Bibliographic record
Abstract
La nature des infractions liées à la culture, au commerce et à la consommation de cannabis fait en sorte que la criminalisation engendre des discours sociaux variés venant justifier et contester celle-ci. La présente étude vise, d’une part, à relever les justifications énoncées pour rendre acceptable l’imposition de la souffrance par le droit criminel, et, d’autre part, à examiner les contestations que génèrent les normes pénales relatives au cannabis. L’examen des justifications et des contestations de la prohibition du cannabis révèle deux vedettes centrales : le déviant et la victime. Ces vedettes se présentent sous des figures variées. Les rhétoriques prohibitionnistes donnent vie à cinq figures typiques de la déviance : le dangereux, le fou, le junkie en devenir, le fumeur et l’« amotivé ». Les figures typiques de la victime auxquelles donnent vie tant les contestations que les justifications sont le corps, la liberté et la société. L’analyse de la construction de ces deux vedettes et des rôles pour lesquels on leur déroule le tapis rouge permet d’entrevoir certains produits culturels du régime prohibitionniste, notamment comment ce régime peut être justifié par certains de ses effets qui se présentent comme des causes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".