Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 143 posts

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#91

Post by smoe »

uououuttt wrote: post #48
ojbyrne wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/magazine/104914/... says "In 2010, Mexican officials estimated that cannabis now provides the cartels with as much as half of their revenue."

I have also seen this 50% figure from various sources but I find it hard to believe, although I have no specific knowledge that would refute it. As far as I know, it's mostly low-grade weed that comes over the border, and while some grow operations within the US are cartel-run, I still am so surprised it would equal their profits from cocaine and methamphetamine combined.

I think another aspect is, that the mexican cartels can grow the marijuana themselves and gain full profit off it, while cocaine or coca plants/paste have to be imported from south america.

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#92

Post by [deleted] »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #44
rayiner wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wickard v. Filburn isn't the lynch-pin of the Federal war on drugs. It's a ridiculous case, but it's also a narrow one: does the Commerce Clause cover marijuana grown for personal use . That is obviously not interstate commerce within any sensible definition of the concept. However, the drug trade in general is archetypal interstate commerce. Almost nobody grows and processes their own weed or their own cocaine. It a…

Possession is illegal at the Federal level. All drug commerce that does not cross state lines is also illegal. There could be no federal war on drugs at all without the interstate commerce power the supreme court has derived. Going further, the purpose of the interstate commerce clause was to give the power to regulate tariffs (and other taxes) between the states, not make entire trades illegal because sometimes thos…

[deleted]

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#93

Post by rayiner »

xacaxulu wrote: post #50
rayiner wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wickard v. Filburn isn't the lynch-pin of the Federal war on drugs. It's a ridiculous case, but it's also a narrow one: does the Commerce Clause cover marijuana grown for personal use . That is obviously not interstate commerce within any sensible definition of the concept. However, the drug trade in general is archetypal interstate commerce. Almost nobody grows and processes their own weed or their own cocaine. It a…

I know more pot growers than pot buyers and I'm not even in a decriminalized state.

I know one person who grows their own weed. But I live in the city. In any case, marijuana and possession generally are a small part of the federal drug war.

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#95

Post by unabridged »

PhantomGremlin wrote: post #61
ahallock wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't we stop enumerating specific rights (which leads to picking winners and losers and inconsistent application) and refactor them into a few basic principles. Such as the basic property right of self ownership. Since you own your body, not the State, you may use marijuana. Simple.

We actually have such an amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Unfortunately the Supreme Court treats it like a fucking joke[1]: Even though the woman grew cannabis strictly for her own consumption and never sold any, the Supreme Court stated that growing one's own cannabis affects th…

I like to think of it more as a Ninth Amendment issue:

  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
  shall not be construed to deny or disparage others
  retained by the people
Just because a "right to the free development of personality" isn't specifically listed doesn't mean we don't have it.

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#96

Post by mseebach »

Tomte wrote: post #71
transfire wrote: post #66

"If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." --Thomas Jefferson

I suppose you'd like to take FDA-unapproved medication? I wouldn't.

I would.

(I would, however, be looking to other sources of approval. Take Daraprim, the infamous $750 pill - at the time of the price hike, it was trivially available from perfectly safe foreign suppliers at <$1, just not with the FDAs approval. It's only available in the US now at that price because some people found a regulatory loophole that allowed them to sell it without the FDAs approval.)

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#97

Post by Loque »

a3voices wrote: post #73
api wrote: post #70

I realized today that it's a privilege to watch prohibition die; it gives me faith in the future to witness the end of a profound injustice in my time.

Morality aside, I think widespread drug legalization will greatly increase usage rates. It could lead to a more dystopic future where a very large portion of people are using various drugs.

Yea Holland and Portugal are as dystopic as they come?!

I think as a society is more progressive/efficient to help and support those with drup problems as apposed to locking them up and creating an industry for the trade of 'illegal' drugs. What a waste of time and resource playing cops and robbers for 'drugs', I hope more and more policing groups are noticing this and feeding back over time.

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#98

Post by throwaway7767 »

Retric wrote: post #32
r0s wrote: post #15

> The move potentially puts Mexico at the forefront of an international movement to decriminalize drugs – despite a decade-long militarized crackdown on drug cartels which has cost the lives of around 100,000 people. This is a sane and direct response to exactly that.

Drug cartels don't make there money selling to people in Mexico, the real money is in the US market.

> Drug cartels don't make there money selling to people in Mexico, the real money is in the US market.

This decision is not sufficient, but if mexico completely legalised drugs, including manufacture, sale and distribution, the cartel violence in mexico would mostly stop, because they'd be legitimate businessmen who could rely on police protection.

The US wouldn't like it, but hey, that's their problem (in theory - in practice they'd make sure this never happened by meddling in foreign affairs as they always do).

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#99

Post by tomp »

frame_perfect wrote: post #87
tomp wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? There will still be criminals tradficking drugs to the US... They just won't be ceiminals in Mexico any more!

Isn't that the whole point? If legalization goes through and the crime is only localized to the U.S., then Mexico's supreme court reduced crime in Mexico.

Yes, that's what I was trying to say... I see no "cost of legalization" for Mexico, only benefits.

Re: Mexico supreme court rules ban on marijuana use unconstitutional

#100

Post by happyscrappy »

throwaway7767 wrote: post #98
Retric wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drug cartels don't make there money selling to people in Mexico, the real money is in the US market.

> Drug cartels don't make there money selling to people in Mexico, the real money is in the US market. This decision is not sufficient, but if mexico completely legalised drugs, including manufacture, sale and distribution, the cartel violence in mexico would mostly stop, because they'd be legitimate businessmen who could rely on police protection. The US wouldn't like it, but hey, that's their problem (in theory - i…

The cartels would not just become upstanding taxpayers and the US is legalizing weed. Anti-American comments will always get you up votes but your scenario is very unlikely.
Post reply on HN