This installment of Psychedelica Lex is another video letter to the Psychedelic Bar Association – Law and Regulatory Committee (LARC). This letter picks up where I left off in my last video letter to the LARC. In my prior video letter, I posed to the LARC that if we are to seek change in the law, we need to draft the Uniform Model Plant and Fungi Medicine Act from the perspective of pushing all our theories and structures through the lens of – would a legislature adopt our model and/or would the electorate in states that permit public initiatives vote for our model? I posit if we cannot get a legislature or the voting public to vote in favor of our model, we are not making functional progress and instead merely at the task of drafting fan fiction. [I don’t want to draft fan fiction.] In my prior letter, I also posit we should be emphasizing permission, not promotion. From that perspective, I also posit the likely least offensive structure to pass in a legislature or at the ballot box would be to establish a regulatory structure that qualifies the end user, rather than a system that automatically opts everyone “in.” Start there and build. [Mind, these are not my personal positions, but they reflect what I believe would be palatable to a legislature and to an electorate.]
So, taking up the concept that people would be permitted to interact with psychedelic substances, I address here the problem of sourcing said substances. I address this in part by supporting home cultivation rights. However, home cultivation is an imperfect solution and will unavoidably exclude the majority of people who would want to engage. I discuss ways to address this. You can watch the video letter HERE.