Mexico's Supreme Court has decriminalised the private use of cannabis by adults

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-57645016

by pmoriarty • 5 years ago

392 275 5 years ago

bbc.co.uk

It's a sad state of affairs when the judicial system of a country feel empowered to pass laws by themselves.

  -"Today is a historic day for liberties," Supreme Court president Arturo Zaldívar said.

Sounds political to me.

toomuchtodo• 5 years ago

The court reiterated constitutional rights of the citizens legislators infringed on with legislation. Checks and balances.

jokethrowaway3• 5 years ago

You got that wrong. The legislation prohibiting cannabis was unconstitutional.

jasonwatkinspdx6• 5 years ago

You are ignorant of how the Mexican legal system works.

FridayoLeary2• 5 years ago

educate me. please.

h2odragon• 5 years ago

Wasn't its banning in the first place an example of international pressuring bullying a smaller nation to pass laws its people didn't want? Did anyone expect the laws to be effective?

jokethrowaway3• 5 years ago

Totally but you can say that for a lot of laws that benefit a few rich companies. Politicians with zero accountability and a 5 years time span serve whoever pays more.

adventured2• 5 years ago

Or laws that primarily benefit a small number of rich countries, which is also a very common tactic. The latest big group move is to attack smaller nations competing with lower corporate income tax rates with an enforced minimum. The rich nations are trying to strangle their competitors through a globally mandated minimum corporate tax rate, wiping out a very lucrative path to rise (attract investment, businesses, jobs) for underdeveloped or otherwise poorer nations. It worked so extraordinarily well for Ireland they can't tolerate any more outcomes like that from smaller, weaker nations. They're not willing or able to go lower (Germany, France, the US, Japan, Australia, Canada, etc), so they're going to try to make sure nobody else can either.

vmception3• 5 years ago

Does anyone understand the ruling and judicial process there, I'm assuming its in Spanish and I also don't know what the case was about. Was this appellate or original jurisdiction, if so how and if not, is that a factor in the Mexican Supreme Court?

scrooched_moose2• 5 years ago

I'm still piecing it together, but what I've found so far:

In 2018 the Supreme Court declared the prohibition unconstitutional, and gave the legislature a deadline to pass a legalization bill - all the rules necessary for dispensing, growing, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_in_Mexico#2018_Suprem...

The deadline came and went several times, with a few extensions, and the ruling today was the court decriminalizing it on their own because the legislature couldn't get it done after 3 years and were asking for another extension (see below; they originally had 90 days to do it and were granted over 30 months worth of extensions).

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/mexicos-supreme-court-strike...

I haven't tracked down what prompted the 2018 ruling.

Edit: What I've found:

Mexico seems to have a system where 5 similar rulings on the same matter by the Supreme Court set binding judicial precedent for all other judges, and starts a timer whereby the legislature must resolve contradictions. 2 seemingly minor cases in 2018 gave them the 5 needed and started the process:

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/mexican-supreme-court-strike...

Seems like this is about as far as I'm going to get without learning Spanish.

Edit2: Probably the last update, but I found a bit about the "5 Ruling" thing:

Later, if the Chambers or the Full Court set case law by five consecutive and uninterrupted decisions, the Supreme Court, once again, will inform the issuing authority of the norm in order to amend the un-constitutional part of the norm within ninety days.
If the unconstitutionality problem persists and it is not solved, the Full Court, with the vote of eight of its members, will expel the norm from the Mexican legal system. If it is a criminal norm, it may have re-troactive effects. It must be noted that this procedu-re is not applicable to norms involving tax matters.

https://www.scjn.gob.mx/sites/default/files/pagina/documento...

vmception3• 5 years ago

interesting, strange! thanks for finding that source outside of the marijuana activist sites

renerthr• 5 years ago

That 2018 ruling from the SCJN (Mexico's Supreme Court) was about individual cases. It looks like the day counter for Congreso de la Union (Mexico's Congress) to legislate on the issue started on February 2019 [0].

