wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 1 | |
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 8:08:36 AM | so what say ye, yay or nay? far as I'm concerned its the first light of day that US drug policy has seen since Reagan.
Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy
By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer Devlin Barrett, Associated Press Writer - 2 hrs 32 mins ago
WASHINGTON - Federal drug agents won't pursue pot-smoking patients or their sanctioned suppliers in states that allow medical marijuana, under new legal guidelines to be issued Monday by the Obama administration.
Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state law.
The guidelines to be issued by the department do, however, make it clear that agents will go after people whose marijuana distribution goes beyond what is permitted under state law or use medical marijuana as a cover for other crimes, the officials said.
The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.
Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
California is unique among those for the widespread presence of dispensaries - businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services. Colorado also has several dispensaries, and Rhode Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, a group that promotes the decriminalization of marijuana use.
Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that he wanted federal law enforcement officials to pursue those who violate both federal and state law, but it has not been clear how that goal would be put into practice.
A three-page memo spelling out the policy is expected to be sent Monday to federal prosecutors in the 14 states, and also to top officials at the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration.
The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the legal guidance before it is issued.
"This is a major step forward," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. "This change in policy moves the federal government dramatically toward respecting scientific and practical reality."
At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.
In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or involvement in other crimes.
And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.
The memo, officials said, is designed to give a sense of prosecutorial priorities to U.S. attorneys in the states that allow medical marijuana. It notes that pot sales in the United States are the largest source of money for violent Mexican drug cartels, but adds that federal law enforcement agencies have limited resources.
Medical marijuana advocates have been anxious to see exactly how the administration would implement candidate Barack Obama's repeated promises to change the policy in situations in which state laws allow the use of medical marijuana.
Soon after Obama took office, DEA agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles, prompting confusion about the government's plans. | |
|
| |
| |
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 9:44:56 AM | | Good I am glad that the states rights are being honored, They next step is to repeal the fed law all together. Texas actually isn't that bad as far as laws, anything under 4 ounces is still a misdamenor(sp?) over that is felony amounts. So that is pretty lean, Missouri for example has worse penalties. Hopefully this will green light more states to allow med mj. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 11:07:45 AM |
It's a start toward honoring state's rights. It's something, but it's not this. Perhaps it's a statement that the administration believes that it such regulation SHOULD be a state issue.
The word "right" seems to be thrown around a lot lately. This isn't a state right. Not yet anyway. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 12:20:04 PM | I've always found it hilarious that those who scream loudest about state's rights often turn on a dime when it comes to federal prosecution of drug laws. The dichotomy is stunning...especially with medical marijuana laws.
Anyway...this is a start. Our federal forces should concentrate on stuff that really matters i.e. terrorism. I find that a much bigger threat to America than cancer patients who smoke dope as part of their doctor-approved treatment plan.
P.S. If you've never seen the effects of marijuana on a cancer patient...especially one going through a round of chemotherapy...it is truly a wonderful thing. They're able to actually eat and keep their food down, and good nutrition is essential to any course of healing. To many cancer patients, No Big Pharm drug can compete with the effectiveness of marijuana.
Paul ;) | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 12:44:31 PM | | OP, I'm entirely in agreement with what Obama's doing on this. I'd also go further and generally decriminalize pot entirely (or nearly entirely -- perhaps excepting those truly huge quantities sometimes found in the possession of violent drug cartels or something like that....I'm not sure how exactly that would play out under decriminalization). But personally I am, although not a user, an advocate of general decriminalization (and taxation) for those who wish to utilize this plant for whatever purposes , medical or recreational. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 4:48:08 PM | | This is a temporary solution. I'm hoping it will be reclassified to a Schedule II drug. That, in my opinion, would allow for the best of both worlds and be the most appropriate (and least ambiguous) long-term solution. | |
|
wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 9 | |
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 5:16:21 PM | | my bet is thats a long way off. obama doesn't have the political capital to spend on it and nobody other democrat could to lead that charge. they'd be sitting ducks for the becks and o'reilly's of the world, unfortunately. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/19/2009 9:19:49 PM | | Working on a mental health floor has changed a few of my views. I have seen pot smoked for medicinal purposes ruin lives, and turn into a monster. Then again, I have seen insulin do the same thing. I guess it's all in how you use it. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/20/2009 10:40:39 AM | my bet is thats a long way off. obama doesn't have the political capital to spend on it and nobody other democrat could to lead that charge. they'd be sitting ducks for the becks and o'reilly's of the world, unfortunately. Of course it's a long way off. But it's a much better solution then making it a policy to ignore federal law.
