Formula for Legality
The federal government categorizes substances like alcohol, nicotine and heroine into what it calls "schedules" and each schedule has a set of criteria. For instance marijuana is in the same schedule as heroine. Which meets the following guidelines:
1. The drug or other substance has high potential for abuse.
2. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
3. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.
Without mentioning the obvious, almost laughable categorization of marijuana into this schedule, I'd like to propose a whole different way to look at substances, certain acts and items. Now the disclaimer here is that the below spew has yet to be thoroughly thought out, so pardon the mess.
THE FORMULA FOR LEGALITY:
“The level of physical or mental harm that an act, substance, or item causes to an adult individual or their community, and if any benefit to self or community may be gained by its legalization, in which the benefit of legalization must clearly outweigh the reasons for illegality.”
Criteria involved in deciphering physical and mental harm:
Harm Rule #1: No immediate or irreversible harm to self or community.
Harm Rule #2: No level of the substance, item or act can be properly regulated in order to comply with Rule #1.
For substances, items or acts that would break the Harm Rules only at increased or improper levels of use must be further regulated.
Inform Rule #1: No encouragement of overuse, long-term use and other abuses.
Inform Rule #2: Clear warnings, regulations with possible need for licensing, training or other tactics to ensure public safety and that a citizen can make a well-informed decision.
Note:
Spiritually cannot play a role in this debate as it cannot be measured in the physical world. What effects these acts, items or substances have on spiritual things such as the soul, are invalid to the physical, measurable world. Religion can certainly set its own rules and give its flock the choice to abide by those rules, and if not, well then the rule-breakers are not part of that religion anymore. And since there are so many religions and non-religions, the Formula for Legality must be a physical declaration, not a spiritual one.
Note 2:
The idea of community can be taken many ways. Some may say, “What’s best for the community is not to have a bunch of drug addicts roaming the streets”. And I couldn’t agree more. My disagreements are mainly with the current methods we use to reduce the abuse, long-term and over use. And propose this “Formula of Legality”, not to condone, but to safely inform and protect citizens from organized crime, unsupportive jail time, and long-term addiction. Morality based laws do little to enlighten the public to the ill effect of their choices and offers little support the addict in their time of need. I say, in many circumstances it makes the problem worse.
Examples:
Crystal meth, heroine, PCP, & nitrous cause too much harm to an individual or its community, mentally or physically (usually do to a prevalence of addiction, even from one or two uses) and it cannot be safely regulated or legal at any level. It remains illegal to protect the individual or others from immediate or irreversible harm, especially citizens that have no such knowledge of its ill effects. It does not fit the Formula for Legality and remains illegal.
Guns can cause immediate and irreversible harm to self or others, but only at improper levels of use. So they must be further regulated by the Inform Rules, which include proper training, licensing and no encouragement of abuse. These steps ensure that under proper regulations, guns can be used recreationally or in defense of one right of the Harm Rules. The Formula for Legality is true.
Alcohol at proper levels of consumption does not break the Harm Rules. But must also abide by the Inform Rules, to ensure the public is aware of ill effects caused by overuse or long-term use. However, the Harm Rules are broken if the person gets behind the wheel of a car, operates heavy machinery, etc. Even so, the Formula for Legality remains true.
Nuclear weapons at any level are harmful to self or others. They cannot be properly regulated to exist at any level, for any citizen to try and make themselves, anywhere. The Formula for Legality is false.
Marijuana has been shown to be addictive with long-term usage, mostly do to routine or psychological need, but not a chemical one. Yet no more addictive than alcohol and in terms of the health effects of marijuana, they are along the same lines as cigarettes. But the drug is not immediately, nor irreversibly harmful to self or others (unless used improperly like alcohol, while driving, etc). It does not break the Harm Rules, but still must abide by the Inform Rules, as heavy or chronic use is not encouraged. And since the benefits of legalization, in terms of monetary savings, proper regulations and a well-informed public outweighs the reasons why it’s illegal AND since illegality actually cause more problems, then the Formula for Legality is true.