[0] https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Reformas-para-uso-l...

xtracto• 5 years ago

Individuals took the case to the supreme court and won . 5 times as someone else said. The supreme court gave Congress enough time to create sensible laws for legal consumption. Congress didn't do its job (all the government systems in mexico are a huge joke. Congress is one of them). After giving them 2 or 3 extensions. The deadline arrived and the Supreme court made it into law.

Congress is VERY political, while Supreme Court is not. I feel that Congress let it's time expire so that the "blame" on making it legal falls in the SC.

Source: Mexican living in Mexico.

easytiger7• 5 years ago

Here's my problem with legalising weed: Smoking it has external problems that are difficult to ever resolve. If you have ever lived beside someone who smokes weed the smell is all permeating, lingers and is absolutely vile. With more people living in apartment buildings it is an increasing problem I have observed.

maloshackeros• 5 years ago

Could be said with anyone that has a drug or alcohol abuse...

easytiger7• 5 years ago

No. It couldn't. How?

bitcurious• 5 years ago

Since legalized weed in MA most consumers in my circle have switched to edibles and vaping, as they are now available and provably* safe. Previously both were something of a crapshoot.

pmoriarty16• 5 years ago

I like the smell of most strains of cannabis, but sometimes it is gross (I suspect because it's been mixed with tobacco).

If it bothers you, you could take it up with your neighbors just as you would if they were blasting loud music late at night.

Criminalizing it just leads to absolutely ruined lives and misery on a much worse scale than just an unpleasant smell.

adventured2• 5 years ago

Taking it up with the neighbors will work zero times out of zero. If you're lucky you'll get a brief reprieve, which will then slip back. This goes for most any annoying, persistent externality when living amongst piles of other people. Their habits and behaviors are not going to change voluntarily to please strangers, even if they initially make a small token gesture to be polite.

For anyone dealing with that situation, the only truly effective solution is to make sure the next time that you choose an apartment complex where the landlord does not allow smoking on the premises (whether tobacco or marijuana).

easytiger7• 5 years ago

Criminalizing it just leads to absolutely ruined lives and misery on a much worse scale than just an unpleasant smell.

Not really. If you can't sleep in your own bed because a pungent smell of shit permeates your home that's not acceptable.

You might be happy to live like that but civilised people are not

sigstoat• 5 years ago

i've heard the same complaints about people who cook with curry.

edgyquant7• 5 years ago

That’s ridiculous curry smells amazing

csnover• 5 years ago

Cigarettes are legal and cause exactly the same kinds of problems. Every apartment complex I’ve lived in has had some smoke-free policy. If yours doesn’t, consider bringing it up with the landlord. I can’t imagine they like having their units ruined by smokers any more than you do.

javiramos• 5 years ago

The smell of my neighbor's cooking is also all permeating, lingering and absolutely vile.

jokethrowaway3• 5 years ago

True, if you smoke it can be as bad as cigarettes.

Similarly to cigarettes, if you vape cannabis the smell is much much much more tolerable, it doesn't linger and it's much reduced.

I have people vaping nicotine in my building and, sure, I'm not a fan of smelling vanilla or whatever flavour they're vaping today, but it doesn't last long and it doesn't linger.

bhawks4• 5 years ago

You could make a similar argument about playing loud music.

Apartments, HOAs and similar communities are free to specify community rules, expectations and consequences in a contract/lease. When a party breaks those conditions then allow the community to enforce the contractual remedies.

There is no reason to involve the state here to take away a person's life and liberty. Just allow people to interact (or not interact) voluntarily.

edgyquant7• 5 years ago

Most places have sound restrictions though, not the building or community but as a city ordinance.

easytiger7• 5 years ago

Nope. Different countries have different rules. Invoking lease breach contracts in my country requires a high court judgement. That would take potentially years to achieve and a lot of money and multiple stakeholders involvement.

Unfortunately keeping weed a criminal substance is the best option as police enforcement can be sought to counter anti social behaviour.

Furthermore, noise is regulated by local authorities in my jurisdiction

vmception3• 5 years ago

so you just aren't aware of those who use edibles, got it

easytiger7• 5 years ago

So that represents 100% of THC users does it?

nickik• 5 years ago

Federal regulation that puts people in prison vs. the need for minimal community organization.

Tough choice.

hackermeows• 5 years ago

I could say the same about bacon

timbit42• 5 years ago

Smokers need to be encouraged to switch to vaping.

bagacrap3• 5 years ago

guess we should criminalize bowel movements

drummer• 5 years ago

Great. Everyone should be free to put into their body whatever they please. And nature cannot be made 'illegal'.

Jeff_Brown• 5 years ago

The question is what the implications are for a Mexican society where drug gangs are more than a menace. As opposed to legalization, mere decriminalization will increase demand without providing new, legal means to get the marijuana.

Then again the gangs get a very small portion of their income from domestic weed sales, so maybe this won't make the situation worse.

bagacrap3• 5 years ago

agree but weed is not really natural any more as we've bred it to be far more potent (thc%) than wild varieties

whalesalad• 5 years ago

Let’s keep this train movin’ baby!

scrooched_moose2• 5 years ago

If you saw Clarence Thomas's comments today, it seems a lot more likely:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/clarence-thom...

raunak2• 5 years ago

Not as if it matters as long as the GOP holds out on passing anything related to legalization. What a joke of a party.

seibelj• 5 years ago

High school, ~2005. A classmate's dad was a fairly high up DEA agent and he came to class to talk about his drug warrioring. Despite all his warrioring, he sadly stated that the DEA probably seized less than 1% of all drugs entering America.

So I raised my hand and asked if all the billions we spent on the drug war were wasted considering it seems like a total failure. He about had an aneurysm! Looked like his brain was going to explode that someone would ask this. I wonder how many people devoted their entire lives to this stupid, useless war. Probably one of the most destructive, idiotic things you could spend your life doing.

cartoonworld5• 5 years ago

Its true, people will grasp at the most emotionally satisfying course of action with only a measured minority stopping to consider the vision, the math, the costs (societal and otherwise) and the sense.

I suspect when those same enraged majority hear "stupid, useless war." (I totally agree by the way) They register it in the same way again: "What?! You want your kids to become drug addicts?"

Congratulation to sense, and congratulations to Mexico.

cartoonworld5• 5 years ago

Late reply, I just listened to Michael Garfield's Future Fossils podcast with guest Leidy Klotz[0] last night.

The subject was subtractive design. Very interesting, part of the discussion regards an 'additive bias' in our thinking. Klotz recounts an academic study he undertook to measure the bias of adding VS subtracting to solve a given problem.

I mention this because I think this bias could be useful while analyzing these sort of errors.

[0] https://futurefossils.net/

71a54xd• 5 years ago

This is cool, but clearly laws never really disincentivized bad actors in Mexico. Now I'm just wondering if I can have Fentanyl with my legal Mexican weed?

cartoonworld5• 5 years ago

Why would they spike it with fentanyl when people will pay more for the real deal?

busymom014• 5 years ago

fentanyl provides a "better high" in very small dosages as compared to other heroine or others. Hence dealers trying to make a bigger profit lace their heroine with fentanyl. This is also why users often accidently overdose on heroine because they inject it using the heroine measurements but since it's got fentanyl, it's a lot more potent and thus easily overdosed on.

stjohnswarts4• 5 years ago

There are large swathes of Mexico that are under cartel control, thousands of square miles, so I don't think we can really don't think this case makes much difference.

jp0d4• 5 years ago

This should be the way everywhere. There is no reason for weed to be illegal when tobacco is legal. I don't smoke either but I support legalisation or at the very least decriminalisation. At least that way the countries can get tax money and also help people who need counselling instead of charging them with unnecessary crimes. They did this in the Australian Capital Territory. Hopefully they'll legalise it in most states.

foxes6• 5 years ago

Because x bad thing is allowed we should also allow y? Ridiculous. I agree it shouldn’t be criminal and having people put into jail over small amounts. But if anything tobacco and alcohol should be restricted too.

enchiridion4• 5 years ago

Are people really so inept that they need the government up tell them what they can and cannot do with their own bodies?

Study and publicize the risks, the rest should be left to personal decisions.

jp0d4• 5 years ago

While I agree with you partially, this is a slippery slope. Sugar and processed food are really bad for you too. Should we start banning or restricting access to those too?

cartoonworld5• 5 years ago

Marijuana certainly shouldn't be legalized because tobacco is legalized. Marijuana should be legalized because it is relatively benign, easily cultivated, useful, interesting and dare I say pretty good.

saiojd• 5 years ago

You're getting buried because of your political opinion, but I agree that "there is no reason for weed to be illegal when tobacco is legal" makes no sense whatsoever... I thought we were supposed to be nerds that overvalued logical thought here ;)

cgrealy2• 5 years ago

Tobacco and alcohol are restricted. Almost every country has rules around how old you must be to purchase or consume them, where you can purchase them, where you can consume them, how much you can consume before driving (in the case of alcohol), etc.

There's no reason we can't apply the same reasonable controls to cannabis.

TylerE2• 5 years ago

No, it should be fully legalized, not just decriminalized.

Decriminalization is this weird grey area where it's legal(ish) to possess small quantities, but generally not to produce, sell, or distribute.

austhrow7432• 5 years ago

It’s weird as fuck to me that decriminalisation is even considered because one of the (or just the?) largest negative effects of people doing illegal drugs is the large crime organisations built to provide them. As well as the then poor quality control resulting in people overdosing because they didn’t know what they were using, although not really a problem with weed specifically.

Decriminalisation keeps the organised crime and dodgy product while removing any sort of demand reducing effect keeping it illegal had.

Semaphor• 5 years ago

That depends on the implementation, though, doesn’t it? After all, in the Netherlands, it’s only decriminalized, yet there are stores selling it all over the country.

busymom014• 5 years ago

As someone who used to be against drug (including weed) legalization, I had my opinion changed completely by this article few years ago. I shared it with a few of my right leaning friends and several of them also had their opinions changed:

Legalize It All: How to win the war on drugs

https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/

It's an excellent read which addresses both sides of the drug legalization debate, side effects of the legalization and how to prevent the bad side effects and presents similar actions in other countries.

A significant majority of my conservative friends are also moving in this direction. Conservative leaning Justice Clarence Thomas today said federal laws against marijuana may no longer be necessary: "The federal government's current approach is a half-in, half-out regime that simultaneously tolerates and forbids local use of marijuana,” the conservative Supreme Court justice wrote.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/clarence-thom...

Now, I am for legalizing and pardoning (non-dealing/manufacturing) weed, cocaine and mushrooms. The only reason I am hesitant for heroine, meth and fentanyl is because if I remember right, heroine and meth get laced with fentanyl which is very easy to overdose on. But I am willing to be corrected if that's not the case.

The last month's ban on menthol cigarettes and flavoured tobacco is a step backwards unfortunately. Considering menthols are preferred by 86% blacks and 46% hispanics, it will just create a new black market and put more of them in prison.

With that said, I don't want everywhere to devolve into San Fransisco either where you see needles everywhere and addicts tweaked out everywhere. Most people who are against legalization aren't going to agree with it if they see things like how San Fran is turning out. So the legalization must be done correctly.

If they are legalized and provided via stores which check ID, that would reduce the black market, reduce cartels across the border, reduce gangs, drug dealing and reduce the prison population which had played a major role in wreaking havoc on many families. It would also reduce policing gone wrong / corruption and have less "rebellious" kids doing it.

LinuxBender3• 5 years ago

It has been decriminalized then re-criminalized [1] before. To end this loop, lets just legalize anything that doesn't hurt others and let people decide what is good or bad for themselves, given we follow this logic on substances and habits such as alcohol, sugar, sun bathing, throwing darts, parachuting, hang-gliding, replying to emails whilst drunk. I would wager that driving a car is a higher risk to others than inhaling or ingesting a drug though I don't have statistics to back that up.

