Canada legalises recreational cannabis use • Hacker News Board

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#161

Post by pennaMan » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 7:58 AM UTC

bitL wrote: post #160

toomanybeersies wrote: post #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 legalisatio…

We already have many problems caused by alcohol and cigarettes, costing taxpayers billions in unnecessary expenses. I get it, people need to escape reality they live in. We know that some weed smokers end up schizophrenic and that in general smoking weed weakens one's will, so in many cases we end up with grown up children going only after the things attainable by easiest efforts. There are also some legit medical us…

Pandora's box was opened by the first sprouting seed of Cannabis on earth. The prohibition came after, so if anything we're talking about a pre-justice world, aren't we?

>Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then?Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then?

Because those things cause falsifiable and measurable harm to society. Cannabis use is by all measures benign while its prohibition actually causing real harm.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#162

Post by flukus » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 7:58 AM UTC

zachrose wrote: post #145

toomanybeersies wrote: post #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 legalisatio…

> Drug prohibition has been a categorical failure in every outcome it was intended to achieve. The following flavor of comment has been made many times on HN, but since I’m halfway through Michelle Alexander’s book The New Jim Crow I’m in the mood for making it again here: The drug war has been “successful”, because its goal was to incarcerate, disenfranchise, extort, terrorize, and break apart the families of minori…

This is a very US centric view but the war on drugs is very international. Cannabis is illegal in most of the world where Americas race relations simply aren't issues, so I really don't buy into this reasoning.

This is good old moral superiority at work.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#163

Post by andyjohnson0 » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:00 AM UTC

foolfoolz wrote: post #135

toomanybeersies wrote: post #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 legalisatio…

> 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. I dont understand this part. The potential for overdose on alcohol is high as well. I can go buy a plastic handle for $10 and if i drink the whole thing tonight i'll probably di…

> I can go buy a plastic handle for $10 and if i drink the whole thing tonight i'll probably die.

I'm intrigued by what a "plastic handle" is, and google isn't helping for obvious reasons. I assume its a slang term but I've never heard or read it before. (I'm in the UK.) Care to elaborate?

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#164

Post by merinowool » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:03 AM UTC

y4mi wrote: post #137

foolfoolz wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. I dont understand this part. The potential for overdose on alcohol is high as well. I can go buy a plastic handle for $10 and if i drink the whole thing tonight i'll probably di…

its way easier to overdose on hard drugs than alcohol. with alcohol, its a slow progress. you keep drinkng and most people pass out / lose their will to drink after they've had enough. hard drugs are generally a single portion and once its in your blood, its too late. you cant say 'hey, i've got enough for today' once you feel it hitting you. You're already doomed if you've chosen the wrong dosage from the start. > T…

I disagree. You can easily overdose alcohol with spirits and "pushing the tempo". Many teenagers died during stupid drinking games. If you drink "normally" it would be difficult, but that is the same with other drugs. If you stick to guidelines you should be fine. Problem with other drugs is that you don't know purity and even what's really in them, as each dealer in the chain adds something to get more weight.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#165

Post by iDemonix » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:05 AM UTC

toomanybeersies wrote: post #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 legalisatio…

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

Britain is the biggest exporter of Cannabis in the world. The 90-acre farm in the UK is owned by British Sugar, which is owned by the husband of the UK's Drugs Minister (facepalm). Second to that, Theresa May's husband works at a firm that is the largest investor in... you guessed it, British Sugar.

Why would Theresa May and the Tory co want to legalise it? That'd mean competition, admitting you've been lying for years, and a big dent in your profits.

I have no doubt that as soon as the Tory government is out, we'll see actual progress (in many other areas too).

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#166

Post by webkike » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:05 AM UTC

exogeny wrote: post #133

webkike wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess putting thousands of minorities in jail is worth it because your friends didn't start venture capital funds

I think you're most likely smart enough to know that wasn't the point I was making, and most likely have enough interests in your life not to waste your own time being a pedantic, obtuse dick to strangers on HN.

I do but this is my day job.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#167

Post by mattbessey » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:06 AM UTC

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #163

foolfoolz wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. I dont understand this part. The potential for overdose on alcohol is high as well. I can go buy a plastic handle for $10 and if i drink the whole thing tonight i'll probably di…

> I can go buy a plastic handle for $10 and if i drink the whole thing tonight i'll probably die. I'm intrigued by what a "plastic handle" is, and google isn't helping for obvious reasons. I assume its a slang term but I've never heard or read it before. (I'm in the UK.) Care to elaborate?

