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

Legalize It All

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 293 posts

Re: Legalize It All

#241

Post by pbhjpbhj »

beedogs wrote: post #232
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How large?

Considering 20% of Trump voters think freeing the slaves was a bad idea[0], I'd say "a lot". [0] http://time.com/4236640/donald-trump-racist-supporters/

I looked for information about the poll but the page you linked and the linked page within the relevant section both appear to lack that information. The 20% is an approximation, apparently.

It seems the question was:

Should "the executive order that freed all slaves in the states that were in rebellion against the federal government" have been made, or something similar. Was that worded badly on purpose, it appears to say "is freeing people who are rebelling against the government good"?

I find the statistic hard to believe, such a claim needs careful support which is lacking. The details that are given suggest an opaque question.

Such questions need follow-up questions to gauge understanding and depth of sentiment. Anyone who asks that and doesn't then ask 'so should the slaves have been freed at all?' as a follow-up is most likely being deceptive.

Re: Legalize It All

#242

Post by awesomerobot »

cpr wrote: post #152
munificent wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free mass education is a requirement in a democratic society. It would be national suicide for a government to give people the vote without giving them any competence to go with it.

Except that the free mass schools provided by the government do little more than dumb people down to a compliant level required for a quiet electorate. See "Dumbing Us Down" by John Taylor Gatto. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumbing_Us_Down

It needs to change, but don't forget that without it our illiteracy rates were ridiculous.

Re: Legalize It All

#243

Post by unprepare »

itsgreene wrote: post #90
krylon wrote: post #3

We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course…

I want to disagree a little on this. I won't disagree that the 'war on drugs' is out of control, largely mismanaged, and likely unnecessary. What I do want to say is I think it's a bit unfair to say "It never was about fighting drug use or preventing the harm it can do." I think it's fair to say the funding and huge catalyst for the war on drugs started in Miami in the 80's. During this time where was a ridiculous am…

>During this time where was a ridiculous amount of violence.

Was this violence not already illegal?

Surely brandishing a gun and firing on a public street in daylight is a crime with or without drug prohibition

Re: Legalize It All

#244

Post by toucan56 »

polshaw wrote: post #163
md224 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone else get almost irrationally angry about this? I HATE that the freedom to modulate our own minds was taken away from us by these awful politicians for such terrible reasons. Not only has the War on Drugs ruined countless lives through incarceration and overdosing, but so many potentially helpful chemicals have been hidden away from society. It isn't just about getting "high"... it's about unleashing our f…

Try being in the UK right now. The government have even given up the pretence that it has anything to do with harm-- every unapproved psychoactive substance on earth is about to be banned from sale/import. Be thankful at least you are dealing with a blacklist and not a (very short) whitelist! The whitelist being; tea, coffee, alcohol, tobacco/nicotine, in addition to prescription medication.

You forgot another addition to the whitelist: any drug if you're a future Prime Minister or Chancellor of the Exchequer. Hard to believe the hypocrisy of Cameron and Osborne.

Re: Legalize It All

#245

Post by user_0001 »

norniron wrote: post #211
user_0001 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

true, but on the other hand you can get caught with 1-2 grams of any powder, less than an oz of cannabis and nothing will come of it. Anything you can argue in court is personal (which is quite a lot) and at worst you are looking at a few hours of community service in most cases.

The court sentence isn't the only consequence to be considered here. Having a criminal record could hurt future employment opportunities. Your parents will probably treat you like some drug addict and so on.

Might get a criminal record. Not a certain.

But it is not ideal granted. But compared to how it appears to be in the US. Coerced into being an informer, mandatory minimums etc - it isn't so bad

Re: Legalize It All

#246

Post by gdubs »

After reading The Rise and Fall of American Growth -- a brilliant work that most here on HN would find relevant -- I came away more convinced than ever before that legalizing drugs would reduce a great deal of drag on our long term economic growth.

Re: Legalize It All

#247

Post by metaphorm »

rayiner wrote: post #177
msandford wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Drug use has an external impact on the families, friends, employers, and coworkers of those using drugs. It's not illegal for me to be a sober (or drunk) asshole. Nor is it illegal for me to be sober (or drunk) and just decide not to go to work, consequences be damned. People are allowed to get drunk legally, despite the statistically increased propensity for violence, douchebaggery, etc. What makes alcohol "good"…

I'm not making any argument why drug use should be illegal. I'm making an argument for why the public should be entitled to decide whether drug use is legal or illegal. I also think, given your examples, the public should also be entitled to decide whether alcohol should be illegal.

any individual person is, de facto, allowed to decide whether or not they use drugs regardless of the legal status of the drug in question.

drug prohibition laws represent something else. they represent the power of the state, and all the inherent violence that goes along with that, bearing down on those that choose to use legally proscribed drugs.

I hope you have a full understanding of what you're saying. legal prohibition implies state sanctioned violence.

Re: Legalize It All

#248

Post by metaphorm »

r0fls wrote: post #194
ZoeZoeBee wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You understand that this is the very reason the US is a Republic not a Democracy, and has safe guards to prevent the tyranny of the majority.

Technically I believe we are a Democratic Republic, as we directly vote on laws within our states. Legal Marijuana, for instance, was chosen by the Citizens of my state, Oregon; not by elected politicians.

> as we directly vote on laws within our states.

that varies from state to state. California, for example, does have direct ballot initiatives at the state level. New York State (where I live) generally does not, though they aren't excluded by the state constitution, there is just not a very strong tradition of direct ballot measures here.

every state in the U.S. implements representative democracy in a slightly different way.

Re: Legalize It All

#249

Post by snsr »

rayiner wrote: post #150
md224 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone else get almost irrationally angry about this? I HATE that the freedom to modulate our own minds was taken away from us by these awful politicians for such terrible reasons. Not only has the War on Drugs ruined countless lives through incarceration and overdosing, but so many potentially helpful chemicals have been hidden away from society. It isn't just about getting "high"... it's about unleashing our f…

The ability to "modulate [your] . . . mind" is why so many people (80-90% when it comes to drugs besides marijuana), oppose drug legalization. Human society has barely learned to cope with the range of neurological behavior naturally present in the population. It's not unreasonable to be afraid of what might happen when you throw new chemicals into the mix. It's important to remember that most people think the opposi…

> Human society has barely learned to cope with the range of neurological behavior naturally present in the population.

Bullshit.

> It's not unreasonable to be afraid of what might happen when you throw new chemicals into the mix.

It is absolutely unreasonable. Moreover, it's really not your concern.

> It's important to remember that most people think the opposite way as those on HN. They do not assume that new things will automatically make society better. They have a strong "don't fix what isn't broken" tendency. And as long as we live in a democracy, they're entitled to structure their society as they see fit.

It's probably time for you to start using "I" instead of "they".

Re: Legalize It All

#250

Post by ZoeZoeBee »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #227
ZoeZoeBee wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're really a Federal Republic, a collection of states where the citizens vote on their Representatives, who are then supposed to legislate under the guidelines of a Constitution which delegates power to various branches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_republic The citizens of Oregon do get to vote on Initiatives and Referendums, that is something which is relatively new to the state 1908, and not the way sta…

... the legislature being comprised of democratically elected representatives, no? A federal republic of democracies at least?

Not really, most of the states in the US are not Direct Democracies.
Post reply on HN