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

311–320 of 431 posts

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#311

Post by olalonde »

collyw wrote: post #281
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 cant say i've ever heard of anyone ever using heroine responsibly. I don't think its the sort of thing people will advertise. Apparently only around 10% of users become addicts

Do you have a source for that? I recall reading it was about as addictive as nicotine which I'm sure gets well over 10% of smokers addicted.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#312

Post by V-2 »

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…

> 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

Hague is no other than a former Conservative Party leader.

The Norwegian government is led by a Conservative Party, too - and they're in the process of decriminalizing illicit drug use.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#313

Post by dalbasal »

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 (imo) a terrible failing in our political thinking.

We narrate our stories using abstractions & personifications, mixing symbolic and regular language. What we end up is more poetry than anything. It sounds good when it expresses our feelings. This is (to quote Monty python) no basis for a system of government (or thought).

What/who's intention was it, that you mention above? Are we talking about actual individuals collaborating knowingly to achieve these goals or is this a "nation weeps" sort of abstraction. What, in less poetic terms does "the real goal" really mean?

How does this explain drug policies in Japan or Azerbaijan?

I mean, I definitely agree that Machiavellian dynamics were involved. Electoral feedback loops. Racism. All these played a role.

But.. when someone insists about the "real reason" without demystifying the abstractions... I think we've left the realm or rational discussion. We're in religion territory.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#314

Post by rayiner »

ynniv wrote: post #297
rayiner wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last point is unsupportable. The increase in crime rate started in the 1960s: https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2016/07/Violent-Crim... . By 1982, when Reagan declared the war on drugs, violent crime had nearly quadrupled since 1960, and was near the eventual 1992 peak. It had already more than doubled by 1972 when Nixon first used the phrase “war on drugs” (though it wasn’t Reagan that actually waged that…

An explanation that fits the data better Only if you ignore the overwhelming racial bias in enforcement.

How did racial bias in enforcement cause violent crime rates to skyrocket starting in the 1960s when the drug war was initiated in the 1980s?

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#315

Post by superflyguy »

wsc981 wrote: post #212
superflyguy wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

... When the old stupid racists (who voted for Brexit) finally die (not so long hopefully) ... Over 50% of Great-Britain is stupid and racist? You have a source for this claim?

I live there.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#316

Post by bzmwillemsen »

chx wrote: post #294

I have a very simple world view which, I guess, could be considered a radically liberal one: everyone can do as they please as long as it doesn't tread on the same rights of another person. You want to inject, snort or sniff something? Go ahead! It's your body, after all. Neither I, nor any government should have anything to say about this. Obviously, you should not operate a vehicle while intoxicated and we need to…

The opposing view is that the people of a country have a responsibility to protect every citizen of their country. By enacting prohibition on certain substances we attempt to protect our citizen from that substance so they can live a more full life.

I do agree that drugs should be decriminalized and that the money we spend on enforcement should be instead spent on public education and rehabilitation to prevent people using them and help people stop using them.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#317

Post by olalonde »

chx wrote: post #294

I have a very simple world view which, I guess, could be considered a radically liberal one: everyone can do as they please as long as it doesn't tread on the same rights of another person. You want to inject, snort or sniff something? Go ahead! It's your body, after all. Neither I, nor any government should have anything to say about this. Obviously, you should not operate a vehicle while intoxicated and we need to…

That's also typically the libertarian position (e.g. there shouldn't be victimless crimes).

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#319

Post by zajd »

dalbasal wrote: post #313
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 (imo) a terrible failing in our political thinking. We narrate our stories using abstractions & personifications, mixing symbolic and regular language. What we end up is more poetry than anything. It sounds good when it expresses our feelings. This is (to quote Monty python) no basis for a system of government (or thought). What/who's intention was it, that you mention above? Are we talking about actual indiv…

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281296850_Drug_abus...

> The paper argues that Japan's 'war on drugs' in the 1980s was a direct result of pressure from the United States to adopt harsher sanctions and from a punitive Japanese public that associates drug use with poor self-control.

I think you'll find a similar story elsewhere

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#320

Post by OldSchoolJohnny »

ajeet_dhaliwal wrote: post #232
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 don't use cannabis but based on what the NHS has to say about it ( https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-body/cannabis-the-facts... ) it's probably not a great idea to use it for most people. However it is important not to waste tax revenue going about trying to stop people in a heavy handed manner. The biggest issue with it seems to be around driving, much like alcohol. That is a real problem and people should be m…

That document you linked to is laughably outdated and filled with propaganda, not scientific facts.
Post reply on HN