wow
― I painted my teeth (sleeve), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 17:39 (two weeks ago) link
man if there's a Weedonald's on every corner
― ain't nothin but a brie thing, baby (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 17:39 (two weeks ago) link
some info I just found on what that means, legally:
Legal Consequences If Marijuana Moved to Schedule IIIMoving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law. With respect to medical marijuana, a key difference between placement in Schedule I and Schedule III is that substances in Schedule III have an accepted medical use and may lawfully be dispensed byprescription, while Substances in Schedule I cannot. However, prescription drugs must be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Although FDA has approved some drugs derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. Moreover, if one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions for the substance from medical providers, subject to federal legal requirements that differ from existing state regulatoryrequirements for medical marijuana.Rescheduling marijuana would not affect the medical marijuana appropriations rider. Thus, so long as the current rider remains in effect, participants in the state-legal medical marijuana industry who comply with state law would be shielded from federal prosecution. If the rider were to lapse or be repealed, these persons would again be subject to prosecution at the discretion of DOJ.With respect to the manufacture, distribution, and possession of recreational marijuana, if marijuana were moved to Schedule III, such activities would remain illegal under federal law and potentially subject to federal prosecution regardless of their status under state law.Some criminal penalties for CSA violations depend on the schedule in which a substance is classified. If marijuana were moved to Schedule III, applicable penalties for some offenses would be reduced.However, CSA penalties that apply to activities involving marijuana specifically, such as the quantity based mandatory minimum sentences discussed above, would not change as a result of rescheduling. DEA is not required to set annual production quotas for Schedule III controlled substances.The prohibition on business deductions in Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code applies to any trade or business that “consists of trafficking in controlled substances (within the meaning of schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act) which is prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.” Because the provision applies only to activities involving substancesin Schedule I or II, moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to deduct business expenses on federal tax filings. Other collateral legal consequences would continue to attach to unauthorized marijuana-related activities.
Moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law. With respect to medical marijuana, a key difference between placement in Schedule I and Schedule III is that substances in Schedule III have an accepted medical use and may lawfully be dispensed byprescription, while Substances in Schedule I cannot. However, prescription drugs must be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Although FDA has approved some drugs derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. Moreover, if one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions for the substance from medical providers, subject to federal legal requirements that differ from existing state regulatoryrequirements for medical marijuana.
Rescheduling marijuana would not affect the medical marijuana appropriations rider. Thus, so long as the current rider remains in effect, participants in the state-legal medical marijuana industry who comply with state law would be shielded from federal prosecution. If the rider were to lapse or be repealed, these persons would again be subject to prosecution at the discretion of DOJ.
With respect to the manufacture, distribution, and possession of recreational marijuana, if marijuana were moved to Schedule III, such activities would remain illegal under federal law and potentially subject to federal prosecution regardless of their status under state law.Some criminal penalties for CSA violations depend on the schedule in which a substance is classified. If marijuana were moved to Schedule III, applicable penalties for some offenses would be reduced.
However, CSA penalties that apply to activities involving marijuana specifically, such as the quantity based mandatory minimum sentences discussed above, would not change as a result of rescheduling. DEA is not required to set annual production quotas for Schedule III controlled substances.
The prohibition on business deductions in Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code applies to any trade or business that “consists of trafficking in controlled substances (within the meaning of schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act) which is prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.” Because the provision applies only to activities involving substancesin Schedule I or II, moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to deduct business expenses on federal tax filings. Other collateral legal consequences would continue to attach to unauthorized marijuana-related activities.
― ain't nothin but a brie thing, baby (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 17:45 (two weeks ago) link
Hooray for rescheduling — it’s a step!
― Piggy Lepton (La Lechera), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 18:02 (two weeks ago) link
legalization seems like pretty low hanging fruit for a not-particularly-popular incumbent President in an election year but honestly idk what he can even do. this seems like a good step at least.
― frogbs, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 18:11 (two weeks ago) link
xpost it's a step I thought was a pipedream for many years. glad to see sanity finally prevailing
― ain't nothin but a brie thing, baby (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 18:20 (two weeks ago) link
― frogbs, Tuesday, April 30, 2024 2:11 PM bookmarkflaglink
with our luck, Trump campaign will do his advertising for him.
