41–50 of 133 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why did the US gvmnt do that?
If you go from the assumption that marijuana is almost as bad as cocaine and heroin — which a lot of policy makers and beurocrats pretty sincerely believed — it makes total sense.
Terrifying, as the distribution of marijuana in the United States remains a federal crime, allowing anyone in this industry to be legally locked up at any time by the feds. Someone once told me that this is how most of China operates; there are many common day-to-day things (such as money transfers) that close to 100% of the population engages in that are completely illegal, yet tolerated. When a person does somethin…
It'd be difficult to get something like that just right so that the bar is high enough (no chance of getting laws stricken down just because police is under-unded and has to prioritise and are trying their best) but still low enough to prevent abuse, and it'd put a burden of collecting a lot of statistics and do a lot of analysis on police to ensure they don't have undue biases, but it's work they should be doing anyway.
There'd still be the option of the legislative to intentionally pass the laws again, scold the police and do nothing to actually change things, but if the bar is low enough and it happens with a lot of laws, they'd be swamped...
Another thing I'd like to see is a legal requirement that laws comes with a set of pre- and post-conditions that the law is based on. E.g. "Given that it's proven that X causes Y effect, we pass this law" and "The intent of this law is to achieve a X reduction in Y behaviour within Z timerame", and give courts the power to suspend laws where the conditions provably don't hold...
Requiring laws to be regularly re-affirmed would be another fun thing - forcing people to go on record voting for a law that today sounds antiquated and that their opponents would use to club them over the head with in the press might substantially increase the chances of having bad laws stricken down... Even "just" requiring laws to be re-affirmed if X years have gone with less than Y prosecutions would be a big deal.
A lot of problems are down to legislatives being able to pass laws and then largely wash their hands of the whole thing and not worry about the consequences or whether or not the laws have the desired effect as long as it doesn't affect the people voting for them too much. Unfortunately that's also exactly the reason we're unlikely to see it happen - it's not in their interest to have to consider the fallout.
Terrifying, as the distribution of marijuana in the United States remains a federal crime, allowing anyone in this industry to be legally locked up at any time by the feds. Someone once told me that this is how most of China operates; there are many common day-to-day things (such as money transfers) that close to 100% of the population engages in that are completely illegal, yet tolerated. When a person does somethin…
And so does India. Marijuana was legal in India til 1985 then US government forced Indian government criminalize it.
Good. It's now time to explore the market for people who want to quit/detox from the weed. I'm not saying this in a sarcastic way - I've been smoking on and off for 20 years and I have great respect for the plant. But it has this "self-limiting" property - sometimes you want to be with it, sometimes you want to take a break. And taking a break is not trivial for some people. This is were the secondary market can take…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you go from the assumption that marijuana is almost as bad as cocaine and heroin — which a lot of policy makers and beurocrats pretty sincerely believed — it makes total sense.
No one actually believes that. Not anyone with any kind of power anyways.
Good. It's now time to explore the market for people who want to quit/detox from the weed. I'm not saying this in a sarcastic way - I've been smoking on and off for 20 years and I have great respect for the plant. But it has this "self-limiting" property - sometimes you want to be with it, sometimes you want to take a break. And taking a break is not trivial for some people. This is were the secondary market can take…
Generic classes/treatments/therapy on addiction already exist. Marijuana has not been proven to be physically addictive like alcohol & heroin. Psychological addiction can happen with anything, so that is why I mention generic addiction treatment. I think your point is valid though. We can always learn more, especially if it can help.
Even worse is the word "addict", which is dirty and degrading and helpless.
Just like the word "drugs" or "criminal". There are so many shades to it that one word just doesn't cut it.
The word we use to state the issue gives us the frame of where to look for solutions, hence a bad statement can lead to bad solutions.
For example, instead of "addiction to marijuana" try using the expression "relationship with the marijuana plant".
This subtile change in statement shifts the domain of the issue and lets us look for a solution in new places. Now we're dealing with a relationship (with a plant) - might it be a replacement for a relationship with a human (current or previous) ? Who is it replacing in my life ?
And so on, you get the point ...
Reframing my "addiction to tobacco" to "relationship with the tobacco plant" has helped me quit smoking for good, because I was not thinking of it as a mechanistic dependency on a substance (nicotine), but as a case of relationship with a plant.
She was my closest friend, my protector, my thinking partner, but she was taking a toll on my health, hence we had to part ways. Peacefully and respectfully, we separated and I've been free ever since.
The point I'm trying to make is that we're still far from a clear understanding of what "addiction" is and how to approach it at the root and that's were green pastures for research and businesses exist.
Good. It's now time to explore the market for people who want to quit/detox from the weed. I'm not saying this in a sarcastic way - I've been smoking on and off for 20 years and I have great respect for the plant. But it has this "self-limiting" property - sometimes you want to be with it, sometimes you want to take a break. And taking a break is not trivial for some people. This is were the secondary market can take…
Generic classes/treatments/therapy on addiction already exist. Marijuana has not been proven to be physically addictive like alcohol & heroin. Psychological addiction can happen with anything, so that is why I mention generic addiction treatment. I think your point is valid though. We can always learn more, especially if it can help.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What scares me is that we've pursued this in such 'medical' terms. It really influences how people think. Remember when it seemed insane to see advertisments about how "8 out of 10 doctors recommend ___ brand cigarettes"? It doesn't seem crazy to me now that there is so much "health" based marketing around marijuana.
And how the tobacco companies are evil and terrible but hey! Wanna smoke pot? That's all GOOD! Marijuana should be legal but discouraged, not permitted to be advertised, put in plain packaging, kept behind counters and not turned into novelty products that appeal to teenagers like foods. Hard to see how it's much different to tobacco really.
For one, you don't have to smoke it (where the majority of negative health effects come from). You can eat it, steep it, drink it.
Comparing it to tobacco is ridiculous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And how the tobacco companies are evil and terrible but hey! Wanna smoke pot? That's all GOOD! Marijuana should be legal but discouraged, not permitted to be advertised, put in plain packaging, kept behind counters and not turned into novelty products that appeal to teenagers like foods. Hard to see how it's much different to tobacco really.
are you serious? thc and nicotine are two different drugs. they are different . they do different things. and the sky is blue and 2 plus 2 equals 4. you don't have to smoke cannabis to get thc. you can eat it, and many people do. if you just don't like the idea of it, that's one thing and completely understandable, but claiming (even rhetorically) it's the same as tobacco is one of the stupidest things i've ever read…
They are different, but they have many similarities. They're used under similar circumstances. The business model around them is very similar. I would expect the industry that forms around it to ultimately behave very much like the tobacco/alcohol/etc. industries, and so it is weird to treat one differently from the other. Or do you think there are important differences?