American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 425–435 | Cite as

Awareness of Novel Drug Legality in a Young Adult Population

  • Michael Singleton
  • John M. StognerEmail author
  • Bryan Lee Miller


In recent years, use of substances commonly referred to as ‘legal highs’ has become a significant concern to policy makers and public health officials. Though legislation banning the use and possession of these novel and synthetic drugs often follows the initial media attention and public outcry, potential users may often be unaware of the legislation. A survey including self-reported drug use and perceptions of the legality of various psychoactive substances was administered to 2,346 students in randomly selected classes at a large public university to determine what portion accurately knew four types of novel drugs were locally illegal. Results indicated that numerous potential and current users incorrectly believed that the former ‘legal highs’ remained unrestricted. This sample did include a number of novel drug users; lifetime use of at least one novel drug was reported by 17.1 %, many of which reported using multiple types of novel drugs. Approximately one-third of the overall sample inaccurately believed that Salvia divinorum (34.7 %), K2/Spice (36.5 %), and Mr. Miyagi/Pot-pourri (32.1 %) were legal in the state and over half (50.3 %) inaccurately believed ‘bath salts’ (synthetic cathinones, MDPV, and other synthetic stimulants) remained legal. As these misperceptions have the potential to influence substance use decisions, they may need to be corrected through educational campaigns as widespread as the preceding media coverage that labeled the drug as ‘legal highs.’ Results also indicated that Blacks and previous users of the substances were more likely to hold inaccurate legal beliefs.


Novel drugs Synthetic drugs Legal highs Synthetic cannabinoids Synthetic cathinones Salvia divinorum Legal knowledge Misperceptions of law 


Role of Funding Sources

This study was supported in part by funds from the Office of the Vice President for Research and the Jack N. Averitt College of Graduate Studies at Georgia Southern University. The office and college had no role in the study design, collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, writing the manuscript, or the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Conflicts of interest

Each of the authors report no conflicts of interest.


