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

Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 431 posts

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#251

Post by jimcsharp »

exogeny wrote: post #111

I despise getting involved in threads like this, because they always descend into whataboutism ("Oh, but alcohol is worse!, etc.), but here we go with my anecdotal evidence. Me, personally, not a huge fan. I dabbled and experimented like a good chunk of Americans, decided it wasn't for me. Not necessarily because I didn't enjoy it - although I was involved in quite a bit of team sports at the time and was worried abo…

There's that recent news about Mindfulness Meditation influencing people in similar ways. I don't think we should mourn the 'loss' of your boring, comfortable friends. You Only Live Once

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#252

Post by justinclift »

rusk wrote: post #245
justinclift wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you sure it's apathy though? Perhaps because it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum, which would only have an advisory impact at best? That the politicians took a basically 50/50 result and have used it to _remove_ the EU citizenship of everyone in the UK is beyond taking the piss.

> it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum Was it though? It seems to me that many very clearly consider it to be binding, though ridiculously the actual meaning is ambiguous.

> Was it though?

Errr yes? That was the whole point. The general concept I had of it was along the lines of "Lets see what the general opinion is, so if there's a large majority one way or another we'll know if we need to look into it".

The non-binding bit was so they didn't have to _commit_ to actually doing anything, just in case.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#253

Post by bitL »

pjc50 wrote: post #186
bitL wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already have many problems caused by alcohol and cigarettes, costing taxpayers billions in unnecessary expenses. I get it, people need to escape reality they live in. We know that some weed smokers end up schizophrenic and that in general smoking weed weakens one's will, so in many cases we end up with grown up children going only after the things attainable by easiest efforts. There are also some legit medical us…

> all sexual deviations We're currently in the middle of the long process of realising that a lot of things that were thought to be harmful or ""degenerate"" actually aren't, and that more harm is done in suppressing them; conversely a whole range of ""normal"" behaviour is non-consensual and actually harmful.

Maybe the line should be like they have over in Czechia - weed is illegal but police ignores it for single individuals as necessary evil addressing human weakness, but prosecutes sellers and manufacturers. So the "hard line" is given, i.e. legally the line is not pushed more towards hard drugs as next generation might argue "we have weed legal, why not heroin? It only affects some people!", pushing the line further, damaging more people because some can't or don't want to attain mastery of self-control and delayed satisfaction.

BTW, when you look at the beginning of communism in Russia, they tried these kinds of experiments and it fell like house of cards in ~20 years, leading them to be even more repressive than what their conservatives would be. Our estimates of what is harmful are too often incorrect. I am not saying that the algorithm in law we have now is perfect, but it's definitely organic and a result of many optimization procedures. It could be local optima, there could be much better optimas, but it's hard to predict if a given step leads to another optima or wrecks the whole civilization like the Chinese population addiction during Opium wars.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#254

Post by ada1981 »

Jarwain wrote: post #185
Jarwain wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I can't edit my comment using this app: A big contributing factor, I think, is the overprescription of opiates to treat pain when it isn't 100% necessary

I wonder how many overdoses were just suicides

My childhood best friend has been a heroin addict for perhaps a decade.

I’ve tried to help her over the years.

She tried going to an Ibogain clinic in Mexico and was sexually assaulted by a nurse while there. I paid for her to give it a second try for her and her boyfriend (also an addict) but after a few days clean they went back to their old life and relationships and couldn’t stay clean.

Her underlying trauma was sexual abuse as a teenager.

She’s spent most of her adult life living with her parents, using heroin, and committing petty crimes or doing sex work to stay high.

She told me that every time she’s OD’d, she knew she was going to and a part of her kind of took over and did more heroin than she knew she should but she just didn’t care.

She’s been brought back to life several times.

She’s still alive, so that gives me hope she might have some insight or be able to try Iboga again with a better supportive context for integration.

Her 10 year old son is going to have a lot of work to do as an adult to heal from this.

EDIT: as stated above, I belive in drug legalization with tax revenue going to Support free access to trauma healing centers for everyone along with an educational program that helps people understand the link between trauma and addiction.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#255

Post by rusk »

justinclift wrote: post #252
rusk wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it was very clearly billed as a non-binding referendum Was it though? It seems to me that many very clearly consider it to be binding, though ridiculously the actual meaning is ambiguous.

> Was it though? Errr yes? That was the whole point. The general concept I had of it was along the lines of "Lets see what the general opinion is, so if there's a large majority one way or another we'll know if we need to look into it". The non-binding bit was so they didn't have to _commit_ to actually doing anything, just in case.

If that was the case it would have been called a plebiscite rather than a referendum.

That it was in actual fact a plebiscite to those who actually understand this nuance isn't relevant to the "Brexit means Brexit" hordes who don't. Or to your friends and neighbours looking on aghast ...

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#256

Post by Pica_soO »

gm-conspiracy wrote: post #222
fsloth wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This is a very US centric view but the war on drugs is very international." US basically dictates global policies in the block of countries not part of the soviet sphere of influence during the cold war. US defends it's position in the global community using every trick and leverage available. If something is illegal in the US you can be quite assured they will try to apply leverage to make it illegal everywhere els…

Like Germany and prostitution?

And the world did end- not

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#257

Post by anoncoward111 »

peterwwillis wrote: post #105
anoncoward111 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, we're screwed. I mean, thats my opinion at least. They'll continue dividing us one by one and limiting our rights and livelihoods. Take a look around-- how many of your friends have jumped multiple social classes in the past decade?

Who is this "they" you speak of? The citizens elected to govern? Or a shadowy cabal of unknown entities working in secret toward some ominous cause that ends in you being forced to do everything you don't want to do? Honestly, follow any "we're all screwed our government sucks" logic train to its conclusion and you hit one of two conclusions: A) oh shit, it's actually my fault along with everyone else's that we're in…

"They" refers to anyone who is quite rich and or powerful, and actively uses those resources against others.

So when you start to wonder, "hmm, I wonder why housing is so expensive relative to my income", or, "hmm, I wonder why that policeman gave me a $400 ticket for 'speeding'", or, "hmm, I wonder why those federal agents are killing children in Waco", or, "hmm, I wonder why no bankers went to jail for fraudulent mortgage practices in 2008"...

... I mean, if you ask yourself these questions, and you tell me that these things are happening because we elected people to do these things, then I don't precisely know where you got that notion.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#258

Post by TheArcane »

cr1895 wrote: post #197
TheArcane wrote: post #194

> The country is the second worldwide to legalise the drug's recreational use. What about the Netherlands?

It's not legalized in the Netherlands. It's not criminalized due to an official stance of tolerance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedogen It's complicated, and there's a lot of nuance to the Dutch model, but it is distinctly different from what you have now in Canada and in numerous US states.

That wiki link has a great example:

"To give an example in layman's terms: a mother may tell her child he can't have cookies from the cookie jar. The father, regardless of his beliefs, can't tell the child it's okay to have a cookie as that would result in a conflict with the mother. If the father sees the child taking a cookie anyway, he may choose not to say anything. He may not want to punish or stop the child but can't condone the behaviour either. The father may act as if nothing had happened to avoid a conflict with both his beliefs and the mother. He "gedoogs" the behaviour."

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#259

Post by courtneycouch0 »

bitL wrote: post #170
pennaMan wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pandora's box was opened by the first sprouting seed of Cannabis on earth. The prohibition came after, so if anything we're talking about a pre-justice world, aren't we? >Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then?Why not accept all hard drugs, all sexual deviations, all violent or manipulative behaviors then? Because those things cause falsifiable and measurable…

> Because those things cause falsifiable and measurable harm to society. Cannabis use is by all measures benign while its prohibition actually causing real harm. There are unfortunately people that could be damaged by smoking weed, irreversibly, if their schizophrenia proclivity gets activated. Also the easy escape from problems is not in society's best interest - see the ongoing shaming for gaming, where boys are pu…

> There are unfortunately people that could be damaged by smoking weed, irreversibly

Perhaps peanuts should be made illegal. There are people that can be irreversibly damaged by consuming peanuts.

If we’re goi to be consistent and ban or regulate substances because there might be harm to an incredibly small minority then sadly there would be very very few legal foods, medications, etc. hell we should probably ban strobe lights as well.

On another note you’d probably be disappointed to hear research and use of hallucinogenic substances has been on a sharp rise. So it seems those wild times you’re fearful of are returning.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#260

Post by imesh »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #174
foolfoolz wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of this can be attributed to these drugs being used in a completely ad hoc manner. There's no usage guidelines on a bag of cocaine. There's no 'Active Ingredient' percentage listed. You dont know what it is. You can't compare it to another until you've had it. Any pill that's an upper is called 'molly' Somehow the vast majority of people who take legal hard drugs such as vicodin or dilaudid, don't overd…

> legal hard drugs such as vicodin Isn't vicodin designed in such a way that the secondary ingredient would kill you before you'd get high on the primary one?

It does work that way but I don't know if it was intentional, acetaminophen is a very valid anti-inflammatory and (non-opiod based) painkiller.
Post reply on HN