The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization • Hacker News Board

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#51

Post by indlebe » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:41 PM UTC

fred_durst wrote: post #37

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'll bring up a point here only because I feel like the HN crowd is on the younger side. Its not until your late 20's and really 30's that you start to find out about and see people you've known in the past that were intelligent, productive people who's lives have been completely destroyed due to their drug addictions. And yes, I've certainly had friends who are 40+ and barely hold down a job and live off friends and…

>And yes, I've certainly had friends who are 40+ and barely hold down a job and live off friends and family because they are addicted to marijuana.

Is the evidence available strong enough to suggest that it's the marijuana causing this? Marijuana is often used by those suffering from depression and anxiety as a form of self-medication.

In BC, Canada the province's leading medical doctors have come out in strong support of legalization.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#52

Post by nick_riviera » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:42 PM UTC

asgeir wrote: post #50

nick_riviera wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I know this is idealist. I'd like people to act responsibly and consider others but to be honest this is beyond a not insignificant proportion of the population. I live in the UK. This class of drug is banned and it should stay so. The police don't go around locking people up - they do slap wrists and that keeps it under control. When it gets too much or puts people in danger, through drug driving or mindless par…

It annoys me when people use healthcare cost as something to be counted against recreational drugs. It seems to me that this reasoning could equally be applied to every avoidable burden on the health system. As an analogy. As far as I know heart disease is one of the main causes of healthcare costs and death. Obesity leads to an increased risk of heart disease. Does this mean that we should have a government mandated…

Very much so. Isn't public health about reducing avoidable risks and keeping the population healthy?

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#53

Post by satori99 » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:43 PM UTC

nether wrote: post #12

And in a decade or two, legalization of prostitution.

It was legalized where I live years ago. Sex Workers pay income tax, and can make work related deductions. They can call the police if they have any trouble with clients. It is just another service industry.

The only restrictions imposed apon them is where they are allowed to operate their business. (Not near schools, playgrounds etc).

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#54

Post by javert » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:46 PM UTC

sharkweek wrote: post #7

Two plugs I always make during any drug law discussion on HN: One - The Economist's 2009 article "Failed states and failed policies" - http://www.economist.com/node/13237193 (you might have to Google the title to get around a paywall) Two - The documentary, The House I Live In - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2125653/ (trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0atL1HSwi8 ) Both make such a fascinating case that drugs sh…

> a crime and punishment issue, but rather one of public health

Not disagreeing with anything you said, just providing a thought.

Common opinion dictates that we need the state to take care of public health; thus, in common opinion, public health is an issue of crime and punishment.

If you take it as a principle (as I do) that we need sepration of state and public health (as with church, as with education), it has interesting implications.

Update: Most glaring example is Obamacare. You have to pay a fine (punishment) if you don't get insurance and it imposes massive burdens on doctors. I am only adding this because I got massively downvoted. I guess people didn't understand that what I said was just a matter of fact. Our society does support the idea that public health is actionable on a "crime and punishment" level and in general that is still the modus operandi.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#55

Post by jebus989 » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:46 PM UTC

Alex3917 wrote: post #22

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).

The risk of driving after using marijuana is comparable to the risk of driving after using penicillin, which isn't illegal. Furthermore, the risk is far less than the risk of driving at .08, which is legal in most states. While I'm not advocating that people drive while stoned, it's not clear that there is a legal problem that needs to be solved.

I've got to query this, I don't believe antibiotics like penicillin cause any motor/visual impairment

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#56

Post by HeyImAlex » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:47 PM UTC

nick_riviera wrote: post #38

cobrausn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you basically just advocated prohibition of alcohol, drugs, and tobacco, and included in your list of reasons 'I don't like the smell'. Never mind that prohibition was already tried and already failed.

Well I'll add one more: The physical and mental health problems and associated healthcare burden. This is not insignificant and totally shrugged off by the "pro-legalisation" side of things.

The first time I smoked marijuana I was 13 years old; prohibition doesn't work, and while MJ has its burdens, prohibition has far more. We should focus on treating the addicted as human beings needing help rather than criminals to be thrown into prison.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#57

Post by TazeTSchnitzel » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:47 PM UTC

resdirector wrote: post #45

This is a step in the right direction. I strongly believe that marijuana legalization is good for the economy -- personally I've come up with brilliant, practical ideas while stoned[0]. Many of which I have gone on to implement and generate wealth. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Think Steve Jobs and Apple etc. [0] I hope the nomenclature evolves re marijuana. "stoned", "bong", "skunk", "chronic", etc conjure up image…

We have plenty of negative names for alcohol and tobacco, though. Booze, fags, etc.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#58

Post by nick_riviera » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:48 PM UTC

HeyImAlex wrote: post #56

nick_riviera wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I'll add one more: The physical and mental health problems and associated healthcare burden. This is not insignificant and totally shrugged off by the "pro-legalisation" side of things.

The first time I smoked marijuana I was 13 years old; prohibition doesn't work, and while MJ has its burdens, prohibition has far more. We should focus on treating the addicted as human beings needing help rather than criminals to be thrown into prison.

Isn't prevention better than cure?

People keep saying "prohibition didn't work" but I'm hard pressed to find a conclusive paper on the subject. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

Edit: Ask for proof/sources = down vote. Hey everyone, fuck science.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#59

Post by cdash » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:48 PM UTC

eli wrote: post #17

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.

I think more importantly is that this is just another in a long trend of signs that people are not scared of saying marijuana should be legalized anymore.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#60

Post by nick_riviera » Sat, Jul 26, 2014, 11:50 PM UTC

mrmagooey wrote: post #44

nick_riviera wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's use an analogy: What if someone was burning a tyre in my neighbour's garden directly affecting my health?

You can't up the ante and claim it's analogous. Burning a tyre releases a tremendous amount of thick black smoke, burning a joint releases several orders of magnitude less smoke, and unless you're within 10m of the person you realistically are not going to be affected. For effect: "What if someone built a rocket launch pad next to my house and it was directly affecting my health?"

Doesn't that depend on how far my neighbour is away? Perhaps we have 500m long gardens...

The analogy is valid as is "pissing over my fence onto my head", "kicking a football through my greenhouse", "catapulting dog shit into my garden" etc etc.