[[Image:DEA badge.PNG|right|thumb|Since 1973, the DEA has enforced the drug laws in the United States.]] The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is a United States Department of Justice law enforcement agency tasked with suppressing the sale of recreational drugs by enforcing the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. It shares concurrent jurisdiction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in narcotics enforcement matters. ==History== The DEA was formed from the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs of the US Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control of the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1973. ==Organization== The DEA is headed by an Administrator appointed by the President of the United States and is approved by the United States Senate. The Administrator is assisted by a Deputy Administrator, the Chief of Operations, the Chief Inspector, Assistant Administrators for the Operations Support Division, Intelligence Division, and Human Resources Division. Other senior staff include the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Counsel. Its headquarters is in Arlington, Virginia, Virginia. It maintains its own DEA Academy located on the United States Marine Corps base at Quantico, Virginia along with the FBI Academy. It maintains 21 domestic Field Divisions with 237 Field Offices and 80 Foreign Offices in 58 countries. With a budget over two billion dollars it employs over 11,000 people to include over 5,000 Special Agents. ==Facilities== The DEA maintains its headquarters offices in Arlington, Virginia. DEA has offices or posts of duty in over 350 locations throughout the world. The DEA jointly runs the El Paso Intelligence Center, which plays a major role in SIGINT and command and control for drug and immigration enforcement along the United States borders with Mexico. ==Narcotics Registration== The DEA has a registration system in place which authorizes medical professionals, researchers and manufacturers access to even "Controlled Substances Act" drugs. Authorized registrants receive a so called "DEA Number" which is to be solely used for tracking controlled substances. The DEA number, however, is often used by the industry as a general "prescriber" number as a unique identifier for anyone who can prescribe medication. A valid DEA number consists of[http://pharmsci.buffalo.edu/courses/phc311/latin.html]: *2 letters and 7 digits *the first letter is either an "A" or a "B" *the second letter is the initial of the registrant's last name *the seventh digit is a "checksum" that is calculated as: **add together the first, third and fifth digits **add together the second, fourth and sixth digits and multiply the sum by 2 **add the above 2 numbers **the last digit (the one's value) of this last sum is used as the seventh digit in the DEA number ==Criticism== The DEA has been criticized for placing drugs which some researchers regard as having potential medical uses, such as MDMA and ibogaine, on highly restrictive schedules, even over the objections of some experts in the field of pharmacology and medicine. Critics claim that such decisions are motivated primarily by political factors stemming from the US government's War on Drugs, and that many potential benefits of such substances remain unknown due to the difficulty of conducting scientific research. There are also some scheduled substances that are extremely rare and no reasoning as to why they are scheduled could be found. This includes the drug U4EA and bufotenine. The DEA is also criticized for not scheduling dangerous drugs seldom used, such as datura, and for being extremely slow in the scheduling popular analogues of existing scheduled substances, such as Dipropyltryptamine, 2C-T-7, and GHB analogues. The DEA is also criticized for allegedly focusing only on the operations that it can seize the most money from, namely the organized crime cross border trafficking of heroin and cocaine. Some critics say that, based on order of popularity, the DEA should be most focused on marijuana or based on order of danger, the DEA should be most focused on locally freebased "crack" cocaine. Based on order of opiate popularity, the DEA should focus much more on medical prescription opiates used recreationally, which critics contend is far more widespread than heroin use. Others, such as the ACLU, criticize the very existence of the DEA and the War on Drugs as inimical to the concept of civil liberties by arguing that adults should have the right to put whatever substances they choose into their own bodies. ==See also== * Bureau of Prohibition * Federal Bureau of Investigation * War on Drugs ==External links== * [http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/ DEA official web site] * [http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/history/ The History of the DEA from 1973 to 1998] United States Federal law enforcement agencies U.S. controlled substances law United States Department of Justice
Marijuana has definite medical uses. Should not be in level 1. User:MJanich Of course it shouldn't. LSD especially shouldn't, as it was proven to cure autism and schizophrenia in some cases during experimentation in the 1950's... However, it is banned because of lobbying by drug companies to keep LSD and other such 'cures' off the market, so as to increase sales of treatments, which never really cure anything, but help ease the pain as the victim, err, patient descends into disease. Actually, in terms of autism and schizophrenia, it seems that only depressents are used, which do not help the patient in any way but make them docile so that they can be herded around in mental institutions. Obviously there is something very wrong with the common system of government, and moreover, with the inordinate feudal-style power corporations have over the government... user: Khranus Marijuana and LSD have no viable medical usages(accusations of big business interference and the wishful thinking of some