Talk:Controlled Substances Act: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:37, 27 November 2016 editLlywelynII (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions90,637 edits →Legal status ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 20:51, 5 January 2024 edit undoRfl0216 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users179,089 edits Assessment: banner shell, Drug Policy, Cannabis, Politics, United States, Law (Mid) (Rater)
(22 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Talk header}}		{{Talk header}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=C\|1=
	{{WikiProjectBannerShell\|1=
	{{WikiProject Drug Policy ~~\|class=C~~ \|importance=~~Mid~~}}		{{WikiProject Drug Policy}}
			{{WikiProject Cannabis \|importance=Top}}
	{{WikiProject ~~Cannabis \|class=C~~ \|importance=Mid}}		{{WikiProject Politics \|importance=Mid}}
	{{WikiProject ~~Politics~~ \|~~class~~=C \|importance=~~low~~}}		{{WikiProject United States \|importance=Mid \|USGov=yes \|USGov-importance=top}}
	{{WikiProject ~~United States \|class=C~~ \|importance=~~low}}~~		{{WikiProject Law\|importance=
			Mid
	{{WikiProject United States Public Policy \|class=C}}
			}}
	}}		}}
	{{archive box\|auto=yes}}		{{archive box\|auto=yes}}
Line 17:		Line 19:
	\|minthreadsleft=4		\|minthreadsleft=4
	}}		}}

	== Article improvements and tag removal ==

	I made what I hope is perceived as improvements and will go back over the article shortly. I added links and reviewed the neutrality as per the tag as well as removing the NPOV and Refimprove tags. Anyone that would like to review the article can let me know about any specific neutrality problems and I will address them. ] (])

	==== External links ====
	I removed the external links section. Information used in this section that can go into the article should be used as the external links section is not intended to be used to list information for inclusion at a later date. This talk page can be utilized for this intention. The ones I checked were dead links and the ones I didn't get to are listed here:
	* Code of Federal Regulations, Section 1308
	* (Cornell) – full text of the law
	and substances of the Act with those named in the UK ], the Canadian ] and three United Nations treaties, the
	* Fazey, Cindy: , April 2003.
	*
	* The Legal basis for the sale of PSE containing substances and the rules that pharmacies must follow
	* Shorter summary for posting in workplaces ] (]) 19:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

	== Why are the most addictive drug are placed on Schedule IV? ==		== Why are the most addictive drug are placed on Schedule IV? ==
Line 37:		Line 25:

	Usually, addictive medications are strictly controlled than those of Schedule IV. I am very confused. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->		Usually, addictive medications are strictly controlled than those of Schedule IV. I am very confused. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
			:The CSA is the primary legal munition for the "War on Drugs", which is a facade for what should really be called the "War on Minority Groups the Government is Not Fond". Placement within the schedule is purely political. Schedule I is reserved for drugs associated with minority groups the government wanted to control (in 1970) -- "marihuana" for Latin Americans, heroin for African Americans, LSD for the hippies, etc. Drugs are placed based on how dangerous they are for the government, not for their users. Schedule II contains the drugs that they want to put into Schedule I, many which most people believe are illegal street drugs, but unfortunately have undeniable medical value (cocaine, morphine, codeine, opium, oxycodone, fentanyl, PCP, Ritalin, methamphetamine, etc). Schedule III mostly contains drugs that the government doesn't like, but are of somewhat less concern than Schedule II. Not a lot of people need them, so they are more restricted. Schedule IV contains highly prescribed medications that are highly addictive. The reason they less controlled is because so many people legitimately need to take them to function in modern society, and would cause problems if not properly sedated. Schedule V shouldn't even exist. It's there for "monitoring purposes".

			:To summarize, the more likely for a substance to cause a person to deviate from being what the state defines as an "upstanding, law abiding citizen", the closer to Schedule I it will be placed, and the more likely for a substance to cause a person to shut up and stay in their place, the closer to Schedule IV it will be placed. ] (]) 23:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

			:Thank you for the explanation, because it does not make sense, like: "Cannabidiol, only in a marijuana-derived pharmaceutical formulation marketed by GW Pharmaceuticals as Epidiolex. Other CBD formulations remain Schedule 1, except for those derived from hemp which are unscheduled but still FDA-regulated.", So it is "schedule 1 or 5, or unscheduled, depending on our mood when we get up in the morning." The same with some things in schedule 1, instead of listing the actual serious dependency or harm, if there are any, the explanation is just empty with "just because". Other than that... metabolic precursors of schedule-1 substances are... unscheduled. What the heck? None of the schedule list makes medical sense, I guess the list is purely based on economical metrics, such as how much black market there is for the substance, etc. Which makes sense, with LSD it would be 300000 USD per gram. And as someone else said, I'd like to see the phase-out of benzodiazepines and opioids and opiates into more controlled categories, where they belong. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			== quick facts needs to be fixed ==
	== U.S. Congress can't pass an Illinios state bill ==
			It displays "Quick facts: Long title, Acronyms .mw-parser-output .nobold{font-weight:normal}(colloquial) …" in the box.
			I do not know how to fix this but I am convinced the code bits shouldn't be there.
			] (]) <!--Template:Undated--><small class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 10:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	''Due to ] (PSE) and ] being widely used in the manufacture of ], the U.S. Congress passed the ]''