Cocaine is probably one of the more difficult substances to apply this formula and rules to. At low levels of potency, the effects are mild and almost identical to caffeine, simply crush up and snort a couple NoDoz and you’re there. And if low levels are similar to caffeine usage, then Harm Rule #2 applies, which states that if levels of a substance can properly be regulated to ensure no immediate or irreversible harm then it should be legal. I’m still not convinced though. It certainly must follow the Inform Rules, as overuse, long-term use or other types of abuse causes harm to self or others. But in terms of immediate or irreversible harm to self or others at recreational levels is debatable. But remember the Formula for Legality also asks the question of "benefit" to self or community over the effects of illegality and like with "instant reply" in sports, there must be clear evidence and reasons to overturn a current "on the field" call. And with cocaine, the current "on the field" call that it is illegal. And for now, it should probably stay that way, until further research and discussion can be made.
Lets throw this formula some curveballs:
Sex. The act of sex under proper safety guidelines and protection isn't immediately harmful to self or community. Furthermore, at recreational levels, it does not break the Harm Rules and fits within the Formula for Legality. But using sex improperly, just like with guns, can break the Harm Rules. As such, regulations on sex like in the act of rape, incest or pedophilia is strictly prohibited. But sex, in general, is still legal if used properly.
Free Speech. The act of Free speech does not break the Harm Rules. But yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre (when there is no fire) does. Therefore Free Speech is still protected under the Formula for Legality, but using it improperly isn’t.
Skydiving can cause immediate and irreversible physical harm to others, but only if used improperly used or abused. Not following strict safely guidelines or following current regulations on safety and training can lead to irreversible effects. Additionally, if only measured on a recreational level, the rush of skydiving is said to meet or exceed the effects of certain illegal drugs. And since the entire point in all of this is to show the parallels between material things like skydiving and snorting cocaine, I’ll get to my final point.
If the legality of substances, acts and items are only measured and quantified in ways they can be misused or abused, than I expect skydiving, sex, driving cars and the internet to become illegal soon as well.
1. The drug or other substance has high potential for abuse.
2. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
3. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.
Without mentioning the obvious, almost laughable categorization of marijuana into this schedule, I'd like to propose a whole different way to look at substances, certain acts and items. Now the disclaimer here is that the below spew has yet to be thoroughly thought out, so pardon the mess.
THE FORMULA FOR LEGALITY:
“The level of physical or mental harm that an act, substance, or item causes to an adult individual or their community, and if any benefit to self or community may be gained by its legalization, in which the benefit of legalization must clearly outweigh the reasons for illegality.”
Criteria involved in deciphering physical and mental harm:
Harm Rule #1: No immediate or irreversible harm to self or community.
Harm Rule #2: No level of the substance, item or act can be properly regulated in order to comply with Rule #1.
For substances, items or acts that would break the Harm Rules only at increased or improper levels of use must be further regulated.
Inform Rule #1: No encouragement of overuse, long-term use and other abuses.
Inform Rule #2: Clear warnings, regulations with possible need for licensing, training or other tactics to ensure public safety and that a citizen can make a well-informed decision.
Note:
Spiritually cannot play a role in this debate as it cannot be measured in the physical world. What effects these acts, items or substances have on spiritual things such as the soul, are invalid to the physical, measurable world. Religion can certainly set its own rules and give its flock the choice to abide by those rules, and if not, well then the rule-breakers are not part of that religion anymore. And since there are so many religions and non-religions, the Formula for Legality must be a physical declaration, not a spiritual one.
Note 2:
The idea of community can be taken many ways. Some may say, “What’s best for the community is not to have a bunch of drug addicts roaming the streets”. And I couldn’t agree more. My disagreements are mainly with the current methods we use to reduce the abuse, long-term and over use. And propose this “Formula of Legality”, not to condone, but to safely inform and protect citizens from organized crime, unsupportive jail time, and long-term addiction. Morality based laws do little to enlighten the public to the ill effect of their choices and offers little support the addict in their time of need. I say, in many circumstances it makes the problem worse.
Examples:
Crystal meth, heroine, PCP, & nitrous cause too much harm to an individual or its community, mentally or physically (usually do to a prevalence of addiction, even from one or two uses) and it cannot be safely regulated or legal at any level. It remains illegal to protect the individual or others from immediate or irreversible harm, especially citizens that have no such knowledge of its ill effects. It does not fit the Formula for Legality and remains illegal.
