possible analog vs. likely analog

[William_Again]

is there a difference between a RC being a possible analog or a likely
analog. I discovered this while browsing erowid, they state that 2c-c
is a likely analog while 2c-d is a possible analog (this also appears
with several other substances).

[gn2osis]

That's just someone's opinion, which is worth the paper you can print
it on. (They were probably saying this relative to
2C-B.......that chlorine is closer to bromine than a methyl group
is.) In practice it all depends on expert testimony and what a
judge a/o jury would say. The courts haven't really decided this
definitively, so best to assume all RC's would be considered controlled
substance analogs, and act accordingly. (Ask the American RC
vendors who were busted about this.)<!--
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//-->

[Solidly-here]

If it Aint illegal, it's a possible analog


For the average Joe (I guess I am Joe), it does not really matter if a particular RC is an analog (possible or likely, OR almost-assuredly). What matters is: Is THIS guy listed on the FDA's hit-you-in-the-head list (Schedule 1).


Odds are, the DEA will not be visiting you house soon, to check its analog status. 99.999% of average Joes just move through their lives, testing their RCs, to their heart's content ... without meeting any government employees who are trying to stop them.


If (on the other hand) you plan to sell a pound of 4-HO-DiPT on eBay, then you would NOT be an average Joe. In this case, its analog status is much more important.


First, the squeaky wheel gets the oil. When someone is "OUT THERE" (makes an RC in pill form, OR advertises to the masses about sales), the DEA does not like it. They prefer people to quietly do whatever it is they want to.


But, when someone is advertising, the DEA looks bad, like they're not doing theirjob properly (as if they actually look good, even if they were doing a good job). Then, a supervisor calls in a flunky and says: "We have been insulted, go after that guy."


So, now flunky has to produce. If not for thepossible analog status of the RC, to looking for any other POSSIBLE violation of the law that this poor victim has (ever) done.


Remember, ANY legal action taken will be appreciatedby flunky's supervisor. Even if the case is dropped later, flunky can get his promotion (after all, the victim had to hire an attorney, and spend a lot of time on the case, he probably has learned his lesson).


So, even though I have RCs which are not listed on Schedule 1, I will not be openly advertising that fact. Instead, I (anonymously) boast here about it. The Internet allows this. Boy, I am lucky.

[Pinkavvy]

a possible analog means that once it's more known it could be prosecuted as an analog in the future.

a likely analog means it's so well known that it's already been decided to be an analog in many areas and/or is current being prosecuted as an analog but has not been decided upon yet.

look the the legal differances of 2c-e and 2c-i. 2c-i is already illegal in many areas of the world, whereas 2c-e is still underground enough that it is still just a possible, rather than a likeley like 2c-i.

[gn2osis]

Again, these terms ("possible vs. "likely") don't have any recognized
legal meaning at all, even though they do raise some interesting issues about RC's and the law generally.<!--
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//-->


<!--
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//-->

Edited by: gn2osis

[mariecurie]

They have no recognized legal meaning, but there is a difference.



2C-B, which is illegal in the United States, is very similar to 2C-I,
2C-F, and 2C-C because they are all halogen substitutions for the
bromine. 2C-F and 2C-C, however, have not been sold actively in clubs
or at parties on a large scale, so they are less likely to be
considered an analog than 2C-I.



2C-D and 2C-E, however, are even less likely to be considered an analog
because they are methyl and ethyl group substitutions respectively.



The number one thing to watch out for is chemicals that have been sold
in clubs as ecstasy and such and those that have caused overdoses.



2C-I and 2C-B are both relatively common in XTC pills as compared to
other RCs, so watch out for these. Obviously 2C-B is already
illegal...I imagine 2C-I will be the next illegalized chemical.

[gn2osis]

Originally Posted by mariecurie

2C-B, which is illegal in the United States, is very similar to 2C-I,
2C-F, and 2C-C because they are all halogen substitutions for the
bromine. 2C-F and 2C-C, however, have not been sold actively in clubs
or at parties on a large scale, so they are less likely to be
considered an analog than 2C-I.



2C-D and 2C-E, however, are even less likely to be considered an analog
because they are methyl and ethyl group substitutions respectively.

I would disagree that the nature of the 4-substituent would have
anything to do with whether a 2C compound would be prosecuted under the
Analog Act. The issue is cultural and legal, not chemical. I think it completely comes down to popularity and
the potential for abuse, as you say:

Originally Posted by mariecurie

The number one thing to watch out for is chemicals that have been sold
in clubs as ecstasy and such and those that have caused overdoses.

yes.



I think that the chances of someone being prosecuted under the Analog
Act are similar to the chances of being prosecuted for possession of a
scheduled drug: whether one gets caught (discretion, luck), and how important it is
to the prosecutor to pursue the case (luck again). It does appear that the lack of much case law
under the Analog Act discourages some prosecutors from going forward
in cases other than high-profile distribution.



It will be interesting to see whether the US government just keeps
adding compounds to the Schedule 1 list, or moves more aggressively to
prosecute cases under the Analog Act. I'd bet on both, the latter
depending on what kind of case law emerges.

<!--
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//-->


<!--
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//-->


<!--
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//-->

Edited by: gn2osis