  1. Akers, R. L. (1992). Drugs, alcohol, and society: Social structure, process and policy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  2. Ayres, T. C., & Bond, J. W. (2012). A chemical analysis examining the pharmacology of novel psychoactive substances freely available over the internet and their impact on public (ill) health. Legal highs or illegal highs?. BMJ Open, 2(4). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-000977.
  3. Bath Salts Direct (2013). New… Ivory Wave. Retrieved from Accessed 25 Feb 2013.
  4. Baumann, M. H., Partilla, J. S., Lehner, K. R., Thorndike, E. B., Hoffman, A. F., Holy, M., et al. (2013). Powerful cocaine-like actions of 3, 4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV), a principal constituent of psychoactive ‘bath salts’ products. Neuropsychopharmacology, 28, 552–562.Google Scholar
  5. Beccaria, C. (1764). On crimes and punishments. In Aaron Thomas (Ed.) On crimes and punishments and other writings. (2009). University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bright, S. J., Bishop, B., Kane, R., Marsh, A., & Barratt, M. J. (2013). Kronic hysteria: Exploring the intersection between Australian synthetic cannabis legislation, the media, and drug-related harm. International Journal of Drug Policy. 24(3) 231–237.Google Scholar
  7. Dahl, J., (2012). Bath salts, drug alleged “face-chewer” Rudy Eugene may have been on, plague police and doctors. CBSnews. May 30, 2012. Retrieved from Accessed 11 March 2013.
  8. Drug Enforcement Administration (May 16, 2013). 21 CFR Part 1308. Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary Placement of Three Synthetic Cannabinoids into Schedule I. Federal Register Volume 78, Number 95, 28735–28739.Google Scholar
  9. Dybdal-Hargreaves, N. F., Holder, N. D., Ottoson, P. E., Sweeney, M. D., & Williams, T. (2013). Mephedrone: Public health risk, mechanisms of action, and behavioral effects. European Journal of Pharmacology, 714, 32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Georgia House Bill 1021 (2010).Google Scholar
  11. Georgia House Bill 1309 (2010).Google Scholar
  12. Georgia Senate Bill 93 (2011).Google Scholar
  13. Griffin, O. H., III, Miller, B. L., & Khey, D. N. (2008). Legally high? Legal considerations of Salvia divinorum. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 40, 183–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hill, S. L., & Thomas, S. H. (2011). Clinical toxicology of newer recreational drugs. Clinical Toxicology, 49(8), 705–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hughes, B., & Winstock, A. R. (2012). Controlling new drugs under marketing regulations. Addiction, 107(11), 1894–1899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jacobs, B. A. (2010). Deterrence and Deterrability. Criminology, 48, 417–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jenkins, P. (1999). Synthetic panics: The symbolic politics of designer drugs. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jerry, J., Collins, G., & Streem, D. (2012). Synthetic legal intoxicating drugs: The emerging ‘incense’ and ‘bath salt’ phenomenon. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, 79, 258–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., & Bachman, J. G. (1981). Cannabis decriminalization: The impact on youth 1975–1980. Monitoring the Future Occasional Paper no. 13. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  20. Khey, D. N., Miller, B. L., & Griffin, O. H. (2008). Salvia divinorum use among a college student sample. Journal of Drug Education, 38, 297–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindigkeit, R., Boehme, A., Eiserloh, I., Luebbecke, M., Wiggermann, M., Ernst, L., et al. (2009). Spice: a never ending story? Forensic Science International, 191, 58–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Louwagie, P. (September 19, 2011). Bath salts hit U.S. ‘Like a freight train.’ Minneapolis Star Tribune. Retrieved from Accessed 25 Feb 2013.
  23. MacCoun, R., Pacula, R., Chriqui, J., Harris, K., & Reuter, P. (2008). Do citizens know whether their state has decriminalized marijuana? A test of the perceptual assumption in deterrence theory. In 3rd Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Papers. Retreived from Accessed 5 March 2013.
  24. McLachlan, G. (2009). Taking the spice out of legal smoking mixtures. The Lancet, 374, 600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Miller, B. L., Boman, J. H., IV, & Stogner, J. M. (2013). Measuring novel drug perceptions: Salvia divinorum, gender, and peer delinquency. Substance Use and Misuse, 48, 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. NACS: National Association of Convenience Stores (2012). Georgia store busted for selling illegal substance. Retrieved from Accessed 5 March 2013.
  27. Official Code of Georgia Annotated § 16-13-25 (2012). Adoption of Emergency Rule 480-34-.04: Synthetic Cannabinoids.Google Scholar
  28. Pratt, T. C., Cullen, F. T., Blevins, K. R., Daigle, L. E., & Madensen, T. D. (2006). The empirical status of deterrence theory: A meta-analysis. In F. T. Cullen, J. P. Wright, and K. R. Blevins (Eds.). Taking stock: The status of criminological theory, 15, 367–395.Google Scholar
  29. Prosser, J. M., & Nelson, L. S. (2012). The toxicology of bath salts: A review of synthetic cathinones. Journal of Medical Toxicology, 8, 33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sheridan, M. (2011). Mark Thompson, found in women’s lingerie standing over dead goat, was high on ‘bath salts.’ NY Daily News. May 5, 2011. Retrieved from Accessed 4 March 2013.
  31. Spiller, H. A., Ryan, M. L., Weston, R. G., & Jansen, J. (2011). Clinical experience with and analytical confirmation of ‘bath salts’ and ‘legal highs’ (synthetic cathinones) in the United States. Clinical Toxicology, 49, 499–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stogner, J., Khey, D. N., Griffin, O. H., Miller, B. L., & Boman, J. H. (2012). Regulating a novel drug: An evaluation of changes in use of Salvia divinorum in the first year of Florida’s ban. International Journal of Drug Policy, 23, 512–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stogner, J. & Miller, B. L. (2013 [Early Online]). A spicy kind of high: A profile of synthetic cannabinoid users. Journal of Substance Use.Google Scholar
  34. Synthetic Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 2012. 21 U.S.C. § 811–812.Google Scholar
  35. United States Navy Medicine (2012). Bath salts: It’s not a fad… it’s a nightmare. Retrieved from Accessed 25 Feb 2013.
  36. Vardakou, I., Pistos, C., & Spiliopoulou, C. (2010). Spice drugs as a new trend: Mode of action, identification and legislation. Toxicology Letters, 197, 157–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vardakou, I., Pistos, C., & Spiliopoulou, C. (2011). Drugs for youth via Internet and the example of mephedrone. Toxicology Letters, 201, 191–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Westphal, F., Junge, T., Rosner, P., Sonnichsen, F., & Schuster, F. (2009). Mass and NMR spectroscopic characterization of 3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone: A designer drug with a-pyrrolidinophenone structure. Forensic Science International, 190, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zimmermann, U. S., Winkelmann, P. R., Pilhatsch, M., Nees, J. A., Spanagel, R., & Schulz, K. (2009). Withdrawal phenomena and dependence syndrome after the consumption of ‘SpiceGold’. Deutsches Artzeblatt International, 106, 464–467.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Singleton
    • 1
  • John M. Stogner
    • 2
    Email author
  • Bryan Lee Miller
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Criminal Justice and CriminologyGeorgia Southern UniversityStatesboroUSA
  2. 2.Department of Criminal Justice and CriminologyUniversity of North Carolina at CharlotteCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations