6 ms·

I live in Norway. While I'm happy about this vote, it remains to be seen how it will play out in practice. So far the Norwegian drug policy has been terrible —

by erokar 9y ago

I live in Norway. While I'm happy about this vote, it remains to be seen how it will play out in practice. So far the Norwegian drug policy has been terrible — police searches of homes and cars with questianble probable cause; routinely harassment of drug addicts by police/police policy of going after low hanging fruits to easily improve statistics; and severe penalty for drug-related crimes (> $150 fine for carrying 1 gram of marihuana, as much as 21 years in prison for smuggling marihuana). Norway has a long way to go. The parliment vote is promising, but as for now I'm cautiously optimistic about how it will play out in practice.

jrs95 9y ago
This is nearly as bad as in the U.S., although I assume you probably don't have the same racial component.
- erokar 9y ago
  Actually I think the U.S. is ahead of Norway here, as cannabis has been decriminalized in several states in the U.S. As to the racial component — Norway is not as racially diverse as the U.S., but if you are black you will be routinely stopped by police and interrogated on the street in Norway. This will not happen if you are white. I know of a university professor from Africa that experiences this several times a year — he has just resigned to the fact. On a diffrent note, Norway has a huge problem with drug-related deaths: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19/which-european-nation-suffers-most-drug-induced-deaths http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19/which-european-nati...
  - int_19h 9y ago
    I don't think we have any states where it has been decriminalized. It has been outright legalized in some, but most still have it illegal - and possession often results in prison time, not just fines. Of course, it's still illegal on the federal level regardless of the state, and you can run afoul of that (e.g. at an internal border control checkpoint).
    - eksu 9y ago
      Alaska for decades.
    - nsxwolf 9y ago
      Illinois decriminalized possession of up to 10 grams last year.
    - dvanduzer 9y ago
      I live in Colorado. Marijuana was slowly decriminalized before it was legalized. A handful of states stopped putting minorities into prison for marijuana. It's hard to argue that any of the states have applied a reasonable standard of justice for anyone convicted of these crimes prior to the laws changing.
    - chairmanwow 9y ago
      Not quite. North Carolina for instance has decriminalized carrying small amounts of Cannabis. The map in this article is particularly illuminating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalization_of_non-medical_cannabis_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalization_of_non-medic...
    - wpietri 9y ago
      I can't speak for all of California, but it's effectively decriminalized in San Francisco, and has been for a decade at least.
    - jknoepfler 9y ago
      The distinction is a legal one, but it's important if you're applying for a job or an apartment. A traffic ticket has very different ramifications than a criminal sentence. I live in a legal state, and I honestly can't imagine living someplace that still prohibits marijuana use by adults... I use edible marijuana pretty frequently while cooking and reading. As far as I can tell, it's just nice and improves my quality of life, like good food or good sex. The very idea of criminalization is so asinine that it's hard to wrap my head around.
  - corndoge 9y ago
    You can still receive jail time for possession of e.g. 1g of marijuana for personal use in states where it is decriminalized. "Decriminalized" just means it's a misdemeanor and not a felony under certain conditions and in certain quantities, but misdemeanors still carry significant penalties.
    - leesalminen 9y ago
      In New York State, “decriminalized” marijuana means the offense is a violation, which is less than a misdemeanor. It’s essentially a $100 ticket for simple possession under 28g. Anecdotally, I’ve found it quite easy to get these cases dismissed. They frequently don’t test the alleged substance because it’s too expensive for the state. So, the judge ends up dismissing the case due to lack of evidence.
      - corndoge 9y ago
        In my state it means a misdemeanor. Also anecdotally, it's not hard to get these cases dismissed here through a combination of a clean drug test and preemptive community service hours. But I have still spent time in jail for a case that was ultimately dismissed and the state law allows for significant (relative to the 'crime') prison sentences for simple possession, even though we are considered "decriminalized".
      - posterboy 9y ago
        why, if the test comes out positive, surely the plaintiff has to pay ..?
        buttcoinslol 9y ago
        The plaintiff is the state. The defendant should not be held responsible for financial costs incurred by the state while gathering evidence.
        posterboy 9y ago
        s/plaintiff/defendant/g # my bad
  - azernik 9y ago
    The racial component in the US is such a hot-button issue not just because of the degree of racial discrimination, but also because the size and non-immigrant status of the black minority here.
  - PhasmaFelis 9y ago
    > Actually I think the U.S. is ahead of Norway here, as cannabis has been decriminalized in several states in the U.S. Most states are still as bad as or worse than Norway, though. In terms of laws and regulation, US states are more like separate nations in many ways.
    - digi_owl 9y ago
      > US states are more like separate nations in many ways. Indeed, though less so than before the civil war. Thus Brexit is an interesting test case for seeing if EU is able to "disassemble" without bloodshed.
      - pjc50 9y ago
        That's going to depend entirely on the Irish border solution. I'm not sure it's a great test case given the total incompetence of how it's being handled.
  - paperpunk 9y ago
    Apropos of nothing, but you mentioning that brought up a memory of when I was in Helsinki this summer: I took a taxi back to the airport early in the morning and the taxi driver (a black man) asked me (white) to sit in the front rather than the back, otherwise he would get stopped by police. Not necessarily something I was expecting in Norway. But what do I know?
    - halflings 9y ago
      One reason why they might have asked you this is because working for services like Uber is illegal in Finland (Helsinki is not in Norway), and they might suspect that a darker skinned person driving with a white person at the back is more likely to be an Uber driver (Uber drivers are predominantly from an immigrant background, from personal experience). Still racial profiling, but maybe not as bad as being stopped for "only" being black.
      - edmccard 9y ago
        >they might suspect that a darker skinned person driving with a white person at the back is more likely to be an Uber driver I think in Finland official taxis say "TAKSI" and have a yellow sign on the roof, so maybe they might suspect any unofficial-looking car with a driver in the front and the sole passenger in the back as being an Uber.
      - AnssiH 9y ago
        > working for services like Uber is illegal in Finland (Helsinki is not in Norway) Not really true. However, you do need a taxi license, and many/most Uber drivers didn't have one.
    - Someone 9y ago
      Not that Helsinki is in Finland, apparently :-)
    - AnssiH 9y ago
      It is standard for taxi passengers to sit in the front in Finland, though.
  - tw04 9y ago
    You do realize the current administration is actively trying to go after state governments that have decriminalized marijuana, right? http://www.newsweek.com/will-jeff-sessions-medical-marijuana-718676 http://www.newsweek.com/will-jeff-sessions-medical-marijuana...
ssalka 9y ago
> it remains to be seen how it will play out in practice Drug policy reform is extremely difficult to carry out well, mostly due to the social impact it has on both the populace and governing bodies - adjustment doesn't happen immediately and are likely to be bumps in the road. From the sound of the article, it sounds like Norway is headed in the right direction, though it may take everyone a bit to get on the right path. Still, this is already happening elsewhere in the world[1], and I think it will continue to happen more as time goes on. I don't know many details of Norway's drug policies (nor Portugal's, for that matter), but it makes sense that decriminalization + treatment, when implemented well, will generally far exceed incarceration when it comes to overall effectiveness and impact on reducing drug abuse, crime, and deaths. I hear people are pretty happy in Norway (compared to the states, at least), but police harassment is never any fun - I hope things improve there. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radic...
- bksenior 9y ago
  Please, nobody would ever know how difficult it is. The problem is that a century of draconian enforcement has created a MASSIVE private complex that feeds and pays so many people that the interests have rooted in the system. Don't be fooled, the lack of progress is almost exclusively a product of vested interest in enforcement and this vague intellectual question of "how?"
  - tyfon 9y ago
    In Norway it's even worse. We generally have very few special interests groups, however the narcotics police have formed their own political group that constantly writes for news papers, joins debates and speaks to the politicians, and their agenda is similar to the reefer madness stuff from the US every time someone remotely threatens their jobs (via deregulation / legalisation). This _is_ a step in the right direction though.
    - pimeys 9y ago
      In Finland we have seemingly corrupted narcotic police and their chief is now going to jail for taking bribes, smuggling drugs and hiding huge amounts of money in his backyard. And then we have the non-profits with crazy fanatical leaders writing texts to newspapers about how a single joint destroyed kids life. We have crazy fanatical ideologies about drugs, alcohol and tobacco. On the other side we have growing wealth gaps and people drinking and combining it with whatever pill is the cheapest on the corner. The government has a monopoly for selling alcohol, which is created to protect the people from the harms of alcohol and on the other hand needs to gain profit and sell more of the product. Drugs might become a problem for a person, but how the society reacts to them currently is not really helping anybody.
pi-rat 9y ago
I also live in Norway, my SO is a psychologist specialising in addiction, according to her this is a big step in the right direction. She routinely have patients motivated to quit, who make big progress during treatment, who manage to turn their life around, they've broken contact with the "drug community", they might even have gotten to a point where they can hold a job, and have gotten a job, some might have started a family, they're essentially on the home run. Then BAM!, out of the blue, the glacially slow moving judicial system calls them to court, and charge them for their past transgressions from ~2 years ago. If they're really unlucky they got caught with 2-3 days (of personal use) worth of drugs - enough to qualify them as a dealer and several years in jail. Nothing ruins a successful treatment and break from your past like getting knocked into jail with your old pals for a few years. It happens again and again and again, it's GIANT waste of resources.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  Australian here. I was charged with two counts of Traffic Controlled Drug and one count of Possess Prescription Drug without lawful excuse on the 28th of December 2012. I was carrying only a little bit more that I might typically be in possession of because it was three days before new years eve. It took two years three months to sort it out in the courts. Fortunately I got referred to a barrister who managed to get the charges dropped. I got all my cash back from the police, that was a pleasant experience. Point being, in those two years and three months I cleaned myself up, got a job and was ready to buy a house, but still had the charges hanging over me. My god, what a stress.
  - mlvljr 9y ago
    Sounds like a story from Rake, ..mate :)

by erokar 9y ago

jrs95 9y ago

This is nearly as bad as in the U.S., although I assume you probably don't have the same racial component.

erokar 9y ago
Actually I think the U.S. is ahead of Norway here, as cannabis has been decriminalized in several states in the U.S. As to the racial component — Norway is not as racially diverse as the U.S., but if you are black you will be routinely stopped by police and interrogated on the street in Norway. This will not happen if you are white. I know of a university professor from Africa that experiences this several times a year — he has just resigned to the fact. On a diffrent note, Norway has a huge problem with drug-related deaths: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19/which-european-nation-suffers-most-drug-induced-deaths http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19/which-european-nati...
- int_19h 9y ago
  I don't think we have any states where it has been decriminalized. It has been outright legalized in some, but most still have it illegal - and possession often results in prison time, not just fines. Of course, it's still illegal on the federal level regardless of the state, and you can run afoul of that (e.g. at an internal border control checkpoint).
  - eksu 9y ago
    Alaska for decades.
  - nsxwolf 9y ago
    Illinois decriminalized possession of up to 10 grams last year.
  - dvanduzer 9y ago
    I live in Colorado. Marijuana was slowly decriminalized before it was legalized. A handful of states stopped putting minorities into prison for marijuana. It's hard to argue that any of the states have applied a reasonable standard of justice for anyone convicted of these crimes prior to the laws changing.
  - chairmanwow 9y ago
    Not quite. North Carolina for instance has decriminalized carrying small amounts of Cannabis. The map in this article is particularly illuminating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalization_of_non-medical_cannabis_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalization_of_non-medic...
  - wpietri 9y ago
    I can't speak for all of California, but it's effectively decriminalized in San Francisco, and has been for a decade at least.
  - jknoepfler 9y ago
    The distinction is a legal one, but it's important if you're applying for a job or an apartment. A traffic ticket has very different ramifications than a criminal sentence. I live in a legal state, and I honestly can't imagine living someplace that still prohibits marijuana use by adults... I use edible marijuana pretty frequently while cooking and reading. As far as I can tell, it's just nice and improves my quality of life, like good food or good sex. The very idea of criminalization is so asinine that it's hard to wrap my head around.
- corndoge 9y ago
  You can still receive jail time for possession of e.g. 1g of marijuana for personal use in states where it is decriminalized. "Decriminalized" just means it's a misdemeanor and not a felony under certain conditions and in certain quantities, but misdemeanors still carry significant penalties.
  - leesalminen 9y ago
    In New York State, “decriminalized” marijuana means the offense is a violation, which is less than a misdemeanor. It’s essentially a $100 ticket for simple possession under 28g. Anecdotally, I’ve found it quite easy to get these cases dismissed. They frequently don’t test the alleged substance because it’s too expensive for the state. So, the judge ends up dismissing the case due to lack of evidence.
    - corndoge 9y ago
      In my state it means a misdemeanor. Also anecdotally, it's not hard to get these cases dismissed here through a combination of a clean drug test and preemptive community service hours. But I have still spent time in jail for a case that was ultimately dismissed and the state law allows for significant (relative to the 'crime') prison sentences for simple possession, even though we are considered "decriminalized".
    - posterboy 9y ago
      why, if the test comes out positive, surely the plaintiff has to pay ..?
      - buttcoinslol 9y ago
        The plaintiff is the state. The defendant should not be held responsible for financial costs incurred by the state while gathering evidence.
        posterboy 9y ago
        s/plaintiff/defendant/g # my bad
- azernik 9y ago
  The racial component in the US is such a hot-button issue not just because of the degree of racial discrimination, but also because the size and non-immigrant status of the black minority here.
- PhasmaFelis 9y ago
  > Actually I think the U.S. is ahead of Norway here, as cannabis has been decriminalized in several states in the U.S. Most states are still as bad as or worse than Norway, though. In terms of laws and regulation, US states are more like separate nations in many ways.
  - digi_owl 9y ago
    > US states are more like separate nations in many ways. Indeed, though less so than before the civil war. Thus Brexit is an interesting test case for seeing if EU is able to "disassemble" without bloodshed.
    - pjc50 9y ago
      That's going to depend entirely on the Irish border solution. I'm not sure it's a great test case given the total incompetence of how it's being handled.
- paperpunk 9y ago
  Apropos of nothing, but you mentioning that brought up a memory of when I was in Helsinki this summer: I took a taxi back to the airport early in the morning and the taxi driver (a black man) asked me (white) to sit in the front rather than the back, otherwise he would get stopped by police. Not necessarily something I was expecting in Norway. But what do I know?
  - halflings 9y ago
    One reason why they might have asked you this is because working for services like Uber is illegal in Finland (Helsinki is not in Norway), and they might suspect that a darker skinned person driving with a white person at the back is more likely to be an Uber driver (Uber drivers are predominantly from an immigrant background, from personal experience). Still racial profiling, but maybe not as bad as being stopped for "only" being black.
    - edmccard 9y ago
      >they might suspect that a darker skinned person driving with a white person at the back is more likely to be an Uber driver I think in Finland official taxis say "TAKSI" and have a yellow sign on the roof, so maybe they might suspect any unofficial-looking car with a driver in the front and the sole passenger in the back as being an Uber.
    - AnssiH 9y ago
      > working for services like Uber is illegal in Finland (Helsinki is not in Norway) Not really true. However, you do need a taxi license, and many/most Uber drivers didn't have one.
  - Someone 9y ago
    Not that Helsinki is in Finland, apparently :-)
  - AnssiH 9y ago
    It is standard for taxi passengers to sit in the front in Finland, though.
- tw04 9y ago
  You do realize the current administration is actively trying to go after state governments that have decriminalized marijuana, right? http://www.newsweek.com/will-jeff-sessions-medical-marijuana-718676 http://www.newsweek.com/will-jeff-sessions-medical-marijuana...

ssalka 9y ago

> it remains to be seen how it will play out in practice Drug policy reform is extremely difficult to carry out well, mostly due to the social impact it has on both the populace and governing bodies - adjustment doesn't happen immediately and are likely to be bumps in the road. From the sound of the article, it sounds like Norway is headed in the right direction, though it may take everyone a bit to get on the right path. Still, this is already happening elsewhere in the world[1], and I think it will continue to happen more as time goes on. I don't know many details of Norway's drug policies (nor Portugal's, for that matter), but it makes sense that decriminalization + treatment, when implemented well, will generally far exceed incarceration when it comes to overall effectiveness and impact on reducing drug abuse, crime, and deaths. I hear people are pretty happy in Norway (compared to the states, at least), but police harassment is never any fun - I hope things improve there. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radic...

bksenior 9y ago
Please, nobody would ever know how difficult it is. The problem is that a century of draconian enforcement has created a MASSIVE private complex that feeds and pays so many people that the interests have rooted in the system. Don't be fooled, the lack of progress is almost exclusively a product of vested interest in enforcement and this vague intellectual question of "how?"
- tyfon 9y ago
  In Norway it's even worse. We generally have very few special interests groups, however the narcotics police have formed their own political group that constantly writes for news papers, joins debates and speaks to the politicians, and their agenda is similar to the reefer madness stuff from the US every time someone remotely threatens their jobs (via deregulation / legalisation). This _is_ a step in the right direction though.
  - pimeys 9y ago
    In Finland we have seemingly corrupted narcotic police and their chief is now going to jail for taking bribes, smuggling drugs and hiding huge amounts of money in his backyard. And then we have the non-profits with crazy fanatical leaders writing texts to newspapers about how a single joint destroyed kids life. We have crazy fanatical ideologies about drugs, alcohol and tobacco. On the other side we have growing wealth gaps and people drinking and combining it with whatever pill is the cheapest on the corner. The government has a monopoly for selling alcohol, which is created to protect the people from the harms of alcohol and on the other hand needs to gain profit and sell more of the product. Drugs might become a problem for a person, but how the society reacts to them currently is not really helping anybody.

pi-rat 9y ago

I also live in Norway, my SO is a psychologist specialising in addiction, according to her this is a big step in the right direction. She routinely have patients motivated to quit, who make big progress during treatment, who manage to turn their life around, they've broken contact with the "drug community", they might even have gotten to a point where they can hold a job, and have gotten a job, some might have started a family, they're essentially on the home run. Then BAM!, out of the blue, the glacially slow moving judicial system calls them to court, and charge them for their past transgressions from ~2 years ago. If they're really unlucky they got caught with 2-3 days (of personal use) worth of drugs - enough to qualify them as a dealer and several years in jail. Nothing ruins a successful treatment and break from your past like getting knocked into jail with your old pals for a few years. It happens again and again and again, it's GIANT waste of resources.

TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
Australian here. I was charged with two counts of Traffic Controlled Drug and one count of Possess Prescription Drug without lawful excuse on the 28th of December 2012. I was carrying only a little bit more that I might typically be in possession of because it was three days before new years eve. It took two years three months to sort it out in the courts. Fortunately I got referred to a barrister who managed to get the charges dropped. I got all my cash back from the police, that was a pleasant experience. Point being, in those two years and three months I cleaned myself up, got a job and was ready to buy a house, but still had the charges hanging over me. My god, what a stress.
- mlvljr 9y ago
  Sounds like a story from Rake, ..mate :)