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

The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 197 posts

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#31

Post by acomjean »

McDiesel wrote: post #21
k-mcgrady wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> But there are some real issues to be worked out, as someone who had a friend sent to hospital after being hit by a stoned driver who blew through a stop sign. Whats the legal limit? Sorry that happened to your friend. Was it proven that the driver was stoned? If so I'm guessing they have an accurate way to measure it. Either way this is always going to be a problem. Look at the number of people killed by drunk dri…

The problem is the studies that show that MJ use is far less of an impact on driving than talking on a phone... The paranoia over stoned drivers is a little high (no pun intended) Not saying it should be ignored as an issue all together, but it seems to be the last issue the opposition can attach itself to and sound sane, and its getting a little carried away.

With self driving cars on the horizon it will at some point become a moot point.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#32

Post by nick_riviera »

techsupporter wrote: post #24
nick_riviera wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally watching my sister-in-law destroy her life and brain with the stuff and having a car written off because someone was fucked up on it and crashed into me, I'd rather it stayed illegal. Also it's not other people's right to inflict the rancid shitty smell upon me is it? (Yes I know that goes for smoking and alcohol too and I'd be quite happy to do away with them as well) Edit: downvoters, please explain rat…

That sounds an awful lot like collective punishment, something I almost always oppose. On the other hand, I definitely sympathize with the smell, the obnoxious behavior, the litter, and even the smoke itself. Were I a supreme dictator with no care for the needs of my subjects and having some method of enforcing 100% compliance, I'd ban all smoking and public displays of alcohol and sleep soundly at night. Unfortunate…

Yes I know this is idealist. I'd like people to act responsibly and consider others but to be honest this is beyond a not insignificant proportion of the population. I live in the UK. This class of drug is banned and it should stay so. The police don't go around locking people up - they do slap wrists and that keeps it under control.

When it gets too much or puts people in danger, through drug driving or mindless paranoia caused violence, they have the power to say "stop - that's enough" and solve the problem there and then through the courts. If legalised, that power diminishes into a non-absolute method of control.

We have laws against drinking and smoking in certain places as well already and things have improved massively since these were introduced.

The deep problem we all know, and this is written in many a paper freely googlable, is that smoking, alcohol and drug consumption have observable and statistically obvious negative health effects and negative effects on society. In the UK, this means healthcare budget being sucked up.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#33

Post by llllllllllll »

nick_riviera wrote: post #20
k-mcgrady wrote: post #3

I sincerely believe the only people who are against legalisation of marijuana are those who don't understand it's effects on a person and those who are easily susceptible to propaganda and fail to do their own research on the subject. I can't think of even one legitimate reason for it's prohibition. If you argue for prohibition based on health consequences or risk to society you should also be arguing for prohibition…

Anecdotally watching my sister-in-law destroy her life and brain with the stuff and having a car written off because someone was fucked up on it and crashed into me, I'd rather it stayed illegal. Also it's not other people's right to inflict the rancid shitty smell upon me is it? (Yes I know that goes for smoking and alcohol too and I'd be quite happy to do away with them as well) Edit: downvoters, please explain rat…

I'll explain it, though I didn't downvote you.

Marijuana is illegal right now. That didn't stop that bad stuff from happening to you or your sister. Turn it into a public health issue and people like your sister-in-law will have more resources to get help.

I also have skepticism that marijuana caused someone to crash into your car. It has not been proven that weed has much if any effect on driving ability, especially for those experienced with the drug.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#34

Post by [deleted] »

nick_riviera wrote: post #26
obituary_latte wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily it's not your right to inflict your views on the rest of us. It is your right to vacate an area that has an odor you disagree with though.

Let's use an analogy: What if someone was burning a tyre in my neighbour's garden directly affecting my health?

[deleted]

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#35

Post by sillysaurus3 »

Alex3917 wrote: post #22
acomjean wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legalize it, But there are some real issues to be worked out, as someone who had a friend sent to hospital after being hit by a stoned driver who blew through a stop sign. Whats the legal limit? I'm not sure how easy it is to detect if someone is "under the influence" as the drug is detectable for weeks in the blood (in this case the join was in the car).

The risk of driving after using marijuana is comparable to the risk of driving after using penicillin, which isn't illegal. Furthermore, the risk is far less than the risk of driving at .08, which is legal in most states. While I'm not advocating that people drive while stoned, it's not clear that there is a legal problem that needs to be solved.

Marijuana delays reaction time. Does penicillin?

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#36

Post by k-mcgrady »

McDiesel wrote: post #21
k-mcgrady wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> But there are some real issues to be worked out, as someone who had a friend sent to hospital after being hit by a stoned driver who blew through a stop sign. Whats the legal limit? Sorry that happened to your friend. Was it proven that the driver was stoned? If so I'm guessing they have an accurate way to measure it. Either way this is always going to be a problem. Look at the number of people killed by drunk dri…

The problem is the studies that show that MJ use is far less of an impact on driving than talking on a phone... The paranoia over stoned drivers is a little high (no pun intended) Not saying it should be ignored as an issue all together, but it seems to be the last issue the opposition can attach itself to and sound sane, and its getting a little carried away.

Even if that's true the drugs effect is different on each person and the amount you take will vary the effect it has on your driving ability. A couple of puffs probably won't make a difference. But you can also take enough that it's hard to even get out of a chair. The easiest solution and one that should appease everyone would be a total ban on driving within 12/24 hours of last taking marijuana imo.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#37

Post by fred_durst »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #3

I sincerely believe the only people who are against legalisation of marijuana are those who don't understand it's effects on a person and those who are easily susceptible to propaganda and fail to do their own research on the subject. I can't think of even one legitimate reason for it's prohibition. If you argue for prohibition based on health consequences or risk to society you should also be arguing for prohibition…

I'll bring up a point here only because I feel like the HN crowd is on the younger side. Its not until your late 20's and really 30's that you start to find out about and see people you've known in the past that were intelligent, productive people who's lives have been completely destroyed due to their drug addictions. And yes, I've certainly had friends who are 40+ and barely hold down a job and live off friends and family because they were/are addicted to marijuana. It definitely happens, don't kid yourself.

I don't know if the correct solution is to criminalize it, but please keep in mind that drugs change who you are. That is truly the unique thing about them compared to other addictions. And again, if you think heavy marijuana use doesn't change a person, you don't know any heavy marijuana users.

For example, banning alcohol and marijuana probably isn't going to work, but selling bottles of cheap vodka at the grocery store 24/7 is setting up a lot of people who are trying to get clean to fail.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#38

Post by nick_riviera »

cobrausn wrote: post #30
nick_riviera wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally watching my sister-in-law destroy her life and brain with the stuff and having a car written off because someone was fucked up on it and crashed into me, I'd rather it stayed illegal. Also it's not other people's right to inflict the rancid shitty smell upon me is it? (Yes I know that goes for smoking and alcohol too and I'd be quite happy to do away with them as well) Edit: downvoters, please explain rat…

Because you basically just advocated prohibition of alcohol, drugs, and tobacco, and included in your list of reasons 'I don't like the smell'. Never mind that prohibition was already tried and already failed.

Well I'll add one more:

The physical and mental health problems and associated healthcare burden.

This is not insignificant and totally shrugged off by the "pro-legalisation" side of things.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#39

Post by obituary_latte »

techsupporter wrote: post #29
obituary_latte wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily it's not your right to inflict your views on the rest of us. It is your right to vacate an area that has an odor you disagree with though.

In this case, I disagree. A couple of opposing views: - What if I was in an area first, say a park? Does the right to light up trump my right to be somewhere in that case? - What if I have to be there? Does the right to light up mean that I miss my bus because I'm walking to another stop or do I just have to live with it if there is no other nearby stop?

Well, it depends on what the rules are. If you are in a park (first, last, doesn't matter) and someone has the right and chooses to exercise that right to light up, you can either move, ask them to move, or deal with it. Same applies to the bus stop.

Re: The New York Times Calls for Marijuana Legalization

#40

Post by eli »

pessimizer wrote: post #25

General legalization and amnesty is the way to go. This piecemeal recreational legalization is only happening in the whitest states in the country, and not helping the primary victims of the drug war.

Keep your eye on DC. It is neither the "whitest" nor even a "state" but it does have a full legalization ballot initiative set for November that will almost certainly pass if Congress doesn't block it.
Post reply on HN