Hacker News Reader

Comment by wowzap | Hacker News Reader

I just hope we don't end up like California and keep hundreds in fines for smoking in public, open containers in cars, having more than 30 grams, etc. People should be allowed to possess any amount they want, grow as many plants as they want, etc. What's the point of legalization if a police officer can still stop you and search to make sure you have under 30 grams? What's the point of legalization if smoking weed still prevents you from buying a gun or holding down a federal job?

I like Larry Sharpe's viewpoint here - Marijuana should be regulated like onions.

View on HN

> I just hope we don't end up like California and keep hundreds in fines for smoking in public, open containers in cars, having more than 30 grams, etc.

I don't see why we should treat marijuana more leniently than we treat alcohol. Drinking in public is already illegal in most places.

> What's the point of legalization if a police officer can still stop you and search to make sure you have under 30 grams?

Police officer cannot stop and search you without a probable cause.

> I like Larry Sharpe's viewpoint here - Marijuana should be regulated like onions.

Maybe, but let's regulate marijuana like alcohol first, and then, when we regulate alcohol like onions, we can move on to do the same with marijuana.

1. Drinking in public in California is a $100 fine, smoking marijuana in public is $250.

2. Probable cause - "our drug dog is trained to detect over 30 grams of Marijuana.", "I smelled marijuana and suspected an open container, asked to see the open container to verify it was legal, open container held over 30 grams."

3.You're right about alcohol... fun fact - it's still federally illegal to distill spirits.

> it's still federally illegal to distill spirits.

Without a distillery license. Which is not especially expensive, and is wholly reasonable considering the significantly higher technical and safety threshold of operating a distillery. Bathtub gin used to kill people.

Pretty sure you can get some kind of really cheap experimental type of license to distill as well.

Only illegal to distill spirits if you aren't licensed as done improperly you can make people seriously ill or blind them.

1. As far as the fines - it is kind of silly to fine people for doing those things. It's what they might to AFTER that should put them in jail. I DO think that "accident" should be considered "malice" when intoxicated in both cases (and other forms of mind alterations knowingly applied to oneself).

2. That's what I was going to point out about probable cause, that it's kind of laughable. Thanks!

3. I did not know that, crazy.

DC's legalization effort has been incomplete due to Congress undemocratically stepping in and overriding local laws, but the legalization measure specifically changed the definition of reasonable suspicion so that "smell of marijuana" cannot by itself be used to effect a search. Makes sense since part of the point of legalization was to reverse the unequal enforcement of drug laws against people of color. Seems like other places could easily adopt a similar rule.

>Maybe, but let's regulate marijuana like alcohol first, and then, when we regulate alcohol like onions, we can move on to do the same with marijuana.

But that leads to stupid laws around public consumption and possession, which make sense for alcohol but not for marijuana. It should be treated exactly like tobacco.

Maybe we should ban public use of tobacco.

Definitely we should ban all tobacco. There are just too many negatives to its production and consumption. Tobacco farmers should receive tail-out subsidies to convert to a different crop, or just retire, but the cultivation and sale of it must eventually be outlawed.

Convert to Tobacco farms to Cannabis farms?

Absolutely, as long as that cannabis is distributed in non-smokable form (vaping oil, edible supplements, whatever), and then only to those 21 and over.

Vaping ain't that great either.

All mind altering substance is not for kids.

Heck, even tobacco should be 21+

Tobacco is commonly subject to many laws (or standard leases) around public and even private consumption. Look at how few places in e.g. Finland or Hong Kong you can smoke a cigarette in compared to just two-three decades ago. In some countries, you may not be able to smoke in your own home or car if children are present or could be present (since toxins linger); if you rent, there are virtually no landlords left who will let you smoke inside; if you live in a block of flats with other people, you cannot light up on your balcony; parks may ban smoking, etc.

Personally I'm a big fan of laws that restrict where you're allowed to smoke. Tobacco smoke smells like death, so please keep it out of my public spaces.

Alcohol consumption can lead to violence. Marijuana does not lead to violence. There is an obvious difference here.

Many people, me included, disagree with laws preventing the open consumption of alcohol. I just don't see it as much different than a nice cup of coffee. Sure you might get drunkards in the streets, but to me, it's worth it for the additional freedom.

Alcohol regs are terrible. There are state stores, Sunday black outs, ABV limits, home distilling prohibitions, restaurant licensing based on food served or outright bans in neighborhoods, three tier distribution requirements, shipping restrictions, etc. It is no model for regulation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com