California bans drones from delivering marijuana | Hacker News Reader

California bans drones from delivering marijuana

theverge.com

59 pointsdvdhnt63 comments

Open articleView on HN

> Transportation may not be done by aircraft, watercraft, rail, drones, human powered vehicles, or unmanned vehicles.

What? Why no marijuana watercraft? In all seriousness though this seems very arbitrary.

> human powered vehicles

Does anyone have an idea why bicycles would be a problem?

I can only imagine this is borne out of "ways we saw marijuana transported while it was still illegal."

Completely spitballing this one, but I can imagine that a bike might be argued to not be a safe way to transport drugs or any sort of high-value delivery, since they are less easily secured and more easily stolen than a locked motor vehicle when it's parked outside an apartment building (for example).

^ This. The California government likes to regulate away things it thinks will be dangerous, or that it's citizens will be too ignorant to avoid doing. Honestly I'm kinda surprised they didn't specify armored car transport as the only acceptable option.

This is probably motivated in part by a desire to prevent legal in-state distribution from being easily parleyed into illegal interstate distribution. They want to be able to keep track of all the vehicles distributing mj. This is easier if they can only drive on roads and are required to have gps.

Since federal regulation of mj is built on the interstate commerce clause, actual interstate commerce is a likely trigger of conflict between the federal government and the California mj industry

In short: this regulation was passed to keep from giving the feds a very easy reason to raid the state government of California.

Sound accurate?

Seems reasonable considering all the ongoing raids on Colorado, Oregon, Washington, and Nevada governments.

From yesterday: Legal Marijuana Is Almost Here, If Only Pot Farmers Were on Board[0]

> California, which by one estimate produces seven times more marijuana than it consumes, will probably continue to be a major exporter — illegally — to other states. In part, that is because of the huge incentive to stay in the black market: marijuana on the East Coast sells for several times more than in California.

Interstate cannabis transport legalization appears to be the hurdle to California's reaping tax benefits from the industry. How will legalization in a few New England states impact Northern California's economy?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15210766

> this seems very arbitrary

It's not arbitrary at all. The only options remaining are 1) walking (totally impractical); and 2) driving a registered vehicle on public roads that are easy to spy on -- see e.g. http://gizmodo.com/feds-are-spying-on-millions-of-cars-with-...

This keeps marijuana inside state boundaries.

Why the ban on human powered vehicles? Sounds bad for the environment on the surface.

Cause you can pretty easily bike, with a big trailer of drugs, from one border town to another.

So dogsleds are horses ok?

"It's like Uber for Marijuana by Pony!"

Nope. "in person by enclosed motor vehicle" only. And the vehicle needs GPS monitoring.

Again, the goal is to make sure that legal marijuana delivery operations are demonstrably not moving legally grown California marijuana across state borders. To avoid federal involvement.

So ice cream trucks would be cool, right?

http://gta.wikia.com/wiki/Distribution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Ice_Cream_Wars

I'm not sure if that would count as "enclosed".

How about delivering marijuana by Mystery Machine?

http://scoobydoo.wikia.com/wiki/Mystery_Machine

The Mystery Machine has the uncanny ability to adapt to any given situation (and the conveniently packed items that might be needed in any given situation):

The back is filled with various equipments (ladder, lanterns, and ropes).

A bench running longwise can be stored in the rear of the van.

Also, the back can fit a table and chairs, plus the walls are lined with computer equipment; a large antenna can be attached on the roof.

Another time a table is included, the walls are lined with kitchen cabinets.

A lot of states have heavy restrictions on transport of alcohol, a sort of state-mandated middleman that is either parasitic or fulfills an important regulatory purpose depending on who you ask. This seems like a natural extension of that. In the article, it even specifies that deliveries must be accompanied by GPS.

Doesn't say anything about tunnels (another biz opportunity for The Boring Company?), or delivery via pneumatic tube.

It's also unclear if ballistic delivery plus a parachute qualifies as a vehicle. So, marijuana delivery by unpowered smart mortar . . . :-)

Drones already deliver medicine in California though https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/2/12350274/zipline-drone-del...

Zipline has no drone delivery operations in California, or anywhere in the US. That article was about starting operations in Maryland and Washington, but neither operation has started yet. They currently operate only in Rwanda, and should start in Tanzania.

http://www.flyzipline.com/service/

My bad, they're based in California but don't operate there. Thanks for the correction.

Cannabis, while undoubtedly a medicinal product, is one with a very high possibility of being used recreationally. Nobody is going to consider batting down a drone carrying chemotherapy drugs being delivered to a reservation, whereas the risk is a lot higher for pot brownies. If (and I don't know whether this is true) the cannabis delivery rules are similar in scope to alcohol delivery rules, I'm not going to get myself worked up over it.

I think you overestimate people. There are lots of people that would bat down chemo drugs if they thought they had a buyer.

"very high possibility of being used recreationally"

You mean like opioids?

Zipline's name is so bloody confusing. I saw a title some time ago which read "Medicine Delivered in Rwanda via Zipline" or something to that effect, and because a zipline is a real, tangible thing already, I just internalized the statement and didn't know until now that it's a drone company.

Wow, I saw that headline too and only realizing now from your comment what was meant!

Well, we don't want the drones getting high now do we?

I'm so so sorry, I just couldn't resist

Flagged. :p

Is no more than I deserve!

In all (okay, somewhat) seriousness, if they really such a demand for waterborne delivery of marijuana that has to be regulated against? Also, the regulations seem to specify that GPS must be used so that the vehicle and by extension the weed can be tracked at all times. Drones come with GPS chips that are just as easily tracked, no? This seems genuinely puzzling.

im guessing their concern is the drone malfunctions and drops the goods over an elementary school. They want hand to hand transactions with consenting adults

When humor is outlawed, only outlaws will have humor.

The problem is that if you allow witty comments that contribute nothing substantially, you will end up with nothing else but witty comments. This happened to a lot of subreddits on reddit.

Pretty much all of it. Except for askscience which is pretty strict on it

This place becomes more and more like reddit every day. Where is proper STEM discourse happening now?

"This place becomes more and more like reddit every day" is so old a meme here, that it wouldn't surprise me if a similar phrase was posted as one of the first 100 comments of HN's history.

While I appreciate your freedom to post your disagreement, it does not make my comment or perception of HN any less valid. My question was, where does proper STEM discourse happen these days? Surely everyone didn't fade into the ether in silence, so where is everyone? It is not unrealistic or asking too much to ask that comments are on topic and not of a comedic nature. I'm not whining here, I love comedy, I'm genuinely asking because I need someone to point me in the right direction of where I should excuse myself to.

The meme is older than the internet for sure,

"In a paper on 'Pure Mathematics for Engineering Students,' published in The Bulletin for March 1901, I expressed opinions which coincide with those given here today. I then said that instruction in mathematics for engineering students should have two objects (1) to develop an engineering mind, and (2) to develop mathematics as an instrument of research for the engineer. I came to these conclusion at that time as a result of inquiries made of graduates of several institutions, who were in engineering practice, and of their employers. From the latter, I have had the statement that it is inadvisable to place a man in the higher positions in engineering who has not has a good mathematical training, especially, in the calculus, which, they assert, develops those modes of thought which are necessary to the engineer." Arthur E. Hayes, Symposium on Mathematics for Engineering Students, 1907

It'd be great if someone could either answer me or refute my assertion instead of pointing to prior art as if it nullifies what was said. This, in itself, is an example of the topic post.

Yeah, I came here for a serious discussion about drones and marijuana. WTF??!

The drones could carry more marijuana if they removed the STEMs.

https://www.coloradopotguide.com/colorado-marijuana-blog/201...

The HN community certainly allows humor, but it has a pretty high bar. I prefer not having to sift through a wall of moderately amusing comments to find the interesting content.

Drones can clear a high bar.

Which is why they're banning drones getting high.

It could be a gateway to other types of drone delivery. We wouldn't want that.

Good to see California really tackling the big issues.

That's not a useful point of view. Should they only tackle one issue at a time, in order of priority?

They shouldn't tackle this at all...

By "this" do you mean marijuana legalization, regulation around the sale and delivery of marijuana, or specifically the part about drones?

I did mean the drone part, but now that you mention it ... all of it - regulation of cannabis should be like alcohol but even lighter IMHO

So you're saying that, yes, they should regulate it.

Out of the thousands of other issues facing the California government, where would you rank it?

Until they do this, no one can sell recreational marijuana legally in the state. The whole point of this is that they're making the regulations lighter. Is that really what you're against?

Yes, they should. You know someone in SV wanted to be the Uber of weed delivery through drones.

Lots of big people in tech do drugs. Steve jobs did acid and Carl Sagan smoked weed. If it weren't for progressive states like California we'd still be locking these people up. Maybe there's people in jail for marijuana possession that could really be benefiting society if they were free. In theory there could be someone who's capable of curing cancer but they can't because they're locked up over something harmless. Part of legalizing is regulating.

Agreed. Getting regulations in place for a new $5 billion industry is a huge issue.

In regulated states transport must happen in a locked container, fixed to the vehicle, operated by a licensed driver. The driver, and vehicle must me registered with the State agency. CA is likely following existing legal designs.

Hard to do those things on bikes or drones.

"Transportation may not be done by ... human powered vehicles ..."

Does that mean no bike deliveries?

>The Bureau also specifically states that those delivering the cannabis aren’t allowed to consume the substance while out on the delivery.

Since driving under the effects of marijuana is already not allowed, maybe they are specifying it for non-driving people?

Brings up an interesting problem...How do the police pull over a drone or rover etc?

Should these vehicles have visibly identifiable plates/cards?

Yep, the FAA requires drones to have visible identifier if over 0.55 lbs. There's even a couple sites[1][2] to help manage it, although I'm not sure how beneficial they are... I've only been flying drones in Canada.

[1] https://drone-registration.net/

[2] https://www.droneid.us/

How about T-Shirt Guns?

http://www.tshirtguns.com/

Damn, so does this mean I need to actually take off my VR apparatus to receive delivery of my dank legal weed?

I can still pay with Bitcoin, right? Sorry I mean Bitcash. Wait no, Dogecoin? Or was it Litecoin?

For real though, 2017 produces the best ever news headlines.

Would other industries be wise to expect such regulations?

All of my "Drone Uber for [weed, pills, guns, flammable materials, knives, slingshots, katanas, scissors, ...]" ideas are now in limbo.

No sequel to Air Bud?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com