[HN Gopher] Surgeon general: No 'value' to locking people up ove...
___________________________________________________________________
Surgeon general: No 'value' to locking people up over marijuana use
Author : DocFeind
Score : 50 points
Date : 2021-07-19 16:27 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (thehill.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (thehill.com)
| throwaway81523 wrote:
| The value was explained back in the Nixon era, and it was a BAD
| value:
|
| " "You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it
| illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the
| public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with
| heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt
| those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could arrest their
| leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify
| them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were
| lying about the drugs? Of course we did.""
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich...
| etaioinshrdlu wrote:
| Doesn't explain why most of Asia is even harsher and more
| restrictive than the USA.
| ipaddr wrote:
| Opium comes to mind historically.
| pstuart wrote:
| The USA does export its drug policy stance, and per the Nixon
| policies, it's a win for any government to have those tools
| of oppression on tap for when needed.
| etaioinshrdlu wrote:
| I think a simpler explanation is that the general public in
| a country such as Japan deeply hates drug use.
| rfd4sgmk8u wrote:
| except booze, the worst drug. vocational drinking is a
| cultural phenomenon.
|
| The deal is lack of education, and exposure. The west is
| a lot further along on the pathway to legalization. I do
| believe that when the day comes, usage will be similar to
| in the west under legalization. We are all humans after
| all.
| m_mueller wrote:
| as a native German speaker it really stands out to me that his
| name translates to "honest man"...
| tilolebo wrote:
| Curious what's the opinion of the HN community on
| decriminalization and legalization of marijuana.
|
| It seems accepted as an inevitable progress.
|
| But seeing the damage alcohol and tobacco does to society, I
| wonder what good it will bring, except from an economic PoV.
| thcrowaway21719 wrote:
| (Anonymous throwaway account because I'm still employed and
| usually comment from an account from which my identity can be
| derived)
|
| I'm a habitual user with a hereditary predisposition towards
| addictive behavior. Moving to the Bay Area for work 7 years ago
| was the best move for my banking account(s) and the worst move
| for my life overall. The few years in between the move and the
| ability for me to walk into a store and walk out with a gram of
| THC across various products - all obtained above the board -
| were some of the most productive and socially rewarding years
| of my life. I was clean and not within hundreds or thousands
| miles of anyone who could serve me my biggest lifelong vice.
| I'm too weak. It took a few months after the change for me to
| cave in. I've missed weddings. I've lost friends because I've
| had season-long depressive episodes where I just can't bring
| myself to respond to any messages - all I have the energy and
| drive to do is crank out JIRA tickets and then go alter
| reality. I'm actually just past the tail end of one now and I
| still have a four-figure notification backlog.
|
| Deep in my heart I know that it is a personal problem and it is
| entirely up to me to defeat my own demons. But I'm the uncaught
| NullPointerException that surfaced when my community removed
| the societal defensive programming around marijuana. I wish it
| were still illegal.
|
| EDIT: and to preempt a "you weren't really addicted if you
| never went to get a farcical medical card" - believe me, the
| itch was there. But it was that extra level of indirection that
| kept me honest and on the straight and narrow. Every time I
| came close, the non-immediate reward was enough of a deterrence
| that I could make the rational choice.
| throwaway913884 wrote:
| I hear you. Like many IT types, my brain is a reliable engine
| that has served me for decades. It loves to be excited,
| stimulated and challenged. Getting high - after several days
| of abstinence - gives me insight and unlocks thoughts and
| concepts that are otherwise hidden behind the sensible
| filters. Those thoughts have turned into ideas that have
| turned into products that have made millions and employed
| many people.
|
| But I'm weak. That initial session turns into another, when
| the ideas are less forthcoming, and then another, when I am
| not even functioning at par.
|
| The way it works best is a short limited session, then
| abstinence for a week.
|
| But I'm weak. My brain doesn't work like that, it just wants
| more.
|
| My current regime is to lock it in a box with a padlock in it
| (its illegal here anyway so at least I can't just restock at
| will) and give someone else the key.
|
| So yeah - pros and cons, but unlimited access definitely does
| not work for me.
| rpmisms wrote:
| It's healthier than most alcohol or tobacco use. I don't see
| why it should be controlled.
| AuryGlenz wrote:
| That depends on what you mean. Tobacco - bad for lungs,
| throat, mouth. Alcohol - bad for pretty much all of you. Pot
| - bad for your brain, and other areas depending on how you
| take it. Can also trigger psychological disorders like
| schizophrenia.
|
| I fear that legalization won't come with the education that's
| necessary to counteract the "marijuana is healthy" crowd that
| make that leap because you can't die from it. It's pretty
| clear it's terrible for developing brains.
