SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
AlterNet reports
Embracing a harm reduction and public health perspective, one of the world's most prestigious medical journals has released a signed editorial calling for the legalization, taxation, and regulation of currently illegal drugs.
In an editorial [May 10] entitled Drugs Should Be Legalized, Regulated, and Taxed, Fiona Godlee, editor in chief of the British Medical Journal, notes that under drug prohibition, the global trade "fuels organized crime and human misery", and asks, "Why should it not instead fund public services?"
Citing an opinion piece[1] in the same issue of the BMJ from British members of the Law Enforcement Action Partnership (LEAP, formerly known as Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) Jason Reed and Paul Whitehouse, Godlee notes that in the United Kingdom (as in the United States) "vast sums are spent prosecuting individuals and trying vainly to interrupt the flow of drugs into cities" while that money would be much better "spent on quality control, education, treatment for drug users, and child protection". Under legalization, "revenues could be diverted from criminal gangs into government coffers", she writes.
Godlee notes that the global drug prohibition consensus is fraying around the edges, and points to the example of Portugal, which decriminalized the possession of all drugs in 2001. There, drug use remains in line with levels in other European countries, but the harms associated with drug use under prohibition have decreased dramatically, particularly in terms of fatal drug overdoses and the spread of injection drug-related infectious disease.
[1] Bad link in TFA; corrected in TFS.
Previous: Portugal Cut Drug Addiction Rates in Half by Rejecting Criminalization
(Score: 4, Informative) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 15 2018, @05:46PM (16 children)
The Democrats famously poo-pooed the idea of marijuana legalization when Obama was elected.
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (former DNC head) is known to be in the pocket of the private prison industry.
Honestly, at this point I think the Republicans are more likely to be drug-friendly: John Boehner has switched sides and wants to legalize MJ. Just wait until someone figures out how to convince Trump that championing that cause will make him more popular, then it'll be done quickly.
(Score: 5, Funny) by bob_super on Tuesday May 15 2018, @05:53PM (1 child)
"Hey, Donald, did you know that this NY builder you don't like because his pretty wife said you're a moron, just got a giant contract building and maintaining private prisons? He said he would use the massive profits to build a taller tower just to cast shade on the Trump one. There's good money in that market because Sessions restarted the war on drugs, and he just bet his all company on that."
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 15 2018, @06:40PM
Hamilson. That was the name of the obese man who always seemed to be sitting on the park bench in a certain neighborhood. Although people in the neighborhood regarded this man as a bit of an eccentric, he was nonetheless very respected and well-liked. As Hamilson was relaxing on the bench, he spotted something that he could not ignore; he got up and walked towards it absentmindedly, and then took it with him into some bushes so that he could begin.
Wailing. As Hamilson slammed his penis deep into the little girl's vagina, she wailed and pleaded for him to stop. "If anyone here is to blame, it's you for being so cute!" the man said cheerfully. This always happened: Whenever Hamilson spotted a cute child, he always took them into the bushes so that he could play with them.
She wailed, she screamed, and she cried, but all of which only served to make Hamilson more excited. And the more excited and playful the man became, the more his fists rained down upon the child. Then, silence.
"Oops!" the man exclaimed. Once again, he had gotten too excited and rough, and so it broke. Hamilson, disappointed with what transpired, peeked out of the bushes and soon saw something that he could not possibly ignore.
Soon after, an obese man was seen walking absentmindedly towards a living, breathing toy...
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday May 15 2018, @06:08PM (13 children)
That's incorrect. The Democratic Party platform now includes removing cannabis from Schedule 1, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is working on a bill [soylentnews.org] to do so. There has been no similar activity on the Republican side, so they aren't going to do anything like that for years.
On the Republican side, President Trump's DEA man is ignoring studies [thehill.com] linking cannabis legalization to decreased opioid use. Trump's advisers have claimed that cannabis legalization is making the opioid crisis worse [soylentnews.org]. Republican Senator Cory Gardner had to play hardball [soylentnews.org] just to get Trump to respect states' rights and keep his campaign promises. Trump's Mean Keebler Elf remains bitterly opposed:
http://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/385132-an-easy-policy-fix-finally-jeff-sessions-should-reschedule-cannabis [thehill.com]
https://chicago.suntimes.com/cannabis/sanjay-gupta-jeff-sessions-medical-marijuana-cannabis-pot/ [suntimes.com]
At best, Sessions has been a good thing for legalization supporters by pissing everybody off and injecting uncertainty into the industry:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/05/06/marijuana-legalization-jeff-sessions-colorado-washington-controlled-substance-enforcement-column/573156002/ [usatoday.com]
Boehner's position is less relevant since he has retired and he has a business interest. He doesn't need to court voters.
Republicans remain in denial over the issue, and the people close to Trump are whispering the wrong things in his ear. When people whisper the wrong things into Trump's ear, you get the wrong things coming out of Trump's mouth. Republicans are not close to championing this cause. Check back in 2 years.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Tuesday May 15 2018, @07:03PM (6 children)
Right or wrong, for better or worse, Trump more often than not acts regardless of advice.
compiling...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Tuesday May 15 2018, @08:53PM (3 children)
Multiple factions surround President Trump and give him some competing viewpoints in many cases. He's also influenced by some people he talks to over the phone, or by news reports.
What's the difference between Trump and a sponge? (I'll let someone else come up with the punchline.)
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Tuesday May 15 2018, @10:16PM
Learned and wise as our cynicism may be, confusing lobbying and advising can only get you so far in a position of power. If a business man can't tell between a representation of a 3rd party interest or an honestly impartial advice, all they need to do is read through the reports and make their own decisions. However, a president doesn't have that privilege. In an age House and Congress representatives can't even read through the bills they're voting on, a president can't even find the time to read through the summaries and reports they're given and are forced to trust staffers to digest it all for them. So, when they end up favoring some lobbyist's phone call over the input of those they've hired over trust issues, that's what I call acting regardless of advice.
compiling...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 16 2018, @09:19AM (1 child)
see subject
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday May 16 2018, @09:25AM
The men squeezing the sponge can.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Funny) by DannyB on Tuesday May 15 2018, @09:35PM (1 child)
Trump doesn't even listen to:
1. The best legal advice money can buy
2. The advice of his own lawyers
(those are non-intersecting sets)
If a lazy person with no education can cross the border and take your job, we need to upgrade your job skills.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 16 2018, @01:07AM
He's clearly done plenty of sketchy and likely plenty of illegal things and faced effectively no consequences, so I wouldn't be too quick to badmouth his legal strategy, as unreasonable as it seems.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday May 15 2018, @07:08PM (2 children)
What is true, which GP correctly pointed out, is that national-level Democrats are much more in favor of marijuana legalization at the federal when they don't have the power to actually make it happen. It's one of many issues wheres the majority would be on their side if they did X, and whenever they don't have the power to make it happen they grandstand about doing X if elected, and once they do have the power to make it happen they ignore X entirely.
But yeah, the Republicans are quite consistently against pot legalization, because conservative != libertarian when it comes to personal freedoms.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday May 15 2018, @07:42PM (1 child)
The Schumer announcement is the most credible yet from the Democratic Party (from a Senate Minority Leader), although he has yet to publish the proposed bill. Schumer is also cosponsoring [merryjane.com] Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's hemp legalization bill, even though McConnell won't reciprocate on hemp's "illicit cousin".
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday May 15 2018, @08:09PM
It's the most credible yet, but that's not saying much. The Dems still don't have that much power in Congress, and Trump is the President and can easily veto anything they pass that doesn't have a sizeable amount of Republican support (which is unlikely, given the Republicans' history of obstructionism). So it still looks just a populist move to show "look! we tried!" when it inevitably fails.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 16 2018, @01:46AM
Just like the 85 (?) votes by the Republic Party to repeal the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") when Obama could veto them all. It's easy to posture when you have no power.
Granted it's better than nothing, and posturing isn't worthless. It's far from being conclusive evidence of a change of policy, though. Talk to me again when they actually could pass such a thing and still want to push it forward.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 16 2018, @11:54AM (1 child)
No activity on the republican side. Huh? Rand Paul (R) has been pushing for Cannabis legalization for years, and submitted legislation for it as recently this year.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Wednesday May 16 2018, @05:48PM
Truly weird Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky reminds me of a spoiled brat without a properly functioning brain. He was terrible at DEBATE! [twitter.com]
While Rand looks supportive of cannabis, I don't see where he has supported or co-sponsored a bill as far-reaching as Schumer's, including descheduling at the federal level.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Rand_Paul_Drugs.htm [ontheissues.org]
https://www.marijuanamoment.net/rand-paul-pushes-marijuana-amendments-funding-bill/ [marijuanamoment.net]
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/13/marijuana-legalization-2020-elections-241576 [politico.com]
I do see him in general saying that he supports ending the prohibition and letting states decide [newsweek.com]. But where's his legislation to that end?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]