These days it's almost a compliment to be a target of Beck's or O'Reilly. It's certainly nothing to run from.
Working on a mental health floor has changed a few of my views. I have seen pot smoked for medicinal purposes ruin lives, and turn into a monster. Then again, I have seen insulin do the same thing. I guess it's all in how you use it. There are many prescription drugs that are abused, with devastating effects. Marijuana pales in comparison. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/20/2009 11:13:50 AM | ^True. Abusing prescreption pills is much more dangerous. I had an old acquaintence die of a pill overdose recently.
Texas actually isn't that bad as far as laws, anything under 4 ounces is still a misdamenor(sp?) over that is felony amounts.
Is it? I was always under the impression it was 2 ounces. I'm going to have to look that up now. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/20/2009 5:35:09 PM | Hopefully this is a step towards legalizing 'pot' 100% for adults in the future. I'd also like to see other drugs legalized in the future. By legalizing the drug(s) we can cut off drug money revenue from the Mexican drug cartels and even put a hurt on the Taliban whom sold opium in the past and probably present.
Lets face it. Criminal organizations rise up when there is a demand for a product that is illegal. Just look at all of the crime and criminal organizations that were created due to Prohibition.
By making the drug(s) legal we can hurt the drug cartels where they hurt the most. Their wallet.
Not everyone wants to be "saved".
On a 'off note' I do find it funny that the many of the same people that support legalizing 'pot' also say junk food and tobacco products are a major cause of our rising health care costs and these products must be heavily taxed to encourage less consumption of them. Smoking pot may not be as bad for you as a cigarette but its still bad for your overall health. And people will turn to illegal pot if we impose heavy taxes on legal pot.
But to answer the Op's question I say "Yay" | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/20/2009 8:51:08 PM | Are we really any closer at ALL to winning the so called "war on drugs"
No, it's a plant you can't stop it, taxing it's sale would mean billions for the goverment. For some it is a real medicine, and to alot of people it is just a way to enjoy yourself that is no more dangerous then alcohol if anything it is safer. The health risk comes from the smoking of it, not the plant itself wich can be had many ways. To smoke anything is not good,
That taxing pays for better roads, better schools, better health care, and you are taking the sale of it out of the hands of criminals. It's like prohibiton with alchohol, you outlaw it, and the criminals just take over it's production. People who want to drink, still drink.
If you don't like it, you never have to do it, this is America after all. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/20/2009 9:07:30 PM | It's a start toward honoring state's rights. It's something, but it's not this. Perhaps it's a statement that the administration believes that it such regulation SHOULD be a state issue. The word "right" seems to be thrown around a lot lately. This isn't a state right. Not yet anyway.
I'm going to have to agree with you slightly, Obama is not the type of president that cares about ours or the states rights, he is your typical East Coast D.C. politician (all about power and money). I see it as more of a political move, this will help erase a lot of the mistakes he and his party have done for the 2012 election. Sorta like Bush changing to the "Iraqi Freedom" thing.
If he truelly gave a damn about our rights and the rights of the states, he would disban the DHS, DEA, ATF along with curtailing the powers of others and getting rid of some more federal agencies. He would get rid of all federal laws on drugs, guns, acohol, tabacco and other issues that should be left to the states.
Actually it IS the RIGHT of the state, the Feds and a lot of citizens just don't want to reconize that it is the STATES right to regulate or not regulate these matters. And there are those who believe that folks should not have rights also. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/20/2009 9:15:16 PM |
Actually it IS the RIGHT of the state, This is just incorrect.
You might not believe that it SHOULD be this way, but that doesn't change reality. Opinion and fact are very different beasts. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 12:09:29 AM |
This is just incorrect.
You might not believe that it SHOULD be this way, but that doesn't change reality. Opinion and fact are very different beasts.
Read this. Try the tenth one:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html
You are right, "opinion and fact are very different beast", as shown by the link above.
I will agree with you on the "reality" bit though. The reality is that Americans are too damn stupid and lazy to to check the Feds overeaching in power, some of the damn fools actually are ignorant enouph to want a larger and more controling government. Yes, so the reality is that the Feds don't respect the RIGHTS of the States because Americans don't seem to care, or understand what they are losing (lost). | |
|
wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 18 | |
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 6:21:53 AM | | some of the damn fools actually have some idea about history and remember some of the evils done by the states. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 9:01:01 AM | Outsideofthemiddle, you are making the common mistake of thinking that any answer can be gleaned directly from one snippit of the base document (the Constitution.) Constitutional law is infinitely more complex than this. If you took the time to try to look into the issue (instead of glibly posting links to the Bill of Rights) you might start to understand. Your first step might be to understand what powers are and are not referred to in the Amendment you refer to. Unfortunately, it seems like you're more interested in stomping your feet and insulting others instead of educating yourself and having any sort of reasoned discussion. The belief that simply reading one document will supply you with the knowledge to make the assertions you're making is naive, at best.
Aside from the fact that you're uneducated on this subject, individuals are not "ignorant," nor are they "damn fools," simply because they want something different from their government then you do. What exactly do you hope to accomplish by hurling insults at those who disagree with you?
Re: the below post: telling him he's incorrect, and telling him why, is not an insult. If he chooses to continue to operate under false pretenses, that's his dog.
I believe you'll find that this administration is not going to move to decriminalize marijuana. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 9:08:52 AM | | Probably the same thing you do based on your post, your post pretty much is off topic and insulting Outside...I think its funny that Obama wants to legalize medical marijuana despite the constitutional issues....First Black President legalize Marijuana...what next? | |
|
wudger
|
Joined: 12/20/2007
Msg: 21 | |
| |
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 9:27:02 AM | Smoking pot may not be as bad for you as a cigarette but its still bad for your overall health. And people will turn to illegal pot if we impose heavy taxes on legal pot.
^^ Yeah, but I'd be in favor of taxing pot (though perhaps not excessively) for the revenue, quite simply. Much needed, in many states. Booze, gambling, it's all regulated and taxed and flows into states' revenues now (instead of just into gangsters' revenues). IMO why shouldn't pot (and , off topic but prostitution) be as well? Both of those "industries" (which today function as underground black-markets which can be occasionally slowed down briefly perhaps but will never be able to be stopped) could be hugely "cleaned up" by the states finally intervening in them, legalizing and regulating them (and then taxing them). I'm not personally in favor however of legalizing the "harder" and/or more synthetic-type drugs (coke, heroin, etc.).
And as a side note, I have heard before that one joint contains as much .... carcinogens, tar, or what-have-you....as 16 tobacco cigarettes?? Anyone know more about that ? In which case smoking a joint would arguably be worse for your health (respiratory health at least) than smoking a cigarette. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 12:05:30 PM | There's no such thing as "states' rights". It's just another delusion common to conservative wingnuts. States have powers, but no rights.
Here's the tenth amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Please note that it says nothing about states having rights, but it does say that states have powers.
I think it's hilarious when people claim to respect the Constitution while making it obvious that they don't know what it says. | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 12:36:19 PM | | Semantics gone awry. Gotta love when a debate turns into a sanctimonious argument on the level of just what is the definition of "is". | |
|
| Obama and Medical Marijuana
Posted: 10/21/2009 2:50:30 PM | saharam:
How about searching deeper than just looking at the "snippit" provided. Explain then where it says the states don't have rights. I doubt you'll try, if you are correct and provide proof then I would be first to admit I am wrong. Otherwise, all you are doing is pulling stuff out of your backside and saying I'm incorrect. Ahh, but those who want something different from their government then you are "wingnuts". Essentially, all I got from your post is that you disegree with my inturpretion, but you are to lazy (or ignorant) to debate it logically and rationally. All you can come up with is a fancy longwinded form of calling me ignorant...am I correct?
So I'm guessing you would rather have the monkeys in DC control the whole country, instead of your local government running things. Those clowns over there are 3000 miles away from my home, what the hell do they know about representing anybody where I am at?
<div class="quote">some of the damn fools actually have some idea about history and remember some of the evils done by the states.
This makes next to no sense at all. Did you take advantage of our president's marijuana declaration prior to typing that?
Saharam
wudger
bushlover
So, by ranting against a state's rights and preaching for a larger federal government...am I too assume that you guys/gals are against Obama dropping some federal regulations on medical marijuana? Are you guys/gals for harsher regs on marijuana? | |
|
Home
login 