Guns can cause immediate and irreversible harm to self or others, but only at improper levels of use. So they must be further regulated by the Inform Rules, which include proper training, licensing and no encouragement of abuse. These steps ensure that under proper regulations, guns can be used recreationally or in defense of one right of the Harm Rules. The Formula for Legality is true.
Alcohol at proper levels of consumption does not break the Harm Rules. But must also abide by the Inform Rules, to ensure the public is aware of ill effects caused by overuse or long-term use. However, the Harm Rules are broken if the person gets behind the wheel of a car, operates heavy machinery, etc. Even so, the Formula for Legality remains true.
Nuclear weapons at any level are harmful to self or others. They cannot be properly regulated to exist at any level, for any citizen to try and make themselves, anywhere. The Formula for Legality is false.
Marijuana has been shown to be addictive with long-term usage, mostly do to routine or psychological need, but not a chemical one. Yet no more addictive than alcohol and in terms of the health effects of marijuana, they are along the same lines as cigarettes. But the drug is not immediately, nor irreversibly harmful to self or others (unless used improperly like alcohol, while driving, etc). It does not break the Harm Rules, but still must abide by the Inform Rules, as heavy or chronic use is not encouraged. And since the benefits of legalization, in terms of monetary savings, proper regulations and a well-informed public outweighs the reasons why it’s illegal AND since illegality actually cause more problems, then the Formula for Legality is true.
Cocaine is probably one of the more difficult substances to apply this formula and rules to. At low levels of potency, the effects are mild and almost identical to caffeine, simply crush up and snort a couple NoDoz and you’re there. And if low levels are similar to caffeine usage, then Harm Rule #2 applies, which states that if levels of a substance can properly be regulated to ensure no immediate or irreversible harm then it should be legal. I’m still not convinced though. It certainly must follow the Inform Rules, as overuse, long-term use or other types of abuse causes harm to self or others. But in terms of immediate or irreversible harm to self or others at recreational levels is debatable. But remember the Formula for Legality also asks the question of "benefit" to self or community over the effects of illegality and like with "instant reply" in sports, there must be clear evidence and reasons to overturn a current "on the field" call. And with cocaine, the current "on the field" call that it is illegal. And for now, it should probably stay that way, until further research and discussion can be made.
Lets throw this formula some curveballs:
Sex. The act of sex under proper safety guidelines and protection isn't immediately harmful to self or community. Furthermore, at recreational levels, it does not break the Harm Rules and fits within the Formula for Legality. But using sex improperly, just like with guns, can break the Harm Rules. As such, regulations on sex like in the act of rape, incest or pedophilia is strictly prohibited. But sex, in general, is still legal if used properly.
Free Speech. The act of Free speech does not break the Harm Rules. But yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre (when there is no fire) does. Therefore Free Speech is still protected under the Formula for Legality, but using it improperly isn’t.
Skydiving can cause immediate and irreversible physical harm to others, but only if used improperly used or abused. Not following strict safely guidelines or following current regulations on safety and training can lead to irreversible effects. Additionally, if only measured on a recreational level, the rush of skydiving is said to meet or exceed the effects of certain illegal drugs. And since the entire point in all of this is to show the parallels between material things like skydiving and snorting cocaine, I’ll get to my final point.
If the legality of substances, acts and items are only measured and quantified in ways they can be misused or abused, than I expect skydiving, sex, driving cars and the internet to become illegal soon as well.
-
Just to be a wise guy, and I'm not disclaiming the piece, which is very well thought out and written well - but:
ReplyDelete"...marijuana is in the same schedule as heroine ..." I realize that this small typo was intendended to read "heroin" ... but if we were to take it at face value, I suppose that marijuana would be considered along with the likes of Joan of Arc, or Emilia Earhart or Mother Teresa.
So my thought is that a bit too much of "mother hemp" was being "processed" about the time that this tome was formulated... Perhaps in a way, that is an indicator of the cautiousness with which we should pursue "unleashing the hounds" of promiscuious use of such substances.