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

171–180 of 431 posts

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#171

Post by Pete_D »

omnimus wrote: post #155
Swizec wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on where. In a lot of Europe (and afaik also Canada) alcohol purchasing times are heavily regulated to combat binge, especially youth, drinking. For example no alcohol sales past 9pm, no sales before 10am etc. And you can’t advertise drinking. You can promote brands, but not drinking directly. Which is weird and I don’t know how the line is defined, but it exists in at least some countries I’ve been to.

Well "a lot of Europe" really means Scandinavia. To be precise it is only Norway, Finland and Sweden where alcohol is sold only by one brand of state owned shops. As far as i know you can drink whatever you want, when you want after you are 18. Notable exception is Germany where from 16 you can drink undistilled drinks like beer and wine. Oh we had lot of fun when i was 16 on our school trip to Germany. Good times. A…

Ontario, Canada is similar: state-run shops have a monopoly on the sale of alcohol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquor_Control_Board_of_Ontari...). They're about to do the same with weed ("in September 2017 the Government of Ontario announced that the LCBO would be the sole vendor of recreational marijuana to the public in that province").

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#172

Post by andyjohnson0 »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #147
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…

I think this has to do with the psychology of disgust sensitivity. Conservatives tend to have stronger senses of disgust than liberals and especially libertarians. "Smoking weed is stinky/gross/icky, therefore we gotta ban it." Here's just one article on the link between disgust and political leanings: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/caveman-politics/201... As a personal anecdote about this, I support decrimi…

> Conservatives tend to have stronger senses of disgust than liberals and especially libertarians.

The evidence for neurological origins of political orientation is definitely something that deserves to be more widely known about. In my experience it is rare to see it discussed, and I wonder if the idea makes people uncomfortable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_political_orientat...

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#173

Post by shams93 »

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…

Legalizing cannabis undercuts the opiate industry's monopoly on pain management.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#174

Post by TeMPOraL »

foolfoolz wrote: post #140
y4mi wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 think a lot of this can be attributed to these drugs being used in a completely ad hoc manner. There's no usage guidelines on a bag of cocaine. There's no 'Active Ingredient' percentage listed. You dont know what it is. You can't compare it to another until you've had it. Any pill that's an upper is called 'molly' Somehow the vast majority of people who take legal hard drugs such as vicodin or dilaudid, don't overd…

> legal hard drugs such as vicodin

Isn't vicodin designed in such a way that the secondary ingredient would kill you before you'd get high on the primary one?

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#175

Post by Jarwain »

coldtea wrote: post #157
foolfoolz wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of this can be attributed to these drugs being used in a completely ad hoc manner. There's no usage guidelines on a bag of cocaine. There's no 'Active Ingredient' percentage listed. You dont know what it is. You can't compare it to another until you've had it. Any pill that's an upper is called 'molly' Somehow the vast majority of people who take legal hard drugs such as vicodin or dilaudid, don't overd…

> Somehow the vast majority of people who take legal hard drugs such as vicodin or dilaudid, don't overdose on them. There's a culture built around taking these drugs responsibly according to their directions. And yet there are tons of addicts on those: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid_epidemic

My understanding of the opioid crisis differs from what you've implied.

Typically, it starts with someone being prescribed opiates. Maybe they use them as prescribed, maybe they don't. If they don't, or they have the kind of genes or psychological issues that make it more likely for them to get hooked, they get hooked. Once they're addicted to the opiate, and discover how much cheaper heroin or fentanyl is on the street, compared to their oxy prescription, they start using them instead, upping their risk a ton.

From there it's all downhill unless the right kind of intervention happens, and the psychological issues underlying that addiction are resolved.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#176

Post by superflyguy »

flukus wrote: post #162
zachrose wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

You're both right. The origins are racial ("Chasing the scream" by Hari is another good resource here) and the brainwashing was successful so for a while now we're stuck with the consequences. When the old stupid racists (who voted for Brexit) finally die (not so long hopefully) younger people (more likely to use or know someone who uses) will legalise it. Politicians just reflect society; it's not true that a clear majority of UK voters want cannabis legal so it's not worth May going against the old farts and the media etc.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#177

Post by maaark »

flukus wrote: post #162
zachrose wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

America started the war, and pushed it on all its allies.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#178

Post by Jarwain »

Jarwain wrote: post #175
coldtea wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Somehow the vast majority of people who take legal hard drugs such as vicodin or dilaudid, don't overdose on them. There's a culture built around taking these drugs responsibly according to their directions. And yet there are tons of addicts on those: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid_epidemic

My understanding of the opioid crisis differs from what you've implied. Typically, it starts with someone being prescribed opiates. Maybe they use them as prescribed, maybe they don't. If they don't, or they have the kind of genes or psychological issues that make it more likely for them to get hooked, they get hooked. Once they're addicted to the opiate, and discover how much cheaper heroin or fentanyl is on the str…

Because I can't edit my comment using this app:

A big contributing factor, I think, is the overprescription of opiates to treat pain when it isn't 100% necessary

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#179

Post by nickik »

maaark wrote: post #177
flukus wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

America started the war, and pushed it on all its allies.

But if it was all about domestic politics then there would have been no reason to to that.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#180

Post by mseebach »

mattbessey wrote: post #167
andyjohnson0 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

And, pertinent to the name, such a bottle will often have a handle built in.

https://siestaspirits.com/products/jim-beam-kentucky-straigh...

Post reply on HN