A handle is a bottle size in the US, 1.75L. Often made of plastic since its so big it would weigh more in glass, and perhaps because the kind of booze you buy in that quantity ain't luxury.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#168

Post by bitL » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:07 AM UTC

pennaMan wrote: post #161

bitL wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already have many problems caused by alcohol and cigarettes, costing taxpayers billions in unnecessary expenses. I get it, people need to escape reality they live in. We know that some weed smokers end up schizophrenic and that in general smoking weed weakens one's will, so in many cases we end up with grown up children going only after the things attainable by easiest efforts. There are also some legit medical us…

Pandora's box was opened by the first sprouting seed of Cannabis on earth. The prohibition came after, so if anything we're talking about a pre-justice world, aren't we? >Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then?Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then? Because those things cause falsifiable and measurable…

As I said, those substances are natural, for many people they would be beneficial as well for some specialized uses, like improving one's medical condition. But leaving humans in pure nature "as intended" destroys civilization - regulating behavior is necessary (even if I personally don't like it and tend to think "I know better" when I don't).

I would propose an experiment - let's look into history and see which civilizations propagated and which went extinct or ended up zombified in a non-progressive isolated state. I'd bet there will be quite a few where "substance abuse" went through the roof, and those that restricted it either completely or moved it to a dedicated "crazy week" (Bacchanalia?) prospered and progressed. Seems like hardships are necessary for progress/motivation(?), short-circuiting pleasure centers with drugs doesn't move society towards higher complexity and beauty.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#169

Post by vidarh » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:11 AM UTC

toomanybeersies wrote: post #128

b6 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Obviously we want to restrict access as much as possible to particular drugs It's not obvious to me. The fundamental question is, does an individual own their own body? If the answer is yes, then don't try to restrict what I can do with it so long as I don't harm anyone else. If the answer is no, well, then we need to firm up exactly what the arrangement is supposed to be.

I guess it depends on your philosophy of government and society. If you live in a social democracy with universal healthcare, drugs policy should probably be based around harm reduction. This is why helmets are required on bicycles (in some countries, for better or worse) and you need to wear a seatbelt in the car. It's your body, but the public has to pick up the tab when you break it. I don't think that you should…

Heroin, for one, is not any more dangerous than a lot of prescription drugs we're happy to hand out like candy when it is medical grade in predictable doses.

It's not the most addictive drug around. It's not at all the most dangerous. It's not all that much more damaging than a lot of other drugs we're happy to let people take.

Almost all of the worst damage caused by heroin today is caused by treating it as a criminal justice problem rather than as a public health issue. If people could seek medical advice safely, could get clean drugs, could get alternative forms (e.g. a lot of people end up injecting heroin because oral oxycodone is too expensive on the black market once they get cut off from their prescriptions), it would not solve all of it, but it would solve most of the problems.

So start there if the problem you want to solve is the cost to society. Heroin is mostly a politician-created problem, and at this point there is sufficient knowledge that frankly I consider any politician still supporting the continued prohibition of it morally equivalent to mass murderers. They are knowingly making decisions that kill people in large numbers.

To the extent there still is a problem after legalising these drugs, look at actual health-focused interventions, rather than turning people with a health issue into criminals.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#170

Post by bitL » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 8:15 AM UTC

pennaMan wrote: post #161

bitL wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already have many problems caused by alcohol and cigarettes, costing taxpayers billions in unnecessary expenses. I get it, people need to escape reality they live in. We know that some weed smokers end up schizophrenic and that in general smoking weed weakens one's will, so in many cases we end up with grown up children going only after the things attainable by easiest efforts. There are also some legit medical us…

Pandora's box was opened by the first sprouting seed of Cannabis on earth. The prohibition came after, so if anything we're talking about a pre-justice world, aren't we? >Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then?Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then? Because those things cause falsifiable and measurable…

> Because those things cause falsifiable and measurable harm to society. Cannabis use is by all measures benign while its prohibition actually causing real harm.

There are unfortunately people that could be damaged by smoking weed, irreversibly, if their schizophrenia proclivity gets activated. Also the easy escape from problems is not in society's best interest - see the ongoing shaming for gaming, where boys are pushed into the "real world" to get some society-benefiting work done instead of them having more fun.

We usually have 1-2 generations that act as guinea pigs on effects of new inventions or discoveries. The wild time with LSD, heroin etc. is thankfully over. Not sure why would we want to backtrack on cannabis, even if it is objectively less harmful. Alcohol & cigarettes are objectively less harmful than heroin etc. but we would be better off without them.