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

US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 918 posts

Re: US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

#231

Post by josefresco »

incomingpain wrote: post #45

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,…

I visited Montreal last year and finding a recreation cannabis shop was not easy. Google maps is filled with "head shops" that don't sell weed, and apparently at some point all shops became nationalized (correct me if I'm wrong) which means there were private shops in existence but then shut down further polluting online listings. I eventually figured this out (after visiting what I thought was a cannabis shop that was actually a deli) but as luck would have it, they were all closed when I was downtown.

Coming from the US, Massachusetts specifically this was a major step backwards. Granted we are spoiled, especially in my region where there's 2-3 shops per town but I was not expecting it to be that hard in progressive Canada.

Edit: I looked it up and only the "SQDC" (1) is authorized to sell Cannabis. 1: https://www.quebec.ca/sante/conseils-et-prevention/alcool-dr...

Re: US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

#234

Post by aidenn0 »

RyanAdamas wrote: post #181
sanderjd wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm quite ignorant about how international law and treaties interact with domestic policy. Could you educate me? What is the mechanism within US law by which this reclassification requires approval by that UN commission?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychotropic_Substances_Act_(U... The above link is the Act that governs the USA's international obligations based on our treaty with the UN to schedule specific drugs and under those terms only allowed to reschedule Schedule 1 drugs with the approval of the UN; often after a review of the drugs medicinal purposes by the WHO. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Drug_Abuse_Preve..…

The 1961 convention, which as far as I know has not been contravened (w.r.t. cannabis) by the subsequent acts only bans non-medical (and non-scientific) uses of cannabis. Schedule IV would probably be sufficient to comply with the US's obligations there, and Schedule III certainly is.

Re: US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

#235

Post by kstrauser »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #171
swalling wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes this seems to be increasingly common, at least on the west coast. The suboptimal part is that the buyer typically gets hit with an out-of-network ATM fee for doing this, so the consumer is paying $2-5 for processing per transaction.

You can use a brokerage account that reimburses atm fees.

Or a credit union.

Re: US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

#236

Post by jcims »

dexwiz wrote: post #216
pests wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every dispo in my area (Metro Detroit) has concrete pillars surrounding the building, usually every two feet or so. One of the first to open a few years back got hit early and everyone seems to have learned the lesson.

Those short pillars are called bollards.

Every fan of physics is recommended to look up bollard test videos.

Re: US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

#238

Post by nerdjon »

vkou wrote: post #2

It's actually wild what the executive can get done in an election year... With the side effect of dangling bait for legislators to take a contrarian, nationally unpopular position.

In fairness we do also see the opposite, which is kind of a problem with the 2 term system.

In a presidents first term they are incentivized to do just enough to not piss of the other side enough to get some crazy numbers out but do enough to appease the current voters that they tried.

But then in the second term any worry about being re-elected goes out the window.

Like I am still convinced that Obama was in support of gay marriage before he publicly said it, and just waited until after he was re-elected. At that point what was he going to loose?

Re: US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

#239

Post by jjulius »

umvi wrote: post #101
CPLX wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe some day someone will explain what “normalizing” means, specifically what people mean by the “don’t normalize X” construction. Pretty sure between Dr. Dre and Willie Nelson weed got normalized decades ago by any definition I understand.

"Normalize" in this sense means "to make culturally acceptable". A thing can be legal but still be taboo, for example, in Japan tattoos are legal but you might get discriminated against at an onsen if the owner doesn't want tattoos on display in their establishment. Weed might be "normalized" in some communities, but a large portion of Americans will silently judge you if you are a recreational drug user regardless o…

>Contrast to, say, beer or wine, which the majority of Americans will not silently judge you for indulging in moderation.

In point of fact, it's often flipped around. It's only been the last few years that I can tell someone I don't drink and be met with lots of, "Good for you!"s rather than silent judgement.

Re: US drug control agency will move to reclassify marijuana

#240

Post by thegrim33 »

laidoffamazon wrote: post #178
segasaturn wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Election year and not to mention that the President's numbers are in shambles with younger voters. This move feels extremely transparent to me.

Yeah, he's doing something that's reasonably popular among everyone. How dare he?

A third of the population, 111 million citizens, do not want it legalized. I wouldn't consider that "popular among everyone". https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/04/10/facts-abo...
Post reply on HN