"With Biden in office, weed is going to be freely available"
Biden's response:
"Hell yeah it is!"
― ain't nothin but a brie thing, baby (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 18:21 (two weeks ago) link
Legalization would require congressional approval, yes? Good luck with that right now
― octobeard, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 18:47 (two weeks ago) link
still might help to get their votes on the record
― frogbs, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 18:49 (two weeks ago) link
get their votes on the record
Good thought, but not gonna happen. In the Senate legalization would be subject to filibuster and never make it to a vote. If the Ds held the House majority they could bring legalization out of committee to the floor for a recorded vote, but the R majority's not going to cooperate on that.
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 18:55 (two weeks ago) link
It doesn't need to get to a vote. The President and prominent Democrats making it an issue would be an energizing issue with a lot of younger (under 50 lol) voters.
― papal hotwife (milo z), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 19:32 (two weeks ago) link
should be decriminalized NOT LEGALIZED
― stwahberrymilkgirlll, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 19:36 (two weeks ago) link
why not
― frogbs, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 19:44 (two weeks ago) link
I seriously doubt that legal weed would be such an electoral slam dunk for a candidate that everyone always hopes it will be. I mean, it’s the right thing to do, but I don’t think it’s moving the needle very much.
― Jeff, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 19:47 (two weeks ago) link
I seriously doubt that legal weed would be such an electoral slam dunk for a candidate that everyone always hopes it will be.
Maybe it's a dumb stereotype, but "really into weed" and "likely voter" seem close to mutually exclusive.
― Instead of create and send out, it pull back and consume (unperson), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 19:57 (two weeks ago) link
Weed is all over the place now as well: from the lowly doobie of mexican weed, to highly concentrated 'dab' and shit like that
― Andy the Grasshopper, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 19:59 (two weeks ago) link
I don’t think it’s moving the needle very much
perhaps not but as unperson says it's one of those issues that might motivate some folks to vote who otherwise would say "who cares, it's all a scam anyway, man...". plus it would force the GOP to argue against something broadly popular. but yeah maybe the ship has sailed I mean I don't live in a legal state and yet it seems to be everywhere these days. that farm bill which passed seems to introduce so many technicalities, like oh here's something that's not at all like weed until you heat it up, in which case it's basically the same...I mean where we're at now just makes no sense. like you can "only" have .3% THC in edibles here but even in legal states you don't often get more than that.
― frogbs, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:08 (two weeks ago) link
i am not going to try to predict the effect this is going to have on voters -- overall rescheduling it from S1 is a logical and useful shift and I am here for it.
― Piggy Lepton (La Lechera), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:11 (two weeks ago) link
https://www.cshl.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Boomer-Esiason-headshot.jpg
― papal hotwife (milo z), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:12 (two weeks ago) link
xpost otm, regardless of its effect it needed to happen
― ain't nothin but a brie thing, baby (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:12 (two weeks ago) link
something that I think has been overlooked itt so far is that this will enable research on a much greater scale
― I painted my teeth (sleeve), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:13 (two weeks ago) link
i.e. lab work, genetics, tests, etc
― I painted my teeth (sleeve), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:14 (two weeks ago) link
cancer treatment, etc etc etc
yes!! and that will legitimize and destigmatize and that is good.
― Piggy Lepton (La Lechera), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:15 (two weeks ago) link
lmao my brain was going the opposite direction and I was thinking "yes, there will be more labs doing work on marijuana genetics and breeding"
― ɥɯ ︵ (°□°) (mh), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:21 (two weeks ago) link
ConAgra Cannabis® - Buds You Can Trust
― Andy the Grasshopper, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:28 (two weeks ago) link
dankest weed moonshot starts now
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:37 (two weeks ago) link
happy 4/30 yall
― frogbs, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:39 (two weeks ago) link
think the corporate weed move will be lowering THC content so that you can buy a pack of Marlboro joints that don't paralyze the average person (also that increase addictiveness somehow) plus all the exotic cannabinoids present naturally in small amounts that supposedly cause weight loss/etc..
― papal hotwife (milo z), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 20:40 (two weeks ago) link
market segmentation, for sure
― ɥɯ ︵ (°□°) (mh), Wednesday, 1 May 2024 18:23 (two weeks ago) link