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

131–140 of 197 posts

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#131

Post by benjymau5 »

GuiA wrote: post #65
javert wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> in common opinion, public health is an issue of crime and punishment. Mh? It isn't illegal to get an STD, and you don't get punished for having an STD; yet our society actively tries to limit STD transmission. Not sure I'm understanding what you're arguing for/against.

AFAIK in a lot of places knowingly transmitting an STD is a illegal. I guess the key part is 'knowingly.'

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#132

Post by llllllllllll »

dalke wrote: post #109
llllllllllll wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many retrospective studies of crash incidents have not found an increased risk with marijuana use. In my personal experience, it's effects are slight but drivers appear to compensate for their impairment by driving slower and being more careful in other ways, hence the findings of the recent survey study below (the lead researcher is quoted in the NY Times article). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24411797 http://…

Based only on the abstract (the text is behind a paywall), it appears the first paper only discusses "the drivers' risk of being killed in a fatal crash", and not overall crash incidents, which is the point of your first sentence. In addition, the abstract's conclusion starts "Although overall, drugs contribute to crash risk regardless of the presence of alcohol, such a contribution is much lower than that by alcohol…

I took the NYT quote from Eduardo Romano to mean that after controlling for some of those confounding factors, there was no evidence of increased risk. I posted the NYT article because the abstract didn't mention much about marijuana specifically.

Specifically, drivers who test positive for marijuana or self-report using marijuana are more than twice as likely as other drivers to be involved in motor vehicle crashes.

Without having read the study, do you know if this statistic controls for age or anything else? If so, I stand corrected.

Thanks for your polite tone, it's not every day I get called a "fucking moron" before 7 a.m. :)

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#133

Post by krschultz »

So the real question now becomes - which organizations with political clout are still fighting to keep Marijuana illegal?

I've actually never smoked weed in my entire life (seriously). I have no interest in smoking weed once it is legal either. But I'm very sick of paying to support a stupid wasteful policy. So who are the people that are actually fighting to keep it illegal? I honestly can't find them, I'd love to read their arguments.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#134

Post by spenvo »

krschultz wrote: post #133

So the real question now becomes - which organizations with political clout are still fighting to keep Marijuana illegal ? I've actually never smoked weed in my entire life (seriously). I have no interest in smoking weed once it is legal either. But I'm very sick of paying to support a stupid wasteful policy. So who are the people that are actually fighting to keep it illegal? I honestly can't find them, I'd love to…

Relevant:

http://www.businessinsider.com/police-unions-and-pharmaceuti...

https://mayday.us/

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#135

Post by adventured »

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…

"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."

Your logic is incorrect. The vast majority of the time in fact, public health is absolutely not an issue of crime and punishment.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#136

Post by thret »

krschultz wrote: post #133

So the real question now becomes - which organizations with political clout are still fighting to keep Marijuana illegal ? I've actually never smoked weed in my entire life (seriously). I have no interest in smoking weed once it is legal either. But I'm very sick of paying to support a stupid wasteful policy. So who are the people that are actually fighting to keep it illegal? I honestly can't find them, I'd love to…

Really? Illegal drugs are an enormous business, I'd guess the people currently making money from it would be fighting to keep it illegal. The same goes for the police/DEA/etc who are paid to enforce the law.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#137

Post by steanne »

spenvo wrote: post #134
krschultz wrote: post #133

So the real question now becomes - which organizations with political clout are still fighting to keep Marijuana illegal ? I've actually never smoked weed in my entire life (seriously). I have no interest in smoking weed once it is legal either. But I'm very sick of paying to support a stupid wasteful policy. So who are the people that are actually fighting to keep it illegal? I honestly can't find them, I'd love to…

Relevant: http://www.businessinsider.com/police-unions-and-pharmaceuti... https://mayday.us/

... and a few more mentioned here:

http://www.republicreport.org/2012/marijuana-lobby-illegal/

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#138

Post by adventured »

a8da6b0c91d wrote: post #121
GuiA wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in common opinion, public health is an issue of crime and punishment. Mh? It isn't illegal to get an STD, and you don't get punished for having an STD; yet our society actively tries to limit STD transmission. Not sure I'm understanding what you're arguing for/against.

Sodomy and fornication were illegal and prosecuted, mostly because they spread disease.

Such things are only ever made illegal when there's someone else that wishes to make life on earth a living hell to promote the sales pitch of a better life after death.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#139

Post by adventured »

djur wrote: post #105
coob wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument made in retort would go along the lines of - What happens if you don't pay the tax, or don't turn up to school? All over a governments abilities boil down in their extreme to their monopoly on violence.

This is a common belief among libertarians, but it doesn't reflect how governments actually work. Governments that have to rely on physical force tend to be unstable, very small, or limited in their ability to effect policies. Most people's decisions whether to follow or disobey laws are more heavily influenced by social pressures and conventions than the fear of imprisonment or physical assault by cops. Incidentally…

It's worth noting that the sole reason the government can garnish your wages and seize your assets, is because they have the understood threat of eventual guns to back up it all up. Without the guns and the threat of potential violence, they could never manage it. You're confirming the parent.

Try seizing houses from people without the threat of guns and violence, see how that works out.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#140

Post by krschultz »

thret wrote: post #136
krschultz wrote: post #133

So the real question now becomes - which organizations with political clout are still fighting to keep Marijuana illegal ? I've actually never smoked weed in my entire life (seriously). I have no interest in smoking weed once it is legal either. But I'm very sick of paying to support a stupid wasteful policy. So who are the people that are actually fighting to keep it illegal? I honestly can't find them, I'd love to…

Really? Illegal drugs are an enormous business, I'd guess the people currently making money from it would be fighting to keep it illegal. The same goes for the police/DEA/etc who are paid to enforce the law.

No I understand that, but it's a lot more nuanced than "it's the police!".

Which specific lobbying groups are for and against it? What factions of the two political parties are hardline for keeping it illegal? What newspapers and TV stations? What arguments are they making?

Post reply on HN