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

Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

adn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 218 posts

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#71

Post by mason240 »

kemiller wrote: post #31
Shivetya wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't DC just vote to legalize it, you just cannot buy or sell it. Here is to hoping the next big issue after marriage equality if fixing our drug laws, which are more damaging than many will admit and far too profitable to law enforcement and the prison industry.

@metrix many prisons are run by for-profit companies. It costs the taxpayers a lot, but there is profit to be made, and some elected officials benefit at least indirectly. edit: awkward wording

>many prisons are run by for-profit companies.

Citation for the "Many"?

Only about 5% of prisoners are in private prisons.

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#72

Post by chc »

eli wrote: post #59
chaostheory wrote: post #32

I still find it very strange that California wasn't one of the first states to legalize marijuana. Now there are three states ahead. EDIT: Looking at the results, these counties that voted 'No' surprised me Los Angeles County (Los Angeles, Long Beach, Glendale, Santa Clarita, Pomona, Palmdale, Pasadena, Torrance, Inglewood, Burbank, Carson, Santa Monica etc.) Santa Clara County (San Jose, Santa Clara, Cupertino, Gilr…

California had a legalization ballot initiative some years ago that was poorly written and went too far. It failed.

We had four this year, but none got enough support to actually make it on the final ballot. Californian potheads generally don't feel the need as strongly as in other states because our medical marijuana laws are so very liberal.

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#73

Post by larssorenson »

toyg wrote: post #49
wavefunction wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it depress prices for other crops? The economic phenomena you're describing is called "replacement" but it's not like farmers aren't growing opium poppies because cannabis is so easy to grow.

Cannabis and opium poppies cannot be used to produce the same end-product. From what I understand, hemp can replace cotton in most end-products; being much easier to grow (and hence cheaper / more plentiful), it could potentially flood markets earlier reserved to cotton, hence depressing prices. Say you have two farmers; one grows cannabis, the other cotton. Because cannabis is easier to grow, the cannabis farmer has…

Interesting, I was not aware that this sort of situation could spring up. But I don't think this should be a reason behind retaining criminalization of marijuana. To those who tout "Free Market" and "True Capitalism," it should be plainly clear that hemp should be allowed to fill the market if it can provide a better or comparable product at a better price. While I don't necessarily think we should necessarily promote a free market economy, I definitely think that marijuana legalization should not be hindered by the potential "negative" drawbacks such as these. Worst case, the government should focus its efforts in regulating prices and uses for marijuana plants, similar to how they regulate/subsidize over-farming.

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#74

Post by jonnathanson »

maxerickson wrote: post #60
jonnathanson wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt there will be much trouble moving weed between WA and OR. Even during the period when it was legal in WA and illegal in OR, OR police pretty much turned a blind eye to interstate "tourists" on suspiciously short trips across the border and back. Now that both states have legalized weed, this will be even less of an issue. And the likelihood that you run into a federal officer while crossing the WA/OR b…

I guess the only times (in recent history anyway) that states vigorously defend their borders is when it impacts their tax revenues. Are there big differences in how Washington and Oregon are taxing marijuana?

Not sure. I have heard, interestingly enough, that there are federal taxes on the sale of marijuana. Which is weird, given that the federal government does not legally recognize one's right to buy or sell marijuana. These federal tax burdens are quite high, if the media reports are accurate:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/03/irs-lim...

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#76

Post by Mikeb85 »

mason240 wrote: post #71
kemiller wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@metrix many prisons are run by for-profit companies. It costs the taxpayers a lot, but there is profit to be made, and some elected officials benefit at least indirectly. edit: awkward wording

>many prisons are run by for-profit companies. Citation for the "Many"? Only about 5% of prisoners are in private prisons.

Given how many prisons are in the US, that probably still qualifies as 'many'...

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#77

Post by mikeash »

kyleblarson wrote: post #11
japhyr wrote: post #7

Here's an interesting piece of the Alaska marijuana legal status. We just voted to legalize recreational marijuana use, which includes growing and selling marijuana. I'm happy to see it pass because possession has been legal here for a long time, but sales and distribution has not. That's a murky legal situation, which I'm happy to see cleared up. But last night an article ran in our local paper stating that the Coas…

As a Seattleite I was optimistic things might change at the federal level when Obama appointed Kerlikowski as drug czar, given his experience as police chief in what even in 2009 was a very cannabis friendly city. I guess I was just another sucker for hope and change that never materialized.

Marijuana laws are up to Congress, not the executive. They have discretion in how they enforce the laws to an extent, but they shouldn't just ignore them.

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#78

Post by Alupis »

munificent wrote: post #54
kyleblarson wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Seattleite I was optimistic things might change at the federal level when Obama appointed Kerlikowski as drug czar, given his experience as police chief in what even in 2009 was a very cannabis friendly city. I guess I was just another sucker for hope and change that never materialized.

The US government is a pretty big boat and takes a while to turn around. You have to have patience and a longer view, but change does happen. In 2012 it was two states. Now it's four. We're getting there.

The issue at the Federal level is not too long ago the US went around bullying UN nations into signing a unified drug treaty which is in effect for I believe 90 years. The idea was that if all countries agree on banning certain drugs, it can have a more unified effort in eradicating said drugs. It mostly targeted hard drugs, but marijuana is also named in the treaty.

It would be very difficult for the US to back out of or alter the very treaty we pressured most of the world into signing not that long ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Convention_on_Narcotic_D...

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#79

Post by khuey »

chaostheory wrote: post #32

I still find it very strange that California wasn't one of the first states to legalize marijuana. Now there are three states ahead. EDIT: Looking at the results, these counties that voted 'No' surprised me Los Angeles County (Los Angeles, Long Beach, Glendale, Santa Clarita, Pomona, Palmdale, Pasadena, Torrance, Inglewood, Burbank, Carson, Santa Monica etc.) Santa Clara County (San Jose, Santa Clara, Cupertino, Gilr…

Legalization will probably be on the ballot again in 2016.

Re: Alaskans vote to legalize marijuana

#80

Post by mikeash »

chimeracoder wrote: post #61
eli wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect it to get a lot of play in the media. In addition to being the seat of government, DC is the first place to vote for legalization on the East Coast. Although the change has already been passed (overwhelmingly) by referendum, the city council still has to submit the changes to Congress, which will have 60 days to veto them. Further, at any point in the future they can restrict what DC can do via amendments to…

> DC is the first place to vote for legalization on the East Coast. Well, DC is a city, and Portland, Maine actually already voted to legalize marijuana in 2013[0]. If DC were a state, it'd be the first state on the east coast, but it's not. It's the first city that is not part of a state (and therefore not subject to constitutional rights allowed states), which is what makes this case very interesting. DC is tricky…

Is it easier to pass an initiative in a city than in a state with a similar population? DC proper has a similar population to states like Wyoming and Vermont.
Post reply on HN