			: I just checked the infobox and not seeing that error. Are you still seeing it? ] (]) 03:36, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
	U.S. Congress couldn't have passed the Methamphetamine Precursor Control Act -- its wikipedia page says that it is an Illinios state bill.
	] (]) 02:38, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

			==Wiki Education assignment: Capstone Course in American Politics==
	==Legal status==
			{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/Oakland_University/Capstone_Course_in_American_Politics_(Fall_2022) \| assignments = ] \| start_date = 2022-09-01 \| end_date = 2022-12-13 }}
	at the ''Financial Times'' (possibly behind a paywall if you don't reach it through Google or some affiliated link) includes the passage

			<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by ] (]) 03:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)</span>
	:But somewhat unusually in the US, the federal Controlled Substances Act does not pre-empt state laws governing prohibited drugs, which gives individual states the leeway to legalise cannabis.

			== citation #48 bad gateway ==
	:State and federal laws running parallel with each other create ambiguities, however, whereby the federal prosecutor has the discretion to enforce the law under certain circumstances, though there is, as yet, no example of this.

			Citation #48 leads to a 404 not found page, not sure where else this info could be found. Cited info is found in the ‘Schedules of controlled substances’ section. ] (]) 17:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
	which I had never heard before and—if accurate—goes a long way towards explaining why states have been able to ignore federal marijuana restrictions without more pushback. ''Is'' that exemption from the usual preëmption of state laws accurate? and, if so, why is that not somewhere in the lead of this article? — ] 14:35, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 20:51, 5 January 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Controlled Substances Act article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 31 days

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Drug Policy (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Drug Policy, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Drug PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Drug PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Drug PolicyDrug Policy

Cannabis Top‑importance

	Cannabis portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cannabis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cannabis on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CannabisWikipedia:WikiProject CannabisTemplate:WikiProject CannabisCannabis
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Government Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Top-importance).

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Why are the most addictive drug are placed on Schedule IV?

Out off all psychiatric medications, Benzodiazepines and some barbiturates are the most addictive and develop a very high dependence potential when prescribed. However, some non-addictive medications such as Methylphenidate or Ketamine are placed on Schedule II and III. According to citations from the drug articles, some medications such as the ones placed on Scheduled II and III do not produce an addictive potential in low doses when prescribed.

Usually, addictive medications are strictly controlled than those of Schedule IV. I am very confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 00AgentBond93 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The CSA is the primary legal munition for the "War on Drugs", which is a facade for what should really be called the "War on Minority Groups the Government is Not Fond". Placement within the schedule is purely political. Schedule I is reserved for drugs associated with minority groups the government wanted to control (in 1970) -- "marihuana" for Latin Americans, heroin for African Americans, LSD for the hippies, etc. Drugs are placed based on how dangerous they are for the government, not for their users. Schedule II contains the drugs that they want to put into Schedule I, many which most people believe are illegal street drugs, but unfortunately have undeniable medical value (cocaine, morphine, codeine, opium, oxycodone, fentanyl, PCP, Ritalin, methamphetamine, etc). Schedule III mostly contains drugs that the government doesn't like, but are of somewhat less concern than Schedule II. Not a lot of people need them, so they are more restricted. Schedule IV contains highly prescribed medications that are highly addictive. The reason they less controlled is because so many people legitimately need to take them to function in modern society, and would cause problems if not properly sedated. Schedule V shouldn't even exist. It's there for "monitoring purposes".

To summarize, the more likely for a substance to cause a person to deviate from being what the state defines as an "upstanding, law abiding citizen", the closer to Schedule I it will be placed, and the more likely for a substance to cause a person to shut up and stay in their place, the closer to Schedule IV it will be placed. Thoric (talk) 23:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation, because it does not make sense, like: "Cannabidiol, only in a marijuana-derived pharmaceutical formulation marketed by GW Pharmaceuticals as Epidiolex. Other CBD formulations remain Schedule 1, except for those derived from hemp which are unscheduled but still FDA-regulated.", So it is "schedule 1 or 5, or unscheduled, depending on our mood when we get up in the morning." The same with some things in schedule 1, instead of listing the actual serious dependency or harm, if there are any, the explanation is just empty with "just because". Other than that... metabolic precursors of schedule-1 substances are... unscheduled. What the heck? None of the schedule list makes medical sense, I guess the list is purely based on economical metrics, such as how much black market there is for the substance, etc. Which makes sense, with LSD it would be 300000 USD per gram. And as someone else said, I'd like to see the phase-out of benzodiazepines and opioids and opiates into more controlled categories, where they belong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.64.7.200 (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

quick facts needs to be fixed

It displays "Quick facts: Long title, Acronyms .mw-parser-output .nobold{font-weight:normal}(colloquial) …" in the box. I do not know how to fix this but I am convinced the code bits shouldn't be there. 178.232.43.153 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

I just checked the infobox and not seeing that error. Are you still seeing it? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:36, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Capstone Course in American Politics

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2022 and 13 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Altair09a (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Altair09a (talk) 03:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

citation #48 bad gateway

Citation #48 leads to a 404 not found page, not sure where else this info could be found. Cited info is found in the ‘Schedules of controlled substances’ section. 131.128.73.134 (talk) 17:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Categories: