7 ms·

> The absence of significant adverse consequences is especially striking given the sometimes dire predictions made by legalization opponents. No kidding - let

> The absence of significant adverse consequences is especially striking given the sometimes dire predictions made by legalization opponents. No kidding - let me just quote Kofi Annan's excellent essay on the subject (published a couple of months before the UN failed to course correct at UNGASS 2016): "Nowhere is this divorce between rhetoric and reality more evident than in the formulation of global drug policies, where too often emotions and ideology rather than evidence have prevailed." http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/kofi-annan-on-why-drug-bans-are-ineffective-a-1078402.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/kofi-annan-on-why-...

FuckOffNeemo 10y ago
Your quote nails my sentiment on the matter of drug legalisation. The conversation shown here within HN is fascinating, from an outliers perspective. The benefits and effects of the legalisation of Marijuana I would assume, have been well documented by now though the quantity of these reports, I would assume to be small in number. Surely it's a benefit if the number of these reports and articles were increased. Surely the reports from Canberra (Australia, where plant ownership is legalised) and Amsterdam are quite numerous? And they would back the sentiment shown in this article? The argument about the 'divorce between rhetoric and reality' around drug policy has enough merit to renew the conversation on drug legalisation by it's self. Once that conversation begins, the number of reports and articles such as this will increase and potential arguments about a single report being either biased or anecdotal will be minimised as the scientific method is leveraged. The conversation should steered towards why drug policy is inaccurate and what we need to do to have laws and systems changed, socially and politically, to cater for more evidence based studies on drug use. Edit: A TED talk on the topic that I found interesting. https://www.ted.com/talks/ethan_nadelmann_why_we_need_to_end_the_war_on_drugs?language=en https://www.ted.com/talks/ethan_nadelmann_why_we_need_to_end... Disclaimer: occasionally I like to smoke weed. So by the sentiment of everyone here, I'm probably biased and my arguments should be subjected to criticism and be entirely disregarded as lacking merit. (see what I did there? ;-D)
- gcb0 10y ago
  you failed to read the one paragraph conclusion. both pro and cons arguments were wrong. absolutely nothing relevant has changed. crime didnt go up nor down. neither did taxes. etc. nada. also, ted is only relevant to rich pot heads ;)
  - timv 10y ago
    Actually, though the article's summary claimed to find no noticeable change, the section on taxes says: One area where legal marijuana has reaped unexpectedly large benefits is state tax revenue.
    - AstralStorm 10y ago
      Which means more money to invest in the country fixing issues, hopefully, instead of being wasted on mansions for corrupt politicians or spent recklessly. For example, issues that cause crime. Wouldn't that be nice? Or at least advancement of science and engineering. Someone gets to fund the space program.
      - Beltiras 10y ago
        Get high so someone else can go high?
      - random_upvoter 10y ago
        OTOH once marijuana is legal it is just another crop and I would expect to price to drop to near zero. Combined with the fact that you hardly need kilograms of it, I wouldn't get too excited about future tax revenue.
        aianus 10y ago
        I would argue otherwise. Alcohol (especially wine) is very easy and cheap to make at home but the Liquor Control Board of Ontario still managed to pull in $1.8 billion last year taxing it.
baldfat 10y ago
Pot is different then Cocaine and Heroine in terms of impact on society and the economy. Can't search for support for the reality, but several cities that had drug free zones had closed them due to harm that is done to the individual and those around them.
- TelmoMenezes 10y ago
  A counter-example is Portugal, that had a severe heroin problem in the 80s and solved it by decriminalizing all drugs. It is true that cocaine and heroin are very serious drugs that can do a lot of harm. It is also true that prohibition and the prosecution of users only seems to make matters worse. For some scientific evidence in cartoon format :) : http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comics_en/rat-park/ http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comics_en/rat-park/
  - baldfat 10y ago
    Drugs are still illegal and dealers and traffickers are still put in prison. People as user are brought to specific court called "Discussion Panels." Repeated users are given various forms of treatment. Recreation users can also have community service and fines. Never work in USA though since the Police work with the Healthcare system and so if a offender stops going to treatment at their doctor's office the office calls the Police and the Police give notice to the user. They also give clean needles (could happen in certain states) and crack pipes (never). There is definitly something there that could help in US but I can't imagine in my lifetime anything even close to this happening across the country. Personally I think we do focus on users more then dealers for police action and I wish we could get to a point where we can stop the neighborhood dealers working in almost every neighborhood in my city.
    - TelmoMenezes 10y ago
      > Drugs are still illegal and dealers and traffickers are still put in prison. You are correct, but there are a few nuances. An important one is that methadone started being provided to treat heroin addiction. Providing a pharmacological-grade opiate to make the addict's life bearable was an important shift in mentality. It also worked really well in solving the actual social problems caused by hard street drugs. I tell you this from first-person observation. I grew up in Portugal and have several friends from the generation before mine, which was the one strongly affected by rampant heroin addiction. > Never work in USA though since the Police work with the Healthcare system [...] To my European ears this sounds extra-creepy. Are people in the US ok with this sort of thing overall? On a side note: Portugal is the most religious country in the EU. More than 80% of the population identify as catholic. Drug decriminalization was achieved by subtle political action, not as a result of overwhelming public opinion. Portugal is in no way more liberal than the US. So maybe there's some hope for rational policy. Another side note: this "subtle action" holds to this day. My guess is that most Portuguese citizens are not aware of the extent of decriminalization. I have had several Portuguese people look at me in disbelief when I tell them that it is no longer a crime to consume any drug in Portugal, including heroin and cocaine. The New York Times talks about drug decriminalization in Portugal more than the Portuguese press does. I suspect this is somewhat intentional.

FuckOffNeemo 10y ago

Your quote nails my sentiment on the matter of drug legalisation. The conversation shown here within HN is fascinating, from an outliers perspective. The benefits and effects of the legalisation of Marijuana I would assume, have been well documented by now though the quantity of these reports, I would assume to be small in number. Surely it's a benefit if the number of these reports and articles were increased. Surely the reports from Canberra (Australia, where plant ownership is legalised) and Amsterdam are quite numerous? And they would back the sentiment shown in this article? The argument about the 'divorce between rhetoric and reality' around drug policy has enough merit to renew the conversation on drug legalisation by it's self. Once that conversation begins, the number of reports and articles such as this will increase and potential arguments about a single report being either biased or anecdotal will be minimised as the scientific method is leveraged. The conversation should steered towards why drug policy is inaccurate and what we need to do to have laws and systems changed, socially and politically, to cater for more evidence based studies on drug use. Edit: A TED talk on the topic that I found interesting. https://www.ted.com/talks/ethan_nadelmann_why_we_need_to_end_the_war_on_drugs?language=en https://www.ted.com/talks/ethan_nadelmann_why_we_need_to_end... Disclaimer: occasionally I like to smoke weed. So by the sentiment of everyone here, I'm probably biased and my arguments should be subjected to criticism and be entirely disregarded as lacking merit. (see what I did there? ;-D)

gcb0 10y ago
you failed to read the one paragraph conclusion. both pro and cons arguments were wrong. absolutely nothing relevant has changed. crime didnt go up nor down. neither did taxes. etc. nada. also, ted is only relevant to rich pot heads ;)
- timv 10y ago
  Actually, though the article's summary claimed to find no noticeable change, the section on taxes says: One area where legal marijuana has reaped unexpectedly large benefits is state tax revenue.
  - AstralStorm 10y ago
    Which means more money to invest in the country fixing issues, hopefully, instead of being wasted on mansions for corrupt politicians or spent recklessly. For example, issues that cause crime. Wouldn't that be nice? Or at least advancement of science and engineering. Someone gets to fund the space program.
    - Beltiras 10y ago
      Get high so someone else can go high?
    - random_upvoter 10y ago
      OTOH once marijuana is legal it is just another crop and I would expect to price to drop to near zero. Combined with the fact that you hardly need kilograms of it, I wouldn't get too excited about future tax revenue.
      - aianus 10y ago
        I would argue otherwise. Alcohol (especially wine) is very easy and cheap to make at home but the Liquor Control Board of Ontario still managed to pull in $1.8 billion last year taxing it.

baldfat 10y ago

Pot is different then Cocaine and Heroine in terms of impact on society and the economy. Can't search for support for the reality, but several cities that had drug free zones had closed them due to harm that is done to the individual and those around them.

TelmoMenezes 10y ago
A counter-example is Portugal, that had a severe heroin problem in the 80s and solved it by decriminalizing all drugs. It is true that cocaine and heroin are very serious drugs that can do a lot of harm. It is also true that prohibition and the prosecution of users only seems to make matters worse. For some scientific evidence in cartoon format :) : http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comics_en/rat-park/ http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comics_en/rat-park/
- baldfat 10y ago
  Drugs are still illegal and dealers and traffickers are still put in prison. People as user are brought to specific court called "Discussion Panels." Repeated users are given various forms of treatment. Recreation users can also have community service and fines. Never work in USA though since the Police work with the Healthcare system and so if a offender stops going to treatment at their doctor's office the office calls the Police and the Police give notice to the user. They also give clean needles (could happen in certain states) and crack pipes (never). There is definitly something there that could help in US but I can't imagine in my lifetime anything even close to this happening across the country. Personally I think we do focus on users more then dealers for police action and I wish we could get to a point where we can stop the neighborhood dealers working in almost every neighborhood in my city.
  - TelmoMenezes 10y ago
    > Drugs are still illegal and dealers and traffickers are still put in prison. You are correct, but there are a few nuances. An important one is that methadone started being provided to treat heroin addiction. Providing a pharmacological-grade opiate to make the addict's life bearable was an important shift in mentality. It also worked really well in solving the actual social problems caused by hard street drugs. I tell you this from first-person observation. I grew up in Portugal and have several friends from the generation before mine, which was the one strongly affected by rampant heroin addiction. > Never work in USA though since the Police work with the Healthcare system [...] To my European ears this sounds extra-creepy. Are people in the US ok with this sort of thing overall? On a side note: Portugal is the most religious country in the EU. More than 80% of the population identify as catholic. Drug decriminalization was achieved by subtle political action, not as a result of overwhelming public opinion. Portugal is in no way more liberal than the US. So maybe there's some hope for rational policy. Another side note: this "subtle action" holds to this day. My guess is that most Portuguese citizens are not aware of the extent of decriminalization. I have had several Portuguese people look at me in disbelief when I tell them that it is no longer a crime to consume any drug in Portugal, including heroin and cocaine. The New York Times talks about drug decriminalization in Portugal more than the Portuguese press does. I suspect this is somewhat intentional.