How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom • Hacker News Board

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#41

Post by mc32 » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 3:57 PM UTC

kennywinker wrote: post #30

mc32 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is more like someone owning a liquor store selling to underage kids, thus breaking the law losing his license then getting denied a job at distillery for prior lapse of judgement.

It doesn't sound like that at all to me. In fact, it sounds a lot more like getting caught drinking underage, and then getting denied a job at a distillery. If we're being precise, it sounds like getting caught drinking when you're 20, then a few years later the drinking age is lowered to 19 but you still get denied a job at a distillery.

More apt would be getting caught making moonshine and getting denied a job at a distillery. The point is the same. Prior bad judgement may result in diminished future outlook.

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#42

Post by pakled_engineer » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 3:58 PM UTC

Here activists called legalization the new prohibition because of all the regulations like no dispensaries within a X distance from each other, a school, church ect so drove them out or cemented monopolies for the existing dispensaries which can raise prices. Then they created high barriers to entry with massive licensing fees and other regulations. This of course spawned online purchasing and delivery business models that's worked well for now, until more regulations on delivery.

One problem with the distributor in this story is he is constantly getting high off his own supply while in care and control of a vehicle which makes nobody want to work with him. That's heatbag behavior asking for problems. His comment on firearms about pulling out a gun during an argument is also something only heatbags do, the guys with side arms on the farm he went to are only armed to deter getting jacked for their product not win arguments.

You can't have a record and operate a dispensary here either, which was designed to keep bikers and other org crime out but they get around this by partnering with somebody that has a clean record.

Also wondering why the guy in Colorado can't apply for a pardon if it was only for teenage possession. Friend in Seattle did that to erase his record and open a weed business.

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#43

Post by kbutler » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:01 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #18

MrsPeaches wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you really want someone with a shitload of existing drug connections, being the poster face for the industry you're trying to vanillify ? This seems like a poor choice of words at best.

Word choice is fine. Vanilla means plain, unremarkable, blends in well. To become an unremarkable part of the economy. Taking an altogether different meaning not fitting the context says more about your interpretive frame of reference.

Word choice is problematic:

"vanillify" (exceedingly rare, new jargon "to make bland" doesn't even show up in google ngrams) is too similar to "vilify" (to demonize) to use in a context of "to un-demonize". https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=vanillify&case...

"face of" or "poster boy for", rather than the mixed-up "poster face for". https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=poster+boy%2Cp...

But then, just because nobody says it that way isn't a reason not to...

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#44

Post by greenisland » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:01 PM UTC

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #36

greenisland wrote: post #10

I read the entire article. The man was duly convicted of a crime in Oklahoma. He broke the law, regardless of what anyone thinks. Fast forward to when selling dope in certain places is now legal and this guys want a piece of the action, but... he cannot legally do so because he's a convicted felon. Should we undo his conviction? No. He was tried fairly and found guilty based on the laws of the time and place. His fau…

I totally agree with you about this guy in particular. He is a felon, with a conviction relating to the industry he wants to work in. Don't let fraudsters become accountants, don't let illegal dealers become legal ones. But the problem is that there are a lot of white people who are guilty of the same offenses, who are currently operating businesses he isn't allowed to operate, but who were never convicted of those c…

What you say is likely very true, but has no bearing on this one man's case. This one man was found guilty and is now paying the price. Some will call foul. Some won't. I don't argue the fact that race relations in the US haven't been pretty and that many people were unfairly treated or even falsely convicted, but this particular man was found guilty of a crime he did commit and is now paying for his crimes. It doesn't matter that his white counterparts did the same and are selling legal dope. They didn't get convicted. This is the crux, not what's fair. He's a convict, they are not. Fair or not, he needs to move on and make something of himself before he becomes afoul of the law again and really ruins his life beyond what damage is already done. Nothing stops this guy from learning how to code and selling his software to the legal dope industry if he wants to be involved that badly.

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#45

Post by MrsPeaches » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:02 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #18

MrsPeaches wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you really want someone with a shitload of existing drug connections, being the poster face for the industry you're trying to vanillify ? This seems like a poor choice of words at best.

Word choice is fine. Vanilla means plain, unremarkable, blends in well. To become an unremarkable part of the economy. Taking an altogether different meaning not fitting the context says more about your interpretive frame of reference.

> Taking an altogether different meaning not fitting the context.

My comment was referring to the fact that the article is about black people being excluded from this new business opportunity.

From the article:

> For now, he explained, California plans to decide whether drug felons like the Distributor can participate in the medical market on a case-by-case basis...White males tend to do better when it’s subjective.

It was a pun to highlight/explore the question: do people feel prefer having white people sell marijuana? In this case my interpretation of the questions was "do you want a black face as the poster for an industry white males are taking over?"

