Obama approves law to ban synthetic drugs

  • Article by: KEVIN DIAZ , Star Tribune
  • Updated: July 9, 2012 - 8:13 PM

Obama signed a bill prohibiting synthetic substances such as 2C-E, which killed a Twin Cities teen.

  • 19
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
bluedevil101Jul. 9, 12 8:35 PM

Obama hates the Republicans. Why would he sign anything that's sent to him from them?

3
16
jarlmnJul. 9, 12 9:47 PM

Harrumph, some "progressive" Obama is. If we proactively spent a mere fraction of what we have wasted on our useless "War On Drugs" and targeted research on producing a *gasp* synthetic drug for folks to *gasp* get high on, ... one that would have minimal side effects and be non-addictive ... we could have put the drug cartels out of business years ago! Ah well, at least now the Obama reelection campaign can claim that Barry has saved us from a cannibal "Zombie Apocalypse."

12
12
sjazn1721Jul. 9, 12 9:49 PM

Nice to see bipartisan support on something these days. Baby steps. What's the deal with Ellison? I suppose not paying 200 parking tickets might have been an infringement on his civil liberties...

12
12
jd55604Jul. 9, 1211:29 PM

Yet another pro-drug war policy by Obama. Not exactly the change he promised us in his last campaign.

13
6
georgepaulJul. 10, 1212:22 AM

Thank you, Mr. President.

9
7
genericloginJul. 10, 12 1:18 AM

The synthetics only exist because of the failed war on real drugs (especially marijuana). Now we the taxpayer can finance prosecuting and incarcerating the makers and sellers of synthetics too. Weeeeeeeee. What a waste.

22
0
vikesgr8fanJul. 10, 12 7:14 AM

Hey, bluedevil, I think you have that backwards.

6
6
cyberhaze9Jul. 10, 12 7:26 AM

The only "concern" legislators have about importing cheap Canadian prescription drugs (you know, those made by the same manufacturers as those in the US but sold for half the cost) is that they might cut into the profits of those companies that give so much money to their campaigns and spend so much lobbying them for influence. And as others have noted, there would be no demand for dangerous synthetic drugs if not for drug prohibition. Nobody would touch K2 if marijuana was legal or 2C-E if natural substances such as psychedelic mushrooms were legal, and those substances are significantly less harmful (and less harmful than alcohol, though definitely not harmless). Prohibition causes more problems than it cures, but like the importation of affordable prescription drugs is tied up with the financial interests of powerful industries who pay the bills for both parties.

11
1
jgmanciniJul. 10, 12 7:51 AM

"Harrumph, some "progressive" Obama is."---------He signed a bill into law that was enacted by Congress-with bipartisan support. If he had vetoed the bill, you would be complaining that he's arrogant, dictatorial, and divisive. If he found a cure for cancer, the wingnuts would be complaining that he's being unfair to diabetes.

5
4
fatredneckJul. 10, 12 8:21 AM

Too bad. More drug war hysteria, courtesy of Amy Klobuchar and almost every other politician. I am tired of knee jerk "illegalization" of drugs. The broad brush being used ( a whole class of potentially medically interesting drugs, the cannabinoids ) made illegal because some people abuse similar compounds. Anything "hallucinogenic" made illegal just because... Life is dangerous. Alcohol, extreme sports and plain stupidity kills and injures more than these substances ever will. If a person chooses to take the risk of use ( for whatever gain they see in it ) it ought to be a matter of personal choice. You know... freedom.

9
0

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT