14 ms·
It looks like hacker news is in favor of legalizing marijuana.
by newnewnew 13y ago
It looks like hacker news is in favor of legalizing marijuana.
- e40 13y agoPerhaps that's because technical people tend to look at facts when they analyze a situation?
- pravda 13y agoUmmm...also because they like to get toasted. I think this plan is discriminatory. "under my proposal, only adults age 21 and over would be allowed to possess up to one ounce of marijuana" Why shouldn't 18-20 year olds have the right to blaze up? Those are the prime toking years.
- jchrisa 13y agoThese are the years it's most likely to tip certain folks over the precipice into mental illness. A tiny minority are at risk, but those are the years.
- Zigurd 13y agoThere is a whole industry of Drug War sponsored quack science that is no more legit than tobacco company sponsored "science."
- threeseed 13y agoThere is plenty of objective, non-sponsored research that shows marijuana to have at least in some cases a negative effect. But nice work blanketing all of the research you disagree with as illegitimate.
- angersock 13y agoThen link it. EDIT: From last time we talked about this, some Google Scholar links-- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890856709.. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890856709.... http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/180/3/216.short http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/180/3/216.short http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7374/1195.1.short http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7374/1195.1.short http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395607.. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395607.... Note, though, that these are pretty inconclusive as far as causality goes.
- Zigurd 13y agoI painted it as illegitimate because it is. ONDCP does propaganda, not science.
- tzs 13y agohttp://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/08/22/1206820109.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/08/22/1206820109.abst...
- Zigurd 13y agoSubsequently debunked as an uncontrolled study. That's a prime example of the kind of research and researchers bought by ONDCP.
- tzs 13y agoCitation for this debunking?
- Zigurd 13y agoHere: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/01/09/1215678110.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/01/09/1215678110.abst... And, as a bonus, here is a debunking of a similar, and similarly widely touted study that made it into the Lancet. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19560900 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19560900 The point is: The whole purpose of these heavily funded studies is to penetrate mainstream journals. They were hyped in the mainstream press with the full weight of government behind the press blitz.
- mistercow 13y agoThere isn't actually good evidence to distinguish the flow of causation with cannabis and schizophrenia. In a significant plurality of cases, schizophrenia manifests in the 15-21 age range, regardless of cannabis use.
- Dewie 13y agoProbably because 21 is the minimum age for buying alcohol, too (I think).
- jlgreco 13y ago> Ummm...also because they like to get toasted. Not really, I prefer drinking. ...coincidentally, the legal age for doing that is 21. How discriminatory.
- speeq 13y agoBecause it might be unsafe. See, the human brain undergoes important development until the age of 25 and research has shown that cannabis significantly affects the brain of children and adolescents. Structural changes have been found in the brains of young cannabis users, especially in the prefrontal cortex, the last brain region to undergo maturation during adolescence. I'm for legalizing medical as well as recreational use of marijuana for adults but I think more research has to be done on how certain cannabinoids affect the brains of children. Especially because cannabis might be the only known substance that helps for example with Davet syndrome - it can save their lives.
- jschmitz28 13y agoAre you suggesting that "might be unsafe" is all the reason needed to legally withhold the right of a person to do something to his/her own body?
- speeq 13y agoI'm suggesting that cannabis should be sold strictly to adults only. Cannabis, just like alcohol, impairs the growth and integrity of certain brain structures of adolescents. Would you want 14-year-old kids to be able to legally buy and consume cannabis and alcohol? Of course it won't stop all of them who want from getting it somehow, it didn't stop me either at that age but do we really want to make it easily accessible and risk having a generation with potential damaged brains?
- aaronbrethorst 13y agoBecause 21 is the legal drinking age in the United States, and it's far more politically palatable to say 'this is just like booze' than it is to say 'let's embrace dirty stoner culture.' Check out the pro-legalization ads that ran in Washington last year when we successfully passed a MJ legalization initiative: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xja72pL-ZEM&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DXja72pL-ZEM http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xja72pL-ZEM&desktop_uri=%2Fwatc... Coincidentally, this weekend is Hempfest here in Seattle. The Seattle PD is on hand passing out Doritos and literature on how to stay compliant with our state laws: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/15/us/seattle-police-doritos-hempfest/?hpt=hp_t3 http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/15/us/seattle-police-doritos-...
- mikeash 13y agoI have no interest in consuming marijuana but I wholeheartedly support legalization, because it would save a lot of public money and because criminalizing it ruins productive people's lives. Anecdotally, a lot of people I know in the tech community think similarly. As for the age limit, take it step by step. Insisting on a perfect solution immediately accomplishes nothing except to delay any solution.
