3 ms·
There's no need to ban the rest. Prohibition is what is causing this problem in the first place. If you legalize marijuana, would be no profit to be made in c
by LordKano 12y ago
There's no need to ban the rest.
Prohibition is what is causing this problem in the first place.
If you legalize marijuana, would be no profit to be made in coming up with new synthetics and without a profit motive, only researchers would do it.
For example, since the end of alcohol prohibition, how many cases are there of people being blinded by methyl alcohol from bathtub gin?
- wjnc 12y agoTrue. And a natural (economic) consequence as well. Although 'legalize everything and advertise what works' seems even more politically unfeasible, than 'only unban what's safe'. It came from an argument (in my head ;) based on the proposition that you would ideally internalize adverse effects in the price of a good. So alcohol-users would pay for alcohol related mischief, LSD for LSD, etc. You would need a product specific VAT for the larger categories. Can't really implement that for N designer drugs, so I thought 'ban the rest for easy of acceptance'. Your effect is more beautiful though.
- oxide 12y agothe synthetic cannabinoids are popular in part because because smoking marijuana will cause a failed UA. when it hit the shelves my friends on probation were smoking it to 'beat' the system.
- LordKano 12y agoThe first person that I ever saw smoke synthetic was someone who was recently released from prison and had to worry about urinalysis.