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

Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

decrimsf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–28 of 28 posts

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#21

Post by robbrown451 »

pstuart wrote: post #19
robbrown451 wrote: post #16

There are some drugs about which good arguments can be made on both sides of the legality issue. Highly addictive ones do indeed ruin lives, and while there is an argument that that should be the person's choice, the other side can argue that the government is there to better the common good, and that can include protecting people from their own bad decisions. I have mixed feelings about the legality issue when it co…

Please bear in mind that the origins of drug prohibition had little to do with "protecting" people, and were instead instruments of oppression. Drug abuse a health problem, not a criminal problem. We spend orders of magnitude on the criminal side and, guess what? It only makes things worse. Legalize. Regulate. Tax. It's very simple, and is the only correct answer.

Maybe. I think it's unfortunate that people who are saying their answer is "the only correct" one are probably going to slow down progress.

Laws aren't always about crimes, by the way. Not wearing seatbelts or motorcycle helmets shouldn't be seen as a criminal problem, but we still have laws about it. Maybe you disagree with those laws, and that's fine.

I think it is less fine to say that your perspective on the issue is the only one that can be reasonably seen as valid.

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#22

Post by goldcd »

robbrown451 wrote: post #16

There are some drugs about which good arguments can be made on both sides of the legality issue. Highly addictive ones do indeed ruin lives, and while there is an argument that that should be the person's choice, the other side can argue that the government is there to better the common good, and that can include protecting people from their own bad decisions. I have mixed feelings about the legality issue when it co…

I'm going to quibble your 2nd sentence: "Highly addictive ones do indeed ruin lives"

Today, I'll agree with you. Question is why?

Clearly heroin ruins the lives of people who commit crimes to pay for it, as they're pulled into the criminal justice system. If you can afford to buy all the heroin you need from your checking account - well obviously it 'ruins your life less' as you're not in prison.

Maybe you decide to turn up at 9am for your job, or stay in bed - but that's an additional choice you have, as you're not locked up.

My point is, the drug's the same, you're the same, and the difference is the access to it you're afforded.

Anecdotally the highest every number of opiate addicts was post the first world war, where it was handed out as an anesthetic by the government.

To bring my meandering back in, I think we simply need to clarify what we want to achieve in society. Reduction in drug use - or a reduction in drug harm.

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#23

Post by newnewpdro »

journalctl wrote: post #15

Amazing how psychedelics might be legalized before housing in San Francisco.

Maybe homelessness sucks a lot less when you can hang out with the talking flowers and trees in beautiful golden gate park all day.

(I'm mostly kidding, there's no significant barrier to accessing pyschedelics in SF as-is.)

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#24

Post by robbrown451 »

goldcd wrote: post #22
robbrown451 wrote: post #16

There are some drugs about which good arguments can be made on both sides of the legality issue. Highly addictive ones do indeed ruin lives, and while there is an argument that that should be the person's choice, the other side can argue that the government is there to better the common good, and that can include protecting people from their own bad decisions. I have mixed feelings about the legality issue when it co…

I'm going to quibble your 2nd sentence: "Highly addictive ones do indeed ruin lives" Today, I'll agree with you. Question is why? Clearly heroin ruins the lives of people who commit crimes to pay for it, as they're pulled into the criminal justice system. If you can afford to buy all the heroin you need from your checking account - well obviously it 'ruins your life less' as you're not in prison. Maybe you decide to…

Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting that they ruin the lives of everyone who uses them.

Still, my main point is that mushrooms should NOT be controversial.

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#25

Post by pstuart »

robbrown451 wrote: post #21
pstuart wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please bear in mind that the origins of drug prohibition had little to do with "protecting" people, and were instead instruments of oppression. Drug abuse a health problem, not a criminal problem. We spend orders of magnitude on the criminal side and, guess what? It only makes things worse. Legalize. Regulate. Tax. It's very simple, and is the only correct answer.

Maybe. I think it's unfortunate that people who are saying their answer is "the only correct" one are probably going to slow down progress. Laws aren't always about crimes, by the way. Not wearing seatbelts or motorcycle helmets shouldn't be seen as a criminal problem, but we still have laws about it. Maybe you disagree with those laws, and that's fine. I think it is less fine to say that your perspective on the issu…

Please don't confuse my adamance in defining the problem as an applied ideology in the real world. I'm pretty damn pragmatic and don't play purity politics.

I'm sticking with my statement, because it's true. I welcome reasonable refutations to it.

You overlooked the word "regulate". That means laws, but applied towards health and safety of products sold, rather than punishing the consumer.

We still need DUI laws (and related), but otherwise it's a personal choice all the way down.

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#26

Post by loeg »

claudiawerner wrote: post #14
loeg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cocaine is Schedule II, actually. While it can be used as a topical anesthetic, I don't think it is especially common anymore. Xanax has significant medical use supported by actual studies. (Yes, it's kind of a problem that the Federal government essentially blocks studies of many substances.) There's not a lot of real distinction between schedules III-V other than "less potential for abuse than the last one" (per DE…

This makes even less sense to me (as someone who knows only very little about drugs other than trying weed a couple of times), but doesn't cannabis also have medical use, and further have a lower potential for abuse, at least along the addictiveness axis?

> doesn't cannabis also have medical use?

There isn't much evidence for medical use of cannabis and what there is is super weak. That's not to say it won't be proven effective in time, just that the research isn't definitive.

> and further have a lower potential for abuse, at least along the addictiveness axis?

I am not super well versed on cannabis abuse/addictiveness research but anecdotally, sure; as far as I know, it's relatively nonaddictive and harm of regular high-dose use is pretty mild.

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#27

Post by loeg »

0x8BADF00D wrote: post #10
arcticbull wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PCP was a general anesthetic, cocaine is still a local anesthetic used humorously enough for rhinoplasty [1] (and eye surgery if I’m not mistaken) and Xanax is an antidepressant so by that strict measure there’s some logic. With that in mind it’s a completely asinine system and should be thrown out. It’s such an utter waste of time when Portugal’s policy of decriminalizing everything a decade and a half ago showed ma…

Xanax is not an antidepressant, it is a sedative-hypnotic.

Ostensibly, it's foremost an anxiolytic.

Re: Decriminalize Psychedelic Plants and Fungi in San Francisco

#28

Post by undersuit »

rincebrain wrote: post #7
undersuit wrote: post #3

I had to vouch averros and I can't reply to him, great. Decriminalize all drugs. Cheese + SSRI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serotonin_syndrome Grapefruit + SSRI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grapefruit%E2%80%93drug_intera...

Are you thinking of cheese+MAOIs? Because SSRIs aren't known for having that interaction with fermented products at any dose I've seen.

I am thinking of cheese and MAOIs. SSRIs are still extensively mentioned in the wiki article on Serotonin syndrome.
Post reply on HN