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

Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 431 posts

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#61

Post by thaumasiotes »

fein wrote: post #8
thaumasiotes wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initiatives_and_referendums_in... ) and ballotpedia ( https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Indirect_initiative_s... ), Ohio allows indirect initiatives. Meaning that if you were right about the voting base, it would be easy to legalize recreational marijuana without worrying what the leadership thought. > In the indirect form, initiative sponsors collect signat…

The salt of the earth doesn't give a shit about the local government; they just want to be left alone for the most part. The issue is getting the signatures in the first place, which requires canvassing, which requires paying someone to organize all of that. The last example of a successful canvassing that we had was a grab at a monopoly over growing ops, which was funded partly by a former member of the boy band NSY…

> The other hurdle is approval by the legislature. In Ohio it's not as simple as "get signatures, get on the ballot".

I'm open to more specialized information, but the description on ballotpedia strongly implies that it is that simple. Specifically, it says that the steps are:

1. Get signatures.

2. The legislature must consider the initiative, either approving or rejecting it.

3a. If the legislature approves the initiative, it becomes law without having to go on the ballot.

3b. If the legislature rejects the initiative, it goes on the ballot.

Thus, once you have signatures, the worst case is that you go straight onto the ballot, and the best case is that you become law without needing to. Theoretically, it could be possible for the legislature to sit on the initiative without ever approving or rejecting it. All I'm working off here is a cursory description of the law of several states including Ohio. Do you have relevant knowledge of Ohio law?

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#62

Post by msbarnett »

bjourne wrote: post #48

Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317170.php It appears to me that if cannabis was a food additive with the same risk profile, no one would think it should be legal. I understand that the counter-argument is "What about tobacco/alcohol?" But those substances are already legal and there are no "equal opportunities" rights for drugs. Li…

Alcohol, maternal stress, and gluten (according to about as many studies as identify cannabis) can also be contributory factors to the onset or kindling of schizophrenia.

If prohibition is our answer to anything increasing the risk of development of schizophrenia, we’re going to be banning a lot of things.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#63

Post by rotred »

bjourne wrote: post #48

Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317170.php It appears to me that if cannabis was a food additive with the same risk profile, no one would think it should be legal. I understand that the counter-argument is "What about tobacco/alcohol?" But those substances are already legal and there are no "equal opportunities" rights for drugs. Li…

I agree, I think that it should have been decriminalized instead (similar to how it is in Portugal).

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#64

Post by lovich »

bjourne wrote: post #48

Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317170.php It appears to me that if cannabis was a food additive with the same risk profile, no one would think it should be legal. I understand that the counter-argument is "What about tobacco/alcohol?" But those substances are already legal and there are no "equal opportunities" rights for drugs. Li…

Alcohol has a risk of brain damage[1]. Acetaminophen increases the risk of liver damage and death [2]. There's an argument that we shouldn't allow risky chemicals, but if were being consistent then the risk of schizophrenia from pot use is right up there with the risks of lots of legal, over the counter chemicals

[1]https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/about-dementia/types-dementia/... [2]https://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm168830.h...

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#65

Post by [deleted] »

wux wrote: post #32
hosh wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I was puzzling over that earlier about yhat and was confused. Does that mean that, up until the 80s, the British government were still involved with Canadian lawmaking? Did that mean Canada was a constitutional monarchy? Still is?

Before 1931, the so-called Imperial Parliament had the power to legislate for Canada, and any legislation they passed had supremacy over colonial legislation under the Colonial Laws Validity Act, 1865. Between 1931 and 1982, the UK Parliament had the power to legislate for Canada only with the request and consent of the Canadian government. This arrangement was codified in the Statute of Westminster 1931. In 1982, on…

[deleted]

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#66

Post by Lazare »

bjourne wrote: post #48

Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317170.php It appears to me that if cannabis was a food additive with the same risk profile, no one would think it should be legal. I understand that the counter-argument is "What about tobacco/alcohol?" But those substances are already legal and there are no "equal opportunities" rights for drugs. Li…

> Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized?

Yes, of course. Substances that enhance the risk of death are legalised, after all. :)

I think what you may mean is "does this specific substance present unacceptably high risks relative to the benefits?" And the answer from your link seems to be "no".

Any attempt to make policy while only looking at the costs (or benefits) in isolation is doomed to failure.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#67

Post by cageface »

bjourne wrote: post #48

Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317170.php It appears to me that if cannabis was a food additive with the same risk profile, no one would think it should be legal. I understand that the counter-argument is "What about tobacco/alcohol?" But those substances are already legal and there are no "equal opportunities" rights for drugs. Li…

The question when considering legality of any substance isn't whether it's harmful or not. It's whether or not making it illegal prevents more social harm than it creates. At this point the evidence is in that criminalizing marijuana does far more social harm than good.

It doesn't make sense to compare psychoactive drugs to food additives because people don't use food additives recreationally.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#68

Post by ValleyOfTheMtns »

bjourne wrote: post #48

Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317170.php It appears to me that if cannabis was a food additive with the same risk profile, no one would think it should be legal. I understand that the counter-argument is "What about tobacco/alcohol?" But those substances are already legal and there are no "equal opportunities" rights for drugs. Li…

>Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized?

Sure, as long as the risks associated with legalising it are less destructive than keeping it illegal.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#69

Post by dilap »

bjourne wrote: post #48

Should any substance which enhances the risk of schizophrenia be legalized? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317170.php It appears to me that if cannabis was a food additive with the same risk profile, no one would think it should be legal. I understand that the counter-argument is "What about tobacco/alcohol?" But those substances are already legal and there are no "equal opportunities" rights for drugs. Li…

I'd say yes. I think my own right put whatever substances I'd like into my own body is an inherent good that outweighs whatever other negative consequences there may be. (So I'd also like to heroin, meth, etc. legalized.)

But even if you don't subscribe to that belief, it's pretty obvious that the ills of prohibition of cannabis far outweigh its very mild negative side-effects (which are far more minor than those of alcohol). Ungodly amounts of violence and suffering have been caused by drug cartels ability to monitize prohibition.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#70

Post by Alex3917 »

rtkwe wrote: post #52
dgzl wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that the 10 amendment in the Bill of Rights is all that a person would need to nullify gross overreaches of power by the federal government.

Good luck convincing the Supreme Court to upend the basis of a huge portion of federal law and decades of judicial precedence in favor of very broad readings of the enumerated powers.

The supreme court has never ruled against the use of drugs for religious purposes in a broad sense, so there's that at least.
Post reply on HN