[1] https://theconversation.com/re-criminalizing-cannabis-is-wor...

jimbob45• 5 years ago

Addiction hurts others though. You can’t get physically addicted to most of the things you listed.

umvi• 5 years ago

To end this loop, lets just legalize anything that doesn't hurt others

Everything hurts others. People and their actions don't exist in a vacuum - we are all players on a team called "society"; the actions of people, even if done privately, can end up affecting the performance of the team. Cars, alcohol, and tobacco are all legal, and all of those things end up harming others directly or through second/third order effects.

I'm not necessarily against decriminalizing or even legalizing marijuana, but I don't think the reason for doing so should be because it "doesn't hurt others", but rather because governments should infringe on liberties as little as possible even if it means bad consequences could emerge from abuse of said liberties.

rayiner4• 5 years ago

To end this loop, lets just legalize anything that doesn't hurt others and let people decide what is good or bad for themselves

I used to think that but I don’t anymore. Not having your shut together and not being a contributing member of society hurts others, so drugs aren’t harmless. Drug users are people’s kids, parents, etc., who have responsibilities and often can’t meet them because of their drug use and that hurts people. And the ship has probably sailed on letting drug users die in the street if they need help so the cost of welfare and services are also a burden.

The real question to me is whether making drugs illegal actually creates more burdens than it avoids. I suspect the answer is that if the culture condones drug use, you’ve already lost that battle and making it illegal is pointless. Laws should help reinforce norms. If the norms have broken down, enforcement of the law needs to be too coercive to be feasible. For example divorce also imposes tremendous social costs, but we probably can’t fix that by repealing no-fault divorce laws.

rayiner4• 5 years ago

I’m not super up to date on medical literature, but are the mental effects of cannabis the same as tobacco? Nicotine is a stimulant. I know a few potheads that whittled their lives away high, but tobacco doesn’t seem to have that effect.

pmoriarty16• 5 years ago

Tobacco is a sacred plant in some contexts, like in Native American ceremonies, where it's not used for its stimulant effects.

Cannabis too can be used sacramentally, spiritually, recreationally, or medicinally. It can be an appetite stimulant or a sex enhancer. Some can get insight through it, while others prefer to get so stoned they can't think.

It's helped me to reconnect with my feelings and motivated me to seek therapy. It can be a wise teacher if you listen.

Or you can watch cartoons on it and eat snacks..

The many uses of it are not mutually exclusive, but how you use it and what you get out of it is your choice.

rantwasp30• 5 years ago

is this causation or correlation? do you know potheads that are wildly successful? because I do. And it does not seem to be linked to weed

hourislate• 5 years ago

It's unbelievable that in 2021 Cannabis is still a Schedule 1 Drug but Alcohol and Tobacco are responsible for more death and have killed more people in America than all the Wars.

https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/features/excessive-alcohol-death...

Excessive alcohol use is responsible for more than 95,000 deaths in the United States each year, or 261 deaths per day.

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/index.htm

Each year, nearly half a million Americans die prematurely of smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke. Another 16 million live with a serious illness caused by smoking. Each year, the United States spends more than $225 billion on medical care to treat smoking-related disease in adults.

Our Government is a Kakistocracy. I really don't believe the current administration will legalize it and any election promises were lies.

rantwasp30• 5 years ago

you should see what sugar does. I think sugar is even worse than alcohol. We put that shit in everything and our kids are addicted to it by the time they are 5. it's ridiculous. but... weed! think about the children!

chillwaves• 5 years ago

I'm with you, but I am afraid we are alone out here.

Maybe if we could get people to think of sugar as a drug. At least it is refined in a way that makes it dangerous.

unishark3• 5 years ago

I'd say society is converging towards outlawing all three. Both smoking and alcohol are vastly more limited and regulated than they used to be. Activist groups like MADD who are blocking decriminalization would certainly be happy to also ban all of the above.

rantwasp30• 5 years ago

It's supersad to me that in 2021 this subject is controversial. I think the "war on drugs" charade has gone long enough and it's time to actually do the right thing. Stop targeting minorities with this stupid war and legalize ALL drugs. Period. Offer rehab programs + make sure that whatever is on the market is safe and the effects are well documented and understood.

mynameisash2• 5 years ago

legalize ALL drugs

I'm no expert here, and I hope I'm not misreading your statement, but couldn't this be swinging too far in the other direction? It seems like equating marijuana with, say, heroin and meth -- they're all in the category of 'drugs', and we know pot isn't addictive like opiates. The neural pathways these compounds take are important.

