[HN Gopher] Germany will legalize marijuana and promote drug har...
___________________________________________________________________
Germany will legalize marijuana and promote drug harm reduction
Author : siva7
Score : 106 points
Date : 2021-11-24 18:16 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.marijuanamoment.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.marijuanamoment.net)
| globalise83 wrote:
| Good news. The momentum is becoming irresistible and
| irreversible.
| monopoledance wrote:
| This isn't about momentum for legalization. That was never lost
| on Germany. However, 21.3% of people allowed to vote are 70+
| years old here. Make that 38.2% for 60+ years old. Germany
| wouldn't have suffered 16 years of conservative neglect and
| stagnation, if it wasn't for the "not really interested in
| politics at my age anymore" and the literally demented.
| Honestly, we only got a chance to a future, pay the
| infrastructure debt and undo the shameful stagnation in social
| progression, because the CDU managed to run with a total dimwit
| and a series of their typical corruption uncovered right before
| election. I am worried, we're fucked beyond repair to be
| honest, though.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Hopefully, as strongest economy in EU finally gets some sanity re
| weed other countries not only in the bloc will follow. No reason
| to vilify (non-trivial) part of the population that just wants
| some relax in these trying times.
|
| Give users selection. Filter and punish misuse with same criteria
| as alcohol. Anything above doesn't make much sense.
|
| Also funny is like police unions quickly protested against, I
| guess significant part of their 'success' is coming from this. In
| US I think also companies owning private prisons push anti-
| legalization propaganda. As they say, just follow the money...
| intricatedetail wrote:
| It's only right thing to do. Fingers crossed it won't get
| derailed.
| jimsimmons wrote:
| As a recovering addict I'm quite mixed about legalisation. On one
| hand it helps out a lot of people and removes stigma around a
| form of indulgence. At the same time this is probably creating
| orders of magnitude more addicts. The adverse effects of a strong
| dependence can be severe: from people letting life blast past
| them without much realisation to lung/brain
| function/psychological disorders. I wish we could have a proper
| debate about this to work out a regulated form of legalisation.
| Somehow this too is politicised and there's a lot of
| misinformation ("weed is not addictive " etc) so we get the
| bipolar version of this issue as we do with pretty much
| everything else these days
| Krasnol wrote:
| I'm sure we'll get a lot discussion once the tabu is gone.
| People were reluctant to talk about it because of fear from
| stigma and prosecution. Most of the people you've heard talking
| about it were either "kids" or artists (musicians, comedians,
| etc.).
| rconti wrote:
| > probably creating orders of magnitude more addicts
|
| [citation needed]
| jimsimmons wrote:
| If there's x% chance of addiction and the availability
| increases by few orders of magnitude wouldn't it naturally
| follow?
| immmmmm wrote:
| no. legalisation or at least decriminalisation can lead to
| less use, as was the case in portugal for instance.
| yodsanklai wrote:
| No. Because availability is high already. Especially for
| teenagers who are most vulnerable to addiction. Also,
| making it legal can also help promoting safe usage, rather
| than simply pretending the problem doesn't exist.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| No, anybody who wants weed knows how to get some, of
| questionable quality, elevated price and can't avoid
| mingling with people who more often than not deal with hard
| drugs, illegal weapons etc.
|
| I would expect the opposite in fact - legal stuff loses
| quite a bit of its cool factor for youth, its not much
| rebelling if you can buy it in shop just around the corner,
| with better quality and effect you exactly prefer. Added
| tax revenue is just a bonus.
|
| Even strong cannabis usage is very easy to wean off
| compared to hard stuff like alcohol or tobacco... which is
| completely legal.
| jimsimmons wrote:
| > questionable quality, elevated price and can't avoid
| mingling with people who more often than not deal with
| hard drugs, illegal weapons etc.
|
| How many people have stayed away from weed or used it
| less frequently due to these reasons? If they were to go
| away and weed was just another shop like it is here in
| SF, don't you think the consumption would spike?
|
| Agree with the cool factor being undercut. But weed he
| hella fun and can get you hooked.
|
| Take it from someone who has struggled with recovery:
| it's not easy to quit. I suggest you browse r/leaves
| subreddit to see how many people struggle with it
| chishaku wrote:
| No.
|
| There is precedent in various US states and a handful of
| countries.
|
| Cost benefit analysis of what is actually happening in
| these places is a key motivator for the continued wave of
| legalization around the world.
|
| This is much studied.
|
| DYOR but here's a start:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
|
| https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=portugal+drug+policy&h
| l...
|
| Also, I'm not sure if you literally mean "a few orders of
| magnitude" or are using that phrase to simply mean "an
| increase".
| jimsimmons wrote:
| TIL thanks.
|
| By few OOM, I mean that the use is very small now due to
| taboo and legal barriers that it is likely to be faaar
| more pervasive once they go away. But your data seems to
| contradict this so I need to do more research
| monopoledance wrote:
| Germany is not Singapore. You won't face any legal
| consequences in most places for minor possession, and
| even dealing weed won't necessarily get you prison time.
| In Germany everyone who wants to smoke weed, smokes weed,
| legal or not. It's really, really prevalent as of now.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Is the use very small now? In the US, even before state-
| by-state decriminalization, anyone who wanted it could
| quite easily get it. There will be an uptick in
| consumption once it's more convenient to buy and has
| better QC and labeling, but I'd be shocked if overall use
| even doubled let alone went up 100x.
| iostream23 wrote:
| Cannabis "addicts" Which has dubious harm potential,
| considering that not a single human being has ever fatally
| overdosed on cannabis in the history of the world.
|
| I'm not justifying my choice of vice, merely pointing out
| that it's safer than coffee
| jimsimmons wrote:
| Harm potential is not dubious.
|
| Do browse r/leaves subreddit to see how many people
| struggle with it
| james_burden wrote:
| Also the little (but becoming increasingly more) known
| cannabinoid induced hyperemesis.
| meowfly wrote:
| It's also very well established that cannabis can cause
| psychosis[1] or depersonalization disorder[2]. Most
| conversations around cannabis risks usually just
| reference teens but that's just because there is a strong
| link between early teen cannabis psychosis and
| schizophrenia.
|
| My understanding is adults over 30, while way less likely
| to develop schizophrenia are not immune to transient
| cannabis induced psychosis or DPDR,
|
| 1. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-
| induced-psych...
|
| 2.
| https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-
| rj.20...
| iostream23 wrote:
| Are you suggesting that I should remain in the legal shadows
| due to your inability to manage cannabis consumption?
| jimsimmons wrote:
| In a way. Many people can text and drive but it's advised
| against for everybody for a reason. it's an extreme example
| but it illustrates a point that ultimately it's a trade off
| between liberty and having guard rails. I'm just disappointed
| that we seem to be going from one extreme to the other
| without considering intermediate options.
| iostream23 wrote:
| Well, it's clear that we are at loggerheads. I
| fundamentally disagree with and resent your position (you
| are trying to restrict my daily psychiatric medicines and
| the closest thing to a religious sacrament this old atheist
| can acknowledge) but I don't think its appropriate to
| hijack this thread to debate this alleged issue. I won't be
| visiting Reddit to hear about the alleged harm cannabis
| causes some people, and as I've stated, there's never been
| a single overdose for cannabis in the history of the world.
| I wish you will find your peace without trying to step on
| my freedom as my use of cannabis does not harm me nor
| society nor you.
| lopis wrote:
| From the article, it doesn't sound like an extreme at all.
| The sale and consumption of weed products seems to be quite
| limited to certain places. But at the end of the day, this
| is all about regulating something that people are doing
| regardless of legality. People can be severely addicted to
| gambling, eating, and sex. Addiction's a mental illness
| that should be treat as such, without punishing the whole
| world for it.
| daptaq wrote:
| Hope this won't lead to more smoking in public places. Every time
| I notice people consuming or having have had consumed the drug in
| some form, I found it even more insufferable than day-to-day
| cigarettes.
| iostream23 wrote:
| I'm unclear on what you are complaining about: other people
| enjoying other vices than your own or air pollution. While a
| particular odor to the stated air pollution can involve a
| personal preference, the odor is question arguably emits fewer
| carcinogenic substances and the rolling papers and filters
| involved certainly pollute less. Single-pull pipe smoking is
| rather common in some places, meaning the consumer makes one
| inhalation and exhalation of smoke and is done, not to mention
| the ubiquitous vaporizer. I do hope you aren't merely trodding
| on the relief of cannabis consumers not being legally repressed
| anymore, as that would be a prejudice 100+ years out of date.
|
| One additional point: you mention "having had consumed" meaning
| you feel at liberty to decide what other humans mental states
| should be?
