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

Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 351 posts

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#81

Post by proto-n »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #58

One moral risk we play is does legalizing our recreational drug (eg alcohol/cannibis) increase the harm done to addicts[0]? While I maintain that there's a logical inconsistency to having legal alcohol and illegal cannabis, I'm on the fence if the consistency should be that both are somehow controlled/illegal (though absolutely not criminal). Another thought on the subject is how many small charges were simply becaus…

Your argument about marijuana being easier to prove is a very bad scenario, regardless of how common it is/used to be. By the same logic why not make it illegal to wear socks, it would provide reason for the system to punish anybody they are 'fairly sure' is up to some other crime.

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#82

Post by gchamonlive »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #58

One moral risk we play is does legalizing our recreational drug (eg alcohol/cannibis) increase the harm done to addicts[0]? While I maintain that there's a logical inconsistency to having legal alcohol and illegal cannabis, I'm on the fence if the consistency should be that both are somehow controlled/illegal (though absolutely not criminal). Another thought on the subject is how many small charges were simply becaus…

What about sugar? Processed meat and fat? Carcinogenics in general? What is the extent of the control we are willing to relinquish to the government in order to control substance abuse?

And how about shifting the discussion from prohibition and control of use to the democatization of healthcare access for people to heal from addiction, if we are so interested in the welfare of addicts at this point?

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#83

Post by didgeoridoo »

For reference, as of January 2022 there were ZERO people in federal custody solely for simple possession of marijuana[0].

As a gesture, this seems fine. But the continued presence of cannabis on Schedule I makes an absolute mockery out of our entire code of laws.

[0]: https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/weighing-impa...

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#84

Post by fsckboy »

kstrauser wrote: post #3

I don't use cannabis. If it were to go away tomorrow, my life wouldn't change one bit. I am absolutely thrilled with this blanket pardon. Rephrasing the statement slightly, like: > I am pardoning additional individuals who may continue to experience the unnecessary collateral consequences of a conviction for simple possession of beer, attempted simple possession of beer, or use of beer. and it sounds utterly obvious,…

[flagged]

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#85

Post by tryitnow »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #58

One moral risk we play is does legalizing our recreational drug (eg alcohol/cannibis) increase the harm done to addicts[0]? While I maintain that there's a logical inconsistency to having legal alcohol and illegal cannabis, I'm on the fence if the consistency should be that both are somehow controlled/illegal (though absolutely not criminal). Another thought on the subject is how many small charges were simply becaus…

I support full legalization of cannabis and I agree that those are valid concerns.

Yes, the harm done to addicts will probably increase. There's always trade offs. I think people on the pro-legalization side are not doing enough to address this.

One of the problems with public discourse is that each side doesn't want to give an inch to the other side. I think a lot of people who support legalization of cannabis kinda know that harms to addicts might increase, but they're afraid that if they mention that then that will just give a talking point to the prohibitionists.

Both sides are guilty of misusing or ignoring facts and concerns that don't benefit their preferred take on the issue. However, it seems to me the prohibitionists are far more egregious when it comes making bad arguments.

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#86

Post by caslon »

oooyay wrote: post #68
akira2501 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The DEA needs to reschedule it. The DEA needs to have this authority rescinded. They clearly cannot be trusted with it, and they have no impetus to remove historically misclassified drugs off the list, as it would reduce their overall budget. It's the federal version of the Siebert strategy and it's completely injust.

> They clearly cannot be trusted with it, and they have no impetus to remove historically misclassified drugs off the list, as it would reduce their overall budget. If that's their logic then someone there can't do math. Between fentanyl, other opioids, and meth they have plenty to do.

Meth is historically misclassified, too. Why are we drawing the line at marijuana?

If we lower the scheduling of opioids to Schedule IV, fentanyl usage in the United States would drop almost entirely within a month. Importing clean prescription drugs from other countries would have low enough risk that the reward would be easily met. Odds are, it would also undercut wider organized drug crime.

You may find this article in The Economist worth a read:

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/10/12/joe-biden-is-to...

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#87

Post by bluish29 »

127361 wrote: post #66

About time. Finally the harm caused by possession offenses is starting to be recognized by the state. If they want to ban drugs in general, then they should prosecute those supplying it and those producing it for sale. Not private individuals consuming it in their own homes, and causing absolutely no harm to anyone. And those who are consuming it in public while presenting a danger to others, that can be made illegal…

> Not private individuals consuming it in their own homes, and causing absolutely no harm to anyone

Considering that there is -at least- a correlation between substance abuse and domestic abuse [1,2]. I wouldn't be so sure to say "absolutely no harm" in this case.

[1] https://www.gov1.com/public-health/articles/the-link-between...

[2] https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article/59/5/1035/5486457

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#88

Post by bongodongobob »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #59
dessimus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else was the government to continue to systemically hold down minorities in this country post-Civil Rights Act, while simultaneously enriching the Military Industrial Complex by flooding local law enforcement with military equipment paid for by US taxpayers?

You act as if they couldn't have gone about this 10,000 different ways. This worked because it's what the people wanted - in response to the 70s - not because some evil scheming overlord.

No, it's fact, not conspiracy theory.

"You want to know what this [war on drugs] was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying?

We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.

Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”

~ John Ehrlichman, Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs under President Richard Nixon

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#89

Post by CPLX »

fsckboy wrote: post #84
kstrauser wrote: post #3

I don't use cannabis. If it were to go away tomorrow, my life wouldn't change one bit. I am absolutely thrilled with this blanket pardon. Rephrasing the statement slightly, like: > I am pardoning additional individuals who may continue to experience the unnecessary collateral consequences of a conviction for simple possession of beer, attempted simple possession of beer, or use of beer. and it sounds utterly obvious,…

[flagged]

How effective were the laws against it?

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#90

Post by bongodongobob »

cm2187 wrote: post #70
tessierashpool wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100%. The War on Drugs was always in contradiction of the spirit of the 21st Amendment, which ended Prohibition. It needs to be formally acknowledged as such, and further as fundamentally unconstitutional, but these kinds of victories take time. At least that so-called "War" is destroying fewer lives now.

[flagged]

Fentanyl is only a thing because cocaine and heroin are illegal or hard to get.
Post reply on HN