I'd certainly argue legalization of pot is overdue, but does that mean nothing should be illegal?

Not exactly drawing my line in the sand, as I haven't give this much thought. I'm genuinely interested in perspectives on the legalize everything vs some things.

pmoriarty16• 5 years ago

Adults should be allowed to have any mind state they want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

If someone wants to have fun skydiving and risk crashing their head in to the ground, let them. It's their choice. If overindulging in whatever activity interferes with a person's life, that should be a medical issue not a criminal one.

The War on Drugs is an abject failure and hurts much more than it helps. People are going to be doing these drugs anyway, only with the War on Drugs they're going to be doing so in much more damaging ways (from playing Russian Roulette with mystery drugs, and from the harm that arrests by police, imprisonment, and destruction of families and these people's futures cause).

rantwasp30• 5 years ago

ALL drugs. ALL of them. It works. It has been done before and it was wildly successful.

https://time.com/longform/portugal-drug-use-decriminalizatio...

zwkrt2• 5 years ago

I work at a shelter, let me give my on-the-ground opinion. People who get hooked on drugs normally do so because their life is awful. Opioids, amphetamines, and barbiturates (not common b/c of cost) are all different ways to escape reality. This checks out if you think of the main demographics of users: the homeless, the unemployed, the lonely elderly, poor rural workers, “problem” students, cooped up housewives. People with things going for them and/or who have a sense of purpose tend not to take these drugs, because the negative side effects are too great, mainly that no one wants to hang out with you if you are strung out.

And the drugs are not in scarce supply. They are not hard to find. What they /are/ though is incredibly dangerous. Most people taking them are very short on cash because they are hooked on drugs, so the drug is getting in the way of paying for food, housing, and family. And drugs are almost always cut with cheaper additives. Opioids are often cut with wildly addictive chemicals that are 100s or 1000s of times stronger than what users are paying for. Needles are expensive and controlled so they get reused. Uppers are cut with many kinds of other amphetamines with awful downsides and agitation that lasts for days on end. Alcohol is so cheap and available we don’t even consider it a dangerous drug, but those dependent on it will die of incredibly painful seizures if they stop taking it.

So put this all together and what we have is a nationwide mental health crisis being compounded by the fact that the easily available medicine people are using to self medicate is illegal, and that makes it dangerous.

Making all drugs legal is only one small part in solving the problem, but if it was legal we wouldn’t be dealing with homemade meth, fentanyl, relapse overdoses, and death by involuntary withdrawal (i.e., running out of money for the drug you are physically dependent on).

Legalized drugs won’t cause your children or loved ones to start doing drugs, a lack of opportunity will.

lm28469• 5 years ago

Decriminalising the use, even of hard drugs, seems to be a net negative for society (see Portugal's case [0])

They're not going to sell meth at walmart if that's what you're worried about.

People addicted to hard drugs are not going to stop because it's illegal, and people who aren't already addicted won't start shooting heroin all of a sudden because it's decriminalised

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal#Observ...

godelski4• 5 years ago

What's crazy to me is almost 70% of Americans are in favor[0], with about 50% of Republicans being on board (48% Republicans, 72% Independents, 83% Democrats). It is insane to me that the Democrats are not pushing this forward. It is an easy win. It creates more jobs. It is the only think you can say "we're going to put a 30% tax on the sale of" and people will rejoice. I just don't get it. It's roughly the same as support for gay marriage is _today_[1] (I 'm not trying to use the comparison as a human rights issue but because it is another controversial topic where people can guesstimate how controversial the opinion is)

I can understand how they are more hesitant with other drugs and possession (though I'm with you on full decriminalization like Oregon did), but I at least understand this one. I _do not_ understand how weed isn't legal yet. It's very popular, profitable, and will help reduce issues in South America.

Edit: I think there even is a double win strategy. First you reschedule the drug. Second you legalize it. So even if you want to play political games there's advantage. The numbers above were for full legalization but they just rise when you include medicinal (less people are ready for full legalization but in favor of medical and rescheduling).

[0] https://news.gallup.com/poll/323582/support-legal-marijuana-...

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486/record-high-support-same...

dabfiend192• 5 years ago

if the taxes are too high, the market will fail and the majority of people will still use the black market. they'll get a lower tax yield and less safety for users.

jasonwatkinspdx6• 5 years ago

I think it boils down to a lot of our politicians being old, scared of being perceived as weak on crime, and some pretty heavy lobbying efforts by tobacco and alcohol companies.

I'm sure the DEA is fighting it as hard as they can too. Same with the police union lobby.

I do think it'll happen in the near term, probably faster than people expect just like with gay marriage. Though I also think there will be a few holdout states.

eurasiantiger5• 5 years ago

will help reduce issues in South America

This is not in the interests of your money-owners.

te_chris• 5 years ago

New Zealand had a referendum on leaglisation with a 52/48 opposed result.

Instead of reading this as rightly that people wanted change, Ardern has done nothing.

tolbish5• 5 years ago

Not to pull the "think of the children" card, but if it were as easy for kids to obtain heroin as it is for them to obtain alcohol...

rantwasp30• 5 years ago

it's not easy for kids to obtain alcohol.

Also, if your safety net is that big brother is going to prevent your kid from doing heroin... well... you're gonna have a bad time. Education is key. Having a good and nurturing relationship with your kid is key.

Anecdotally: there are places in the world where kids can have alcohol even as young as 10-12. Not legally, but within the family and it's not taboo for a kid to try it out if they're curios. I'm going to let you guess which places have more trouble with alcohol abuse: places where it's treated like any other thing and kids can try it or places where it's illegal to drink it until you're 18 or 21.

onlyrealcuzzo• 5 years ago

Most people aren't going to stick a needle into their arm to get high unless they've tried many other drugs already.

And given alternatives, most people probably wouldn't try it - especially given it's reputation.

cloverich5• 5 years ago

Where I grew up (middle class suburb) it _was_ easier to obtain drugs than alcohol. This is not an uncommon experience.

29athrowaway• 5 years ago

Legalization of alcohol, marijuana, psylocibin, etc. is not the same as the legalization of opioids and other more destructive drugs.

IMO, dealers should be punished harshly and addicts should be treated as patients rather than criminals.

rantwasp30• 5 years ago

the point is people 1) should be educated 2) should make up their own damn minds.

qwerty4561272• 5 years ago

legalize ALL drugs

It's worth mentioning that legalization doesn't mean unregulated availability to everybody.

Ironically, getting even non-narcotic prescription meds often is harder than it is to get illegal substances.

spicyramen• 5 years ago

I'm all for it, but is very annoying having kids and.going to the park and some pot head is smoking because he is free to do so

fy20• 5 years ago

A lot of parks in my city are no smoking and no drinking. There's always one or two people who ignore the rules, but compared to how many there would be otherwise it's good. If someone is doing it near the kids playground I kindly remind them and ask them to go elsewhere while my kids play.

dabfiend192• 5 years ago

I'm in favor of people smoking pot anywhere you can smoke cigs. most parks have no-smoking laws.

petre3• 5 years ago

Maybe ban smoking in parks and beaches and other places where people usually take their kids?

mrwww• 5 years ago

letting people grow their own is a great step that might take some profit away from the cartels. But part of the game should really be to make the production and large scale sale legal and controlled, and a non-cartel business. Leaving this massive business to organized crime is a huge problem.

qwerty4561272• 5 years ago

"By adults" means teens will still go to jail?

Mexico's Supreme Court has decriminalised the private use of cannabis by adults

Related Stories