In article  "Aidy"  writes:
>> Under a legalization scenario, there wouldn't be "other/newer drugs that 
>> are
>> still illegal".  That's the point.  The "other/newer drugs" would be 
>> legal.
>> They might be regulated, but they would be legal to possess.

>So you are suggesting that under legalisation I could concoct any chemical 
>substance I want and it is instantly "legal"?  Do you seriously think this 
>is a good thing or will ever actually happen?

Yes.  Currently, you can legally own bleach or lye or any of hundreds of
chemcals that are lethal.  Some common household chemicals can be combined
to create deadly chlorine gas.

I'm not saying it would automatically be legal to sell on a store's shelves,
but it should never be illegal simply to possess a substance unless that
substance in and of itself poses a danger to others.

Regulation applies to labeling and sales, not to possession.

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@seeheader.nospam)

"pi seconds is a nanocentury."

		-Tom Duff

> Yes.  Currently, you can legally own bleach or lye or any of hundreds of
> chemcals that are lethal.

But you can't sell them to the public as fit for human consumption.

> Regulation applies to labeling and sales, not to possession.

Yes, but there is no possession without sale.