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

The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 197 posts

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#11

Post by FreeKill »

ebabchick wrote: post #9
k-mcgrady wrote: post #3

I sincerely believe the only people who are against legalisation of marijuana are those who don't understand it's effects on a person and those who are easily susceptible to propaganda and fail to do their own research on the subject. I can't think of even one legitimate reason for it's prohibition. If you argue for prohibition based on health consequences or risk to society you should also be arguing for prohibition…

I was under the impression that tobacco and alcohol companies are against legalization and have the largest hand in keeping it illegal.

Not only that, but there is a substantial body within countries like the United States who benefit a lot from it being legal. For instance, the for profit prisons incarcerate non-violent drug offenders. Also, law enforcement relies heavily on policies such as seizures as a source of funding. These types of institutions also have a lot to lose when it comes to drug legalization...

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#14

Post by eurleif »

acomjean wrote: post #10
k-mcgrady wrote: post #3

I sincerely believe the only people who are against legalisation of marijuana are those who don't understand it's effects on a person and those who are easily susceptible to propaganda and fail to do their own research on the subject. I can't think of even one legitimate reason for it's prohibition. If you argue for prohibition based on health consequences or risk to society you should also be arguing for prohibition…

Legalize it, But there are some real issues to be worked out, as someone who had a friend sent to hospital after being hit by a stoned driver who blew through a stop sign. Whats the legal limit? I'm not sure how easy it is to detect if someone is "under the influence" as the drug is detectable for weeks in the blood (in this case the join was in the car).

There's apparently a breathalyzer in development[0] that can detect use within the past two hours.

[0] http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/thc-breathalyzer-could-help-pol...

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#15

Post by drumdance »

benmarks wrote: post #2

Not a user, but after being a bartender for years - and knowing many who do consume marijuana - there seems to be no logical reason to punish (let alone _incarcerate_) people for something which is ultimately less destructive than what I was allowed to push for so many years.

Yeah, alcohol is far more likely to result in police incidents. Here in Boulder I often think that if all the drunk college students were getting high instead, the worst thing that would happen is all the restaurants will get overrun at 2 am.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#16

Post by k-mcgrady »

acomjean wrote: post #10
k-mcgrady wrote: post #3

I sincerely believe the only people who are against legalisation of marijuana are those who don't understand it's effects on a person and those who are easily susceptible to propaganda and fail to do their own research on the subject. I can't think of even one legitimate reason for it's prohibition. If you argue for prohibition based on health consequences or risk to society you should also be arguing for prohibition…

Legalize it, But there are some real issues to be worked out, as someone who had a friend sent to hospital after being hit by a stoned driver who blew through a stop sign. Whats the legal limit? I'm not sure how easy it is to detect if someone is "under the influence" as the drug is detectable for weeks in the blood (in this case the join was in the car).

>> But there are some real issues to be worked out, as someone who had a friend sent to hospital after being hit by a stoned driver who blew through a stop sign. Whats the legal limit?

Sorry that happened to your friend. Was it proven that the driver was stoned? If so I'm guessing they have an accurate way to measure it. Either way this is always going to be a problem. Look at the number of people killed by drunk drivers. The only solution is harsh prison sentences imo. Some people, willing to take the risk of DWI, disregard the danger they pose to others and if they can't understand that they should be severely punished. DWI shouldn't just lose you your license and get you probation. The punishment should be much more severe.

As for your question on the legal limit - there shouldn't be one. If you get in the car you should not have had any marijuana in the last 24 hours.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#17

Post by eli »

icebraining wrote: post #8

To the Americans around here: do you think this will have any important effects? It seems to me it could have, if it had been done ten years ago, our if the NYT was a newspaper aligned with a more conservative line, but nowadays I'd expect most readers of the Times to think "took you long enough!"

I think this is a big deal. The New York Times is hardly universally respected, but it has a lot more credibility than the image normally associated with the marijuana legalization crowd. I would expect Sunday morning news programs to mention this editorial tomorrow.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#18

Post by eli »

bavcyc wrote: post #4

And so does the National Review: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/379018/let-states-deci...

That's an Op-Ed, not necessarily the position of the National Review's editors.

The NYT isn't just running a series of articles on legalization, they are taking a stand as a newspaper in favor of it.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#19

Post by acomjean »

eurleif wrote: post #14
acomjean wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legalize it, But there are some real issues to be worked out, as someone who had a friend sent to hospital after being hit by a stoned driver who blew through a stop sign. Whats the legal limit? I'm not sure how easy it is to detect if someone is "under the influence" as the drug is detectable for weeks in the blood (in this case the join was in the car).

There's apparently a breathalyzer in development[0] that can detect use within the past two hours. [0] http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/thc-breathalyzer-could-help-pol...

if it works, that would solve the problem of detection.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#20

Post by nick_riviera »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #3

I sincerely believe the only people who are against legalisation of marijuana are those who don't understand it's effects on a person and those who are easily susceptible to propaganda and fail to do their own research on the subject. I can't think of even one legitimate reason for it's prohibition. If you argue for prohibition based on health consequences or risk to society you should also be arguing for prohibition…

Anecdotally watching my sister-in-law destroy her life and brain with the stuff and having a car written off because someone was fucked up on it and crashed into me, I'd rather it stayed illegal. Also it's not other people's right to inflict the rancid shitty smell upon me is it?

(Yes I know that goes for smoking and alcohol too and I'd be quite happy to do away with them as well)

Edit: downvoters, please explain rather than leave a cowardly silence. I'd love to see people's down votes named on HN.

Post reply on HN