| klyrs wrote:
| > It seems accepted as an inevitable progress.
|
| I see a pendulum in motion. When Sherlock Holmes was written,
| we had a very different view on drug use. Back then, it was a
| capitalist/libertarian utopia, where folks could generally cook
| up, sell, and use, pretty much anything they could manage. In
| the early 20th century, abstinence movements got popular, and
| everything including alcohol was criminalized. Today, we've got
| (depending where you live) legal alcohol, legal weed, open
| sales of hallucinogens, and safe injection sites for opiates.
|
| Meth, weird to me, doesn't appear to be a big priority and it's
| huge in organized crime. Opiates are the villain of today, and
| the result of that may lead to a sharper distinction between
| "hard" and "soft" drugs.
|
| There's a big conversation underway about UBI -- opponents see
| it as encouraging "laziness," which, any honest stoner will
| admit, cannabis encourages. That could end up swinging the
| pendulum back the other way. I don't really see any of this as
| permanent or inevitable
| GuB-42 wrote:
| > Meth, weird to me, doesn't appear to be a big priority and
| it's huge in organized crime. Opiates are the villain of
| today
|
| From everything that I've seen, opioids are the worst, by
| far. Highest addiction potential, physical withdrawal
| symptoms, low therapeutic index (easy to overdose), dangerous
| route of administration (injection), and ultra-potent
| substances like fentanyl make it even worse.
|
| Meth is bad, crack cocaine is bad, but opioids are worse. The
| only drug that can compete in harm to society is alcohol, but
| only because of sheer numbers.
| president wrote:
| Allowing drugs and other vices for the sake of economic
| prosperity is sad and goes against progress for humanity. I
| live next door to someone that smokes non-stop everyday and the
| second-hand smoke pisses me off to no end.
| rfd4sgmk8u wrote:
| "Something irritates me so I want the irritant taken away and
| locked in a cage". Your vision of the world is clouded by
| your own hate. As you are someone who conflates a plant with
| 'drugs', I strongly recommend you spend some time to
| understand the issues, understand the really nasty history
| behind prohibition.
|
| Stop and think about how your attitude is trapping humanity
| in a box. Live a little. Be open to change. Understand others
| perspective.
| edmundsauto wrote:
| All the same, they should not be subjected to the smell of
| smoke from their neighbors house.
| echlebek wrote:
| Would you stop BBQing if your neighbour complained about
| it?
| edmundsauto wrote:
| That's an interesting question. If someone had a smoker
| running all day, everyday, and it was an annoyance to
| neighbors - yes, I think there should be recourse.
|
| One person shouldn't be allowed to harm other people's
| enjoyment of their property.
| rfd4sgmk8u wrote:
| As someone who was vegan/vegetarian for many years, the
| smell of bbq used to make me ill. (I only eat meat now).
|
| Only a self absorbed busybody loser jerk with nothing
| better to do would complain about the neighbors bbq'ing.
| 'get a life'.
| Karsteski wrote:
| So you would prefer people be locked in cells for what they
| do to their own bodies? How far would you like to take this
| line of thinking, for the "progress of humanity"?
| klyrs wrote:
| Different folks have different motivations.
|
| Capitalists want to legalize for profit.
|
| SJWs want to legalize to reduce the prison population.
|
| Libertarians want to legalize because one should be free to
| choose what they do with their bodies.
|
| Users want to legalize because they don't want to deal with
| the risk, and prefer above-board retail.
|
| Your characterization of smoking as a "vice" is your personal
| belief, and personally speaking, I see forcing that belief on
| others as a vice.
| version_five wrote:
| You're missing that legalization breaks criminal
| monopolies, let's people get help more easily if they need
| it, and removed a mechanism where law enforcement can
| basically make someone or some group they don't like a
| criminal, by making illegal something that most people do.
| pstuart wrote:
| Whatever damage drugs do is insignificant compared to the
| damage that the prohibition laws do -- from punishing
| individuals to subsidizing organized crime (by artificially
| raising prices on drugs by making them illegal).
| AuryGlenz wrote:
| The idealist in me thinks it should be legal, as what people
| should put into their bodies should be there choice.
|
| The pragmatist thinks it should stay illegal. We know it's bad
| for people's brains, especially developing minds. That's
| compounded by the fact that many people think the primary
| danger from drugs is death, and since it won't kill you it must
| be basically harmless.
|
| I'm sure a good portion of us also know people that have become
| psychologically addicted to it and have wasted a good portion
| of their lives. I have friends that didn't do any pot until
| they went to a state where it was legal, and they decided they
| liked it enough where they risked bringing some back with them.
| It seems clear legalization will lead to increased use.
|
| In short, it's a battle of individual rights vs. what's best
| for society. I'm not sure what the answer is. It also seems
| like a slippery slope - if weed is legal, shouldn't most other
| drugs be? If that's the case, should prescriptions still be
| necessary for things like stimulants?
| edmundsauto wrote:
| > We know it's bad for people's brains, especially developing
| minds
|
| To clarify, we know its bad for developing brains, but I
| don't think we know the effect on people who start smoking >
| age 25. There have been studies that show different things,
| but I don't think we have any consensus about the impact of
| cannabis usage on brains > 25 y.o.
|
| Also, if we're going to base it as individual vs. society,
| its important to include the cost of enforcement as a
| negative on the societal part. For me, that makes the
| decision pretty easy - in both cases, we have harm caused
| either by the drug or by the drug + enforcement.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| You seem to be assuming that making it legal would lead to
| increased usage. And also that a person's individual right to
| do what they want with their own body and mind had no value.
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| It may not bring good, but using prison and ever-stricter laws
| have only introduced additional damage.
|
| Entire vast populations are effectively under the control of
| drug cartels. Civil forfeiture is a product of the drug war.
|
| Current efforts have not stopped the flow of drugs, most and
| especially marjiuana are easier to get than ever. Ask any
| public high school student.
| [deleted]
| gizmo686 wrote:
| Prohibiting alchohol did so much damage to society that we
| passed a constitutional amendment to repeal prohibition.
|
| The crimanalization of marijuana has already done damage to
| society that will take generations to repair. I find it very
| difficult to see how the increase in usage that would follow
| from legalization would be more damaging than the damage done
| by prohibition.
| anm89 wrote:
| Wow, how brave of them to come out 20 years after this was
| consensus amongst health professionals.
| Karsteski wrote:
| Better now than never. It saddens me that the impact of
| criminalizing drug usage so heavily in every country will never
| truly be appreciated. So many lives and families ruined...
| president wrote:
| It's not so much as punishing people for weed but punishing them
| for knowingly breaking the law right? Maybe locking people up is
| a bit harsh but people know the consequences no? Maybe we should
| recognize that there is value in having people in a society
| follow the rule of law.
| shawnz wrote:
| Just like there is value in civil disobedience. I think it is a
| faulty assumption that the value of following the law is not
| understood by those purposefully breaking it.
| Karsteski wrote:
| At some point, black people in US were punished for drinking
| from the wrong water fountains. Maybe locking people up is a
| bit harsh but people know the consequences no? Maybe we should
| recognize that there is value in having people in a society
| follow the rule of law.
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| The problem is when law isn't applied consistently, or when
| phenomena such as one's net worth making a difference in level
| of justice received is observed, then that's a strong message
| to those paying attention that there isn't value in following
| the rule of law, but rather value in knowing people in the
| right places or getting as much money as you can.
| svrourke wrote:
| This seems like a bit of the appeal to authority logical
| fallacy. Law does not make something valid good or proper and
| to follow laws for the sake of them being laws is missing the
| point of laws no? Do you actually value the purpose of the law
| or is it just a boolean true or false if something is illegal
| its bad and wrong because it's illegal?
|
| How valuable to society are people who pretend not to be gay
| when it's illegal?
|
| How much value was there in keeping black people out of the
| same restaurants as white people?
|
| What value do you perceive society gains by locking people up
| for smoking a plant that makes you laugh?
|
| On the contrary does it not remove value from society to
| stringently pursue punitive measures against something like
| being in possession of a gram of cannabis while higher crimes
| often face far less significant (relatively) consequences?
| phnofive wrote:
| The US has no federal laws AFAIK regarding use, only possession,
| which itself was reduced to a misdemeanor ages ago. Hopefully,
| the Congress will take a leaf out of the Alaskan legislature's
| book and simply stay out of its citizens' homes.
| throwaway6734 wrote:
| Marijuana use essentially bars a person from working in the
| federal government or do any associated contractors
| t-writescode wrote:
| No. Hopefully Congress will roll back its decision and make it
| fully legal.
|
| That way: * it's legal to grow * legal to
| sell * legal to sell across state borders *
| possible to get a bank account used in its financial
| transaction * we can start to undo the damages to 10s of
| millions who have experienced by either themselves, or
| their loved ones, being thrown into the prison system.
| LatteLazy wrote:
| I'm just old enough to remember when the surgeon general said
| masterbation was OK and drug policy should be changed and got
| sacked under Clinton. Let's hope it works better this time.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joycelyn_Elders
| k12sosse wrote:
| The idea of pro-masturbation comment to cause her to "lose the
| support of the (Clinton) Whitehouse" is pretty damn hilarious.
|
| As a non-American, she was news to me. Thanks for sharing.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-19 23:02 UTC)