15 ms·
California moves to decriminalize use of magic mushrooms, other psychedelics
- aiunboxed 3y agoWondering what is next o_O
- allears 3y agopaywall.
- sexy_seedbox 3y agoKiwi Browser + Bypass Paywall
- SavageBeast 3y agoI have a good bit of experience with some of these drugs. These types of drugs absolutely have therapeutic use cases and its good people who need them will have easier access. HOWEVER - these are powerful drugs and making them more easily available to The Common Idiot is grossly negligent.
- rcoveson 3y agoFreedom for me, but not for thee Thou art a common idiot, see? Though I've tasted the fruit And seen that it's good I fear it won't suit you like prison would.
- AYBABTME 3y agoThat's a nice poem! Although I disagree. Therapeutic use: yes. These should be controlled substances.
- mptest 3y agoSeriously, people on a technical forum arguing for prohibition with the wealth of evidence showing it's a well intended failure at best, a farcical show to placate and win votes from ignorant sanctimonious puritans at worst? Tragic. At this point It's a way to funnel money that could go to addiction treatment to the DEA, money going to an unwinnable war to control adults who are going to do what they want. 5% of the global economy in the black market we could take from criminals and turn it towards the social good. Instead of violent cartels that will serve the need no matter what we could have taxed businesses with daily limits. "But ppl will do bad things". Tell me how that's worth the cost of the war on drugs? Shocking position. Please explain it to me how what cartels do is worth your desire to be sanctimonious?? The only thing we have to do to get huge financial and social benefits is give up your frankly childish notion that we should control uncontrollable substances and police adults in something that in most cases harms no one. Police adults who commit crimes on substances extra. Let adults make their own choices otherwise. The war on drugs and anyone still supporting it as a way of doing anything but throwing money in a fire pit are a joke.
- onetimeusename 3y agoDo you really feel that way? How about prohibition of possessing and manufacturing radioactive materials? Think of all the research consenting adults could be doing and all the medical uses but a bunch of anti-science puritans are keeping them from doing it.(sarcasm) I am assuming there is hardly anyone on the planet who thinks the public is able to make its own informed decisions about radioactive materials. So it's odd how instead of arguing the merits and costs of criminalization/decriminalization there is this argument that anyone who wants to limit drug use is an ignorant, corrupt puritan and that restriction has been generally a failure. There is a nuclear black market too and the spread of nuclear weapons has still happened. Does anyone think we should shut down IAEA because of its failures?
- superb_dev 3y agoThat is a huge false equivalency. Radioactive material has no use to the average person and has immensely more safety issues than psychedelics
- zarzavat 3y agoUnless “decriminalize” means something different in California, decriminalizing a drug exactly means that it’s a controlled substance, it’s still illegal to sell. It just means you are not throwing people in jail for personal possession. Whatever you think about mushrooms, jail is certainly more harmful than the mushrooms themselves.
- _blk 3y agoLooking at all the tranq zombies in CA, I strongly disagree with that last statement no matter the drug. Unfortunately, I'll have to concede that jail is likely not the right place either. I think we can all agree that those people need hope and something to live for long-term. Drugs have proven not to be that solution to everyone except those in their bondage. In that sense, I fail to see how decriminalization of possession is going to send anything but wrong signals. Kids don't do drugs, just keep them in your pockets. How's that sound if it was your kid?
- bobthepanda 3y agoThe real root problem is that we refuse to pay to treat any of the actual root causes of any of this, whether that is on the street or in a jail cell. The health system has a shortage of mental health and drug treatment spaces and practitioners, and what exists often isn't affordable to those who need it. At the same time, we don't pay for those things in prison either, and it's also expensive to have a bunch of disruptive, unhinged prisoners constantly needing to be contained after damaging stuff when they have an episode or whatever. Bail and sentencing reform was often kicked off by conservatives initially, because a low-tax state cannot afford the very expensive cost of locking up every single drug user. California has been sued multiple times over the fact that its prison system is chronically overcrowded, and lost at the Supreme Court level: https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/crim/overcrowding_080511.aspx https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/crim/overcrowding_080511.asp.... But there is no appetite to pay more to open new prisons, which are nearly impossible to site even if there was funding (do you want to live next to a prison?)
- anigbrowl 3y agoWhat qualifying process did you go through prior to first using them?
- kdmccormick 3y agoSeveral rounds of "culture fit" interviews I imagine ;)
- skidd0 3y agoSo because of 'idiots', anyone looking to experience the therapeutic effects should continue to carry the risk of jail time and a permanent record?
- dhritzkiv 3y agoMy reading of the parent comment suggests that they're in favour of decriminalizing them, but not permitting the commercial sale of them. Acquisition would then be achieved by e.g. prescriptions / medical studies, growing for personal use, or from "friends". The important thing is that no one is charged criminally for possession.
- skidd0 3y agoAh, that's not as bad. Still, I'd prefer full legalization. Commercial sale as well. The less risk, the better. Risk from still being illegal, from bad sources, from bad product.
- distract8901 3y agoIt's something that has both extremely positive and extremely negative effects. We should treat it like other dangerous medicines
- JoshTriplett 3y ago> We should treat it like other dangerous medicines We should decriminalize those, too.
- tux3 3y agoThe first step to protect adults from accidental poisonings with medicines is by making better safety caps, and storing them on a much higher shelf where adults cannot reach them But you cannot only rely on storing medicines up high and using adult-resistant caps to protect your adults. Also, it is just not possible to watch adults every second. So, other strategies need to be put in place to prevent your adults from gaining access to medicines.
- wyldfire 3y agoProbably couldn't go any worse than it has with firearms.
- electrondood 3y agoWhat are you on about? California's gun laws makes it the 3rd-lowest state in gun deaths per capita [0] https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-deaths-per-capita-by-state https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-deaths-...
- edgyquant 3y agoIf you think firearms couldn’t be a lot worse you’re out of touch with reality.
- wyldfire 3y agoThat's not what that says. It refers to unchecked drug use as not worse than firearms, not whether or not firearms could be worse than they are now.
- leet_thow 3y agoYou should know better than to criticize "progressive" policies online.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- babyshake 3y agoA huge amount of this IMO has to do with driving. Autonomous vehicles are a game changer in many respects, but one of them is making it safer for the "Common Idiot" to use mind altering substances more safely.
- nico 3y agoThis is pretty much the same excuse used to prevent full democracy from happening Hey, voting is great, helpful and powerful, but letting The Common Idiot vote is a slippery slope For the record, yes ideally we should have better education, especially around drugs and how to use them At the same time, anyone can buy a knife or scissors or plenty of toxic chemicals, and do a ton of harm (way more than with any psychedelics), how do you propose we regulate those?
- Mizoguchi 3y agoGrowing up in a communist regime I'm all in for democracy and freedom. Having experienced drug addiction while having a graduate degree I also believe regulation of drugs and alcohol is necessary. You think you are in control until that one day when you take it too far. If you don't have a strong support system of relatives and friends and access to good health care, there's no coming back from that hole.
- skidd0 3y agoA degree doesn't mean you're somehow less susceptible to addiction. The risk of addiction shouldn't prevent anyone else from choosing what they put in their own body.
- tux3 3y ago>A degree doesn't mean you're somehow less susceptible to addiction I could see this go either way. There are people who are, somehow, simply unaware of risks and not very interested in learning more. I'd expect at least some effect. Do you have any source for the claim?
- uoaei 3y agoI propose a hearty ban on bad-faith "do you have a source for that" questions directed at negative statements. If this community is to be science-based, it must adopt the position that the null hypothesis is valid until proven otherwise.
- 01100011 3y agoYeah I've had a mixed history with psychedelics. Imitation LSD(probably DOx on blotter) left me with panic attacks and HPPD around 16 years old. Later on I had great experiences with LSD, psilocybin and mescaline over a couple decades. Recently, a strong mushroom trip left me with months of spasmodic torticollis(violet head jerks to the side), migraines where I would lose half my vision, and seriously diminished my cognitive abilities. I don't think psychedelics should be illegal, but I don't think we should be encouraging folks to do them until we understand them more completely.
- highstep 3y agowhat strain of mushrooms?
- 01100011 3y agoI think it was either PF Redspore or Golden Teachers. Home grown but dried and kept in an oxygen free environment until use. Probably took around 5g dried but that's over 6-8 hours as I never eat them all at once. When I was doing 5g/night, I started getting the day-after headaches. Did them at least 4 times without long-term side effects until I got them.
- TotalCrackpot 3y agoMaybe you have some neurodegenerative disease that you think is mushrooms?
- laserbeam 3y agoThe article is not very clear about that. It does say that is decriminalizes posetion of limited quantities for adults, it requires that institutions research the drugs further, and does not decriminalize commercial sale. Obviously there's some amount of risk with these drugs and you don't want them to be widespread and consumed daily (like alcohol, which is also nasty). But you need such laws for medical institutions (of all sizes) to be able to touch the drugs. No one is being negligent here.
- faeriechangling 3y agoLong overdue. I’m becoming more and more inclined to think that the criminalization isn’t bad because of the side-effects of criminalization. I think the very INTENTION of criminalization, to reduce the consumption of these drugs, is harmful.
- inamberclad 3y agoYes, that's often the case. Many interests (alcohol, police, private prisons) gain revenue from all the 'drug crimes' that really shouldn't be treated as severely as they are. It's also a common excuse to arrest, search, and oppress minority groups while the affluent majority generally gets a pass.
- readthenotes1 3y agoThat's only half the story... I believe Stephen Brust said something like "Each law is an opportunity" (speaking from a criminal's viewpoint).
- mortureb 3y agoAnd honestly also from the cops perspective. It’s a way in.
- babyshake 3y agoThis is especially true for psychedelics. Psychedelics are very useful, but really should not be sold by some anonymous person in a park or alley who isn't providing any guard rails or guidance.
- ipaddr 3y agoThe worry is people relying on someone else with a title to make decisions who only have a fraction of information but people give themselves permission to turn off critical thinking. Getting from a park or alley people means you need to take responsibility because no one is looking out for you. In a store setting or expert setting many will blindly accept instructions designed for the average because someone sounds official (even if official is just trying to sell more product)
- bdevine 3y agoMy cynical take is that this will not make it past the Senate, due to Newsom leveraging himself into the discussion behind the scenes. His national political ambitions likely prevent him from taking a public stand on this issue, as he would were it to come to him to be signed.
- davidandgoliath 3y agoThe Senate already passed it, as per the article.
- jjulius 3y agoFrom the article: >Gov. Gavin Newsom will now decide the fate of Senate Bill 58... >The measure passed the Senate 21 to 14, with several Democrats opposing.
- bdevine 3y agoAh. It was paywalled and I foolishly assumed it was copy I read earlier about it passing the Assembly with it yet to be sent back to the Senate. That's what I get for assuming.
- tiahura 3y agoFinally! I know every time I travel to LA and SF my main impression is that there aren’t enough druggies around.
- coffeebeqn 3y agoYou’re seeing opioids and amphetamines
- kinakomochidayo 3y agoPsychedelics have anti-additive effects. Common ones like LSD, mushrooms, Ayahuasca have helped many people quit cigarettes, alcohol, and the stronger ones like Iboga help people get off of meth and opiates. Based on what you’ve said, you would actually support this.
- readthenotes1 3y agoDidn't work that way for 2 out of 2 of my family members. I would be curious what replicated studies have shown your claim though.
- lucasban 3y agohttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25586396/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25586396/ See the related studies section for additional examples
- kinakomochidayo 3y ago> Didn't work that way for 2 out of 2 of my family members. Set & Setting, dosage is important. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25586396/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25586396/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4286320/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4286320/ Personally for me, it helped me quit alcohol, cannabis, and even alleviated my diagnosed ADHD permanently so I quit taking my prescribed stimulant medications. I used it in a therapeutic environment, not with friends or at a party. After numerous Ayahuasca ceremonies, turns out my traumas/upbringing led to the addictions in the first place.
- discordance 3y agohttps://archive.is/oZYy9 https://archive.is/oZYy9
- photochemsyn 3y agoOne good idea I've heard is to reschedule pyschedelics to the same level that commonly used medications for things like ADHD, anti-depressants, etc. are, i.e. Schedule IV. The main effect really would be reducing the barriers to scientific study and clinical trials while retaining some basic barriers to reckless use by people who have no idea of issues such that the dose-response curve is more exponential than linear (e.g. the effect of 500 ug of LSD is not simply 5X the effect of 100 ug of LSD, etc.). A similar approach would be to only supply them in low-dose packages, which would also facilitate ease of microdosing approaches. Using psychedelics should be contemplated as something like driving a car - letting someone who has never driven a car get on the road with no training whatsoever is just not that great of an idea.
- clipsy 3y agoThat is how this sort of thing should be handled in a functional country -- unfortunately ours isn't, and even rescheduling cannabis to schedule III (as has been proposed) will inevitably be a massive political fight. Worse: the opponents of rescheduling often hypocritically use the lack of research to justify their opposition. These state-level laws, as awkward as they may occasionally be, open up an opportunity to build a fact-based case for rescheduling (or descheduling) drugs at the federal level in the longer term. I at least don't see any other realistic way of reaching that point.
- briHass 3y agoPoint of note that most of the ADHD drugs (stimulants, the ones that work) are Schedule II, which makes them a PITA to obtain, even with lawful prescriptions. Most opiates are in this category as well. Schedule IV is basically the benzos(Xanax)/z-drugs(Ambien), which is ludicrous considering drugs in that category aren't supposed to have much addiction potential. S3 drugs are mostly weak opiates in formulations that help prevent abuse and steroids. For purposes of studies, S1 is the only real deal breaker, because by definition, there are no medical uses for these drugs. The rest of the schedules are roughly equivalent in terms of PITA for studies and research, only nuance with dispensing to patients varies significantly.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- yellowapple 3y agoGood to see. Here in Nevada we had a chance to beat California to the punch, but the legislation got neutered to the point that it didn't even decriminalize anything - just established a committee to determine whether or not it should be decriminalized.
- Etrnl_President 3y agoNow lower taxes, start picking up poop, and enforcing property rights, and I might move back!
- intrasight 3y agoI think we're moving towards a place where lower taxes and enforcing property rights are mutually exclusive
- georgeecollins 3y agoYou don't have to lower the taxes, you just have to make the property taxes equal regardless of when you bought the property. While extremely unpopular, this would solve so many problems for California.
- gamblor956 3y agoThat would be the single largest tax break in U.S. history, and all of the benefits would go to the wealthy, who don't need it.
- astrange 3y agoWouldn't it be a tax increase? The car dealership near me would no longer pay $1000 a year in property tax.
- intrasight 3y agoNeither a decrease or increase overall - at least not in PA where reassessments must be revenue neutral. What is does do is create equity in taxation. Formula should be super simple: my taxes = total budget * my assessment / total assessments. But with corruption and spineless politicians ...
- intrasight 3y agoMany municipalities have that issue. It's an issue where I live also. Here the county does the reassessments and does so at their own schedule. It's been 12 years since the last one. But my point is that low property taxes create inequity because they are typically based upon "value to owner" and don't include "cost to society". The largest cost is unaccounted for - the cost to protect property rights. Your property is worth nothing to you if a thug could come and take it away.
- Mizoguchi 3y agoThis is exactly the type of policies you need to address a drug epidemic.
- seattle_spring 3y agoMushrooms and opiates have absolutely nothing in common.
- the_only_law 3y agoYou could tell these type of idiots that Tylenol is a drug and they’d be up in arms trying to have it criminalized.
- electrondood 3y agoNuanced issues... how do they work?
- fluxem 3y agoWhen you legalize all the drugs, junkies magically transform into pharmaceutical consumers
- nikolay 3y agoThis is part of the plan to completely ruin California!
- bsimpson 3y agoIt's nice to see progress being made towards more rational drug policy, and also disappointing that this a "plant medicine = good" bill instead of a "criminalizing psychedelics is stupid" bill. Chemically-derived ones like LSD and MDMA are not in-scope in Wiener's bill, even though (like mushrooms) they aren't the kinds of drugs that cause social problems.
- LinuxBender 3y ago"plant medicine = good" That's risky. I and millions and others have natural hallucinogens growing in the fields in North America and much of Europe. Henbane is pretty hard to completely eradicate, is likely one of the most naturally powerful hallucinogens and is also one of the most dangerous to use as a recreational drug safely as potency varies wildly in each plant. Every part of the plant is a drug and every part of the plant is deadly. It can be and has been used in the medical field but has been replaced with chemicals that are safer to measure.
- corethree 3y agoWe need more progress on this. I don't see enough homeless people getting high on the streets of SF. Priorities.
- electrondood 3y agoThey were originally, from the article, this is a narrower version that removed ibogaine, LSD, MDMA. Which is silly, because LSD is comparable to mushrooms and MDMA is a powerfully therapeutic substance.
- animitronix 3y agoGreat, it worked out SO well for Oregon...
- amanaplanacanal 3y agoAs someone who uses mushrooms too help control depression, not having to fear arrest and jail is working out great for me.
- annexrichmond 3y agoIs there any data on how many people in California are being arrested over magic mushroom or LSD possession? What impact does this bill have in that sense?
- cagmz 3y ago"Potential future savings (General Fund) to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), of an unknown but potentially significant amount, in reduced incarceration costs. Under existing law, personal possession of mescaline, DMT, psilocybin, or psilocin is punishable by incarceration in county jail or, if the defendant has certain prior convictions, by incarceration in prison. Under this bill, possession of small amounts of these substances will no longer be a criminal offense. If there are fewer prison sentences issued for drug possession as a result of this bill, CDCR's incarceration costs will decline." Source: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB58 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient....
- asadotzler 3y agoI can't find this data for CA but here's my guesstimate: The web tells me there are approximately 750,000 drug possession-only arrests in the US each year. The web also tells me that psychedelic arrests make up an estimated 2-3% of that. Of those arrested, about 33% seem to do at least some time as a result, but usually months not years. Those are national figures, based mostly on FBI claims, so hard to say about CA but if CA is at all typical, here's how that would look. Maybe 600-1,000 psychedelic possession defendants doing time each year. Let's assume about $8K for each of those doing time (assuming short, like 2 months) and $2K for the rest that end up in court but not in jail and you get over a million dollars a year prosecuting people who do no harm and whose use of the substance otherwise has no cost on taxpayers (except maybe the occasional uninusured ER visit). Perhaps not a huge savings, but also, IMO, a hugely wasteful spend that should come to an end that will have the more important benefit of not overturning the lives of thousands of people for no good goddamn reason other than purely puritanical bullshit we should have abandoned a long time ago.
- fieldbob 3y ago"The spice must flow".. ? the creative economy is dependent on psycadelics for innovation?
- coding123 3y agoWhy a priority vs homelessness and skyrocketing housing prices?
- RGBCube 3y agoSo you can forget it all by drugging yourself.
- marcell 3y agoUnpopular opinion incoming: the move to legalize drugs is a society-wide experiment that will end very badly for everyone affected by it. From the article: > Criminal justice reform advocates said decriminalizing psychedelics is a step toward ending a war on drugs This assumes ending the war on drugs is a good idea. In fact, it is a bad idea on an individual level as well as a society level. On an individual level, it is likely that all of these drugs are harmful. We know all pharmaceutical drugs have negative side effects, and they are only meant to be prescribed by a doctor who weighs the costs and benefits. Why would recreational drugs be any different? Alcohol, the most common recreational drug, has terrible health effects on individuals. Are we supposed to believe marijuana or LSD or DMT will be somehow harmless? On a society level, legalizing recreational drug use will contribute to the social decay. Recreational drugs are a way to withdraw from society. Even if most people do not become addicted, many will, and the addicts will wreak havoc on society. Look at alcohol: alcoholism is a bad thing. Anyone who has seen it in their family or friends knows this. Alcohol is associated with drunk driving and violence. And alcohol is a substance with a long, long history of regulation and social conventions. It is the "best case" out come for a recreational drug, with a huge amount of mitigating forces. Are we really to think that throwing in 10 new drugs in the span of a few decades is going to end well for society?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- playday 3y agoMy opinion is throwing people in prison and confiscating their stuff is wrong unless they’ve violated someone’s person or property. Drugs can be legal as long as crimes committed under the influence of drugs are properly punished.
- sam_goody 3y agoLegalizing drugs without a clear understanding of what you are trying to achieve and how to get there has been a net loss in many countries. I absolutely trust California to do it wrong, since they seem dedicated to keeping as many homeless on the streets and in the maximum poverty possible, while trying to insulate the rich. [I assume they want to switch people from Fentanyl to Mushroom, since they border Mexico and stopping the influx of drugs is not gonna happen. From my meager experience it won't work.]
- amanaplanacanal 3y agoWhich “many countries” have legalized drugs?
- senttoschool 3y agoI don't know how much my experience with weed matters here. I've never tried psychedelics. But with weed, I tried it in 2021 because it was "legal" so it must not be so bad. At first, I just used it socially. Eventually, I started using weed every single day, from morning to evening. This was made easy by WFH and boredom due to covid lockdowns. After lockdowns, I still used it - even more. I justified it because it was "legal" and I felt like it was better than alcohol, which poisons the body and increases aggression in men. Weed made me unambitious, scrape by at work, ignore family and friend messages, stop working on tech side projects, fat, lazy, dumb. Weed slowly consumed my life. It wasn't sudden. Unlike alcohol addiction, weed felt harmless at first. Alcohol addiction has clear downsides immediately. Weed addiction is slow. Next thing you know, your whole life could be based on it. I finally saw the negative effects of weed and made a decision to quit forever. Never again. I'm not a mentally weak person. I have a fairly clean background. I never smoked cigarettes. I never drank alcohol by myself. Never tried other drugs. Weed consumed 2 years of my life. I basically did almost nothing except get fat and scraped by work. If I continued, I'm sure I would have lost my career and I was prepared to be ok with it just so I can continue to get high everyday. In the past, I was pro-legalization of weed because of all the things I read about jail times and the criminal injustice. Today, I'm not so sure anymore. In this case, I do not wish for California to legalize anymore drugs until we are absolutely 100% sure of its effects on society and that it's better. Let other states or countries try it first and then analyze the data.
- TotalCrackpot 3y agoIt's legal to drink bleach. Does that make it not harmful?
- senttoschool 3y agoWhat are you implying? Help me understand. I'm a recovering weed addict and my IQ hasn't come back to normal yet.
- TotalCrackpot 3y agoYou should always read about things you put into your body I wanted to write. It's called harm reduction.
- grondilu 3y agoIt sure is something California needs these days : more drugs.
- Lolaccount 3y agoFck yeah boi's ! Let's get at it.
- pluijzer 3y agoI have used Magic Mushrooms on occasion. They provided me with very valuable insights that led to make meaningful changes and choices in live. Insights that have stops my panic attacks, made me more appreciative and empathetic to others. I really believe I am at a better place in live because of those experiences. I am however very careful with taking them. Only when I feel very stable mentally and physically. Only when me and my environment is well prepared and not too often. I had a friend that took them after he split up with his girlfriend and went to the fair on them. Yes, ... don't do that.
- playday 3y ago[flagged]
- RickJWagner 3y agoThat'll help with the homeless problem, surely.
- amanaplanacanal 3y agoThat is a separate problem which can only be addressed by more housing availability driving cost down. Which I believe California is also working on.
- toader 3y agoCalifornia has a rampant, unmanaged homeless problem largely caused by mental illness, addiction and economics and they are choosing to legalize more drugs which will increase access, and yes, while psychedelics are known to help some, they are also known to cause psychosis and exacerbate mental health issues in others especially when combined with other drugs. Seems like a questionable choice.
- rjbwork 3y agoWhat will definitely help the homelessness problem is turning people into felons, locking them up for a number of the prime years of their lives, and making it much harder to have a viable career with a criminal record.
- toader 3y agoI understand your point, however California has the most relaxed drug prosecution laws in the United States. Short of distribution, people aren't often prosecuted for minor drug possession. Edit: In a controlled environment, I'd tend to agree with you. California's issues are so grave though it seems they should address the current issues prior to potentially adding to the existing problem.
- sentientslug 3y agoDo you live in California? This is textbook whataboutism. Wtf does this bill have to do with homelessness?
- toader 3y agoI have spent ample time in California and even if I hadn't, the data is available. My response isn't whataboutism, causation and/or correlation perhaps. If you don't see the connection between the decriminalization and accessibility of drugs and mental health, addiction and homelessness, I don't know what to say.
- circles_for-day 3y agoTIL from these comments that many hacker news comments originate from having an axe to grind. Holy shit