Geohot Arrested for Marijuana Possession En Route to SXSW | Hacker News Reader

Geohot Arrested for Marijuana Possession En Route to SXSW

iclarified.com

79 pointsjetxs56 comments

What will this look like 20 years from now when marijuana is decriminalised? I always wonder that when seeing these sad stories. How will our future selves view the ignorance of the past in regards to drug laws?

Even 5 years ago I never thought gay marriage had a chance in America. But now it seems like just a matter of time and entirely obvious. There will come a tipping point with drugs laws in America where marijuana decriminalization seems equally inevitable. Unfortunately we still have a ways to go.

It likely is not going to take 20 years... at least, for states that aren't Texas. My state (Washington) is the front-runner to regulate the sale of marijuana in this year. I-502 polled with an 8 point lead last month, with 47% in favor, 39% opposed, and 15% undecided. [1] Of course, the initiative in California polled well last year and still failed, but this is almost certainly going to pass in less than twenty years on the west coast.

[1] http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_WA_2...

> at least, for states that aren't Texas.

Depends on where in Texas. This was on the Austin news last week. Sorry for the blogspam, best source I could find:

http://pics.blameitonthevoices.com/052011/fox_news_marijuana...

The federal government can and will still enforce its more severe marijuana laws against residents of states without such laws.

The Supreme Court has taken this case (Gonzales v. Raich) and decided that state medical marijuana laws provide no protection. The court decided 6-3 against medical marijuana laws with one justice a cancer patient and one's husband a cancer patient at the time providing two surprise votes for sanity; most observers expect such state reforms to never again have more than one vote (Clarence Thomas) on the court since those two soon died and retired.

Obama has been an exceptionally lenient president, reducing the prosecution of medical marijuana patients so long as they aren't caught in his frequent raids of buyers' clubs and aren't involved in any kind of commerce or production. Even licensed facilities have been granted no leniency. States that consider state provision and regulation of marijuana have been consistently threatened by Obama's AG Eric Holder with prosecution and incarceration of state officials.

That will likely be enough to defeat legalization initiatives and certainly end the likelihood of measures passed through the legislatures.

But if legalization initiatives pass, expect a new growing industry of federal prosecutions to reverse the new laws. When the Republicans next elect a president, the states that tolerate marijuana will probably see massive punishment doled out until the laws change back.

Actual legal marijuana is not likely to be seen anywhere in America before 2030 and then only if the pace of reform continues to accelerate.

Changes in public opinion are really insufficient in the near term. This is politics. Fear, inertia, and moneyed interestes are arrayed strongly against legalization. The voice of the people enters the discussion weakly and slowly, but it can win over a long period of time.

I worked in Reno when Nevada became the first state in the Union to put a measure on the ballot legalizing recreational marijuana (up to 2 oz.), I think in 2003 or 2004.

It polled above 60% in favor, but when it came time to put down the bong and go vote, it ended up over 60% against.

I think it will definitely pass on the west coast some year soon, but the nation as a whole won't accept that and you will still have these problems when you venture into "the REAL 'muricah".

Colorado tried to pass a decriminalization amendment in 2006, and it lost 60-40[1]. However, we have it on the ballot again this year, though I don't know the polling numbers.

[1]http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/CO/I/0...

The fed atty general in Colorado just the other day said medical marijuana clinics and laws are meaningless in the eyes of fed drug laws.

So legalize all you want (and that's a necessary first step), but the fed is going to take a long time to come around.

more interesting, what it will look like when you realize some people does not have $1500 readily available to not go to jail after each blockade

I think it will look exactly like it does now: like a brutal and dysfunctional police state violating the privacy and dignity of its citizens and locking them in cages for trivial offenses that harm nobody.

P.S. My mom told me in the 90s that they had these same conversations in the 70s. A 20 year time frame may be optimistic...

Please think again when you say it does nobody any harm.

Its well documented, that MJ coming from Mexico does a great deal of harm. You must think of the entire production process. If it were legalized, it would still do people harm. Its been well documented, that doing enough of it will just tune out your senses... Making you a "pot head" and a lazy ass, that I don't want to have to support when you decide to live off the government.

Its pretty bad form to claim how well documented something is (twice in 3 sentences) and then just hand wave and not provide any links to any of this supposed documentation.

(I didn't downvote you)

It does harm because it's illegal. If it were legal, people wouldn't need to buy it from Mexican gangsters. Notice how Chicago isn't filled with people massacring each other with tommy guns since alcohol prohibition ended.

Chicago's still well-known for its organized crime, and it's still largely fueled by drug prohibition.

It'd be more correct to say that people in Chicago aren't brutally massacring each other over alcohol since alcohol prohibition ended.

Personal possession of less than 1 oz of marijuana is a misdemeanor offense ($100 fine, not arrestable) in Massachusetts. That was passed at 67%. The police claimed that it would unleash anarchy in the state, that they didn't know how to deal with misdemeanors and didn't have any forms to fill out.

Nothing bad has happened.

We still have blue laws and dry towns, but they are increasingly regarded as eccentric anachronisms.

Remember that the people who were 50 years old and voting each other in to office in the 1990s... are now 70 and retired. People overestimate change in the short run, underestimate in the long run.

Attention medical marijuana card holders! It's not protection in other jurisdictions. Don't get casual.

He still made it to SXSW.

His talk (audio only) can be found here: http://schedule.sxsw.com/2012/events/event_IAP992467

It's unfortunate that Austin, such a creative and progressive city, is surrounded by the rest of Texas.

A relative oasis, but there's still an awful lot of Texas in Austin.

Don't blame Texas - the Department of Homeland Security and border control checkpoints are all D.C.

Please unpack this for us foreigners who don't get the reference immediately.

Texas, like most southern states, is considered quite conservative on social issues; one might even call them "Christian Conservatives" (including laws regarding possession of illicit material). Austin, however, is considered a liberal bastion (and it's the capital), with many progressive ideas, and a vibrant music scene.

"If I owned Texs and Hell, I'd rent out Texas and live in Hell" is how Ben Franklin put it.

First, you miss attributed this. It was Philip Sheridan; a Union General assigned to occupy Texas and oversee reconstruction after the Civil War. He was less than popular and removed from his post by president Andrew Johnson for his harsh application of the Military Reconstruction Acts.

Which leads me to a much better quote.

"Fuck You! I'm from Texas."

The guy wasn't even arrested in Texas. He was arrested by the Feds... who Texans usually have no love for. Succeed is on bumper stickers here. But yeah, I admit... Texas enforcement and sentencing can be BS. So don't break our laws and we wont break you.

> Succeed is on bumper stickers here.

Took me a minute to figure out what that bumper sticker was supposed to mean, but it's perfect.

What a waste of time and taxpayer money.

Ruining people's lives for no reason at all. Completely nonsensical, but then again when things like this baffle me I get reminded of humanity's past (and present) - gladiators, slaves, genocide, ritual sacrifice, lynching, witch-hunts, genital mutilation, whatever...and things like this no longer seem so bad in comparison.

But I lose significant faith in humanity.

"for no reason at all"

Private prisons gotta have their supply of prisoners. (I think you mean no good reason.)

Whoah. Didn't realize private prisons existed. Forgot anything can be capitalized

what a fucking waste of money. don't these law enforcement officials have anything more useful to do?

As a lifelong resident of the south and a current resident of (Austin) Texas I can tell you.

You have to be very careful driving through the smaller towns. The cops have absolutely nothing else to do and the jursidictions make a lot of money of pulling out of towners over. Mostly for speeding butaparently narcotics busts as well too now

I have never seen so many cops by the side of the road as I have in Texas...

I wish they'd loan a few to Italy, which could sorely use a few more traffic stops for things like tailgating at 2 meters and flashing the brights to indicate that at 150km/h, you're way too slow and get the fuck out of the way right now god dammit because I've got a bitchin Camaro.

I have daydreams about one of those guys with some Texan cop... "sir, d'ya know just how fast you were goin'? Yer gonna have to come down to the station with me...".

People in Italy drive Camaros? God, I can think of a couple dozen cars I would rather drive in Italy than an American muscle car. Hell, any Alfa Romeo will likely be classier and of a better build quality.

No, they don't:-) A "Bitchin' Camaro" is not an actual car, it's a state of mind...

Ah, being an American, when I hear "bitchin' Camaro" I think of a muscle car with a loud exhaust.

When I hear "Bitchin' Camaro", I think "Dead Milkmen".

I do not have anything to say about the morality of Marijuana but I must say that carrying a illegal drug, apparently in a state with a higher chance of getting caught, is an incredibly stupid thing to do.

It is okay to get caught doing such a thing if the person is making a political statement; which in this case is not true. Otherwise, I think either the person should not do it or at least be careful while doing it (for his/her own sake). You might question the morality of an law, but it is expected to still be civil (and law abiding) about it.

Edit: grammar - clarification.

This iClarified link is a summary of a much longer article from Above the Law that seems to be the commom source of all current stories (which also means this really should be considered uncorroborated).

http://abovethelaw.com/2012/03/famed-hacker-arrested-for-pot...

I got busted for smoking weed in public in Eugene, Oregon. I walked away with a ticket. I had a 1/8th on me at the time.

The ticket was ten dollars more then the weed that was confiscated.

Sounds like when weev got raided in Fayetteville, AR and they found his (small) stash of drugs by the computer, too. The local drug charges were dropped eventually.

I grew up in Arizona and Border Patrol is everywhere down south. It looks like Geohot ran into a permanent checkpoint. Seems like a really poor choice.

Hopefully he knows some lawyers. The article mentions some oddities about the search.

I don't take cannabis (and I wouldn't even if it was legal) but I recognise the current status is causing considerable harm; both to people like Geohot getting caught with tiny amounts and to people in Mexico being killed in drug-gang wars.

Some people are using this post as an opportunity to bash Texas, but the article says he was arrested by DHS (federal authorities) in Seirra Blanca, which is in New Mexico. This doesn't have anything to do with Texas.

I agree current laws are crap. But isn't is possible for someone to refrain while traveling to avoid such a circumstance? And no, medical use is crapola - folks treat this like some miracle drug.

Damn you glaucoma, thou art a vile affliction.

Why is there a checkpoint? US turning into 1940's Germany?

They've been there for a long time. For the children.

What an unfortunate choice of picture for that article.

Also, what a trumped up set of charges. I had a friend just tell me the other day about some hippies that got locked up because they were charged by the weight of their edibles. What a fucking waste of time, money and prosecution of perfectly good members of society.

What an unfortunate choice of picture for that article

The funniest photo of geohot is the one on his Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hotz

Haha! I was listening to the song "Young wild and free" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa5B22KAkEk just now =P

I am constantly amazed that people seem so surprised that when people break the law, they get in trouble.

Just because you don't like a law, doesn't mean you should be surprised when, like so many people before them, people get caught for breaking it.

I often wonder if I am the only person in the tech world who wouldn't mind much higher penalties for possessions of narcotics, instead of this current "illegal, but most of the time not really" business. I'd be fine with legalisation too, I just wish the law would go heavily one way or the other.

ORLY?

I'm against higher penalties for narcotics, since the penalties themselves don't seem to provide a deterrent, and just serve to increase the prison population.

People are gonna do what they're gonna do, and I'm for lower penalties, since I think that would mean less people in prison.

Are you sure that a fixed prison sentence, enforced on everybody, for possession of any amount of cannabis, wouldn't cause many people to stop?

I'm fairly sure it would, looking at my friends who smoke because they believe (rightly) the worst they will get for possession is a smallish fine.

I'm sure that's not the prevailing reason for their choice.

Please do not pursue a career in government or law enforcement.

Do you think that everyone who currently smokes cannabis would continue to smoke it, even if the penalties were massively increased, and strictly enforced?

I find that fascinating. I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't think introducing prison sentences would reduce usage, and believe that the existing scientific evidence backs my viewpoint. You clearly disagree with me. Unfortunately ycombinator is not the best place to have a discussion about such things, but I would recommend in future if you would like cannabis to be legalised, you shouldn't be so dismissive and insulting to people who hold an opposing viewpoint to you, who I assume you would want to convert.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com