, or just like trolling through old cannabis discussions looking for an argument, or…?

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    This question is missing huge key context - What country you’re in.

    Without knowing if you’re in Jamaica or France how can we possibly answer?