Just say yes! Ron Paul 2012
I did a couple speeches in my communication studies class this semester on this exact thing. During my research, I found that the problem with these new drugs is not just the negative effects of the chemical in measured doses, but the widely varying doses and psychoactive chemicals used to produce the effect.
The popularity of these products caused the DEA to have it emergency-scheduled, making it illegal. Half the reason it is being used by people was the legality of it, compared to the real stuff. The producer's response to this was to mess with the chemical make up of the original popular chemical, JWH-018, to make it slightly different, making that new chemical legal and still somewhat similar. The danger lies not in the similarities of these substitute synthetics (of which there are thousands to choose from) but in the ways they are different.
One study i looked at stated that after testing about 500 samples of 15 different brands from all over the country, there were about 90 different substances, with about 20 of them coming up often. The other part of this study showed the great disparity of doses used in the same brand, from other areas. Basically, the doses ranged from single digits all the way up to 65 mg of chemical per gram of product. This is the stat that troubled me most deeply.
Of course, in my persuasive version of this speech, I ended with a way to kill the demand of synthetic. I laid it out really simple, legalize weed and this **** will never be heard of again. I tried so hard to NOT be THAT GUY, that does a legalize weed speech. Unfortunately, in my professor's notes and grading explanation, he wrote that my topic was legalizing pot... Needless to say, I was pissed. I was trying to denounce this ****, while providing a simple solution. Not say that this is a reason weed should be legal. But I did get an A
Last edited by 1 dol fan; 12-04-2012 at 03:59 PM.
Reason: typos and clarification
I just want to win.