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

71–80 of 197 posts

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#71

Post by DangerousPie »

javert wrote: post #54
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 in…

The state has methods at its disposal other than crime an punishment. For example, they can try to influence the behavior of their citizens by education or taxation, like they do with cigarettes or alcohol.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#72

Post by asgeir »

nick_riviera wrote: post #52
asgeir wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I for one do not want a nanny state. I would much rather have personal freedom to do what I want with my body rather than sitting down to a nice hot government ration #323. There are some things that make life worth living and not all of them are good for you. If that means that I have to pay higher taxes then so be it, that is already the price to pay for living in a welfare state. In any case any perceived burden can be offset with a vice tax.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#73

Post by k-mcgrady »

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…

In studies marijuana has been shown as less addictive than caffeine. Sure people can use it to waste away their lives but unlike alcoholics they are making the choice to do it. Everybody has things they struggle with. Junk food. TV. Alcohol. Tobacco. There are many, many ways in which you can waste and ruin your life. Adding one more to the list isn't going to make a huge difference. Not to mention the fact that many lives are ruined because people are prosecuted for using marijuana sensibly and causing no harm to others.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#74

Post by kkklllppp »

nick_riviera wrote: post #48
llllllllllll wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll explain it, though I didn't downvote you. Marijuana is illegal right now. That didn't stop that bad stuff from happening to you or your sister. Turn it into a public health issue and people like your sister-in-law will have more resources to get help. I also have skepticism that marijuana caused someone to crash into your car. It has not been proven that weed has much if any effect on driving ability, especially…

You are quite clearly an absolute dire example of a complete fucking moron if you think that smoking weed doesn't affect your driving. It affects your judgement, your motor skills, slows your reaction time and so can the withdrawal symptoms. I'm not even going to link a page because it's that easy to find supporting information that is credible.

You don't know what you're talking about, I bet that you are not a stoner.

I've been smoking for many years, and have many friends that do. The majority of stoners will tell you that it's very safe to drive while high. Why? When you're high each and every one of your senses are heightened, making you more 'aware' of things going on around you, making you a safer driver. And in addition, the feeling of slight paranoia usually makes you drive pretty slow and careful. I have no studies to back that up, but most stoners generally agree on this.

Never heard of one single incident of smoking and driving causing accidents. Alcohol and driving on the other hand, oh boy, been there done that, never doing that again (irresponsible teenager at the time). Vision blurry, misjudgement is distance, etc., very dangerous side effects for driving usually only associated with alcohol, and not marijuana.

Btw, I'm one of those productive stoners, can't stay away from my programming hobbies when I'm high. I enjoy marijuana, but I'm not exactly an advocate of legalization. There are many dangers with Marijuana from my experience, but driving certainly isn't one of them.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#75

Post by [deleted] »

eof wrote: post #63
fred_durst wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> because they are addicted to marijuana. It definitely happens, don't kid yourself. As a somewhat-in-denial marijuana addict that now recognizes the health impact it has had on me over 10+ years of regular use, and have seen lots of people placated by marijuana use I think you are assuming causation where there is only correlation. I'd consider myself somewhat high-functioning, but often wonder at where my mind and…

[deleted]

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#76

Post by jiggy2011 »

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've heard anti legalisation advocates suggest that prohibition of alcohol would indeed be a positive thing and were alcohol a new drug then it should be criminalised. However prohibition attempts (of alcohol) are doomed to fail because of how much drinking is entwined with our culture. For example pubs or bars being focal points of the community, wine being a common meal accompaniment etc. Marijuana doesn't have the same culture built around it , except for a minority of stoners.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#78

Post by grosbs »

nick_riviera wrote: post #58
HeyImAlex wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Hey, light up dude. Take a puff, you'll see how fallacious your comments are.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#79

Post by pessimizer »

eli wrote: post #40
pessimizer wrote: post #25

General legalization and amnesty is the way to go. This piecemeal recreational legalization is only happening in the whitest states in the country, and not helping the primary victims of the drug war.

Keep your eye on DC. It is neither the "whitest" nor even a "state" but it does have a full legalization ballot initiative set for November that will almost certainly pass if Congress doesn't block it.

It's now on my radar. Thanks.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#80

Post by themartorana »

[deleted] wrote: post #66
indlebe wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 suppo…

[deleted]

I never thought that about alcohol and it's advertised like crazy.

There is no possible way a 12 year old is going to take from five sentences that drugs are safe for 24-7 consumption. In fact, I'd argue that stigma and prohibition are more likely to cause a 12 or 14 year old to try pot than anyone asking if substance abuse might have other underlying causes.

Post reply on HN