| robocat wrote:
| HN guidelines: "Please respond to the strongest plausible
| interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's
| easier to criticize. Assume good faith.", and "Be kind. Don't
| be snarky.". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| I presumed the commenter is just extremely sensitive to the
| smell. The people I know like that don't have a choice - it
| seems they are biologically like that.
|
| They could have meant what you said... You could politely
| discover what they mean. If they were being rude, then
| perhaps try and help them to be more polite, to create a
| better community here. And IMHO downvoting is quick and
| appropriate if the comment is low value or inflammatory.
|
| Edit: you are inflaming the situation with multiple low
| quality comments on the parent comment - please don't do
| that. I am not a mod - I am just a user that wants this to be
| a friendly and informative place for everyone including you.
| daptaq wrote:
| > I presumed the commenter is just extremely sensitive to
| the smell. The people I know like that don't have a choice
| - it seems they are biologically like that.
|
| Yes, I should said this more explicitly.
| iostream23 wrote:
| I've addressed all your concerns in other comments here. I
| do believe that you should follow your own proposals and
| see that I mean no snark and am 100 earnest and engaged
| here. Please do read my other comments here. I have a
| personal stake in this and as such the OP is definitively
| treading on the tips of my toes, and it hurts, please stop.
| robocat wrote:
| As per sibling comment, you have misread the OP. The OP
| could have been clearer, but often that is due to writing
| in another language, which seems very possible when the
| base topic is about Germany.
|
| I don't feel you answered my concerns at all.
|
| It appears to me that your comments are similar behaviour
| to that you are accusing the OP of. If others think your
| responses are inflammatory, you are likely to get
| moderated. Your history of responses gets reviewed when
| considering moderation. Perhaps you are having a bad day,
| or even a bad life, but please try and follow the HN
| guidelines.
|
| I apologise that my comments come across to you as
| snarky, and that I have upset you. I put my time and
| effort into writing carefully, and I feel that I have
| been writing with good intention and in good faith:
| heaven knows whether my subconscious agrees!
|
| If anybodies comments, including my own, are
| inappropriate or in poor form then that is what the
| flagging system is for. If you think a comment is
| seriously outside of the norms, then you can email the
| moderators and ask for their help.
|
| Edit: Everybody expects disagreement here, and sometimes
| there are wildly divergent opinions on a topic. What
| matters is how you express your disagreement, and how
| others judge the tone and form of your comments. I am
| writing down the facts as I understand them: I am not
| trying to attack you or your opinions. I am still trying
| to learn how to write clearly without inflaming the
| situation, and unfortunately I often fail.
| iaabtpbtpnn wrote:
| You sound like you could use a puff from a joint.
| [deleted]
| rconti wrote:
| It seems fairly obvious that the subset of circumstances in
| which you become aware someone HAS ingested a drug (and is
| therefore intoxicated) would be more annoying than the superset
| of circumstances in which you merely see that someone is
| beginning to consume a drug.
| ohazi wrote:
| Not necessarily. If it's the smoke and smell that bothers me
| rather than intoxicated antics, I might be more annoyed by
| someone lighting up at the coffee table next to mine than if
| they were just sitting there stoned out of their mind.
| iostream23 wrote:
| Totally legit. I smoke at home or hidden away from sight or
| bothering others with the smell. I was referring to the op
| who is seemed to say they were irritated by other's
| consuming cannabis, which irritates me, as it's some
| apparatus designed to mess me up with no regard to my
| preference in remaining unmussed.
| daptaq wrote:
| There must have been a misunderstanding. I don't care
| about consumption per se, just the effect that smoking in
| public spaces has on my nose.
| LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
| You know what has more effect on my nose in public spaces
| than any smoke?
|
| The _stink_ of people, be it perfume, deodorant,
| hairspray, or the utter lack of washing and cleaning hair
| and clothes, sometimes even their breath from afar.
|
| Well at least pre-corona. Now I don't notice it so often,
| since I don't share that much space & time with them
| anymore.
|
| Anyway, that can even cause tears in my eyes and a
| strange sting in the nose, making it run. Smoke of any
| kind doesn't.
