ACLU - Billions of Dollars Wasted on Racially Biased Marijuana Arrests

Mott the Hoople said:
I seriously doubt that. You may be right in theory but you're dead wrong if you think he could just unilaterally do that an not pay steep, steep, steep political consequences.

Public perception may have changed in that for the first time a simple majority now believes pot should be legal. It's going to take a hell of a lot more than a simple majority to make that happen so you're pollyannish if you think Obamma could do that at the stroke of a pen.
Click to expand...

With all due respect good brother, that's the kind of lack of courage that is typical of Obama .. typical of today's Democratic Party.

It's the right thing to do for a plethora of reasons, and you're suggesting that it might be bad politically? Marijuana laws are being passed by states all over the country in defiance of federal law, but Obama should worry about his political career?

You don't think there's a political cost for being frozen in fear?

If republicans were smart, they'd introduce it. They aren't as afraid of what the other side might think as democrats are.

It's the right thing to do .. everything else is just excuses.
 
blackascoal said:
With all due respect good brother, that's the kind of lack of courage that is typical of Obama .. typical of today's Democratic Party.

It's the right thing to do for a plethora of reasons, and you're suggesting that it might be bad politically? Marijuana laws are being passed by states all over the country in defiance of federal law, but Obama should worry about his political career?
Click to expand...

It's not just his political career. It's the dem party overall AND the ability to get other things done; this could divert the congress so much that they get even less done than they have been.

However, when you are running for president, feel free to come out in favor of full legalization. I would send you a donation!
 
tekkychick said:
It's not just his political career. It's the dem party overall AND the ability to get other things done; this could divert the congress so much that they get even less done than they have been.

However, when you are running for president, feel free to come out in favor of full legalization. I would send you a donation!
Click to expand...

If I haven't said hello to you before .. Hello good sister .. you are an excellent addition to the board.

Congress is not required. An executive order gets it done.

Obama's Medical Marijuana Crackdown Could be Stopped by Executive Order
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2012/05/marijuana_obama_eric_holder_executive_order.php
excerpt

At the same White House Correspondents Dinner over the weekend in which the president was skewered by Jimmy Kimmel over his pot policy, Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, acknowledged there's quite a lot the administration could do to back off state-legal medical cannabis.

Holder (Eric) happened to be sitting at the table of the Huffington Post, where a journalist asked him about Obama's statement suggesting the administration's hands were tied by "congressional law."

The Post journalist noted that Obama could legally make an executive decision removing marijuana as a Schedule I drug, thus allowing its legal medical use -- and preventing even federal law enforcers from going after legit dispensaries.

Congressional approval would not be necessary.

Holder's response?

"That's right."
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2012/05/marijuana_obama_eric_holder_executive_order.php

There is a political cost for leadership without courage.
 
tekkychick said:
While in general I agree with you - I do know people who make their own wine and beer; and certainly there are illegal stills out there.

In terms of growing pot - alas, my thumb isn't just non-green, it is known as "major-plant-killer" in certain groups; the Darth Vader of the plant killing world. So I will have to rely on the goodness of others to share their crops.

But certainly there are people much more adept than I growing their own pot currently; and who is to say their little tykes don't sometimes nip at the bud? We do tolerate parents deciding what's best for their young'uns up to the point where it's physically or mentally harmful (and, sad to say, sometimes beyond that point).
Click to expand...

it is good to have friends. how did that old Beatles song go 'with a little help from my friends...'

fortunately, both my wife and i have green thumbs

she has ibs and the mj helps

unfortunately, as far as pain control, i have to get so blasted that i cannot function before it dampens the pain enough

also, if anyone is interested, pm me about how to make Buddha butter, it is much better than smoking it and lasts longer :)
 
Only issue with exec order is the next president could reverse it.

But yeah, would be nice if he at least removed it as a schedule 1 drug; that is way too harsh a classification.

Interesting -looks like there have been proposals to remove since 1972. BILL CLINTON - where were you? - your country needed you!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_of_cannabis_from_Schedule_I_of_the_Controlled_Substances_Act

Since 1972, there have been numerous proposals in the United States to remove cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the most tightly restricted category reserved for drugs which have "no currently accepted medical use". Rescheduling proponents argue that cannabis does not meet the Controlled Substances Act's strict criteria for placement in Schedule I, and therefore the government is required by law either to permit medical use or to remove the drug from federal control altogether. The government, on the other hand, maintains that cannabis is dangerous enough to merit Schedule I status. The dispute is based on differing views on how the Act should be interpreted and what kinds of scientific evidence are most relevant to the rescheduling decision.

Schedule I is the only category of controlled substances that may not be prescribed by a physician.
Click to expand...
 
tekkychick said:
Only issue with exec order is the next president could reverse it.

But yeah, would be nice if he at least removed it as a schedule 1 drug; that is way too harsh a classification.

Interesting -looks like there have been proposals to remove since 1972. BILL CLINTON - where were you? - your country needed you!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_of_cannabis_from_Schedule_I_of_the_Controlled_Substances_Act
Click to expand...

pharmacologically, mj is a hypnotic not a narcotic. while it may be psychologically addictive, it is not physically addictive. you can blame william randolph hearst and tricky dick nixon for making and keeping 'demon' weed as a schedule one drug and spreading lies about it.
 
Don Quixote said:
addiction is a medical problem and needs to be treated as such
Click to expand...

I was being facetious. That said, my point is that people know that addiction can be an outcome prior to taking drugs. Therefore if they choose to take drugs and they are one of those that becomes an addict, then their medical bill is on them. Not on the tax payer.
 
Superfreak said:
I was being facetious. That said, my point is that people know that addiction can be an outcome prior to taking drugs. Therefore if they choose to take drugs and they are one of those that becomes an addict, then their medical bill is on them. Not on the tax payer.
Click to expand...

what if 1. they did not know or 2. the medication was prescribed for them.

addictive personalities may be identified at an early age, but do we want that level of government intrusion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top