I Have Biden / Weed Questions
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 бер 2024
- Check out good.store/ today!
Having thought about this more, I think that the Biden admin might be saying "expungement" when they mean "pardons act kinda like expungements in the eyes of most of society" which they should not be doing. I think they're doing that as a way to pre-empt the "Biden's pardons didn't actually free anyone" because pardons do deliver benefits outside of getting freed from jail.
I think that's dumb and they shouldn't do that, but possibly I am missing something.
I think, by far, re-scheduling marijuana and making it MUCH LESS ILLEGAL to possess marijuana is the biggest deal here and it's weird that it wasn't discussed at all.
This video was edited by Milo! She is great! miloportfolio.carrd.co/
Folks are misunderstanding that these pardons are meant to enable people to be eligible for SNAP benefits (food), FAFSA benefits (education), to lift hindrances for employment, housing, etc. Our system keeps people down even after they do their time, by inhibiting them from getting access to basic aid and jobs that will improve their lives. It's like being punished forever, for something you already served time for. That's what these pardons are meant to change. It's a huge deal, something that the DPA and such organizations have been pushing for a long time. And this administration has taken action on it, in a way no other administration has. We're taking steps. Good to see the whole picture here. Great video, Hank. I'm thrilled that this is a cause you feel strongly about 💚
that is the case but it's also being used as evidence that Joe Biden has made good on his promise to remove people from jail who were there for marijuana when it's completely unrelated.
@@pedrogarcia8706 That's the misunderstanding that I'm referring to. It was *_not_* intended to "remove people from jail." The practical effects were always about removing blocks to aid and jobs and school
I would be overjoyed to hear that we would not be doing such things to anyone that has served their time and is in need of federal support and protection.
Reading that we do... Well, joy wasn't the feeling.
@@tabularasa the Biden quote is talking about how no one should be in jail. Mentioning pardons or expungements in the same breath as saying no one should be in prison for marijuana is itself creating the misunderstanding
To be pardoned you have to be guilty
The point is the guilt should be removed, not reinforced
“i’ve done marijuana crimes”
-hank green
Hank and Carl Sagan move closer and closer every day
Dear Diary,
Today I learned the smartest man I know has indulged in the devil’s lettuce.
How will I cope?
@@saytaylor3603have a try in a safe environment if your health allows for you to try it safely
“Not anymore…. because it’s legal *lil sip* 🤭” -Hank Green
@@saytaylor3603 Dear Saytaylor3603,
everyone is free to smoke whatever they want, but you shouldn't partake in smoking marijuana only because someone you admire does it (or has done it in the past). Greater intelligence isn't correlated with cannabis use.
With love,
Your Diary
The weed questions can wait, Hank. Please return the president.
I chuckled.
Biden ÷ Weed Questions = ?
this deserves a spot in a quote book.
@@Pickelhaube808biden/weed questions= twitter is bad
You win the Comment Award of the day
I hope that "Hank googles things" continue to be series because it's both delightful and informative.
Yes!
I never knew I needed to know about these putty ass looking whips but it was a delight to learn with Hank.
And I try not to care too much about American politics (because the politics in my own country affect me way more), but I just love Hanks emotional rollercoaster going down these rabbit holes: his eagerness to get to the bottom, his frustration with the people on the internet and his joy in finally finding out and being able to communicate an answer.
It brightens my day.
"Twitter is bad" would also be a really good series
I'm totally loving and here for him making videos on his deep dive hyper focus sessions.
@loreleifae4730 I was the 419th person to thumbs up your comment, soooooo close 😅😂
Also i agree, I love watching Hank do research!
Criminal reeentry attorney here, great video. You are spot on, expungement is not a federally available remedy and using all of these terms interchangeably is incredibly confusing. Thanks for taking the time to break this down.
Noting the Democrats held both the House and Senate, isn't the commitment then for Biden to champion the introduction of a Bill to enable automatic expungement by the federal courts?
What I found even more misleading is that he was so specific about simple posession. How are you supposed to even go to federal prison for simple posession ? If you land in federal there are is ALWAYS something else going on, otherwise you would land in state prison
@@daftwulli6145 I can think of an instance (small it is) that simple possession is a federal crime and could potentially put you in federal prison) Being found in possession of pot on an interstate flight. Anything done on an interstate flight is a federal thing afaik.
@@daftwulli6145 my guess is it would mostly be people who were found in possession of marijuana on military bases
I love the “Hank does research in front of us” genre of video. These should absolutely be taught in high school.
They usually teach how to research in English classes, that’s what all the informative essays were for :)
Hes basically teaching how to do critical thinking. I dig.
@@kaninchen____4227 Oh def. I mean, like, teachers should use these videos as examples for how it looks.
@@filmkerp absolutely. They should show people going through the process, how they determined the right questions to ask, where and how they found answers, and how it was analyzed at the end.
@@kaninchen____4227 The only thing I was taught in english was "You can't link to wikipedia". They didn't discuss things like researching the source of the information, looking at opposing opinions, how to look at data, how to see biases, etc.
_"This is the thing about Twitter fights: No one is talking about the same thing"_
Less filling!
This is common everywhere. People are more concerned with trying to "gotcha" others to look smart instead of coming to an understanding.
@@NihongoWakannaiyou literally replied to one-up the claim of “twitter fights” to “all fights everywhere”. You are that annoying ‘gotchya!’ person
@@carrotfacts Nope, I just added on to the conversation. You're the one who intentionally tried to twist the narrative in a way that lets you feel like you got a one up on others. You're exactly who I was talking about.
@@NihongoWakannai are you guys having a twitter fight in here. Both of you suck at it.
I have 3 felonies for 3 ounces of weed first offense at Penn State, it made me lose all my scholarships and grants, and I did over a year in jail. This was in 2008. Weed stores opened at Penn State less than 5 years later.
I was diagnosed with cancer last year around same time as you Hank. I'm a 5'9 male weighing 130lbs and cannabis helped to suppress my appetite and keep me from wasting away during chemo.
Chemo therapy is apparently rough on the lungs, so I had to use other means of consumption. Oh, and I get the results of my latest CT scan tomorrow, fingers crossed...
How'd your CT scans go dude?
You demonstrate perfectly how it would be cruel to continue criminalizing the use of cannabis.
To add to this point, I am also someone who qualifies for medical use of marijuana. I have PTSD and I used to use cannabis to help suppress insomnia and PTSD episodes (flashbacks and anxiety attacks) that are often triggered by everyday things. I say “used to” because my employment forced me to stop a medication that was highly recommended by both my prescribing psychiatrist and my therapist. Despite living in a state where both medical and recreational use are legalized for those over 21, my employment maintains these policies because they work for the government and therefore must abide by federal law. Therefore testing positive on a randomized urine drug test for any of the class 1 drugs-which stupidly lists marijuana alongside cocaine and meth as if they pose the same risk-will result in my immediate termination and potentially even jail time. It doesn’t matter if I was only getting high on the weekends, or even if I only took CBD instead of THC (which _will not_ get me high), if any cannaboids are found in my urine my future will be ruined.
As a result of being forced to quit cold turkey, I am now having to deal with the full brunt of PTSD episodes at work as well as endless nightmare-plagued sleepless nights sapping my energy, all while they nag me for not being 100% productive all day every single day. Even if I pursed what accommodations do exist, what I would really need in place of cannabis is days or even weeks on end of paid medical leave or 6 weeks of PTO, and we do not live in a society/country where people are kind and understanding towards those with invisible disabilities-nor do employers want to be. They can and will find a way to fire me because it simply costs them too much to keep me if I pursue accommodations. So all I am left to do is ration my limited PTO and grit my teeth as my supervisors yell at me for not being productive, _which will also cause an episode._
@@riverstein7251 I'm sorry you have to go through that. I hope this isn't speaking out of turn, but I would recommend melatonin if you haven't already tried it. I have PTSD and sleep issues myself, and it helps me to stay asleep and get back to sleep when I wake up in the night. It may help take the edge off of symptoms you're experiencing. Best of luck for your healing. 💚
"It seems like Twitter is bad." Yeah, that tracks.
Previous bias confirmed. Now I need to go research whether Twitter is actually bad.
Nazi website
Worse for my mental health than weed ever will be
I feel like we didnt rly need a 12min video for that conclusion
TL:DW of this whole video.
Twitter doesn't want to look up shit. Hank does and proves that Twitter doesn't look up shit.
(Oh and something about marijuana)
P.S. You should ABSOLUTELY do what Hank just did as soon as something angers you... Instead of doing a Twitter.
Important context: a lot of the conversation around pardons is for non violent drug offenders, but we need to remember that even having a weapon legally in your possession turns any drug offense into a violent drug offense by default. Here, in the gun country.
Please keep doing these, like this, even longer if necessary. Showing the actual steps to verifying a claim (even if they don't involve calling anyone) can really help show people how to properly fact check things - but more importantly, show them how utterly ridiculous it is to believe a statement of fact at face value.
This. Like the amount of research required to figure out the truth is SO MUCH and this is a good representation of what is actually required.
High schools should show this video as part of a required media literacy class
Media Literacy and Personal Finances, 2 extremely practical classes that I wish were taught in high school.
@@Icehawk55082my sister is doing online school through Penn Foster and she’s gotten media literacy, online digital/ privacy safety, personal finance and AI competency courses. She’s gotten a wide range of classes that I haven’t seen public schools offer and I’m pretty stoked that she has an opportunity to graduate high school early while being more prepared for adulthood than I was!
In my state a personal finance class (called consumer economics and goes over net/gross pay, budgets, taxes, credit, inflation, etc) is required. The problem is that most 14-16 year olds don't have a vested interest to learn the material yet and don't absorb it beyond doing homework and passing the tests. @@Icehawk55082
@@Icehawk55082 precisely why the government doesn't want that
@@user-mb2fk9hz6jmedia literacy 101: the government is not a singular hivemind. it's a lot of people, some of them want that some of them might not. it's fair to say that Betsy Devos wanted it much less than Miguel Cardona.
I just want to say that the single greatest thing these videos can do is SHOW PEOPLE HOW TO ACTUALLY DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH!! You don't need to go to a library and start rifling through old records. You can do it online very easily, but you need to know HOW. Read multiple sources. Click on their citations. Look at the author, what else have they written/studied/worked on, to ballpark their expertise/credibility. Learn how to tweak the wording of your searches themselves to get better results. Honestly, one of my favorite things is to try different searches just to see how easy it is to flip the results in one direction or another for the same topic. Subtle things like "did Biden lie about X" versus "did Biden follow through on X" might bring you very different flavored search results. So it's good to check that you're not biasing the answers you find unintentionally.
or you can do what my grandparents do and just throw a bunch of terms into the search bar and feel 100% validated in whatever you were thinking as long as anything turns up in the results
@@burchifiedI think this is due to a fundamental misunderstanding media literacy and of what a search bar does.
Many people seem to treat the search bar as if it does research for you. There was a time when if you wanted to know something you didn't know previously, you needed to research. That meant reading old archives and other sources, often many, and slowly cobbling together an understanding. This would naturally lead to a balanced answer because to get _any answer at all_ you often needed to search and read many things, and not just one excerpt.
Search doesn't do that. Search finds words. You put in word, search find word. So you put in "did biden lie about X" and search finds "biden lie about X." Meanwhile "did biden follow through with X" it finds "biden follow through with X."
If you think the search bar is researching for you, its easy to take the result as true and not question it any further. "Its just supposed to give answers" you may think, but it doesn't at all, it finds stuff. That's it.
edit, as an aside: I think older people may be more susceptible to this mistake not because they're stupid or dumb, but rather that they relate search to researching, since it's something they already understand. It's only natural to map something new onto something you already know, even if it isnt quite right. Im hopeful that the newer generation (which includes me by the way) may be better at distinguishing this, but i fear they may simply forget how to research entirely and instead rely on just search.
I'd rather some people not do their own research. False cognitive closure and confirmation bias are hardened states in their type.
i dont disagree with you, but, with all sincerity, who has the time
@@flowerheit4512Make the time, or don't get invested in the topic.
The biggest problem with the pardons was that he only pardoned people in federal prison that solely had possession charges and absolutely nothing else.
The feds don’t go for simple possession, they slap everything they can with it and use the marijuana as an amplification for charges. So most people got possession with intent to distribute, which wasn’t pardoned. And if you got arrested with a firearm on your person with weed, you got a firearms felony charge with the weed and no pardon.
Just look at Kyle from PKA and formerly FPS Russia. He got possession with intent and firearms charges, and he’s discussed this openly that he’ll never get his firearms rights back and always be a felon if this is as far as the Biden pardons go.
That's literally all he can do though. It wouldn't go over well if he started pardoning marijuana possession + gun crimes + distribution etc. At some point those aren't just marijuana crimes, they're much different. The important bit is putting it on record, and having it be the official stance of his administration that possessing and using marijuana is okay. That along with pushing the reclassification.
Basically every complaint I see of Biden is him doing what he is allowed to do, and people saying "well why doesn't he just do the thing" when he literally cannot, by law, unilaterally do the thing.
That's one of those "it's not a bug it's a feature." Possession with intent threshold is so low they can hit you with it basically every time. To see the USCC tell it the same 360 million people have been smoking one cone for 100 years. The issue is they don't have to hit the threshold for the mandatory minimums to charge you with intent to distribute. If they did the law would be much more reasonable because the threshold for the 5 year mandatory minimum is 100kg of marijuana and I don't think anyone would argue that someone with 100kg of marijuana has no intent to distribute, such a claim is laughable.
@@milhousevanhoutan9235 I know multiple people that got arrested for possession with intent because they bought weed and had a scale in their bag because they didn't trust their dealer. Police's view is "the only use for a gram scale is to cut up weed and become pablo escobar immediately".
To be fair, when making a call like this it's hard to push for nuance. You can't just say anyone charged with possession should be released. What if someone was murdered but they also tossed in the possession charge, the right would have a field day. "Biden releases murderers" wait they do that anyway. Maybe you have a point.
@@dyerseve3001 It's also politics so it's just as likely that Biden never wanted to release anyone for Marijuana since both he and his VP have historically been extrememly anti marijuana. This gains them good will from the left while allowing them to in reality do nothing whatsoever. Free publicity really.
I enjoy this series and hope it continues! As a librarian, I really appreciate Hank modeling good information literacy skills here, demonstrating how research is iterative. Keep it up!
This should be a series, I suggest "Decoding Conversations on The Bad App" as a name.
Agreed
+
I third this recommendation.
+
Literally no one:
Hank: Casually shows how to stop misinformation.
Can you just start a politics show? Or just run for President yourself? lol
I loves “times” as in “three times four”. The word “times” in multiplication is hard to wrap your head around like why multiplication has anything to do with time then this is the best way to do it:
“3 times 4” means “I have 3 four times”.
Like: one time, I had a pie. Three times, I had four pies. Three times, four pies.
This has nothing to do with your video except I’m super high and really love the word “times”.
Love you Hank bye
THREE TIMES I HAD FOUR PIES...three times...four!
@@hankschannelI had 4 pies for pie day. They were delicious.
I now have semantic satiation for the words "four pies"
3 times 4 pi ≈ 37.699
@@kosmikme”semantic satiation” is amazing. now i have a name for this niche thing we get.
now when an idiom finally makes sense i know i will be semantically satiated.
Thank you...Bidenweed is the name of my new band now.
I'm pre saving on spotify
You just hit the top of my dream sesh list, Hank
When a president says something like, "records should be expunged", and the president has no power to do such a thing, it's a message to people who do have that power, or are looking to get elected into positions that have that power. How voters respond to such things can tell them if it's an issue they should run on. It also tells people in power that they won't receive push back from the administration.
This.
That's a pretty good description of the bully pulpit
I am absolutely confounded by the number of people that think the president can just do anything he wants
@@gurgleblurgle7345 Same! Biden promised a hell of a lot but he can't just snap his fingers and make it happen. No president can. People need to start directing their anger at Congress where it belongs. They will do their absolute best to block ANYTHING the opposing party's president tries to do. Mitch McConnell said the quiet part out loud when Obama got elected, when he said his whole focus would be blocking anything Obama tried to pass. And of course Dems do the same thing. It's no secret. Yet it's always the President that takes the heat.
bully pulpit
The rescheduling is absolutely the most important piece. Marijuana being schedule 1 is what prevents it from being officially legally used as a medical treatment. If it was schedule 3, that opens the possibility of medical cannabis actually being available via prescription (vs medical marijuana cards which are in a legal grey area) and covered by health insurance. Right now even if you have a medical need for cannabis and you have the card (which you pay for our of pocket) you have to go to a dispensary with your actual money and buy it out of pocket. If your reason for using cannnabis is for pain control or as an anti nausea treatment your insurance should cover it the same way it covers tramadol or zofran.
i believe and correct me if im wrong, but the rescheduling would remove the possibility for a adult use market and would require a prescription for all use cases would it not?
@@wubz508 I think that would be true for medical uses yes. I suspect that recreational uses would remain in the same grey area where they are now - legal at the state level, dispensaries would still operate, technically illegal at the federal level. The long term goal still needs to be full legalization and decriminalization. Rescheduling is a first step.
It would also make it a LOT easier for researchers to be able to conduct large scale studies on its medical applications without having to jump through as many hoops to do so.
@@thatjillgirl yes also this! Right now we work with largely anecdotal evidence because researchers haven't been able to study the effects. We know it does something for pain but why? How? Are there side effects? Which compounds are involved and can we isolate them? How much is the right amount? What's the best delivery method? All things we know about far more dangerous drugs that are routinely prescribed.
You misspelled descheduling
Schedule the system Should be abolished, What's the worst that could happen? Somebody gets convicted for drug crimes based on a jury of their peers and instead of a minimum sentence That was explicitly based on racism
This video is incredible. Never thought I would see Hank Green talk about Cannabis, but then again it was in his name all along.
I appreciate all your hard work, keep it up!
How does this only have 3 likes
I am a public services librarian and I LOVE this. This is how you research. I think that you could totally make a video of how to know when something is fake news. Thank you for spreading your awesome knowledge.
What I love about this 'series' is that it's a practical demonstration of how to effectively research and fact check the things we see on the internet. We often have people say "Check your sources" and "Do your own research" but then not actually empower people with the tools and the frameworks to actually go out and do it. The fact that here we can watch someone well respected and seen as "smart" by the world at large go through the actual motions of this and struggle in places to find the information that they are looking for shows us all how we can also approach fact checking and research online. Looking forward to the next episode!
+
+
+
Here I go thinking more complexly again 🙄
I actually paused the video at 7:59 to read more of the article and internalize the information. (Damn it, Hank. This is a super effective format.)
I was thinking this exact thing while watching the video. So many do the research, polish it up with charts and graphs and cool visuals, and present it. But then, those in the dark attack sources or the person saying the thing as just wrong. But here it is, looking at the sources in real time, making admissions about what is hard to prove. This is beautiful. Chaotic, but beautiful.
+
The people who were pardoned were probably no longer in jail because they had completed their sentences, not that they were on parole, however, they were still felons with all that carries. Now they will no longer be felons, even though there is still a court record of their convictions. This restores civil rights to the individuals (firearms possession, certain federal benefits, etc).
Yep, this is going in my Hank Green talking about weed playlist
While in a Arizona jail for trespassing awaiting my sentencing I met a 19 year old who was doing 8 months for sitting on a park bench not realizing there was a bag of stems and a old pipe under the bench.
2002.
I'm in Mesa Az now, and there are dispensaries every other block, that's insane and I hope that kid was ok.
Sadly this is very believable. I had a coworker who was nearly arrested for a hit and run and while on a suspended license. Problem being he didn't have a license so he couldn't have a suspended one, and he was in a plane on the other side of the planet at the time. It was brushed off as "All you Asians have similar names". Yeah, it ended up being a white woman.
@@ian562ADF52E just shows cops will use any law they can when they can whether it's right or wrong
@@ronblack7870Cops get paid per arrest, they're simply just recruiters but for prison
@@stellviahohenheimthere are often incentives for the police to arrest people, but the police in the U.S. - or in any country, to my knowledge? - are not paid per arrest
I know this is a huge bummer, but I just want to point out that my mom basically was in and out of jail my entire childhood for weed possession (for her pain). I have CPTSD from the 'abandonment' this regularly caused. I was abandoned by my mom by the cops by proxy on a regular basis. As a Texan, the only hope I have is that some dumb maverick will figure out we could make hella tax money if we legalized weed. We might still be one of the earlier adopters but for now... this prohibition has done enough damage to me and my family and watching my party handwave while doing very little makes me pretty angry.
Your story is important for people to hear. Have you ever written out how the War on Drugs has impacted your life? I'd love to feature your story on my website.
I think your mom did the damage. “Bro I need this drug for my pain bro, let me put my child in danger and in foster care for my weed bro”
@@Dap1ssmonk It's so spectacularly telling that your immediate suspicion upon hearing "My Mom used cannabis for pain and the prosecution she faced caused me a lifetime's worth of damage due to her incarceration" is to think "I bet she didn't even need that and was just using her medical condition as a smokescreen to justify to everyone including herself cuz she was actually a Druggie von Druggiepants who doesn't give a shit about her kid."
It couldn't possibly be that the person had something genuinely wrong with them and that was the best of the list of bad options: Risk criminal prosecution vs living every day of your life non-functional.
Touch some grass man. Jeez.
@@Cheebzsta not my fault your mom couldn’t control herself. My mom had weekly migraines and she wasn’t risking the state taking me away to ease her pain. Your mom took the easy path.
@@Dap1ssmonk Yeah... Bud you're insulting the wrong guy's Mom. I'm not OP.
"Weekly"
As a former daily pain suffer... That's it? You think that's as bad as it gets?
Seriously. That's so naive as to be almost adorable.
Your opinions are trash but I sincerely hope you never find out how bad it can really be.
I joyously exclaimed when you made the distinction that LSD and Heroin should not be in the same category. Seriously, thank you. People n e e d to be more educated about psychedelics.
It’s a shame too that psilocybin is taking a similar route weed was about 10 years ago but good old acid still gets all the hate it has been getting since 1966.
to be fair, although LSD is not physically dangerous, it is an extremely potent psychedelic pound for pound, and is a much more complicated molecule when compared to psilocybin/psilocin/DMT. LSD can bind to way more types of receptors with varying levels of affinity due to it's status as both a phenylamine and a tryptamine. just look at the chemical structure for:
Serotonin
Dopamine
then
Psilocybin
Psilocin
N, N DMT
and LSD
Yay, thanks for another one of these research videos Hank!! I would love to see more of these, they’re so fun and a great way to help improve my googling skills!
Hank: "It seems like Twitter is bad!"
John: "WHAT HAVE I BEEN TELLING YOU!!!!"
I want a clip of just the last 2 seconds of this video. Is that possible idk how on UA-cam
Listen to John Mastodon. Less misinformation there.
The fact that there will be no Awesome Weed Club makes me sad…
there are only several thousand Average Weed Clubs
Weed’s already not profitable. No need to blow money on youtube ads just to convince its target audience to do the thing they already do.
@@Syzygy_Blisssocks are already sold every day
Yet people do buy their sock club stuff.
My fave reply😊
@@Syzygy_Blissethical anything is profitable, because it's based on trust, and Mr and Mr Green has a lot of that.
"seems like twitter is bad" 100% agree, but this video also demonstrates that most journalism is sadly lacking as well. It really shouldn't be this hard to get a factual answer like that.
Thank you for showing a good example of proper media literacy. This level of media literacy should be taught to everyone in schools as a modern day literacy class. People need to know how to sift lies from truth online.
So what about Hunter Biden?
@@wearethenewsnow3644 what about him? If you’re talking about the Ukraine business dealings, it’s been investigated to death. There’s been so many supposed witnesses that ended up being lies.
On another topic, what about this video do you believe was “simping”? I saw plenty of fact checking and both acknowledging that some things that POTUS has said were not done and possibly lies. It doesn’t seem like you’re coming into this conversation in good faith.
"Fuckin SHEETS"
++++
Sometimes you just gotta do a spreadsheet about it, y'know?
@@gmdille Hank Green casually teaching us good media literacy AND data organisation
😎
I got a qualification excel in high school, and I'm now going to say this anytime I make a sheet from now on. Hanks out here changing vocab
@@jacobchristopher6941 Exactly! I genuinely think that, from now on, whenever I'm breaking down a hard problem, this will pop into my mind and I'll wield the tool more often.
Hank! Most people that went to jail for possession also had other minor crimes and then the possession part is taken off so that the "more serious" crime is put to focus. I was once accosted by the police for smoking not possession but the actual charge they gave me was trespassing (I was in the hallway of a building I lived in). So when it came to papers work, no one cared about the possession. It was an excuse.
If they arrest you and you have both cannabis and maybe also some spare money, you are now absolutely guilty of possession with intent to sell.
So in both these cases, the cannabis was used as a pretext for other forms of harassment and justifications.
@HankGreen do you see why some people would be in jail (or prison) but it's *not* because of Cannabis?
@HankGreen this is the best example of whats going on
100% this.
I love this "new series" of yours! Literally me on the internet. But so much better when it's you bringing us along on your research rabbit hole!
"I've done marijuana crimes...
Not recently...
Cause it's legal now"
a 3 act play in 10 words.
Love Hank gently, kindly, empathetically showing the internet how to fact check.
i have a principle, a hard and fast rule i apply on the internet, and I swear it saves me from a lot of missinformation. it is this: "information presented in an image format is unusable" That is, if you see someone posting a PICTURE that in any way show information, or is used to make a point, it is not to be considered valid. that gets rid of all screenshots of news headlines, missunderstood graphs, a quote from Jane Goodall and pictures of people in situations doing things that have been deprived of context. Now, unusable information does not mean it is untrue, it does not mean it is true either, it means that this can not be used to inform you. it is not allowed a place in your brain. Unusable information is broken, like a device is borken, it can not fulfill a its purpose any more. Yes, this rule is not perfect, Yes, it sometimes filters out true things, but it is simple, aplicable, and does more right than wrong.
I like this rule a lot! I'm going to try applying this in my own internet adventures.
That is so good! Definitely was already doing this somewhat but I think I'll start doing it more intentionally
++++
Lol Borkin!
@@metanevets91 my finger silpped
so many issues:
Alcohol is schedule ZERO. It is not scheduled. But moving marijuana to schedule 3 will, I ASSUME, allow dispensaries to do banking -which at the moment they cannot. This accumulation of cash at each store creates endless problems.
Why/How would taking cannabis OFF the schedule list entirely create lawsuits or legal issues? Who would do it? J Who decides on scheduling anyway? What legal "thing" gives them that power?
If a person applies for a job and has a pardon, do they have to report it to the prospective employer? Is it even legal to ask if you have ever been arrested?
Rather than pressing the question of "What has Biden promised?", I prefer the questions of:
What do we want? What is equitable? What effect will these have on our society?
PS I am in favor of nothing more restrictive than alcohol regulation.
I have really enjoyed seeing old photos of you Hank, you even got me to sign up for the newsletter in the hope you would put up more lol, you better watch, they seem so popular that people will be subscribing twice or more!
Hey Hank! A tip for researching here on youtube. When you were trying to find a specific part of Biden's state of the union, you can click on the video and open the description, there you'll find a button labeled Show transcript. From there you can just ctrl+f whatever you're looking for in a video and it'll be timestamped for you in the transcript. Hope this helps for your next rabbit hole!
I did not know there's a transcript now?!
@@geeksdo1tbetter Yep! Actually been there for a few years but UA-cam for some reason hides it in the description heh.
++
Nice! ♥️
You have your Media Literacy Crash Course, but this is like "Applied Media Literacy" and I love it. It's also topical... And you could bring attention to different issues... Pease do more.
I love these! Please keep doing them! It’s exactly how I go down rabbit holes.
I love this format, make this a series please!
Rescheduling, and eventually descheduling, is going to have the biggest long-term effect. And I've noticed Biden does a lot of stuff like that in a much more low-key way. Like, he's been doing loan forgiveness in waves and it's barely been getting noticed. It's strategic - his biggest attempt to deal with student loans got blocked. So he has to backdoor everything, and he's good at it, but it doesn't get good headlines.
He's forgiven roughly 1/3 of his initial promised amount, allocated toward the people who need it the best. 100 billion out of 300 billion. It's really transformative for a lot of people.
Biden doesn't have Speech 100, but he do have Stealth 100.
@@TheStrangeBloke I hadn't realized that the Biden administration had forgiven that much so I dug into it and they have actually forgiven $143.6 billion! That's incredible.
I'm not a political fanboy by any measure but if Biden wants to win big this year his campaign needs to start running adds everywhere with simple bite sized FACTS about things he has done for the people. Heck, meme it up. Something along the lines of:
"$144 Billion student loans forgiven 👈 I did that"
"Thousands of marijuana pardons and cannabis rescheduling - Let's go Brandon"
"Insulin and out of pocket drug prices for seniors capped - No Malarkey"
"50,000 roads, bridges, and rail infrastrucure projects - Choo choo MFers"
"9 million lead water pipes replaced - glug glug Hydro-homies"
"I didn't try to overthrow the government - Abe Lincoln approves"
Source:
www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2024/03/public-service-loan-forgiveness-passes-60-billion-erased-debt/395131/
"... Biden has used programs like Public Service Loan Forgiveness as a way to fulfill a campaign promise, albeit on a piecemeal basis. Across all of those programs, the administration has forgiven $143.6 billion in student debt owed by nearly 4 million people."ua-cam.com/users/sgaming/emoji/7ff574f2/emoji_u1f448.png
Honestly, my take has held that Biden is, thus far, one of the best Presidents in US history.
@@seigeengine Which isn't really saying much because as far as I can tell, the US has only ever had three, maybe four, presidents who can actually be called good.
Make it a series, let's go!
+
+
i am *loving* the "hank has questions and will get answers goddamnit" videos these are so so enjoyable to watch
It's also worth saying that it isn't true that the President has "no power" over State law. He has a huge platform, he has all kinds of levers. If he wanted to push states to pardon people in state prison, there's a lot more he could be doing.
There is more he could be doing, I agree. However, legally, he does not have any lawful standing to pardon people in state run prisons. That’s just the truth of the matter and what was being referred to in the video. He can suggest that state governors should pardon those with marijuana convictions, but also know that not every state allows their governor the ability to issue pardons/expungements. The “lever” reference reminds me of the argument people make when they think/state that presidents somehow dictate the state of the economy and the cost of gas/other goods.
@@TitaniumTurbine Right, I get that.
I think a lost bit of context is that the DEA has considered rescheduling marijuana in the past and then chose to keep it Schedule I. There is no reason to suspect that the HHS recommendation posed under Biden's administration will carry more weight, and because of the lengthy red-tape-addled process the DEA uses to reschedule a drug, there would be no movement on this until after the election. The timing of events, in my mind, make this a very symbolic gesture. Although in reality like with most things, the President mostly only has symbolic power over any of this. Legislation would be needed to declassify it altogether, and somehow despite bipartisan support by the voting masses, it's currently politically infeasible. This really speaks to a larger issue with American politics. Even when a majority of people on both sides of the political spectrum want a thing, it's electoral suicide to support that same thing. How is that? Hint, gerrymandering.
Correct. And, the fact that many legislators are interested in *_ruling_* over their constituents, not *_representing_* them
Ya, that argument worked before Trump just sat and signed executive orders the entire time he was in office. The foot-dragging on our side is absolutely purposeful, and we need to acknowledge that marginal improvements are not nearly enough when the opposition is actually willing to use their power when they get it.
“CRS is unaware of any instance where DEA has rejected an FDA recommendation to reschedule. As a comparative example, in September 1998 FDA recommended to DEA that Marinol be rescheduled to Schedule III, and in July 1999 DEA rescheduled Marinol to Schedule III.” - Congressional Review Service report on the implications of HHS’s recommendation.
Do you have any examples of DEA rejecting an FDA/HHS recommendation?
It's unfair to reduce the issue to gerrymandering. Another problem that happens on other issues or in countries with a representative legislature:
If 5 % are vehemently pro-X, 10 % are vehemently anti-X, and 85 % are "somewhat pro-X / disinterested" then the result is X stays banned. Because as a politician, worst-case you lose 5 % of your electorate if you keep X banned but you lose 10 % of your electorate if you allow X.
This is why political activism is so important. It's not just about convincing other people to align their vote with your issue, it's also about signalling to shift the risk/reward analysis for political action.
@@mere0 Please look up the ruling by DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Francis L. Young from September 1988. The DEA has previously overruled their *_own_* recommendations
I’m loving these videos, it kinda feels like a de-structured Crash Course Research
I absolutely love this series, please keep doing it.
I honestly love this format so much. A youtuber that I loved but is no longer active used to do these sort of "let's google things and see where it takes us and what we can learn" vids from time to time and I've missed them dearly so I really hope that this format sticks around
I was at a comedy show last night and they were handing out a free drink ticket to the person in the audience with the best socks, no joke. Shouldn't come as a surprise but a pair of Awesome Socks won
🎉🎉🎉🎉
Please keep this “series” going! I love em
I am in love with this new 'series'! would be interested to know how long all that research actually took
Little bit of nuance re: the pardonings, maybe technically no one was released from prison, but I have to imagine anyone who was on parole got released from the parole system, which-clearly parole is not the same as being in prison, but it's also definitely not the same as being a free citizen, like, parole can be very difficult.
Yep, the rules for parole can get INSANE. I read an article about a woman who violated her parole (which was technically true, but extreme extenuating circumstances) because she had a curfew but had to call an ambulance when her kid spiked a dangerously high fever in the middle of the night. Her kid was admitted to the pediatric ICU, but apparently she was supposed to put her very sick toddler in an ambulance alone instead of going with.
So I used to be involved in... the circulation of a few substance, including cannabis. First, this was in the late 90's and early 00's, and second it was at the interstate level, not ground level. What o want to put out there though it's that while cannabis use doesn't usually come with any violence, there is *extreme* violence involved with it's trade in the black market. It's just a fact. Cartels, gang lords, human trafficking, war. So while cannabis is *nearly* harmless, it's illicit trade comes with a lot of harm, both human and ecological. Buy from your dispensaries if you have them, because otherwise You're ultimately funding a m*rder machine.
I'd much rather fund a local family farm, haha.
The gangs are run by the alphabet boys. Our system exists as it is to fund contras ect.
@@whatthebeepvideos That's the rumor, and it feels probable.
OR.....just don't use weed? seems simpler 🤷♀️
Nobody is getting killed over weed in states where weed is legal my guy, why the fuck would someone risk their life over a black market weed deal when dispensaries exist? Y’all just don’t think or something? Lmfao
No drug should be illegal. In fact, we desperately need real drug education in this country. I'm talking types, dosages, receptor sites, agonist, antagonists, metabolic pathways. Drugs don't kill people, ignorance kills people.
I've felt like a criminal since I was 18, just because I took an interest in psychedelic drugs after I did a a research paper for high school. Now I live in Colorado and I'm no longer a criminal, but after being labeled a criminal, and being in danger of going to jail for something so inconsequential... I've never really felt like a part of society. A lot of pent up anger about that. Frustration. What kind of society hunts down and captures it's own citizen? Who did I hurt?
Our society.
Just so long as you are not operating heavy machinery including cars while on it or withdrawing I'm cool with that.
nah cocaine, meth, heroin should be fucking illegal
I'm obsessed with this series and I hope the algorithm spreads your good deeds of media literacy far and wide.
I love the chaotic energy of the editing of this video tbh. I know a lotta folks don't focus on editing but I appreciate it damnit!
A thing I will continue to struggle with. How many people are in prison, either state or federal, who went to jail for marijuana and additional crimes, who wouldn't have had the altercation if marijuana was legal.
If the cops entered into a home soley 'for marijuana' and then they found other additional things or something else occurred. They aren't going to be pardoned but I think they should.
If a cop pulls me over for a reason that is later deemed incorrect, what happens next can be thrown out of court. Why is it we only save the 'safe' drug users.
I grew up in the eighties, was rather sheltered, and the satanic panic and drug wars had a heavy affect on me. Then I tried weed. Everything changed. One lie busted; time to question everything.
Hank its awesome to see you still making content brother you’ve taught me countless things through youtube videos, stay golden
Its pretty obvious at this point, that most of the time people on social media like to narrow their points to seem correct by removing context or at least warping it. Thanks Hank, for looking into it and filling out that context everyone conveniently misses or is too lazy to discover themselves. But that also might be by the nature of short form content and sensationalism for the sweet dopamine of confirmation bias
I think a lot of it is kind of in the nature of Twitter specifically as a platform: it's nearly impossible to have a nuanced conversation about complex topics like this because of the character limit. Because of that, people must keep their points short and quippy.
Also, everyone wants this to be simple. It SHOULD be simple. The distinction between federal and state convictions only really serves to make it more complicated to navigate the system.
For example, when I change my name, I shouldn't have to first get a court order, then send that info to the social security administration, then show that social security card to the RMV to get a new ID. Getting that court order should come with getting both the ID and the social security card in the same package. Instead, everyone has to jump through tons of hoops to do what should be simple and easy.
Unfortunately, a lot of times, charges for marijuana possession were not the only thing someone was charged or jailed for. And given the inertia of the legal system, having to review each case to see if that would reduce or eliminate any sentencing will take time. And if there were other charges, they could be, "Well, this part isn't there anymore, but this/these thing(s) you are still being punished for so..." And then if the classification is changed Federally, then State and local laws, charges, and incarcerations would have to be reviewed, etc. Which could languish if the State administrations are the sort to drag their heels instead of being proactive or at least timely about it.
No one should be jailed for using marijuana and UP TO a certain amount in possession. It should still be a crime to possess unreasonable amounts of marijuana to limit the illegal sale of it.
The fact that examining such a seemingly simple thing took a 12 minute video really helps demonstrate why no one is ever on the same page with political beliefs, even though I bet that if everyone went this in-depth into every issue that Americans would agree on like 80% of issues
This is such a useful video. There is so much misleading or outright false information on the internet, I think a lot of people have the tendency to give up and think “I just can’t tell what’s true anymore.” They wouldn’t even know how to approach researching it.
It’s so important to have examples like this of people doing the work to figure out if something is true or false-especially for topics they don’t have a lot of knowledge about going in.
+
+
And this is why we like primary sources. Any time the "legislation x is going to do y" panic starts happening, the links to Congress's website come out. Text of bills is fully searchable there.
"The bill doesn't even say that. Someone is just trying to scare you"
Look at the pardon website again. It's not automatic; you have to apply for it individually. If you scroll down to the FAQ portion of the same page it says they've issued 184 pardons so far.
good catch!
This is a great series! I hope you continue it.
I went down this exact same research rabbit hole a few months ago (minus the spreadsheet) so it feels reassuring to know I took a similar approach to Hank. This is an excellent format; I'd love a recurring "come fact check with me" video.
i love how you and john both have been really demonstrating research and critical analysis and clarifying definitions of terms and like... how to engage with the media. it's a really good thing to demonstrate in this methodical way with the platform you have. i really appreciate it
I love that you’re doing arguably the exact opposite of smoking weed here: data entry into a spreadsheet
A+ comment
Idk personally the only time I've ever willingly made a spreadsheet was when I was high on edibles 😂
+
Tell me you dont party without telling me you dont party.
@@scobeymeister1"Guys we are doing some rad shit right now! Give me a minute I'm going to quantify how rad we are being over time."
I love these kinds of videos and would be so excited to see more of them. It's actually a teachable moment as to how to fact check things effectively!
My favorite part of this video wasnt even the results or the questions you were asking but seeing your process to research and answer your own question.
Loved this, need more videos going down the rabbit hole fact checking discourse people see in passing on twitter. The hyperfixation you had for finding answers was very satisfying to watch, please do it more
+
Biden can only pardon (restore rights lost due to criminal conviction and end penal term) or commute (shorten penal term) and he can only do so for federal crimes.
He did pardon thousands of people who had federal convictions for simple cannabis possession (these are people who got caught smoking weed in national parks and stuff like that). However, none of them were serving prison sentences because the federal government doesn't send you to prison for that. Most cannabis crimes are state crimes and Biden can't pardon state crimes, but he did publicly encourage governors to issue pardons similar to his.
He did commute the sentences of nearly a dozen people serving disproportionately long sentences for non-violent cannabis crimes, usually trafficking and distribution, but none of those commutations shortened the sentence to nothing, so no one was released.
He cannot expunge records because expungement is a judicial action. Those with pardons would have to petition the federal court they were sentenced in to get their records expunged.
He cannot unilaterally legalize, reschedule, or deschedule cannabis. There are only two paths to change cannabis' legal status and both are outlined in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA): either Congress can pass a law amending or repealing the CSA or the president can invoke an executive rulemaking process that requires reports and recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), with the DEA holding final say on the matter.
Biden initiated that rulemaking process ~18 months ago. HHS has completed their report and recommended rescheduling and the DEA is currently conducting their review.
So, Biden has done basically all he can with the exception of fully commuting all sentences for federal non-violent cannabis offenses, like trafficking. We're currently stuck waiting for the DEA to complete their review and nothing else can be done until then. If the DEA refuses to reschedule, then we'd need Congress to amend the CSA, which would mean voters would have to show up en masse on midterms to vote in enough pro-cannabis Dems to pass such an amendment in both chambers for a pro-cannabis Dem president, like Biden, to sign into law.
Also, while the DEA is technically part of the executive branch, it is the most independent executive agency in existence. Only two DEA positions (director and assistant director) are appointed by the president and neither have unilateral authority to finalize the scheduling review, so Biden can't just pull a Nixon and fire DEA administrators until he gets one who will reschedule.
He arguably could do that. In that the DEA positions he does control would be able to find more tolerant humans to replace any assholes who are a part of the group making those decisions.
genuine question: do you read Biden's tweet as "I already did a thing" or "We really should do the thing in the future"?
@@defofawanderer7619The current DEA administrator, Anne Milgram, gave generally favorable responses when asked about the DEA's cannabis rescheduling review in a Congressional hearing, so replacing her won't do much. You could replace her with Snoop Dogg and the DEA would move just as slow on its final recommendation.
@@geeksdo1tbetterI read it as an aspirational goal that Biden is trying to push by way of the bully pulpit, especially with him knowing the federal executive's limitations in reaching that goal.
As a side note, I don't think Biden has been perfect on cannabis. I think he's been great, I think he's done the most by far of any president in modern US history, but I personally do think that ALL non-violent cannabis offenders, including those convicted for trafficking and distribution, should be pardoned.
And Biden has made mistakes in his messaging, too. He recently said that the people he pardoned wouldn't have to check the box on employment and rental applications that says they've been convicted of a felony, which is incorrect. The felony is still on their record, they just have their rights restored (like the rights to vote and bear arms) and can hopefully use the pardon letter as leverage to get past that box.
All in all, though, I think Biden has done a great job as president and has really excelled in making boring, behind-the-scenes bureaucratic changes that do help people, they just don't make for exciting headlines.
The DEA director is similarly restrained by law and regulation in how the review works and who works on it. They can't just fire and replace the relevant bureaucrats. This is one of those cases where the deep state is basically real, for good or ill.
This format is hilarious, engaging, and very informative. Keep it up, damn, Hank!
Thanks so much for discussing this, Hank! It’s hard to get good accurate info without doing the amount of research you did!
This is the best title I’ve seen pop up in my feed
No one was in jail *just* for simple possession. There were always other crimes tacked on because cops are cops. So while one crime was pardoned, they still have to serve the sentence for any other crimes they were convicted of. That's why it was symbolic
Unfortunately true, and unfortunately a lot harder to fix. You'd have to dig into each and every case where someone was convicted on multiple charges. For example if someone was arrested for possession and resisting arrest does it makes sense to pardon both because one stemmed from the other? That really depends on the context and it can't really be done in a sweeping universal action
This is my favorite series since tangents please please continue
I love this concept and I do hope you make it a series. Not only is it educational, it teaches others how to think through these issues on their own and fact check for themselves.
The research in real-time was awesome.
I need one of these deep dives like- every day for all the things I see online. This is a service to humanity. There should be a Crash Course that's just how to do this and why everyone needs to do this and that it's great. Thank you for these, please keep doing them. Especially for all the political stuff this year.
I absolutely want this to be an ongoing series please.
"It seems like Twitter... is bad!!" Hell yeah brother I'll drink to that
Hank looks pretty passionate about this
Hank is always passionate, that's why we love him. Whether it's weed or car colors, or Mars
@@m.c24601or what is or is not legs
He did just publicly admit to marijuana crimes
WHOA! Dropping the F bomb. Hank isn't playing anymore!
Hank's ability to make this complicated topic interesting to follow and entertaining, this should totally be a series.
His googling path seems very similar to what an internet savvy person would take but with the appropriate amount of effort that I would think the majority of us don't put into most topics. The goodwill that he has with the internet also helps with knowing he'd be sincere and try to avoid bias
All in all, this is an alternative deep dive series I look forward to seeing more of
I agree. Every time I get a sample ballot in the mail, I sit down with a computer (close to Election Day) and research every amendment and candidate thoroughly. Maybe it has to do with being a former campaign manager and knowing way too much about the inner workings of this stuff, but at least I know that I voted ethically and responsibly by removing as much partiality as I could.
My mom was thrown in jail in her late 50s for simple possession of cannabis after not being able to pay for her probation and fines in 2015 in Tennessee. She passed away in 2021 and I have been working in the cannabis industry since 2019, my dream is to create a strain of cannabis named after her, "Sticky Vicky" as it was one of her most favorite plants.
I'd sign up to get Awesome Weed Club every month. We smokin that Johnny Tuberculosis Pack, its a sativa that'll make you wanna get up and prevent a preventable disease! We smokin that Complexly OG. That Hank Dank. That Crash Course Cannibis.
My thought is that if alcohol is legal although it can make for crazy behavior, pot should get the green light. Munchies never hurt anybody. I don't care for pot. It doesn't care for. But for those who like it enjoy.
I remember a quote from Joe Rogan when he was still fairly reasonable, something along the lines of, "Hardly anyone who gets high wants to get in their car and go somewhere. They just want to chill at home, and no one has driven their couch into a fatal car wreck."
As someone with a genetic connective tissue disorder that causes severe, chronic pain and inflammation, weed is good for me. It makes life bearable and keeps me functional in ways that opioids never could, and without the consequences of them. Is it good for everyone? Maybe not.
Man, I love your presentation of this fact checking!
Hank, thank you for your curiosity on this issue and for looking into it to learn more. That said, you still seem to be confused about the distinction between pardons (issuing forgiveness) and commutations (actually shortening sentences and/or releasing people from incarceration). They are both forms of clemency that can be issued by the president, but are very different.