| iostream23 wrote:
| I've smoked daily since I was 14. I don't get intoxicated,
| it's my psychiatric meds, and I don't take kindly to
| meddlesome youngsters who think they know how to run my life
| better than I do, lol... /s ironic sarcastic reference to the
| notion that someone could ever be more sober or miserable
| than I am. I only work and have basically no fun and I've not
| had a day off in years, so I wish to be clear that people who
| character cannabis users as either lazy or intoxicated are
| tiresome and ignorant.
| oblak wrote:
| ok, I'll bite. Why is it worse, I mean "insufferable"?
|
| The whole point is not to be hunted for the horrible crime of
| smoking a joint. Is it any worse than drinking coffee or
| something? I think not but you obviously have your
| reservations.
| [deleted]
| daptaq wrote:
| I find it hard to breathe in spaces where people had either
| smoked Marijuana. The smell of something like coffee is far
| less invasive, so it doesn't disturb me as much.
| dahfizz wrote:
| > Is it any worse than drinking coffee or something?
|
| Yeah, that's the nature of smoking. You're forcing everyone
| else around you to breathe your smoke and smell your dank
| weed.
|
| You can drink your coffee, but you wouldn't try to force your
| coffee down my throat.
| oblak wrote:
| Hey, I am not advocating smoking of any kind near other
| people. That's just wrong.
|
| Just saying there are all kinds of bad smells/stuff in the
| air. I, for one, can't stand most cars. They smell bad and
| make a lot of noise.
| pimeys wrote:
| In Berlin tobacco and weed smoke is everywhere. I don't really
| see how legalizing weed would make it any worse. People already
| smoke it in bars and on the streets and Germany loves their
| cigarettes too...
| daptaq wrote:
| Sure, in cities like Berlin I am not surprised to here that
| more people consume it. But outside of big cities, I rarely
| encounter it. The only reason I don't like this legalisation,
| is that with the drug being more easy to obtain, more people
| might smoke it, leading to more smoke in public (at train
| stations, in parks, ...). I hope I am wrong, but intuitively
| this seems plausible.
| givemeethekeys wrote:
| While smoking cigarettes isn't illegal, it is certainly not a
| good look any more - thanks to controls on how it can be
| advertised and where it is allowed and the concentrated
| advertising campaign linking smoking to cancer.
|
| I can see marijuana taking a similar trajectory.
| iostream23 wrote:
| Excepting that it's not linked to cancer. Grant you that the
| majority of German "kieferen" mix with tobacco, as is the
| fashion. Tobacco is unhealthy, all medical evidence suggests
| completely different results from long term pure cannabis
| consumption and either alcohol or tobacco consumption.
| Hopefully regulators will consider evidence when determining
| appropriate regulations
| daptaq wrote:
| This is basically my hope too. I don't want the advances that
| have been made in removing tobacco from public spaces to be
| undone by legalising marijuana. It is great that it won't be
| treated as a criminal act to use/possess/sell it, but I don't
| want this to make smoking (be it with a different substance)
| more acceptable.
| ushakov wrote:
| Things will change when cannabis users (in Germany) stopped
| treated like criminals
| xcambar wrote:
| Where is "here"?
|
| The article mentions it is decriminalized in DE.
| skrause wrote:
| It's not really decriminalized. While you don't have to fear
| criminal prosecution in most cases (unless you're in Bavaria)
| they will punish you by taking away your driving license,
| even if you never actually drove under influence.
| ushakov wrote:
| not just that: employers, insurances and banks could use
| this information against you (police record = bad business)
|
| "decriminalised", but given "right circumstances" will
| screw you for years
| vb6sp6 wrote:
| we should probably put on our thinking hats and use the
| powers of deduction to figure out he is in place where it is
| not legal
| hobofan wrote:
| It is not obvious though if they mean Germany, where it is
| still illegal right now, and they are looking forward to
| the change, or if it is another country where it is illegal
| right now and the would like to see the same change
| happening.
| rightiousrob wrote:
| How hard is it to imagine that an hn user is not based in the
| us?
| xcambar wrote:
| very easy since I'm not.
|
| what did you understand or infer from my message?
| hervature wrote:
| How hard is it to imagine that an hn user is referring to
| "here" as hn?
| canadianwriter wrote:
| Mostly off topic but when I read these stories I'm always irked
| at the use of "marijuana" instead of cannabis. Maybe because I'm
| in Toronto where cannabis is fully legal and every store around
| me that sells it uses cannabis - not to mention the products all
| use that term as well.
|
| Marijuana just seems like your using old, slightly racist
| terminology. And makes me think of 4/20 BLAZE IT kind of crap.
