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

US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 194 posts

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#151

Post by mmcconnell1618 »

whythre wrote: post #90
CameronNemo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans don't make laws (or approve judges), Senators do. <16% of the US population elects 50 senators.

It’s almost like the US is a representational republic, not a democracy.

The problem isn't that we're a representative democracy. The problem is the ratio of representation is very far off from the ratios present when the country was formed. The population growth in urban centers combined with the addition of many states with low population has shifted power significantly to a minority.

When the United States was formed and the compromise for 2 Senators per state and house representatives by population was agreed to, the largest state population was 11x the smallest state population. Today, California is 70x Wyoming. This has the effect that Senators from smaller states have way more power in today's world than they did in the 1800s. The ratios are unbalanced and need to be adjusted just like we adjust the apportionment of house representatives via the census every 10 years.

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#152

Post by boogies »

chillwaves wrote: post #137
boogies wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> somehow this is taking away your freedom IIUC it could indirectly reduce some people’s freedom to live, because marijuana can impair driving but is harder to diagnose as the cause for accidents than alcohol — because tests only show whether it has been taken in the last few weeks, not whether the subject is intoxicated at the moment of the test. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

As mentioned, there are 100 other ways a driver can be "impaired", what's more there are ways to make the roads safer thereby increasing my freedom. Why don't we just put automated red light cameras and speed cameras everywhere? Won't that maximize my freedom to on safe roads? Would you support such a measure?

I considered it for a bit. I think I wouldn’t, because they’d presumably run proprietary, un-auditable software that could surveil many innocent bystanders — if they ran verifiably decent Free software I likely would. There are similar risks with the DEA et. al., so I think we should push for high transparency from them, preserve oversight and due process such as requiring warrants before search and seizure, ban no-knock warrants (pass the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act), and otherwise make them much more accountable than a typical surveillance camera is. Edit: and make this a local issue, and let each locality deal with it as suits that locality best.

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#153

Post by lotsofpulp »

boogies wrote: post #148
lotsofpulp wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As could mobile phones, putting on make up, working a 24 hour shift at the hospital... In fact, all the things listed above make someone a far more dangerous driver than marijuana use. Yet working extra long hours and sleep deprivation in the name of "productivity" is celebrated.

I believe governments can and do outlaw using mobile phones or taking hands off the wheel while driving. 24 hour shifts at the hospital may be justified AFAIK by potentially saving more lives than they risk losing — I would hope there are precautions in place to minimize those risks (such as housing immediately adjacent to the hospital — IIRC this was the case for Ben Carson when he worked long shifts at Johns Hopkin…

If you have had experience with marijuana or people who have used marijuana, I do see how one could justify the think the risks commensurate with a wholesale ban on consumption.

I can think of a million other things to ban, starting with mandatory breathalyzers on all cars that disable the engine upon detection of alcohol, that would yield a bigger benefit in exchange for the loss of freedom.

But I’m also not about banning every single thing that increases morbidity/mortality risks.

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#154

Post by mullingitover »

jacques_chester wrote: post #127
mullingitover wrote: post #86

The fact that this won't sail through congress in a week (it'll never even come up for a vote in the senate) really illustrates how out of touch legislators are with voters. If there was a nationwide referendum on legalizing (not just decriminalizing) it would pass in a landslide today. Instead, congress will dither on this issue for probably the next five years at minimum. I realize it's more complicated than giving…

> fully legalizing now would violate a number of important treaties with other countries As I understand it, the US Congress has the power to withdraw from any treaty with legislation without restriction[0], by passing an Act that repeals the effect of the treaty. "Parliament | Congress cannot bind its future self" is a well-settled Common Law principle. Treaties receive no special status. While they may be negotiate…

Yes, this is exactly what I was getting at - that full legalization could nullify a number of treaties, so it's not just a thing that stands on its own. Congress can absolutely do it, but it's complicated.

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#155

Post by dwaltrip »

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #149
qw3rty01 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just an echo chamber, there's actual data: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/11/14/americans-s... https://news.gallup.com/poll/323582/support-legal-marijuana-... That's not to say people who oppose the legislation's vote doesn't matter, but it's overturned by the majority that favor it.

