enzymes rarely make racemic mixtures. chemists often do.
3 Likes
The long-term objectives of this research are to identify those structural features responsible for individual cannabinoid effects and ultimately to elucidate the mechanism through which cannabinoids produce their distinctive behavioral effects. These objectives will be reached through a collaborative effort with Dr. B.R. Martin of the Medical College of Virginia.
I apologize if this question is deemed stupid.
So what happens on October 20, 2020? After all of these comments have been submitted, is it congress who will say yes or no to this IFR? Or is it up to the DEA to read our comments and then decide to keep this IFR or change it? What happens to those who are now operating illegally, according to this IFR?
2 Likes
Its up to the DEA to read the comments - they don’t actually have to accept the comments, but they are supposed to tell you that their either are or are not accepting them.
There are already court cases working against the DEA on this (some are even linked on this forum). Those will prevent the rules from taking place, if the judge says to do so.
Otherwise - the rules will take effect and only an act of the courts or an additional act by the legislature will be able to change those rules.
If someone is operating with non-compliant hemp products - even before this IFR was published that was already illegal.
There’s a provision in the Farm Bill which changed the AIA to allow for tribes and states (and the USDA) to define negligence vs bad actors. Only the bad actors are supposed to get in trouble per the AIA - you know, those people willfully violating the regulation and the intent of the law.
Dude - you know that providing people a method to do something that you know is illegal is illegal - right? So you know, don’t go doing that kind of thing, so that people don’t have to go to prison. Just because the WHO is worried it will happen, doesn’t mean that anyone should do it. Indeed - trying to be a self-regulating industry means not doing that kind of stuff, so that enforcement actions are not needed.
That is the whole point of self-regulation. You do not need to be told to do the right thing, you build doing the right thing into your processes.
I don’t believe that is entirely accurate. Anarchist Cookbook?
BTW, you are posting on a forum dedicated to making concentrates from a federally illegal schedule one plant.
6 Likes
Citing a book about blowing people up and making terrorists. You funny. Creating THC in a non-licensed state facility under the Cole Memo, super illegal. Working with hemp concentrates - made legal in 2014 and then again in 2018. We are legit talking about fighting the DEA on this specifically in this forum topic.
You can decry self-regulation all you want. There is a reason it works - and there is a reason enforcement actions happen. And that’s because people decide they don’t want to self-regulate and try to follow their local rules.
There’s some pretty elaborate regulations for the making and usage of explosives as well. And helping random people make them - can land you in prison. Especially if the people that you help are doing it for illegal purposes.
So - if you are trying to make d9THC from d8THC or CBD - then you are almost assuredly doing so outside of a state specific license to operate. Which would land you in the black market. The black market being a place that the licensed folks don’t want to be - because we want self-regulation so there is limited if no enforcement action.
Anarchist Cookbook had all sorts of stuff in there… including drug making. Not just explosives.
2 Likes
Plus a 3d printed gun kinda makes it seem like anarchist antique roadshow cookbook, it’s a brave new world, I’ll be interested to hear the rules they make up as they go along.
But what if the person teaching “illegal” activities are located in a place where said activities are NOT illegal?
1 Like
Then I imagine that person should hope not to be extradited and not travel to a place where this might illegal. And potentially still be responsible for responding to a subpoena to give testimony for the person in a place where it is illegal.
I think the key here is no to be telling people how to do more black market stuff, until the DEA IFR is more resolved than it is. And to also acknowledge that enforcement actions are up, so doing things that may lead to enforcement action are more risky than usual.
You know what I mean? Its all a risk balance - but randomly deciding that today is the day you try to make an illegal substance in a state without a license to do so… seems like an inappropriate risk to me. -shrug-
1 Like
I want to say that the people doing it are playing a numbers game. There’s too many people doing it to have any real direct enforcement. Accept for the couple that are going to win the enforcement lotto, and be “brought to justice” as an example to all the rest. The people doing it are just really really really hoping and praying that they don’t win the lotto, and have their door kicked in.
I really don’t see any other way it’s going to go down accept for legalization. All of us hoping and praying that government would just fucking legalize the shit already and let us get down to business
2 Likes
POLITICS
Supreme Court Declines To Hear Marijuana Case Challenging DEA’s Restrictive Classification
2 Likes
This is not the most recent case - its still pending. I wish we weren’t having to look to the courts on things like this and instead able to use science and the legislative pen. Such is life working with the agency. 
2 Likes