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

Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 351 posts

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#181

Post by 0ct4via »

nailer wrote: post #149
dessimus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else was the government to continue to systemically hold down minorities in this country post-Civil Rights Act, while simultaneously enriching the Military Industrial Complex by flooding local law enforcement with military equipment paid for by US taxpayers?

Cannabis laws applied to all Americans.

"Application" depends purely on enforcement and the discretion of (a) the arresting officer, and then (b) the justice system further down the line.

You can't deny that the WoD and cannabis prosecutions in particular have disproportionately targeted African Americans and other minorities.

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#182

Post by more_corn »

heads wrote: post #27
zdragnar wrote: post #6

I don't disagree that this is good for those involved or affected. However, nothing stops the same from happening to someone tomorrow. The past several administrations have been relying too heavily on executive fiat for the optics. The DEA needs to reschedule it. Anything else is at best a band-aid, if not simple lip service to buy votes.

The optics, for a modern democratic republic, aren’t even that fantastic: pardons and proclamations are the acts of Kings. Democracies change laws through debate, legislation, and the voting by the representatives of the people. I hope this pardon doesn’t dilute the will for more substantive drug policy reform.

It will probably set the stage for it.

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#183

Post by CyberDildonics »

tptacek wrote: post #152
4RealFreedom wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are you going to tell me what it is then?

I don't have to. We've had a nationwide epidemic of deaths from regulated, labeled opiates, which is a fact that refutes your argument without requiring me to provide an alternative.

You are making a claim then saying you don't have to back it up while making another dubious claim.

Among synthetic opioid–involved overdose deaths in 2016, almost 80% involved another drug or alcohol, such as: another opioid, heroin, cocaine, prescription opioids, benzodiazepines, alcohol, psychostimulants, and antidepressants.

https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/deaths/other-drugs.html

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#184

Post by fragmede »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #59
dessimus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else was the government to continue to systemically hold down minorities in this country post-Civil Rights Act, while simultaneously enriching the Military Industrial Complex by flooding local law enforcement with military equipment paid for by US taxpayers?

You act as if they couldn't have gone about this 10,000 different ways. This worked because it's what the people wanted - in response to the 70s - not because some evil scheming overlord.

Richard Nixon is widely recognized as said scheming overlord, with the drug policies he enacted.

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#185

Post by secretsatan »

dheuoddjo wrote: post #138
dessimus wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty clear what certain people wanted in response to the 70s stemming from the rise of minority groups like the Black Panthers or the American Indian Movement trying to use their newly-enacted rights to fight oppression. Even the NRA was pro gun control when the Black Panthers were using the 2A for open-carrying to protect black Americans. If it was truly about marijuana use, then when usage rates for white an…

> black people would not be 3.5 times more likely to be arrested for possession than white people While on its face true, this isn’t taking into account things like recidivism or multiple charges. That’s to say the average black person has more priors and is more likely to have multiple charges when charged compared to the average white.

But if say, one group was more targeted they would have more priors and more multiple charges, isn’t it just a feedback loop?

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#186

Post by helmor »

kstrauser wrote: post #145
ramesh31 wrote: post #52

Missouri and Ohio have both legalized recreational home cultivation in the last year; the first two red states to do so. Hard to overstate what an achievement that is. Prohibition is more or less over at this point, outside of the deep red south.

Having grown up in Missouri, you could have knocked me over with a feather when that happened. They what?!

From Ohio. Can't speak for Missouri, but the reality here is that like most states, it's a rural-urban divide more than a "the whole state is red." Ohio has a solid red majority, especially in the legislature, but the cities are very blue and there are plenty of moderates. So I think those groups passed it, but you could see the conservative legislators were none too happy about it and were going to fight implementation tooth and nail, just like they'd like to do with abortion protections. There is sadly a pretty strong division as with many issues in this country, but enough of a majority to move the needle at least.

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#187

Post by [deleted] »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #59
dessimus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else was the government to continue to systemically hold down minorities in this country post-Civil Rights Act, while simultaneously enriching the Military Industrial Complex by flooding local law enforcement with military equipment paid for by US taxpayers?

You act as if they couldn't have gone about this 10,000 different ways. This worked because it's what the people wanted - in response to the 70s - not because some evil scheming overlord.

[deleted]

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#188

Post by zdragnar »

ethanbond wrote: post #130
zdragnar wrote: post #6

I don't disagree that this is good for those involved or affected. However, nothing stops the same from happening to someone tomorrow. The past several administrations have been relying too heavily on executive fiat for the optics. The DEA needs to reschedule it. Anything else is at best a band-aid, if not simple lip service to buy votes.

Calling it “for optics” is downplaying the severity of the situation. The reason presidents rely so much on executive fiat is because our actual legislative system has paralyzed itself with partisan politics, gerrymandering, and the filibuster. Obviously it’s intentional that it’s hard to pass things, and legitimately controversial things should be difficult to pass (and shouldn’t happen by executive fiat), but there…

The problem with blaming Congress is that the harms could be easily mitigated by the DEA changing the scheduling, which was my point.

Rumor has it that is in the works, but the fact that it has taken so long starts and ends with the executive office.

That said, Congress decriminalizing it entirely is definitely something that is going to take too long, and will also be entirely the fault of Congress.

Re: Granting pardon for the offense of simple possession of or use of marijuana

#190

Post by itronitron »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #58

One moral risk we play is does legalizing our recreational drug (eg alcohol/cannibis) increase the harm done to addicts[0]? While I maintain that there's a logical inconsistency to having legal alcohol and illegal cannabis, I'm on the fence if the consistency should be that both are somehow controlled/illegal (though absolutely not criminal). Another thought on the subject is how many small charges were simply becaus…

Do you have any thoughts pertaining to the legal status of products containing nicotine?
Post reply on HN