notwithstanding). Some components of them, such as THC may have. The legalization of recreational drugs is based on public perception of their dangers not on the perceptions of te counter-culture minority. LSD, once touted as the cure for the (not-so)common cold, has been proven in numerous studies conducted by the AMA and others to have long lasting negative (called chronic) effects on the CNS which preclude its daily use. While I generally believe that people should have the personal choice to do what they want I also believe that some will chose to harm themselves in the longterm for a short-term award, and yes, I believe that some people have to be protected against themselves for they are their own worst enemies. The above is simply the uninformed opinion of others--User:Numerousfalx 14:19, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) Don't you mean wrongfully informed. Khranus's facts are incorrect. LSD was supposed to be a cure for the common-cold. It was never shown to have any use as a psychtrophic drug. And stimulant based drugs are primarily used to treat autism and other physiological brain disorders. Non-stimulant based meds are currently enetering the market. --User:68.80.223.233 14:23, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) While certain narcotics have both a medical and recreation use, public outcry has prevented the legalization of the narcotics. While alcohol and its derivitives are widely accepted, narcotics are not and until the people reach a consensus (hardly likely) they will reamin illegal. Those US states which allow medical marijuana allow it inthe pill form and it is widely perceived by the public as thefirst step in the attempted legalization of narcotics. While the war on drugs isn't going well it does need to be fought whole heartedly with the napalming of those areas that produce the basis and the administration of the Singapore Solution (ie manditory deathe sentence) to the producers and purveyors thereof. Just my two bits. --User:Tomtom 19:57, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) ---- From Village Pump: ==Wikipedia & ethics of "sensitive" information== While researching the article on medical prescription, I stumbled across information on what consistutes a valid DEA number (US government's Drug Enforcement Agency). That, is the number of letters and digits and the relationship of the digits and letters within the DEA number. While this information is clearly public, including it Wikipedia certainly aids criminals in prescription forgeries. Should I include it in an article? (The same discussion would apply to credit card numbers, etc.) User:Samw 00:40, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) : I'm not familiar with these numbers (hey, an article ''about'' the numbers would be good) - what legitimate interest would someone have in finding these numbers in an encyclopedia? -- User:Finlay McWalter 00:48, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) : The information on Credit_card#Credit_card_numbering is already in Wikipedia, which I don't see as problematic. These are all very simple and openly published checksums, so relying on them to prevent fraud would certainly be foolish. If there is an article in which the DEA number information would be of interest, I would say go ahead and add it. --User:Delirium 08:38, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC) :: I agree. I recall that, at age 15, how to construct a valid credit card number was part of my school syllabus (if my memory can be trusted, they have certian prefixes and a mod 10 checksum). I don't see how a DEA number could be any more sensitive. User:Stewartadcock 17:02, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) :No answers, but perhaps I can formulate some questions. The big question is, "is it legitimately of interest to someone who's interested in the subject of prescriptions?" Let's put it another way. We normally accept that encyclopedia articles ''are'' of legitimate interest to somebody who is ''not'' a professional in the field described by the topic. If we truly believed that "A little learning is a dangerous thing/Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring" there would be no point in having an encyclopedia at all. Your article on medical prescriptions (which looks very good, by the way) already contains information about prescription forgeries. I find this information interesting to know, even though I've never forged and never intend to forge a prescription. Normally we assume that the inclusion of information is ''not'' tantamount to an enticement to abuse. Personally, I think that information about the internal consistency check algorithm for a valid DEA number is legitimate, while, say, Bill Gates' social security number is not. :I tend to agree with those who deprecate "security through obscurity." There was a recent research paper by some computer security gurus who looked at the structure of an ordinary cylinder lock with master-key system. They saw analogies to well-known security issues in computer systems and were surprised to find that the system was extremely insecure. Their publication created a minor flap—but then it emerged that the security issues had, in fact, been known to locksmiths and criminals literally for over a century. The only people that hadn't known about them were the people that relied on the security of these locks. :The second question is: can you get in trouble yourself or get Wikipedia in trouble by including some piece of information? I think I'm not going to even try to guess on this one. User:Dpbsmith 15:01, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) Thanks for everyone's input. I've added a description of the checksum algorithm to Drug Enforcement Administration. User:Samw 21:39, 30 Dec 2003 (UTC) ---- What is U4EA supposed to be? No reference to it by that name on the DEA website. The few references I get when I google for it is from a Beverly Hills 90210 episode, and some who think it's actually 2C-B.
