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

Time to end the war on drugs

virgin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 217 posts

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#161

Post by chimeracoder »

ams6110 wrote: post #156
bostonvaulter2 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

States can be more restrictive but they cannot be less restrictive. Thus if the nation declares that marijuana is illegal a state cannot declare that it is legal (see the medical marijuana raids in California). And if the nation declares that alcohol is legal then a state can make it illegal within that state.

And this is the opposite of what the founders would have wanted, I'd guess. The constitution mandates that powers not specifically granted to the federal government are reserved by the states. I'm no constitutional scholar, but I'm pretty sure the federal authority to regulate drugs was "found" in the interstate commerce clause as part of the food and drug reforms in the early 1900s. At the time, there were definitel…

This is why the first two federal laws targeted at prohibiting drugs didn't actually do it directly - they did it by way of taxes. The Marihuana Stamp Tax Act (1937) is the most famous, but it was preceded by another act that targeted proper narcotics (morphine, etc.). I believe it was the Harisson act, but I'm not certain.

In any case, the 1937 bill created an impossible-to-satisfy tax structure, because they knew that a direct prohibition would have been deemed unconstitutional. Unfortunately, by 1970, everyone had forgotten and the Controlled Substances Act passed easily.

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#162

Post by armandososa »

gerggerg wrote: post #97
lukeschlather wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has been waging what can pretty validly be called a war on drug lords in Latin America for a few decades. After the fall of the USSR, that's basically what our military bases in Latin America do. Generally I agree with macuenca; claiming that it's a war on an abstract principle trivializes the very real combat between US-backed authorities and local drug lords.

"called a war on drug lords in Latin America" This is exactly what I'm talking about. Humans fighting humans. That is a war. The War on Drugs also includes locking up 16 year olds for smoking pot in their own houses. Calling the general concept of drug control and prohibition a war generates this very confusion. "claiming that it's a war on an abstract principle trivializes the very real combat" Claiming those 16 yea…

In Mexico it's called "The War Against Narcotraffic". It makes more sense.

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#163

Post by sneak »

bostonvaulter2 wrote: post #154
sneak wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that indeed override the state laws? Many states have laws against things that are not federally prohibited, and legal in other states that do not prohibit those things. I think you may be incorrect.

States can be more restrictive but they cannot be less restrictive. Thus if the nation declares that marijuana is illegal a state cannot declare that it is legal (see the medical marijuana raids in California). And if the nation declares that alcohol is legal then a state can make it illegal within that state.

Yes, that is what I'm talking about. The person I was replying to seemed to claim otherwise.

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#164

Post by gregholmberg »

tdfx wrote: post #70
macuenca wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you suggest not to call a "war" has killed thousands of people in countries like Mexico and Colombia[1]. Is this what you mean when you say "deaths of large numbers of combatants"? I come from a country that suffers this "war on drugs", I've had members of my family kidnapped, I've seen people being assassinated in front of me by hit-men. Some others haven't been that lucky. I, with you permission, call this a "…

Well-armed criminal groups and government forces can have a war. I don't think anyone disputes that. But you can't go to war against a concept (i.e. drug use).

Have a conventional war against a concept? No.

Declaring "war" on an idea allows the state to permanently oppress anyone who can be associated with the idea.

This is a powerful totalitarian tool. [0]

[0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_war

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#166

Post by pedrocarvalho »

sneak wrote: post #141
pedrocarvalho wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn't. In Portugal, the healthcare system is free.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

By free I mean it's not a direct purchase. I'm perfectly aware that the healthcare system in my country is payed by my taxes.

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#167

Post by heyitsnick »

sneak wrote: post #141
pedrocarvalho wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn't. In Portugal, the healthcare system is free.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

To me (Brit) _free_ in this context is perfectly understood as _free at the point of use_

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#168

Post by LaGrange »

buritica wrote: post #125
beardicus wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glyphosate == Roundup(TM). This is the most used herbicide in the US... certainly not banned. Regardless, I agree with your conclusion.

Yes it is a widely used herbicide.. let me tell you a little bit about Roundup(TM). It is a wide spectrum herbicide that inhibits synthesis of some essential aminoacids. Basically, it prevents plants from growing, any and all plants that synthesize aminoacids like phenilananine and tryptophan. It does not affect crops because they have been genetically engineered to withstand the effect of glyphosate. I'll leave whol…

While I agree that social action is the best course, I disagree with one premise: that drug users don't know the consequences. They quite often do, they decide they'll take the risk for a variety of reasons, including plain-old self destruction, boredom, depression and others. Each of those has to be tackled in a different way — no silver bullets here.

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#169

Post by opendomain »

opendomain wrote: post #146

I have a feeling that the people that are promoting the end of the "war" are casual users or would like to be. Has any REAL experience with Drugs? I have - my family was ripped apart by drug abuse. Drugs alter your brain - addiction is VERY powerful. If some drugs were legal, MORE people would become addicted and crime will go up for people to feed their habits.

Just because you do not agree with me does not mean my comment should be downvoted.

Re: Time to end the war on drugs

#170

Post by biturd »

betterth wrote: post #150
chimeracoder wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should have been clearer - I was just trying to be concise to prove a point. And I'm making the assumption that we're comparing drugs of high quality in either category (because obviously drugs that are mixed with adulterants are going to have other problems). You seem to understand what's going on, but for anybody else who's curious: Adderall isn't methamphetamine. However, the methyl group doesn't change the way…

Awesome information! While unrelated to the science, I am a previous user of Adderall XR and then Vyvanse and I want to share some advice on the subject for any hackers out there using these drugs or thinking about them: It's crazy, it makes you operate on a different level, and I feel bad for anyone in a competitive college or learning situation that isn't using it: it's just unfair. But is cheating at being smart u…

Hacking and code need a non sedating opiate/opioid. Hydrocodone to start, maybe hydromorphone, then into oxycodone and oxymorphone. Stay away fro the morphines, diacetylmorphine, as they are too sedating. The others give you focus and drive.
Post reply on HN