I had a sociology professor who used to love to talk about this. Basically, at some point, a powerful person in the Government (such as J Edgar Hoover) decided that those drugs should be illegal and pushed to make them illegal. Also, legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco are commonly used by those in power and those industries have powerful lobbies who work hard to keep them relatively unrestricted.
Don't get me wrong, these drugs can destroy lives. However, so can alcohol and tobacco. The decision of which is and is not legal is largely a product of the personalities involved, not any relative threat to society. In fact, the professor I mentioned believed that when Opium was available through any doctor, it was better controlled than it is today.
2006-12-20 10:20:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Wundt 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Congress and the FDA have decided that drugs such as heroin, cocaine, and marijuana have little redeeming medicinal benefits to justify their everyday use and compensate for their addictiveness. Thus they outlawed the possession and trafficking of such substances in the United States.
Whilst corn and Christmas trees can also be "dangerous" (if you eat excessive amounts of corn every day of your life, you will certainly not be too well-off in later years; if a Christmas tree falls on you, you will most likely incur some unpleasant injuries), they are not dangerous in the way that opiates and marijuana can be dangerous to your health. And they are certainly not habit-forming.
Painkillers like Novocaine are also potentially habit-forming. However, Novocaine is less addictive than morphine, which is why the latter has been phased out of common usage. They have also found that the benefits that illegal opiates and narcotics may confer can also be derived from other, less addictive drugs.
2006-12-20 10:25:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The FDA or government in general.
You also used to be able to walk into the local pharmacy and get cocaine.
But "the war on drugs" is good business practice, nevermind the all the innocent people killed because of it and the trampling of citizens rights, but I digress.
Basically any drug that is derived from a natural substance must be illegal to protect the interests of the Pharmaceutical companies which create drugs to do the same thing as natural counterparts.
Morphine and codeine come from opium and are still legal for medical use, though a synthetic is probably mostly used.
Cocaine is still apparently used legally, I've seen it in a hospital.
Marijuana has been found to have legitimate medicinal use, not to mention the industrial uses of hemp.
There is also a cure or preventative for cancer, but since it's a natural substance it is a threat to the profits of "cancer treatment" and "finding a cure".
2006-12-20 11:04:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The F.D.A make the decision, and heroin used to be a drug for depression which is why it was legal at the time it was made, and marijuana is a plant but also can be smoked to get the high and can be harmful to your brain cell, and put cancer to your lung. I support the F.D.A because it they are banning all the drugs, such as crack, cocaine, mdma, heroin... etc drugs has killed many lives of young ones, make people an addict and causes crime rate. If there were no drugs in the world what you think those addict would be doing right now? drugs will change you and yes it is expensive!!
2006-12-20 10:43:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The decision as to how to classify drugs is made by the FDA or Congress.
There are five schedules of drugs (1 - 5), with 5 being the lowest and 1 being the highest.
Currently, marijuana and heroin are both classified as Schedule 1 drugs. To be classified as a Schedule 1 drug, the drug must have no medical value, be highly addictive, and have a high propensity for abuse. This classification is the subject of debate by medical marijuana proponents, who argue it should be a Schedule 2 drug, and prescribable, like cocaine (which is used in hospital dental surgery as an ansthetic).
2006-12-20 10:18:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by ted_yc 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
What do i think of? i think of you're a dopehead who's pissed off which you would be able to not purchase weed at 7-11 and care not something approximately civil liberties or government oppression. That in the event that they decriminalized weed, you will have not something extra to assert. i've got faith that the federal conflict on drugs has cost hundreds of thousands, has not stopped or stemmed drug utilization and grew to become it right into a criminal corporation which ends up in hundreds of thousands of deaths and ridiculous incarcerations. i've got faith that the guy could have the main appropriate to ingest any substance they choose in any way they choose. It does me no injury. yet i'm not nor will ever be a consumer, I in simple terms have faith in person liberty.
2016-12-30 17:21:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The government.
2006-12-20 10:20:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Congress and the FDA. If they find that a drug/chemical tends to do more good than harm, they'll generally ban it.
2006-12-20 10:17:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by i♥sf 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
well the goverment makes the laws and if it makes u feel good they make it illegal or hard to get
2006-12-20 10:54:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by tboner49er 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
F.D.A., and yes.
2006-12-20 10:18:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by ball_courtney 5
·
0⤊
0⤋