| Which is probably why companies here use cannabis to go after the
| non "taking this is my entire lifestyle" crowd.
| sturza wrote:
| Marijuana is the dried leaves and flowers of the Cannabis
| sativa or Cannabis indica plant. I cannot imagine how the term
| is racist. But the fact thay it makes you think of 420, that's
| just you.
| [deleted]
| yodsanklai wrote:
| I agree with parent. Cannabis and marijuana are synonymous.
| Marijuana is more negatively connoted. I'd prefer to use
| Cannabis which is more neutral.
| caseyohara wrote:
| > The use of "marihuana" in American English increased
| dramatically in the 1930s, when it was preferred as an
| exotic-sounding alternative name during debates on the drug's
| use. _It has been suggested that in the United States the
| word was promoted by opponents of the drug, who wanted to
| stigmatize it with a "foreign-sounding name"_.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana_(word)#Early_use_of_.
| ..
| kahrl wrote:
| "It has been suggested" sounds like some weasel words from
| someone who doesn't want to back their claims. Even if this
| is true, who actually cares if people from the 30's thought
| foreign sounding words were scary? Shouldn't we strive to
| stick it to those fuddy duddies by continuing to use the
| actual Spanish word without fear?
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| Marijuana was like a barely existing Spanish slang promoted
| at the beginning of cannabis being illegal in the first half
| of the 20th century to make cannabis seem more foreign and
| worthy of a ban.
|
| It's definitely suspicious at least. If you really want you
| can view it as more cynically exploiting existing prejudice
| than prejudiced in and of itself, but I am not sure that is
| much of an exoneration.
| 3np wrote:
| Language evolves. The use is uncontroversial today and
| specifically refers to the flower.
|
| We're all aware of previously uncontroversial words that
| are taboo today. The reverse can happen as well.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| Sure, but also it just sounds weird to use a ramming
| together of names in Spanish as the formal word for
| anything in English. Especially when the thing comes from
| Asia.
| dahfizz wrote:
| How is "marijuana" racist?
| couchand wrote:
| If you'll believe it, here in 2021 the state of New York passed
| a law with "marihuana" (sic) in the name!
| throw_m239339 wrote:
| Saying marijuana is fine. It is offensive toward literally no
| group of people. Seems to me that some people are always
| looking for something to get offended about nowadays in order
| to control everybody else's speech.
| netizen-936824 wrote:
| That's exactly what it is. I make a point to use the term
| cannabis, as marijuana is simply slang with racist connotations
| attached due to the propaganda of the war on drugs
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| For similar reasons, I refer to burritos as tortilla bean
| wraps.
| trulyrandom wrote:
| Hah, I can't believe that Germany (of all EU countries) will
| likely be legalizing cannabis before the Netherlands.
|
| This is good news, though.
| posterboy wrote:
| They are not going to. I have not heard any plans to allow home
| growing, and I don't expect there will be anything that could
| cut into the tax profits. That means it is still prohibited in
| the most basic form. It's sinister.
| rpadovani wrote:
| Let's see if the government will stay alive for long enough to
| actually promote the law. It's the first government after-Merkel,
| I am really curious how things will go...
| alecco wrote:
| This sounds like a distraction to cover actual issues right now.
| Krasnol wrote:
| So your theory is that soon everybody will be so stoned that
| they stop caring about everything else or whom is this
| distraction supposed to be targetted on?
| y4mi wrote:
| I'm pretty sure his theory is that the whole discussion about
| cannabis is a distraction from other political topics, i.e.
| that our new Kanzler was one of the people responsible for
| the biggest corruption scandal in Germanys history (Google
| his name + CumEx) and other similar stuff.
|
| It's not so much what people are gonna do once it's passed
| and more about what controversial topics they can raise so
| people don't pay attention to other things.
|
| I personally have never had a worse outlook on Germanys
| political future. This will show any politician that they
| don't have to worry about anything and keep enriching
| themselves with no recourse to speak of.
| monopoledance wrote:
| This is a minor section of the coalition contract, and maybe
| the only point the parties agreed upon right from the beginning
| of talks. Kinda non-news, really.
|
| You see this on HN, because people want their big cannabis
| stocks go up. Btw. I very much doubt those will end up owning
| the biz in Germany, as the modalities of legalization will
| differ from what's happening in North America.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-24 23:03 UTC)