71–80 of 918 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course not, that's how democracy works! My actual issue with this is: a) it should have been done sooner. Waiting until $election_year to do something popular has severely damaged the growth of cannabis industry and b) it's another executive branch rule by decree that could be reversed as soon as 6 months from now after election day.
> it should have been done sooner. Not everyone agrees though. I don't want it legalized or normalized more.
Weed being illegal on a federal level has had some interesting effects. Because of these laws, all legal weed has to be grown, processed, and retailed within a single state. So much industry and local employment has been created by the legal barriers in place. It’s probably still a net positive to release the federal restriction, but I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or ot…
I've got my tinfoil hat on but I totally believe this to be due to the lobbying efforts of big tobacco. Purely because cigarette sales continue to decline and vaping is becoming more and more regulated and, therefore, less profitable. But marijuana enjoys high markups, pseudoscience "health benefits", and is becoming more and more acceptable to Americans each and every year.
What else will I spend my billions in revenue on if I can't advertise and have to hide all my employees?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On it's surface it seems to have worked better than these experiments. Otherwise the experiments would not be getting rolled back... There's very few if any fans of what played out in Portland, for instance. Overt drug usage exploded and became a much worse problem. The exact opposite of what proponents had hoped. Some will say "but they didn't do it right" or similar - tired arguments we hear every time pet policies…
This is a very un-nuanced take on what happened in Portland, and lines up with what the uncritical and uninformed national reporting about Portland has been saying. It was not successful, but it was also never effectively funded, not implemented well, and rolled out in a rush.
So... like almost every government program? What makes you convinced it can actually be achieved in reality? With real people, real politicians, real budgets that get robbed for other pet projects down the line...
Even if it was achieved in reality - let's pretend to wave a magic wand - what is the expected outcome? Fewer people doing hard drugs than before? That seems difficult to accept given all consequences will effectively be removed... how many celebrities (with effectively unlimited resources) struggle their entire lives with drug abuse - in and out of rehab, etc. It seems it's better to prevent people from becoming addicts in the first place, vs. attempt to treat/mitigate addiction after it has formed.
Weed being illegal on a federal level has had some interesting effects. Because of these laws, all legal weed has to be grown, processed, and retailed within a single state. So much industry and local employment has been created by the legal barriers in place. It’s probably still a net positive to release the federal restriction, but I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or ot…
Being gulped up big corporations is good. They will much more efficiently serve the market. SMBs are notoriously unproductive. Though maybe you want your drug dealers to be unproductive, for society's sake! I may take this back...
One major effect of this is that weed stores will be able to use banks and payment processors legally once the regulators catch up.
Looking forward to this, silly to see so many Kia "boys" being used for gross violence crimes when regulation changes could lessen it.
> https://www.king5.com/article/news/crime/seattle-pot-shop-cr... for example
Here in Canada, it has been rather eye opening the extent of cannabis use. There are more cannabis shops then mcdonalds. You can grow your own and most people do. There's online options. A society which criminalizes something so popular and widely used; will ultimately fail at their prohibition. The next step for society would be to attempt at changing opinion, but what are the unintended consequences? The answer is,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SE Asia/East Asia at least have much harsher attitudes on drugs. US is pretty forgiving to drug users &c.
US is only lenient when compared to even more severe steamrollers of human rights. Executing individuals for drug possession is absolutely unconsciousable and unacceptable. Incarceration being less diabolical does not mean it is not still highly diabolical. Countless lives were and continue to be destroyed.
I'm sorry but after seeing how american gradually get into worse and worse drugs, and seeing channel 5's video on people using tranq... yeah I think complete ban on drugs for non medical reasons is the best choice.
Yes, because Prohibition was such a ringing success. Just because someone says you can't do something does not prevent someone from doing that thing. If people want something badly enough, they will find a way. When that want has progressed to being a literal need from addiction, the ways found will become more and more bold/risky. Hell, even if you added the drug that blocks the opiate receptors into the water suppl…
https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/6/5/18518005/prohibit...
Edit: to the downvoters, I look forward to future academics and politicians being absolutely shocked when it turns out the absence of evidence is in fact not evidence of absence and there are a myriad of negative health and societal consequences from legalizing marijuana use
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does that have to do with treatment programs?
Well, enforcement is a form of treatment - just not the form some might want. We're trying the other way and failing right now. Perhaps we should figure out why...
I'm sorry but after seeing how american gradually get into worse and worse drugs, and seeing channel 5's video on people using tranq... yeah I think complete ban on drugs for non medical reasons is the best choice.
1. Attempt to ban it.
2. Accept that people are going to get high, and try to limit the harm.
The first has been a complete and utter disaster. The second -- e.g. applying the same rules about who can use it and where they can use it as alcohol -- is the only sane option.
Prohibition is about as effective as abstinence-only education and for many of the same reasons. We can either work with how we wish people would behave or how they're actually going to behave.