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

There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 147 posts

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#81

Post by qppo »

djitz wrote: post #38
SmellTheGlove wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is it about cannabis that makes it so much more amenable to direct democracy compared to popular democracy. Polls show that overwhelming majorities in most states support legalization. Yet elected representative have been extremely reticent to move policy in that direction. Two thirds of Americans support legalization, yet neither of the major party candidates for president do. It's counter to "tough on crime"…

It turns out alcoholic beverage companies and big pharma have deep pockets. Whoops, forgot the link as an example. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/13/one-s...

I feel like the smart thing to do instead of wasting money on bribes is to invest in the new markets before they're legal.

The booze companies are already cozy with state regulators and have the logistics to get everything off the ground post legalization. Some even have age restricted venues (taprooms, pubs, etc) where they can sell directly to consumers and reduce concerns or risks with zoning.

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#82

Post by eyelidlessness »

dcolkitt wrote: post #7

I think it would make a fascinating poli sci case study about why almost all cannabis legalization came from popular referendum instead of legislation. What is it about cannabis that makes it so much more amenable to direct democracy compared to representative democracy. Polls show that overwhelming majorities in most states support legalization. Yet elected representative have been extremely reticent to move policy…

It’s not a wild leap if you’ve followed the history. Cannabis prohibition is directly tied to post-Civil War criminalization of Black lives/activities/culture. The word “marijuana” is a racialization of the drug to associate it with Latinos. Using prohibition to increase law enforcement scrutiny, imprisonment and the war on drugs has been consistently part of how the US has maintained two power dynamics that have significantly eroded by popular shifts in public opinion.

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#84

Post by mustacheemperor »

sevencolors wrote: post #50
crazygringo wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's pretty simple -- politicians think it's going to happen, but don't want to be personally linked to it because it can hurt their popularity with certain segments of voters they rely on. Nobody wants to claim credit for it. So they put it up for referendum instead, so it happens but it doesn't harm anyone's careers. It's not at all any kind of vindication of direct democracy. Rather, because it's broadly p…

I also think it's an older generational mindset, that being pro-pot will sink your career. They don't want to offend too many people so it's easier to stick their head in the sand and then "come around" when it's suddenly popular. There's also people like my mother who believe marijuana is akin to meth. If you smoke it once you'll end up homeless, under a bridge down by the river

>They don't want to offend too many people so it's easier to stick their head in the sand and then "come around" when it's suddenly popular.

Another example to point to from recent US political history: the federal legalization of same-sex marriage, and subsequent rapid rehabilitation of the public platforms held by its former opponents still regularly running for re-election.

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#85

Post by mdifrgechd »

whatshisface wrote: post #70
mdifrgechd wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I find marijuana smoke way more irritating than cigarette smoke, at least second hand outside. Maybe I'm reading too much in to your comment, but with cigarette smoking there is a lot of the "if you want to destroy your lungs" attitude that I hypothesize stems from the puritain "if you want to prioritize enjoying something over long term health, I'll be especially harsh towards you". I 100% understand the…

> But judging the "destroying your lungs" aspect is nobody's business but the person doing it. There's a limit to how far this principle goes. If you saw someone trying to saw something out of their arm, would you think "whatever, it's their arm," or "this person is having a psychotic break and desperately needs medical attention, including restraint?" A lot of people would extend that to most forms of irrational sel…

I was thinking closer to common behaviors that are known to be unhealthy... drinking pop, not exercising, whatever. If someone is trying to kill themselves I think its different and they should get help. But we cant be hyperbolic about what that means and try to force everyone into a norm that values long term health above all else, because of how it encroaches on freedom.

A more realistic example of what you're saying could be like when people get those big holes in their ears. It's clearly destructive to the body, I personally think its gross, but there is no good reason to limit people's right to do that. The limitations on freedom that preventing that behavior would entail is far worse than letting it happen.

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#86

Post by porknubbins »

dboreham wrote: post #57

Interesting to see people on social media with one breath talk about how mask wearing should be up to the individual, with another that legalizing weed is a terrible move that will lead to the breakdown on society. Personally I really do not like the smell so I would like a "freedom from skunk smell" bill passed too.

With decriminalization the smell is everywhere around parks too which bothers me the most when I’m trying to enjoy fresh air. I wish they’d go ahead and switch to vapes or something that smells less. Even tobacco was better or carries less.

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#87

Post by option »

bigbubba wrote: post #75
option wrote: post #33

I am in favor of legalizing and regulating marijuana. But I’d also like to see tax dollars from it to be used on educating public on its danger, much like we do for tobacco. A personal story - when I was a teenager, a friend of mine smoked weed, thought that he can fly and jumped from the roof of 9 story building. He was 15. Just a warning that this is not all just fun and games.

You'd probably faint if you heard a tenth of the stupid shit people do after drinking alcohol. And yes, it includes people jumping off buildings.

so what’s your point? it is all safe and no harm whatsoever?

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#88

Post by nashashmi »

Etheryte wrote: post #72
nashashmi wrote: post #49

Some people voted yes despite never consuming because it was persecuting a certain race of individuals. That’s not how laws should be formed in this country.

Out of sincere curiosity, how did you come about this knowledge of what reasons people voted for or against this?

I asked people who opposed marijuana on religious grounds of never intoxicating the mind. And they were young and inclined towards social justice. And they told me.

I asked a hospital doctor who said the same after witnessing Newark communities and voted to legalize.

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#89

Post by [deleted] »

munk-a wrote: post #40
djitz wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out alcoholic beverage companies and big pharma have deep pockets. Whoops, forgot the link as an example. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/13/one-s...

And I think it's important to fight to make sure we don't get similarly entrenched weed cartels. We now have a new fight - against market consolidation of the weed producers.

[deleted]

Re: There was a clear winner on election night: Marijuana

#90

Post by buzzert »

Nobody seems to talk about marijuana being a “gateway drug” anymore, even though it’s still true.

I’ve witnessed friends in college become addicted to weed (yes, psychological addiction is still addiction) and their futures have suffered as a consequence.

I believe we need to discourage drug use as a society, not give up and let it become accepted. If that means instilling fear that one could be arrested with possession, then let it be.

Post reply on HN