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Drug_Enforcement_Administration:
Drug_Enforcement_Administration
Drug_Enforcement_Administration
Drug Enforcement Administration
[[Image:DEA badge.PNG|right|thumb|Since 1973, the DEA has enforced the drug laws in the United States.]] The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is a United States Department of Justice law enforcement agency tasked with suppressing the sale of recreational drugs by enforcing the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. It shares concurrent jurisdiction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in narcotics enforcement matters. ==History== The DEA was formed from the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs of the US Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control of the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1973. ==Organization== The DEA is headed by an Administrator appointed by the President of the United States and is approved by the United States Senate. The Administrator is assisted by a Deputy Administrator, the Chief of Operations, the Chief Inspector, Assistant Administrators for the Operations Support Division, Intelligence Division, and Human Resources Division. Other senior staff include the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Counsel. Its headquarters is in Arlington, Virginia, Virginia. It maintains its own DEA Academy located on the United States Marine Corps base at Quantico, Virginia along with the FBI Academy. It maintains 21 domestic Field Divisions with 237 Field Offices and 80 Foreign Offices in 58 countries. With a budget over two billion dollars it employs over 11,000 people to include over 5,000 Special Agents. ==Facilities== The DEA maintains its headquarters offices in Arlington, Virginia. DEA has offices or posts of duty in over 350 locations throughout the world. The DEA jointly runs the El Paso Intelligence Center, which plays a major role in SIGINT and command and control for drug and immigration enforcement along the United States borders with Mexico. ==Narcotics Registration== The DEA has a registration system in place which authorizes medical professionals, researchers and manufacturers access to even "Controlled Substances Act" drugs. Authorized registrants receive a so called "DEA Number" which is to be solely used for tracking controlled substances. The DEA number, however, is often used by the industry as a general "prescriber" number as a unique identifier for anyone who can prescribe medication. A valid DEA number consists of[http://pharmsci.buffalo.edu/courses/phc311/latin.html]: *2 letters and 7 digits *the first letter is either an "A" or a "B" *the second letter is the initial of the registrant's last name *the seventh digit is a "checksum" that is calculated as: **add together the first, third and fifth digits **add together the second, fourth and sixth digits and multiply the sum by 2 **add the above 2 numbers **the last digit (the one's value) of this last sum is used as the seventh digit in the DEA number ==Criticism== The DEA has been criticized for placing drugs which some researchers regard as having potential medical uses, such as MDMA and ibogaine, on highly restrictive schedules, even over the objections of some experts in the field of pharmacology and medicine. Critics claim that such decisions are motivated primarily by political factors stemming from the US government's War on Drugs, and that many potential benefits of such substances remain unknown due to the difficulty of conducting scientific research. There are also some scheduled substances that are extremely rare and no reasoning as to why they are scheduled could be found. This includes the drug U4EA and bufotenine. The DEA is also criticized for not scheduling dangerous drugs seldom used, such as datura, and for being extremely slow in the scheduling popular analogues of existing scheduled substances, such as Dipropyltryptamine, 2C-T-7, and GHB analogues. The DEA is also criticized for allegedly focusing only on the operations that it can seize the most money from, namely the organized crime cross border trafficking of heroin and cocaine. Some critics say that, based on order of popularity, the DEA should be most focused on marijuana or based on order of danger, the DEA should be most focused on locally freebased "crack" cocaine. Based on order of opiate popularity, the DEA should focus much more on medical prescription opiates used recreationally, which critics contend is far more widespread than heroin use. Others, such as the ACLU, criticize the very existence of the DEA and the War on Drugs as inimical to the concept of civil liberties by arguing that adults should have the right to put whatever substances they choose into their own bodies. ==See also== * Bureau of Prohibition * Federal Bureau of Investigation * War on Drugs ==External links== * [http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/ DEA official web site] * [http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/history/ The History of the DEA from 1973 to 1998] United States Federal law enforcement agencies U.S. controlled substances law United States Department of Justice
Drug Enforcement Administration
Marijuana has definite medical uses. Should not be in level 1. User:MJanich Of course it shouldn't. LSD especially shouldn't, as it was proven to cure autism and schizophrenia in some cases during experimentation in the 1950's... However, it is banned because of lobbying by drug companies to keep LSD and other such 'cures' off the market, so as to increase sales of treatments, which never really cure anything, but help ease the pain as the victim, err, patient descends into disease. Actually, in terms of autism and schizophrenia, it seems that only depressents are used, which do not help the patient in any way but make them docile so that they can be herded around in mental institutions. Obviously there is something very wrong with the common system of government, and moreover, with the inordinate feudal-style power corporations have over the government... user: Khranus Marijuana and LSD have no viable medical usages(accusations of big business interference and the wishful thinking of some notwithstanding). Some components of them, such as THC may have. The legalization of