Live data from Hacker News

Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

usatoday.com

241–247 of 247 posts

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The DEA can enforce and arrest people tomorrow if they wanted I’m sure it would go down really really well if the DEA started arresting people for simple possession in states where it’s perfectly legal.

The problem is the process of producing it (manufacture) and selling it (commerce), are inextricably tied to Interstate commerce, thanks to some stupid case about how wheat grown for intra-state non-commerce is inextricably still covered by Federal jurisdiction because that intra-state non-sale effects the interstate market. I kid you not. Link below, read it. The same logic that is applied to making production of fu…

What I find more riduculous than the Wickard v. Filburn case is the fact that it was partially overturned by a gun case.

> Possession of a handgun near a school is not an economic activity and doesn't have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, and therefore cannot be regulated by Congress. The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 is unconstitutional.

And even more riduculous is the fact that certain justices dissented on this opinion.

Of course it’s all heavily politicized, but the federal government really loves milking the commerce clause ad absurdum.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think right now is exactly where I want weed to be in society: a taboo, not normalized in the mainstream, you get in trouble if you’re stupid with it, but otherwise if you’re just an occasional user you can get it just fine. This is pretty much perfect to me. What I don’t want is broad normalization of it. Maybe some cultures do just fine with that, but the trend is America has been to maximize the individual liber…

Not really grokking your comment, a lot of inconsistency. You point to deeper issues in American society, and you are very much fine with playing endless whack-a-mole with its symptoms manifesting left and right instead of dealing with issue like grown ups do - attack the underlying problem, instead of seeing endless spiral of growing issues that it brings. You base this on extreme idea that when weed is legalized it…

I do want to solve the underlying problems, of course. My point in this limited context is that until we can solve those problems, legalizing weed just compounds the issues. The underlying problems are really fkn-ing hard to solve. It's a culture problem.

I base the idea that weed will proliferate based on the trajectory of porn or alcohol: they ARE everywhere.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#243
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think right now is exactly where I want weed to be in society: a taboo, not normalized in the mainstream, you get in trouble if you’re stupid with it, but otherwise if you’re just an occasional user you can get it just fine. This is pretty much perfect to me. What I don’t want is broad normalization of it. Maybe some cultures do just fine with that, but the trend is America has been to maximize the individual liber…

> And for the record: I have edibles at home. I’m not against responsible weed use at all Then throw away those edibles (that some body might confuse with food) and replace it with the safer, much safer, dried flower.

Why? I'm pretty clear here: I'm for responsible weed use, but I think legalizing weed will lead to massive irresponsible use

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#244
post #113
post #92

Currently 37 of 50 states have some sort of law on their books allowing legal Cannabis sales in some form. The 13 with no legalization: Idaho Wyoming Nebraska Kansas Iowa Wisconsin Indiana Kentucky Texas Tennessee North Carolina South Carolina Georgia

most of these states have active efforts for legalization in at least some context, many have CBD legal but not THC (what gets you high), and at least in Kansas there is a "loophole" where hemp products can contain up to .3% THC (so just really big edibles)

"While the literature is contradictory, most studies suggest that CBD is not converted to psychotropic THC under in vivo conditions. Nevertheless, it is certain that CBD degrades to psychotropic products in acidic environments."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7357058/

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A democracy is not a system of government in which the government's power derives from the people who know calculus. It a system wherein power comes from the people, period. Also, literacy tests were ruled unconstitutional in Oregon v. Mitchell.

Please do not put words in my mouth. Calculus is currently an AP / college subject, not a required public education one.

Fair enough.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They had full control and could have legalized it That's not how the Senate works. A 50-50 "majority" is not full control. In any case, it's pretty silly to blame the party that's on your side for not being able to overcome the bad-faith obstructionism of the opposing party. It's not about political "footballs", it's about having finite time and public attention to be able to get things done. If every single fight h…

>>In any case, it's pretty silly to blame the party that's on your side Not to be a complete downer, but there is so much special interest money involved in our political system, neither the Democrats or the Republicans are on your side. They are both on the moneyed interest side. These political footballs are, for the most part, to string along voters on "hot button" issues to keep the public disinterested on the nu…

If you believe in cannabis legalization, which is what this thread is about, then one party is very obviously on your side on that issue, and one is very obviously not. But sure, let's go through the list, just for fun.

> expanded military spending

Democrats don't really vote for this, certainly not to the same degree, but sure, I wish there were more difference.

> global expansionism

Vague to the point of meaninglessness.

> corporate tax reduction

Definitely not the same. Democrats recently pushed for a minimum corporate tax (https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-corporate-tax-plan-th...).

> lessening monopoly laws

Also vague, but not generally true. Democrats will vote for actual antitrust legislation; they won't vote for the Republicans using "anti-trust" as a meaningless scare-word to bash businesses they don't like for unrelated reasons.

> reducing banking restrictions

Maybe in the 90s, but not recently. Who wrote the Dodd-Frank Act, and who repealed it?

> reducing spending on interstate infrastructure

Vague, but not generally true. There are a bunch of major transportation projects (e.g. California HSR, DC's Purple Line) that have been held up for ages because Democrats will vote to fund them and then Republicans will take it away, or because it's impossible to get Republican states/counties to pay their fair share. For telecomms, Democrats will tend to push more for equitable-access programs, whereas Republicans will frame corporate tax cuts as "infrastructure spending" as long as some infrastructure-related companies benefit. Go look at the numbers and priorities in the 2021 infrastructure bill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Investment_and_...), which passed on mostly party lines, and tell me the parties agree on cutting infrastructure spending.

> cutting education spending

Laughably false. Go look at the per-student education budget per state. (Federal DoE spending YoY is kind of weird because it's washed out by college loan financing; most direct spending on education is at the state level.)

> restricting the ability for fair and equal elections through redistricting

Seriously, you're going to sit there and argue, in the year 2022, that the parties are the same on election fairness? The fact that the Democrats don't aggressively gerrymander is why they don't currently hold the House - the New York legislature could have chopped up Long Island differently to stem the losses. More generally, Democrats consistently vote for protecting ballot access, against Republicans who nakedly want to make it more difficult to vote - and that's setting aside the whole armed-insurrection-to-overthrow-an-election thing, which, last I checked, 90% of the Republican party will still fall in line for.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sucks how uneducated about basic things US voters are. The Affordable Care Act is probably the most impactful law passed by Democrats in the recent past. In a survey of 2000 voters, a staggering thirty-five percent did not know [1] that the ACA and the colloquial "Obamacare" were the same thing. Bizarrely, an additional number didn't know that 'Obamacare repealed = ACA repealed'. I cannot blame either party for pl…

"The national uninsured rate in the United States has reached an all-time low of 8%". Given this, I would say 92% US citizens don't care. Most people get insurance from work, family or are of the 120 million Medicare/Medicaid patients. On the other hand, if the US population wasn't health care insured (like Europe believes) - they would know each word of those bills.

The ACA made life much, much better for people who are insured. Most of what the ACA did was tell insurance companies that they had to actually pay for things once in a while - e.g., getting rid of "preexisting condition" excuses - so that their product would be just a bit more predictable and less of a scam.
Post reply on HN