3 ms·
The problem with the analysis re: Marijuana is that it appears to leave out the anti-drug treaties we've signed with other UN members. As I understand it, feder
by intopieces 12y ago
The problem with the analysis re: Marijuana is that it appears to leave out the anti-drug treaties we've signed with other UN members. As I understand it, federal legalization is a nonstarter w/r/t that agreement.
- adventured 12y agoAny treaty that's inconvenient will be abandoned, with hardly a second thought. Those treaties are the least concerning challenge in the entire legalization process, they are truly irrelevant. Nothing will happen to the US if it abandons those treaties. It'll be a blip in the news for one day, as a few grumbles are heard. Other than that, what you'll hear is mostly cheering and celebrating. Other countries will take it as a cue that the global war on drugs the US has been prosecuting is now over, and they will begin legalizing (this is already underway). It's no longer a question of if; at this point nothing will stop the inevitable rolling back of the war on drugs, the momentum is overwhelming.
- sanderjd 12y agoCorrect me if I'm wrong, but my understanding has always been that the US has been the one pushing for those treaties. If that is the case, it seems possible that if anti-Marijuana policy loses support here, its support in the UN won't be so strong.
- unics 12y agoThe US has been behind it and putting mountains of cash along with it to enact the treaties.
- gdubs 12y agoThe US has a pretty casual understanding of international law...
- kbenson 12y agoOr perhaps the US has a fairly nuanced understanding of international law, and when it can circumvent it, when it can ignore it by expending some power or international good-will, and when it will cost too much.
- wavefunction 12y agoWe can always rescind our involvement in treaties.