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#46

Post by Retric » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:04 PM UTC

greenisland wrote: post #37

Retric wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is tacking on an extra penalty for breaking the law after the fact which is generally considered unconstitutional. Further, by living in city's poor black people end up with much harsher punishments for the same crimes. Which set's up cycles of negative consequences we are all stuck with. Picture this, you apply for a job but now all background checks are required by law to include speeding tickets which prevent…

A felony conviction is a far cry from a mere moving violation. A felony conviction means you cannot be trusted. Full stop. Selling dope is a choice. The man made a choice and paid for his actions. Should he now be allowed to profit from the same (now legal) action that got him barred in the first place? No. The legal dope industry, as shady as it is, has established laws that says "felons not welcome", and that's OK.…

Felony's where meant to mean something, but it's become a meaningless label.

Give it 20 years and do 5mph over the speed limit could easily be a felony. Hell you have likely committed a few hundred felony's of one type or another. (3 per day is BS, but several a year is common.)

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#47

Post by imgabe » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:07 PM UTC

ikeboy wrote: post #34

kennywinker wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you say is entirely logical, but omits the reality that as a black person in america you are vastly more likely to be arrested for drug crimes. Not more likely to DO drug crimes, just more likely to get caught. This means profiling and racist policing directly leads to economic exclusion. If the american dream is upward mobility, that means black people get a smaller shot at the american dream. But all tha…

This is just bad statistics. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/25/race-and-justice-much-m... >For example, all of these “equally likely to have used drugs” claims turn out to be that blacks and whites are equally likely to have “used drugs in the past year”, but blacks are far more likely to have used drugs in the past week – that is, more whites are only occasional users. That gives blacks many more opportunities to…

> Likewise, whites are more likely to use low-penalty drugs like hallucinogens, and blacks are more likely to use high-penalty drugs like crack cocaine

This raises a question about why drugs that whites are more likely to use are penalized less severely than drugs that blacks are more likely to use.

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#48

Post by pflats » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:09 PM UTC

ikeboy wrote: post #34

kennywinker wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you say is entirely logical, but omits the reality that as a black person in america you are vastly more likely to be arrested for drug crimes. Not more likely to DO drug crimes, just more likely to get caught. This means profiling and racist policing directly leads to economic exclusion. If the american dream is upward mobility, that means black people get a smaller shot at the american dream. But all tha…

This is just bad statistics. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/25/race-and-justice-much-m... >For example, all of these “equally likely to have used drugs” claims turn out to be that blacks and whites are equally likely to have “used drugs in the past year”, but blacks are far more likely to have used drugs in the past week – that is, more whites are only occasional users. That gives blacks many more opportunities to…

> Likewise, whites are more likely to use low-penalty drugs like hallucinogens, and blacks are more likely to use high-penalty drugs like crack cocaine.

Why is it, then, that crack cocaine is a high-penalty drug, and hallucinogens are low-penalty drugs?

(I leave this as an exercise to the reader.)

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#49

Post by knughit » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:11 PM UTC

traviswingo wrote: post #20

> But it can’t be someone who got caught. Which for the most part means it can’t be someone who is black. It's thinking like this that pisses me off. Henderson wasn't hired because of a record. Yes, racism still unfortunately exists, but in order to move towards an equal future we need to stop bringing it up and searching for problems where there are none. Fucking Buzzfeed and Huffington post are constantly using the…

Ignoring up problems won't fix them.

Re: How Black People Are Being Shut Out of America's Weed Boom

#50

Post by ikeboy » Fri, Mar 18, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #47

ikeboy wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just bad statistics. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/25/race-and-justice-much-m... >For example, all of these “equally likely to have used drugs” claims turn out to be that blacks and whites are equally likely to have “used drugs in the past year”, but blacks are far more likely to have used drugs in the past week – that is, more whites are only occasional users. That gives blacks many more opportunities to…

> Likewise, whites are more likely to use low-penalty drugs like hallucinogens, and blacks are more likely to use high-penalty drugs like crack cocaine This raises a question about why drugs that whites are more likely to use are penalized less severely than drugs that blacks are more likely to use.

He discusses this in the summary.

>It would be nice to say that this shows the criminal justice system is not disproportionately harming blacks, but unfortunately it doesn’t come anywhere close to showing anything of the sort. There are still many ways it can indirectly harm blacks without being explicitly racist. Anatole France famously said that “the law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich as well as poor people from begging for bread and sleeping under bridges”, and in the same way that the laws France cites, be they enforced ever so fairly, would still disproportionately target poor people, so other laws can, even when fairly enforced, target black people. The classic example of this is crack cocaine – a predominantly black drug – carrying a higher sentence than other whiter drugs. Even if the police are scrupulously fair in giving the same sentence to black and white cokeheads, the law will still have a disproportionate effect.

But note that this supports very different conclusions from what you'd think only knowing that blacks have higher penalty rates. Is it racist laws, or racist policemen? The response to each is going to be different; e.g. giving policemen "diversity training" or something only helps if they were the problem.