Live data from Hacker News

Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

bbc.co.uk

71–80 of 431 posts

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#71
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder how many state has to legalize it before the federal government in USA is forced to change their classification. It's already arguably legal under federal law under the equal protection clause because congress legalized it in DC. As far as I know the feds aren't locking anyone up for possession of small amounts. E.g.: https://novacriminalattorney.com/marijuana/marijuana-legaliz...

Am I missing something or is your link making the exact opposite point that you made?

The parent post was arguing that it would be hard to prosecute marijuana possession under federal law because federal law allows possession in DC. The link argues that state laws against marijuana are not affected by federal law. So in Virginia, you won't be able to escape prosecution for marijuana possession under Virginia's law just because it is not illegal under federal law or another state's law.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#72
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What even are rights anymore.

We have them on paper. But, de facto, we do not have many at all. It is worse than anarchy. It is arbitrary democracy.

Not to point fingers, but I feel like some generations were sleeping hard on the government. The Constitution is almost entirely built to give citizens the power, and to limit the role of government as much as possible. And now society has fallen into a trap of misinformation and distraction. Can future generations push out the corrupt leaders after they pass away? #termlimitsoncongress

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#73
Meanwhile in Britain, the former leader of the Conservative Party, William Hague, spoke out and claimed that the war on cannabis had been "irreversibly lost".

He was quickly shut down by Theresa May, who categorically ruled out legalisation or even decriminalisation [1].

I don't understand how politicians can stand up and claim that legalisation would have substantial negatives, when every experiment with legalisation has been a success. It's the same blinkered thinking as the anti-gay marriage politicians claiming that it will cause the breakdown of families, or politicians claiming that universal healthcare in the USA clearly wouldn't work.

Drug prohibition has been a categorical failure in every outcome it was intended to achieve. It has cost governments trillions of dollars and incarcerated millions, funded terrorism and civil wars, and caused the deaths of millions of people from both violence and drug related harm. Plus the harm caused by the demonisation of drugs that have potentially powerful positive effects as part of psychiatric treatment such as LSD and MDMA. All due to some concept that taking "recreational drugs" is a moral failing and hence should be illegal.

At least society in genera has finally come around to realise that drug addiction and drug use are not moral failings (although my parents aren't quite convinced).

Obviously we want to restrict access as much as possible to particular drugs, such as heroin or methamphetamine, which are so harmful and addictive that nobody should be using them, or GHB, where the potential for fatal overdose is so high. But penalising the end user is not the solution. People who want to take drugs will take drugs. I have never met somebody who has decided to not take a drug because it's illegal. Whether it was alcohol when underaged, smoking a joint, injecting heroin, or snorting cocaine. I know plenty of people who don't take drugs as a personal choice or because they get drug tested at work, but never was the law a reason why the abstained. It doesn't restrict supply either. Drugs are easy to find and readily available practically everywhere in the world, all that prohibition does is push up the price, fund criminals, and increase harm due to poor quality control and cut drugs.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44526156

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#74
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…

How has making it illegal worked out or the entire “War on Drugs”? The only thing it has done is give more power to the “justice system” to lock up poor people and minorities for non violent crimes.

Anything that takes a weapon out of the hands of law enforcement to unfairly lock up people, I’m all for.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#75
post #52
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.

Thanks, we'll need it.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#76
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is why salvia is legal to buy.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#77
post #52
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.

How is that a broad reading? Under what reasonable interpretation of the Constitution does the federal government have the power to tell you not to grow plants on your own property for your own consumption?

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#78
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people aren't really the ones making the decision. Here in Ohio, for example, we didn't have a vote on recreational, instead we had a vote on a government sanctioned monopoly possibly leading the way to recreational. If there was some sort of state issue that could be voted on which was "regulate it like we do garden tomatoes", it would pass. Leadership has prevented this, not your cartoon idea of the oh so ignor…

Monopoly, really? One single corporation was going to control the whole cabal? You are misrepresenting facts.

Would you prefer cabal? It was a certain group of a limited number of people who could grow, with nothing in the lines of allowing private growers to create startups.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#79
post #22

What do we do about heroin/opiods that are the real problem today? Cheap, highly addictive. Multiple overdoses today in my local news feed reported.... :( You cant overdose and die from MJ use (or its highly unlikely). This whole war on drugs thing feels like a game of smoke and mirrors...

Treat addiction as a problem and offer treatment. Oh wait, we don't even have real universal health care. Rehab centers are stupid expensive. In America, only the rich get afford the $2k to $5k up front for the cheap rehab. That's why they end up making so many music videos about it.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#80

Meanwhile in Britain, the former leader of the Conservative Party, William Hague, spoke out and claimed that the war on cannabis had been "irreversibly lost". He was quickly shut down by Theresa May, who categorically ruled out legalisation or even decriminalisation [1]. I don't understand how politicians can stand up and claim that legalisation would have substantial negatives, when every experiment with legalisatio…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN