8 ms·

The most important part of this to me is that it generates a huge amount of precedent for the Latin American countries such as Uruguay and Guatemala that are co

by scythe 14y ago

The most important part of this to me is that it generates a huge amount of precedent for the Latin American countries such as Uruguay and Guatemala that are considering legalization. The United States has used its global influence to push drug prohibition in other countries -- see for instance http://www.cannabis-med.org/english/bulletin/ww_en_db_cannabis_artikel.php?id=218#2 http://www.cannabis-med.org/english/bulletin/ww_en_db_cannab... -- and with these victories -- even if they prove to be merely nominal -- the people of Latin America can see that prohibition is crumbling. There are some people who like to portray marijuana as a first-world-luxury or sideshow political issue, but for people in the countries most affected by the drug war, it is anything but. This electoral victory may just show some serious positive influence in Mexico, where the realities of drug prohibition have inflicted a lot of suffering on a lot of innocent people, and that's the real victory here.

InclinedPlane 14y ago
It certainly seems like this is the tipping point. Overall national support for decriminalization is at just over 50%. Several of the most populous states, such as California, have medical marijuana, decriminalization, or outright legalization statutes on the books or have just passed them. All of the west coast is pro legalization. I imagine that once there is more social acceptance of marijuana out in the open and a longer track record of legalized marijuana without society crumbling more and more people will come around on the idea.
- dsrguru 14y ago
  > All of the west coast is pro legalization. Then how did Measure 80 fail in Oregon? :) I do agree that the general trend toward more states approving medical marijuana suggests that fewer and fewer people are still viewing the drug as evil. If the federal government doesn't interfere with Colorado and Washington, I'm hopeful that marijuana grown in those states will start to replace Mexican marijuana on the black market and weaken the cartels. It's really unconscionable that American politicians are willing to perpetuate the constant state of fear that so many Mexicans are living in now by maintaining marijuana prohibition. What could possibly be worth 12,358 lives in 2011 alone? [1] The knowledge that we're making it harder for our children to obtain a safer alternative to alcohol? [1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Drug-War_Related_Murders_in_Mexico_2006-2011.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Drug-War_...
  - InclinedPlane 14y ago
    Oregon has medical marijuana and partial decriminalization on the books. But more substantially the de facto policy of the police and public attorneys has been one of tolerance and escalating decriminalization amidst very soft enforcement of any sort of limits on "medical" use.
    - DanBC 14y ago
      That creates some weird situations though, surely? How do they handle Bob, who grows 5 plants for personal use, and shares it with Ann? In the UK Bob is in considerable trouble, even though he's avoided all the criminal gangs and humanitarian harm caused by prohibition.
      - aes256 14y ago
        Heck, even if you're a couple of sixty-somethings who grow marijuana and donate large amounts of the profits to charity, you're still going to jail in the UK: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/19/british-couple-jailed-for-growing-marijuana-for-charity/ http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/19/british-couple-jailed-fo...
        Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
        Just because you donate a load of the proceeds to charity it doesn't change that it's a crime. I'm in favour of decriminalisation but what they do with the money is neither here nor there.
        coldpie 14y ago
        Unless it shouldn't be a crime in the first place. Enforcing anti-MJ laws is immoral, even more so considering the particulars of this case.
        Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
- sturadnidge 14y ago
  > All of the west coast is pro legalization. Then how did Prop 19 fail? http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/inthepeninsula/detail?entry_id=76181 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/inthepeninsula/detail?en...
  - Alex3917 14y ago
    It was a poorly written law. Support for legalization nationwide is currently about 55-59% in the abstract, but on any given law it's rarely higher than 50%. Prop 19 was an especially bad law for a variety of reasons, and even then it came very close to passing.
    - okok 14y ago
      What was wrong with it?
      - Alex3917 14y ago
        http://blog.norml.org/2010/11/08/10-lessons-learned-from-marijuana-election-defeats/ http://blog.norml.org/2010/11/08/10-lessons-learned-from-mar...
  - erichocean 14y ago
    Medical dispensaries are opposed to legalization for recreational use because they currently have a state-enforced near-monopoly on Cannabis sales. Unintended regulatory consequences in three, two, one...
- jonnathanson 14y ago
  "Several of the most populous states, such as California, have medical marijuana, decriminalization, or outright legalization statutes on the books or have just passed them. All of the west coast is pro legalization." There has actually been a lot of backward momentum in recent years, especially in the West. Californians rejected the full-decriminalization proposition a few years ago. The state is also cracking down on dispensaries, and/or allowing more and more DEA raids against dispensaries and state-sanctioned growers. On the other side of the pond, even Amsterdam is starting to crack down on cannabis shops and decriminalization statutes. By all accounts, the measure in CO was an abberration from recent trends. Maybe it will be a tipping point back in the pro-legalization direction. But it represents a shift in the prevailing tides of the last few years.
  - accoinstereo 14y ago
    Simply not true. Marijuana has been decriminalized in California since 2010. The proposition to legalize the drug failed to pass. But I would hardly call this "backward momentum." It's not like there was a ton of incentive for Joe Pot to rally behind the move--cheap prescriptions, cheap dispensaries, and cheap penalties is keeping him plenty happy and stocked. There was no such "cracking down" in Amsterdam. And I would hardly call what happened in the Netherlands "cracking down." Many cities were weary of tourists entering the country simply to get high. So those cities combatted the "anti-social" tourist by requiring marijuana IDs at their coffeeshops. Citizens are free to use, but unless other countries adopt legalization laws in the Euro Zone some Dutch cities feel they must enforce these policies. Will be interesting to see how Colorado/Washington deal with this, as they will likely encounter the same issue. If I lived in a border city like Vancouver, I'd be prepping for an influx in 2014.
    - jonnathanson 14y ago
      "Marijuana has been decriminalized in California since 2010." Specifically, the possession of less than 1 oz of marijuana has been decriminalized. Possession of a larger quantity, or sale or intent to distribute, has not been. "The proposition to legalize the drug failed to pass." Prop 19 was not a full legalization; it was more like a major decriminalization. Possession of up to 1 oz would have been legalized, but many of the "gotcha" side-penalties (employers retain rights to drug screen and consider cannabis in the system a firable offense; legal penalties for possession above 1 oz; etc.) would have remained in place. I think it's fair to say that, had it passed, Prop 19 would have been a really big step toward legalization. But let's not split hairs. "There was no such "cracking down" in Amsterdam." Not only has the sale of marijuana to tourists been outlawed, but "coffee shops" are being forced to reorganize as membership-only clubs, with caps on membership at around 1,000-1,500 per shop. There is also a growing movement, with vocal sponsors in the Dutch parliament, to ban "coffee shops" altogether. "And I would hardly call what happened in the Netherlands "cracking down." Again, hair spliting over semantics here. The fact is that the Netherlands is moving in a more conservative direction w/r/t marijuana policy. However you want to define "cracking down," the present directionality is from X to Y, where X is a more liberal policy, and Y is a more restrictive policy. I see your point that policy in the Netherlands is not necessarily germane to policy in the US. I think that's a fair one.
veidr 14y ago
That is so right. The "war on drugs" is not simply some stupid wasteful boondoggle; it is truly a heinous crime against humanity. Some folks scoff when they hear a statement like that, but it really is true. Not because it makes it (slightly) harder for me to buy weed in San Francisco, but because of the very real and devastating effects that it has on people outside the US. People who are rarely, if ever, covered by the mainstream media.
- shredfvz 14y ago
  It's a humanitarian issue for sure, and not just for the controversy surrounding the War on Drugs. Prohibition of marijuana is an attack on science and medicine. To outlaw a plant which undeniably benefits cancer and Alzheimer patients [1], and people in excruciating pain is to deny people the will to live. And why? Because a central authority stipulates you shouldn't be allowed to live, if it means you'd ingest a certain plant. Over 4,000 Americans every day are diagnosed with some form of cancer. Meanwhile the government in these situations recommends you heed the advice of your friendly neighborhood big pharma corporation, and heal yourself in a way that makes powerful interest groups millions upon millions of dollars. Otherwise, you might as well just die. This is about giving people in need a second chance at life, at a price they can afford. In 2012, the only reason you would be against legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes is if you're ignorant, or profiting from it somehow. [1] http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507 http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507
  - aes256 14y ago
    This is about recreational, not medicinal use. Edit: Don't know why this is being downvoted. Medicinal and recreational use are separate issues, with separate arguments for and against each. To call cannabis prohibition "an attack on science and medicine" is also rather disingenuous. Cannabis may have valid clinical applications, but there are still dangers associated with its use, especially increased risk of psychotic symptoms [1] Painting the issue as black and white, and conflating arguments for medicinal and recreational use, is not conducive to rational debate. [1] http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d738 http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d738

by scythe 14y ago

InclinedPlane 14y ago

It certainly seems like this is the tipping point. Overall national support for decriminalization is at just over 50%. Several of the most populous states, such as California, have medical marijuana, decriminalization, or outright legalization statutes on the books or have just passed them. All of the west coast is pro legalization. I imagine that once there is more social acceptance of marijuana out in the open and a longer track record of legalized marijuana without society crumbling more and more people will come around on the idea.

dsrguru 14y ago
> All of the west coast is pro legalization. Then how did Measure 80 fail in Oregon? :) I do agree that the general trend toward more states approving medical marijuana suggests that fewer and fewer people are still viewing the drug as evil. If the federal government doesn't interfere with Colorado and Washington, I'm hopeful that marijuana grown in those states will start to replace Mexican marijuana on the black market and weaken the cartels. It's really unconscionable that American politicians are willing to perpetuate the constant state of fear that so many Mexicans are living in now by maintaining marijuana prohibition. What could possibly be worth 12,358 lives in 2011 alone? [1] The knowledge that we're making it harder for our children to obtain a safer alternative to alcohol? [1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Drug-War_Related_Murders_in_Mexico_2006-2011.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Drug-War_...
- InclinedPlane 14y ago
  Oregon has medical marijuana and partial decriminalization on the books. But more substantially the de facto policy of the police and public attorneys has been one of tolerance and escalating decriminalization amidst very soft enforcement of any sort of limits on "medical" use.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    That creates some weird situations though, surely? How do they handle Bob, who grows 5 plants for personal use, and shares it with Ann? In the UK Bob is in considerable trouble, even though he's avoided all the criminal gangs and humanitarian harm caused by prohibition.
    - aes256 14y ago
      Heck, even if you're a couple of sixty-somethings who grow marijuana and donate large amounts of the profits to charity, you're still going to jail in the UK: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/19/british-couple-jailed-for-growing-marijuana-for-charity/ http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/19/british-couple-jailed-fo...
      - Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
        Just because you donate a load of the proceeds to charity it doesn't change that it's a crime. I'm in favour of decriminalisation but what they do with the money is neither here nor there.
        coldpie 14y ago
        Unless it shouldn't be a crime in the first place. Enforcing anti-MJ laws is immoral, even more so considering the particulars of this case.
        Tyrannosaurs 14y ago
sturadnidge 14y ago
> All of the west coast is pro legalization. Then how did Prop 19 fail? http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/inthepeninsula/detail?entry_id=76181 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/inthepeninsula/detail?en...
- Alex3917 14y ago
  It was a poorly written law. Support for legalization nationwide is currently about 55-59% in the abstract, but on any given law it's rarely higher than 50%. Prop 19 was an especially bad law for a variety of reasons, and even then it came very close to passing.
  - okok 14y ago
    What was wrong with it?
    - Alex3917 14y ago
      http://blog.norml.org/2010/11/08/10-lessons-learned-from-marijuana-election-defeats/ http://blog.norml.org/2010/11/08/10-lessons-learned-from-mar...
- erichocean 14y ago
  Medical dispensaries are opposed to legalization for recreational use because they currently have a state-enforced near-monopoly on Cannabis sales. Unintended regulatory consequences in three, two, one...
jonnathanson 14y ago
"Several of the most populous states, such as California, have medical marijuana, decriminalization, or outright legalization statutes on the books or have just passed them. All of the west coast is pro legalization." There has actually been a lot of backward momentum in recent years, especially in the West. Californians rejected the full-decriminalization proposition a few years ago. The state is also cracking down on dispensaries, and/or allowing more and more DEA raids against dispensaries and state-sanctioned growers. On the other side of the pond, even Amsterdam is starting to crack down on cannabis shops and decriminalization statutes. By all accounts, the measure in CO was an abberration from recent trends. Maybe it will be a tipping point back in the pro-legalization direction. But it represents a shift in the prevailing tides of the last few years.
- accoinstereo 14y ago
  Simply not true. Marijuana has been decriminalized in California since 2010. The proposition to legalize the drug failed to pass. But I would hardly call this "backward momentum." It's not like there was a ton of incentive for Joe Pot to rally behind the move--cheap prescriptions, cheap dispensaries, and cheap penalties is keeping him plenty happy and stocked. There was no such "cracking down" in Amsterdam. And I would hardly call what happened in the Netherlands "cracking down." Many cities were weary of tourists entering the country simply to get high. So those cities combatted the "anti-social" tourist by requiring marijuana IDs at their coffeeshops. Citizens are free to use, but unless other countries adopt legalization laws in the Euro Zone some Dutch cities feel they must enforce these policies. Will be interesting to see how Colorado/Washington deal with this, as they will likely encounter the same issue. If I lived in a border city like Vancouver, I'd be prepping for an influx in 2014.
  - jonnathanson 14y ago
    "Marijuana has been decriminalized in California since 2010." Specifically, the possession of less than 1 oz of marijuana has been decriminalized. Possession of a larger quantity, or sale or intent to distribute, has not been. "The proposition to legalize the drug failed to pass." Prop 19 was not a full legalization; it was more like a major decriminalization. Possession of up to 1 oz would have been legalized, but many of the "gotcha" side-penalties (employers retain rights to drug screen and consider cannabis in the system a firable offense; legal penalties for possession above 1 oz; etc.) would have remained in place. I think it's fair to say that, had it passed, Prop 19 would have been a really big step toward legalization. But let's not split hairs. "There was no such "cracking down" in Amsterdam." Not only has the sale of marijuana to tourists been outlawed, but "coffee shops" are being forced to reorganize as membership-only clubs, with caps on membership at around 1,000-1,500 per shop. There is also a growing movement, with vocal sponsors in the Dutch parliament, to ban "coffee shops" altogether. "And I would hardly call what happened in the Netherlands "cracking down." Again, hair spliting over semantics here. The fact is that the Netherlands is moving in a more conservative direction w/r/t marijuana policy. However you want to define "cracking down," the present directionality is from X to Y, where X is a more liberal policy, and Y is a more restrictive policy. I see your point that policy in the Netherlands is not necessarily germane to policy in the US. I think that's a fair one.

veidr 14y ago

That is so right. The "war on drugs" is not simply some stupid wasteful boondoggle; it is truly a heinous crime against humanity. Some folks scoff when they hear a statement like that, but it really is true. Not because it makes it (slightly) harder for me to buy weed in San Francisco, but because of the very real and devastating effects that it has on people outside the US. People who are rarely, if ever, covered by the mainstream media.

shredfvz 14y ago
It's a humanitarian issue for sure, and not just for the controversy surrounding the War on Drugs. Prohibition of marijuana is an attack on science and medicine. To outlaw a plant which undeniably benefits cancer and Alzheimer patients [1], and people in excruciating pain is to deny people the will to live. And why? Because a central authority stipulates you shouldn't be allowed to live, if it means you'd ingest a certain plant. Over 4,000 Americans every day are diagnosed with some form of cancer. Meanwhile the government in these situations recommends you heed the advice of your friendly neighborhood big pharma corporation, and heal yourself in a way that makes powerful interest groups millions upon millions of dollars. Otherwise, you might as well just die. This is about giving people in need a second chance at life, at a price they can afford. In 2012, the only reason you would be against legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes is if you're ignorant, or profiting from it somehow. [1] http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507 http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507
- aes256 14y ago
  This is about recreational, not medicinal use. Edit: Don't know why this is being downvoted. Medicinal and recreational use are separate issues, with separate arguments for and against each. To call cannabis prohibition "an attack on science and medicine" is also rather disingenuous. Cannabis may have valid clinical applications, but there are still dangers associated with its use, especially increased risk of psychotic symptoms [1] Painting the issue as black and white, and conflating arguments for medicinal and recreational use, is not conducive to rational debate. [1] http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d738 http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d738