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

Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 218 posts

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#181

Post by coldtea »

bayesian_horse wrote: post #179
exprA wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did they manage it in the 30s (or whenever depending on your nationality)? Are you absolutely certain that criminalization wasn't an overreaction to a problem that after all wasn't all that big?

Short answer: They didn't. Back then lives were being ruined as well. And the availability and affordability of dangerous drugs has only increased since then. People just didn't make such a "fuss" of addiction, and especially in the case of poorer people, nobody really cared.

>People just didn't make such a "fuss" of addiction

So why should we make a fuss out of it today?

>and especially in the case of poorer people, nobody really cared.

Whereas now they do?

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#182

Post by cr1895 »

TillE wrote: post #44
foldor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be surprised if it had close to zero impact. As much as people like to talk about Amsterdam's legal marijuana laws, I'm skeptical many people visited that country only because of that. Marijuana isn't exactly hard to get and smoke in private in the places these laws are being enacted in.

"Marijuana" isn't one thing. Dutch coffeeshops are fairly unique in their offering a tasting menu of dozens of varieties of marijuana. But yes, the actual number of cannabis connoisseur tourists is tiny.

>"Marijuana" isn't one thing. Dutch coffeeshops are fairly unique in their offering a tasting menu of dozens of varieties of marijuana.

Hardly unique and recently greatly outshone by the offerings in states in the US where it's legal.

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#183

Post by auntienomen »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #175
auntienomen wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the contrapositive. Being cool helps you access the trust networks through which illegal supply flows.

>> Does smoking pot make you cool? > No, the contrapositive. The first thing you're ever taught about the contrapositive, generally at the same time the name is taught, is that a statement is exactly equivalent to its contrapositive.

In boolean logic, when the law of the excluded middle holds. The theorem you're trying to use is manifestly inapplicable.

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#185

Post by chris_wot »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #176
chris_wot wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying they are good, only that it's better never to sign a treaty like this in the first place.

You can't retroactively have not signed a treaty, though. Your analysis doesn't address the question of "OK, we're in a bad spot, what do we do?", which is the question facing parties to the Convention.

Yup, diabolical isn't it?

There are two choices, break the contract and risk the consequences, or live with the bad treaty.

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#186

Post by MustardTiger »

grecy wrote: post #90
kobayashi wrote: post #87

Very big hiccup that this policy might possibly run up against: the American border. Given the 280,326,500,000 USD in exports that Canada sends to the US [0], even a minor disruption at the border could wreak devastation on Canada's economy. If an American administration even hinted at an increase in border wait times due to newly enhanced searches as a result of legalization, any Canadian federal government would ha…

What you say is true, though it would be a sad day when the future of what Canadians want Canada to be is limited by the financial pressure of another country. Of course, to prevent this problem, Canada could just hint at slowing down or limiting the 12410000000 barrels of oil it exports to the USA [1] (see, two can play that game, and nobody wins) [1] http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/canadian-oil-e...

>What you say is true, though it would be a sad day when the future of what Canadians want Canada to be is limited by the financial pressure of another country.

That day happened like 50 years ago and has been that way ever since. As much as Canadians define themselves by being "not Americans", we're very heavily influenced by the US.

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#187

Post by soundwave106 »

cb18 wrote: post #121
golergka wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you account for rural/urban populations? Population density always has an effect on crime rate

I'm sure somebody's tried it. But the differences are so large that no amount of statistical trickery is going to be able to make them go away. http://www.infowars.com/black-crime-facts-that-the-white-lib... One must also consider that it isn't the density per se, but the populations. For example, you could compare two equally dense areas but made up of different population groups. You would find a difference.

The problem here is knowing what really is the cause and what is the effect.

It is well known that, in the United States, drug usage between all races tends to trend roughly the same. However, the arrest rate for blacks is much, much higher. See these charts for marijuana.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/06/04/the-b...

One possible explanation, of course, is indeed that blacks are more likely to be arrested while committing another serious crime. Hence the gap.

An alternate explanation reverses the argument: blacks may be more prone to commit serious crimes because they are more likely to be arrested for trivial crimes like marijuana usage. Prison does have social consequences after all (eg, people are less willing to hire someone with an arrest record; prison can establish contacts with underground economies that are more likely to utilize violence to settle disputes; prison can tear apart families; etc. -- http://www.economist.com/node/708550 ) and since America is not keen on reintegrating criminals into society (a very high rate of recidivism compared to most countries -- http://www.salve.edu/sites/default/files/filesfield/document... and http://www.businessinsider.com/why-norways-prison-system-is-... ), it is very possible that early arrests for modest crimes lead to later arrests for worse crimes later.

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#188

Post by ooooo00000 »

bayesian_horse wrote: post #165
ktRolster wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For one thing, decriminalization is easy to do. Decriminalization is a bad idea. It increases demand, which gives gangs and mafia types more money. If you're going to do it, legalize it.

I can't see that being an option in the case of heroin or meth. It makes sense to decriminalize users/addicts because they are the victims whom drug legislation is supposed to protect in the first place. But to me it makes no sense to allow anyone to profit from a substance that causes this much harm.

> But to me it makes no sense to allow anyone to profit from a substance that causes this much harm.

It's possible to use heroin daily for the remainder of your life and have a better health outcome than a cigarette smoker.

The drug war makes heroin use more dangerous. Now you have dirty needles, cut drugs, highly inconsistent doses, lack of free treatment/therapy, fear of police and the legal system that leads to reluctance to seek medical attention, etc. And of course black market violence still exists here and abroad.

"Like most opioids, unadulterated heroin does not cause many long-term complications other than dependence and constipation."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#Adverse_effects

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#189

Post by ooooo00000 »

hasenj wrote: post #160
huhtenberg wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The amount of homelessness and crime is 10 times more what I've seen anywhere else in North America. Woah. Talk about 4/20. I'll have what you are having. > I've been to Vancouver and it wasn't a very pretty sight. Well, I've been to US and it wasn't a very pretty sight either. I am of course talking about the atrocities I've seen on a late Friday night in Walton, Nebraska, but clarifying that would just totally ru…

You are talking in a very defensive tone, like I have said something to deeply offend you. The mess extends to the surrounding areas as well, such as China-town. Also, I've mentioned the signs on shop windows (in areas far away) indicating an unusual crime level. Many streets were, not very clean, to say the least. Which is not hard to understand, given the "broken window" theory.

But it's not clear why you think that homelessness in Vancouver is strongly connected to the availability of marijuana. Any evidence?

Re: Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis

#190

Post by ant6n »

leesalminen wrote: post #92
ant6n wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...I'd prefer my neighbors not to stink up the whole building with their skunk stench.

There are plenty of commercial grade filters available for just about any space. Perhaps your HOA/apartment complex could form regulations around ventilation, filtration, waste disposal, etc..

I live in a triplex from 1910. My 'ventilation' is opening the front and back balcony door. The outside air often stinks like skunk. It's actually pretty nauseating.
Post reply on HN