- threeseed 13y agoGive us all a break. 'Technical people' are just as (if not more likely) to be biased than ordinary people. Marijuana is safer than cigarettes and alcohol but it is hardly harmless and we definitely don't know enough about its effect on the brain especially amongst younger users. But of course you will often see such concerns dismissed.
- jlgreco 13y ago> Marijuana is safer than cigarettes and alcohol And few people are seriously proposing that we regulated it less than alcohol and cigarettes, so where exactly is the irrational bias? It doesn't have to be magical hippy juice to legalize it, being safer than alcohol or tobacco is reason enough to legalize it. Hell, the clear racial motivations for the initial banning and the continuation of it are reason enough to legalize it.
- verbin217 13y ago> 'Technical people' are just as (if not more likely) to be biased than ordinary people. True but they at least have facts ready to support their biases. ;) So many nerds assume they're above confirmation bias without considering the sophistication effect.
- victorf 13y agoWhich study on technical people having facts to support their biases are you referencing? :)
- angersock 13y ago"it is hardly harmless and we definitely don't know enough about its effect on the brain especially amongst younger users" I'm a great deal more worried about tobacco and alcohol binging in youths, or in the privacy nonsense and the social stuff, then I am about some weed. If you really want to argue "Think of the children!" look at Portugal's decriminalization for the past decade, and see if they have any numbers for you. Stop scaremongering.
- alan_cx 13y ago
- ahallock 13y agoIf you believe that you own your own body, then it would make sense. I wonder what people will say in 100 years. Will they laugh at us for letting people with the label "government" lay claim on how we use our own bodies? I would think so.
- pekk 13y agoPerhaps they will all be incredibly conservative and religious. It's a cheap trick to claim that your own view is the view of the future.
- nasmorn 13y agoOur view today is by definition the conservatism of tomorrow. If my children want to be religious they would have to be progressive religious because I am going to be the conservative atheist.
- TelmoMenezes 13y agoOr maybe it's just optimism and the belief that society tends towards increasingly more rational behaviour. Unless there are some dramatic scientific findings in the future, the case against cannabis is flimsy at best -- especially when compared with other legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco.
- rodgerd 13y agoIt's certainly opimisim. A quick look at the history would suggest there's no particular reason to believe that things always get better.
- jlgreco 13y agoBy any reasonable account, things have been getting better for at least several centuries now. Infant mortality is down, birth rates drop as prosperity increases, advances in farming technology have rendered world hunger a logistics problem, literacy rates are improving and access to education (traditional or otherwise) has never been better. Fewer people are being burned as witches (particularly in developed and developing countries). Entire diseases have been eradicated and more will soon be eradicated. Tolerance of alternative lifestyles, once relegated to small pockets of geography and history, is spreading. Slavery continues to be on the decline. The collapse of the Roman Empire was by most accounts a setback, as was the the Black Death and two brutal world wars (though even after those we resisted the temptation of widespread nuclear, chemical or biological warfare). It really is quite difficult to find broadly negative trends. Even the loss of the Roman Empire becomes a temporary setback if you zoom your timeline out more. The Romans were doing better then the Babylonians (well, some of them were at least), and we are doing better than they were at their height. Things get better because that is what humans do; we stand on the shoulders of giants. Stubborn incremental improvement.
- rdl 13y agoI'm somewhat undecided on legalization vs. decriminalization. It's even more of an issue with drugs other than pot.
- Zigurd 13y agoRationalism and left and right libertarianism will get you there. The same mix is against the high prison population, harsh penalties for non-violent crime with low economic value, e.g. copyright infringement by individuals, expensive wars, continuing to build Cold War weapons, etc. The federal Drug War itself is expensive, but it also a large fraction of local and state policing, prisons, and even the State Department. Lots of expensive economic drag is tied up in that. We would prefer to be more prosperous, in addition to being freer.
- bjourne 13y agoRather that those who themselves use marijuana is much more likely to comment and be in favor of legalization. It doesn't tell you anything about the "silent majority." Then HN:s up & down-vote system means your comments are likely to be downvoted in spite if you voice concerns.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y agoI'm not a pot user (though I have tried it). I favor legalization of most drugs (also not a user of those drugs). Imprisonment of drug offenders is horrible, counter-productive, and expensive tactic for dealing with social issues (I was a prison guard for a few years, too). PS I rarely downvote anyone to spite them solely for their opinion.