recreational drugs is based on public perception of their dangers not on the perceptions of te counter-culture minority. LSD, once touted as the cure for the (not-so)common cold, has been proven in numerous studies conducted by the AMA and others to have long lasting negative (called chronic) effects on the CNS which preclude its daily use. While I generally believe that people should have the personal choice to do what they want I also believe that some will chose to harm themselves in the longterm for a short-term award, and yes, I believe that some people have to be protected against themselves for they are their own worst enemies. The above is simply the uninformed opinion of others--User:Numerousfalx 14:19, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) Don't you mean wrongfully informed. Khranus's facts are incorrect. LSD was supposed to be a cure for the common-cold. It was never shown to have any use as a psychtrophic drug. And stimulant based drugs are primarily used to treat autism and other physiological brain disorders. Non-stimulant based meds are currently enetering the market. --User:68.80.223.233 14:23, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) While certain narcotics have both a medical and recreation use, public outcry has prevented the legalization of the narcotics. While alcohol and its derivitives are widely accepted, narcotics are not and until the people reach a consensus (hardly likely) they will reamin illegal. Those US states which allow medical marijuana allow it inthe pill form and it is widely perceived by the public as thefirst step in the attempted legalization of narcotics. While the war on drugs isn't going well it does need to be fought whole heartedly with the napalming of those areas that produce the basis and the administration of the Singapore Solution (ie manditory deathe sentence) to the producers and purveyors thereof. Just my two bits. --User:Tomtom 19:57, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) ---- From Village Pump: ==Wikipedia & ethics of "sensitive" information== While researching the article on medical prescription, I stumbled across information on what consistutes a valid DEA number (US government's Drug Enforcement Agency). That, is the number of letters and digits and the relationship of the digits and letters within the DEA number. While this information is clearly public, including it Wikipedia certainly aids criminals in prescription forgeries. Should I include it in an article? (The same discussion would apply to credit card numbers, etc.) User:Samw 00:40, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) : I'm not familiar with these numbers (hey, an article ''about'' the numbers would be good) - what legitimate interest would someone have in finding these numbers in an encyclopedia? -- User:Finlay McWalter 00:48, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) : The information on Credit_card#Credit_card_numbering is already in Wikipedia, which I don't see as problematic. These are all very simple and openly published checksums, so relying on them to prevent fraud would certainly be foolish. If there is an article in which the DEA number information would be of interest, I would say go ahead and add it. --User:Delirium 08:38, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC) :: I agree. I recall that, at age 15, how to construct a valid credit card number was part of my school syllabus (if my memory can be trusted, they have certian prefixes and a mod 10 checksum). I don't see how a DEA number could be any more sensitive. User:Stewartadcock 17:02, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) :No answers, but perhaps I can formulate some questions. The big question is, "is it legitimately of interest to someone who's interested in the subject of prescriptions?" Let's put it another way. We normally accept that encyclopedia articles ''are'' of legitimate interest to somebody who is ''not'' a professional in the field described by the topic. If we truly believed that "A little learning is a dangerous thing/Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring" there would be no point in having an encyclopedia at all. Your article on medical prescriptions (which looks very good, by the way) already contains information about prescription forgeries. I find this information interesting to know, even though I've never forged and never intend to forge a prescription. Normally we assume that the inclusion of information is ''not'' tantamount to an enticement to abuse. Personally, I think that information about the internal consistency check algorithm for a valid DEA number is legitimate, while, say, Bill Gates' social security number is not. :I tend to agree with those who deprecate "security through obscurity." There was a recent research paper by some computer security gurus who looked at the structure of an ordinary cylinder lock with master-key system. They saw analogies to well-known security issues in computer systems and were surprised to find that the system was extremely insecure. Their publication created a minor flap—but then it emerged that the security issues had, in fact, been known to locksmiths and criminals literally for over a century. The only people that hadn't known about them were the people that relied on the security of these locks. :The second question is: can you get in trouble yourself or get Wikipedia in trouble by including some piece of information? I think I'm not going to even try to guess on this one. User:Dpbsmith 15:01, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) Thanks for everyone's input. I've added a description of the checksum algorithm to Drug Enforcement Administration. User:Samw 21:39, 30 Dec 2003 (UTC) ---- What is U4EA supposed to be? No reference to it by that name on the DEA website. The few references I get when I google for it is from a Beverly Hills 90210 episode, and some who think it's actually 2C-B.
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
D
DA | DB | DC | DE | DF | DG | DH | DI | DJ | DK | DL | DM | DN | DO | DP | DR | DS | DT | DU | DW | DX | DY | DZ |Words begining with Drug_Enforcement_Administration:
Drug_Enforcement_Administration
Drug_Enforcement_Administration
Sponsored links: praca, nurkowanie.
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