It's important to keep in mind that it's not as clear as many of these headlines make it sound. By the numbers in the links you provided, those supporting legalization for medical use only (which I do) represent a significant portion (> 1/3) of those lumped into the broader "support legalization" category. At the same time, many people interpret that broader category as supporting legalization of recreational use, wh…

59% vs 41% is a respectably large margin. That's 18 points.

Additionally, that number will almost certainly be higher in coming years. The shift we have seen in recent decades seems very robust.

I would argue this is due to the American public realizing that many of the arguments in favor of prohibition were exaggerated or downright false.

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#156

Post by curiousgeorgio »

grecy wrote: post #146
curiousgeorgio wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...illustrates how out of touch legislators are with voters. If there was a nationwide referendum on legalizing (not just decriminalizing) it would pass in a landslide today. In your own echo chamber, that may be true, but I hope you understand, there's a large number of voters (myself included) who oppose legalization. They may not be as vocal about it online, but their votes count just as much as yours.

> there's a large number of voters (myself included) who oppose legalization After seeing what has happened in Colorado (and many other states) and the entire country of Canada, I'm curious to learn why you oppose legalization? I don't use it, and personally don't really care, but I see it like same-sex marriage - let people do what makes them happy and lets move onto actual important issues.

> I'm curious to learn why you oppose legalization

For starters, a 20% increase in violent crime and significant increases in hospitalizations[1] directly related to marijuana use are two concrete examples. There are many more less-direct negative effects (e.g., insurance rates increasing for everyone due to marijuana-related accidents/injury) that probably aren't immediately reflected in public data, but are still detrimental to society.

[1] https://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/reports/2018-SB13-283_...

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#158

Post by defertoreptar »

mindslight wrote: post #143
defertoreptar wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[removed]

Acoustical gunfire triangulation would only affect the people Republicans want to prevent from having guns, so it's not that. I've given up trying to find coherent values in Republican actions. There are many conservative views that have merit, but they're not reflected in Republican policies.

[removed]

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#159

Post by InitialLastName »

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #156
grecy wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's a large number of voters (myself included) who oppose legalization After seeing what has happened in Colorado (and many other states) and the entire country of Canada, I'm curious to learn why you oppose legalization? I don't use it, and personally don't really care, but I see it like same-sex marriage - let people do what makes them happy and lets move onto actual important issues.

> I'm curious to learn why you oppose legalization For starters, a 20% increase in violent crime and significant increases in hospitalizations[1] directly related to marijuana use are two concrete examples. There are many more less-direct negative effects (e.g., insurance rates increasing for everyone due to marijuana-related accidents/injury) that probably aren't immediately reflected in public data, but are still d…

Not sure where you're seeing a 20% increase in violent crime in this data, but per page 160 of this, violent offense rates per 100,000 population are pretty stable from 2008-2016, with a tick up in 2017. That may or may not be related to legalization, since AFAIK Nebraska didn't legalize anything lately and they also had a tick up in violent crime in 2017 [0].

[0] https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/explorer/state/nebr...

Re: US House passes federal cannabis decriminalisation bill

#160

Post by dragonwriter »

mullingitover wrote: post #86

The fact that this won't sail through congress in a week (it'll never even come up for a vote in the senate) really illustrates how out of touch legislators are with voters. If there was a nationwide referendum on legalizing (not just decriminalizing) it would pass in a landslide today. Instead, congress will dither on this issue for probably the next five years at minimum. I realize it's more complicated than giving…

> fully legalizing now would violate a number of important treaties with other countries.

As far as Marijuana goes, those treaties are on a path to being a dead letter, anyway. Canada and Uruguay, Mexico almost certainly by the end of the year...

And, in fact, the US, given its federal nonenforcement policy (which, is, in part, statutorily mandated in federal law) in states that have legalized, is already in open and flagrant violation of them, anyhow, so that's not a change with legalization.

Post reply on HN