Council Should Amend Proposed K-2 Ordinance
Posted by Jeff Pruitt - 7/29/10 @ 8:00 am - Filed Under City Council, Featured
The city council is considering regulating the K-2 product (and other similar products) which is described by some as a “synthetic marijuana”. Users of this product allegedly receive a marijuana-like high but will not test positive for marijuana. Currently there is no Indiana state or federal law restricting its distribution or posession.
The ordinance for consideration, sponsored by Mitch Harper and co-sponsored by Tom Didier, would introduce a fine system that would penalize businesses up to $2500 for selling the product and individuals up to $1000. One criticism that has been made about the product is that while it is labeled as something you shouldn’t ingest, it is obviously being smoked by the vast majority of the people who purchase it which is likely the real intent of the manufacturer.
Some might consider this consumer fraud but I would not agree with that position. I think the label was put there partly to avoid future regulations from local governments and law enforcement. But, more likely, the labeling is there to avoid existing regulations regarding food and drink products. I think nearly everyone would agree that those who smoke the product know full well why they are buying it and what the real intent of the manufacturer is. Thus the fraud isn’t on consumers but on what the manufacturers probably believe is an over-bearing government.
Harper has pointed out that his proposed ordinance is relatively modest and will mostly effect younger children who can obtain the product from a local neighborhood store and experiment with a “THC analog” substance. On a wider scale, he recognizes that this ordinance won’t have much of an impact on adult use since those users can easily drive to other cities to purchase the product.
My position is that regulation of this product is unwarranted. There are no credible studies or evidence that I have seen to suggest this substance is dangerous. But even if there were, I do not believe it’s the government’s responsibility to make decisions for people regarding what they want to do to their own body. I do sympathize with trying to protect children but that is the job of parents and not government. As for adults, they are more than capable of deciding if they want to ingest this product.
How is this different than banning trans fats, high fructose corn syrup or any other health-related product? I do not believe that Harper is a Souder-esque drug warrior - I think he’s merely trying to react to community requests that something be done about a product that many think is targeting and harming children. Therefore, I think an appropriate compromise might be to regulate the use such that minors are prohibited from purchasing or possessing the product - the same standard we apply to tobacco purchases. While perhaps not an ideal solution, it would still follow and support what I believe is the true intent of the ordinance - namely to restrict impressionable kids from trying something that might be potentially harmful and addictive.
At the end of the day I believe that in a free society people should be free to make their own decisions - even bad ones. The city council should reject this ordinance or at least amend it in such a way that doesn’t restrict adults from making choices about what they wish to do with their own body…
Comments
8 Responses to “Council Should Amend Proposed K-2 Ordinance”
Leave a Reply
If the ordinance is about protecting children, why not just do it like cigarettes and lottery tickets:
“No individual may sell, give, or distribute K2 to any person under the age of 18.”
Neil,
Are you suggesting language for such an amendment? The language sounds agreeable enough to me…
If the goal is to protect children, then we should make the amendment about children instead of a broad reaching ordinance affecting all people. Those above 18 should be free to make their own choice.
Among us liberals there is an old joke that goes like this: A conservative is someone who spends his time worrying that someone, somewhere might be enjoying himself.
Protect the children? From what?
Until this stuff has been studied we have no reason to believe it is harmful. (Nor do we know that it is harmless.)
If we had just taken the time to study marijuana before outlawing it, we wouldn’t be in the current position of having laws against a non-addictive drug that never killed anyone, while simultaneously selling highly addictive tobacco products that we once assumed were safe.
What’s the hurry, since there doesn’t seem to be any rash of addiction or overdoses on K2. Let the researchers give us a little advice first.
There was that one recent car wreck, but if you were a teenager who just trashed his family’s car (probably by driving the way teenagers drive), wouldn’t you want something else to blame?
There is no need to jump the gun.
Little John,
Because K2 is smoked, it probably has the same long term effects as cigarettes. Neither product should be available to minors.
It is hard for me to fathom why our City Council feels the need to regulate this substance at all.
City Council should have a large number of more important items to work on. Fort Wayne’s underfunded pension plans would be a great place to start.
Mike Sylvester
I’m with Mike as well, seems Ft Wayne has plenty of pressing matters for your council to address without wading into this.
Speaking from experience, when I was a teenager (yeah,yeah, waaaaaay back in the stone age) if you didn’t have any dough, good old Indiana ragweed would get ya where ya wanted to be….If kids wanna get high, they’ll find a way.
Well at least now the marijuana dealers can jack their prices back up and pay their rent.
/sarcasm off