Ah gotcha, makes sense, and I absolutely agree, however we still need some form of control on the sale and distribution (like what we have on alcohol for example), as well as a system to be able to help addicts with the medical help they need to get out of addiction.

No worries.

I think you're referring to the Controlled Substances Act, which details all the shit.

Fun fact, all the links I found at the top of a search about this law seem to have "DEA" in the URL, rather than any regular link to actual legislation. It's almost as if they're monitoring them. Most of them were broken lmao.

The thing is, a law needs to exist, it just needs to be written by people who don't chew crayons. I'm not talking about those tasty ones the Marines gnaw on, but the dodgy import ones that the DEA think make them look classy.

In all seriousness, we don't need to remove the law (which has a pretty solid name) we just need to reclassify all the drugs and change the penalties to be appropriate for the good of society. Possession of anything in general should not be a crime, except for possession of a significant amount of a potentially fatal drug, as such possession could only reasonably point to intent to supply. Supply of fatal drugs (eg fentanyl, maybe certain bath salts or whatever) should remain illegal. Beyond that, recreational drugs would be better legitimised such that any issues with them can be faced in daylight, instead of dark alleyways. Even the worst of the major recreational drugs wouldn't be all that harmful if people had support around them - certainly no more harmful than alcohol.

However drug policing is literally the DEA's bread and butter, they're not going to give up their job for the greater good.