Spicer says to expect federal enforcement of marijuana laws.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Welcome to white Christendom. Your opinion and rights don't matter. And you guys thought that was just for black people. Hang on.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: TinySickTears

the job or the state does not matter.

But I thought it was a state's rights issue?

And what if the job involves operating heavy machinery?

i say it needs to be legal at the federal level. its a state rights issue to a point but my issue is the drug testing. that is cause of federal laws.

what if the job involves operating heavy machinery.....so what

its medicine.
like all other medicines there are different doses and strengths. low thc which is what gets you stoned and high cbd which gives you pain relieving properties.
there are heavy duty doses that i would not recommend when working around equipment but there are low level thc, high level cbd which would be no problem.

here is a news flash
people that operate heavy equipment are legally taking all kinds of opiates for pain. pills and patches...different milligrams and micrograms....

i take vicodin every day. its prescribed.

funny thing i was not on any opiates when i cut my finger off at work. the opiates came after

people need to get it out of their head that the only medical option is a fat blunt or a brownie.
so many different delivery methods and so many different strengths.

I am happy for the following; shared earlier:

Congress' new Cannabis Caucus isn't just blowing smoke about legalizing pot

Oh?
The four brought this caucus just one week after Jeff Sessions was confirmed in hopes to "keep Sessions in line".

The Cannabis Caucus

Four lawmakers representing states that have legalized weed have launched the first ever Congressional Cannabis Caucus. Jared Polis (D-Colorado), Dana Rohorabacher (R-California), Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon) and Don Young (R-Alaska) say they want to work together on legislation related to the legalization and regulation of marijuana.

-Source

Here's the caucus plans as described in the OP and my take on them:
ºNew laws to help cannabis research happen: Fair studies, ie not paid for by lobbyist with agenda pushing sides, need to happen.
ºAn increase in access for medicinal marijuana veteran patients: Sorely needed throughout states where medicinal use is restricted. Should be addressed as well as with children and others who need the help.
ºReform tax and banking laws: Would see that as making the industry more legit, have more access to services that are now restricted. - www.abovetopsecret.com...

Though, has me wondering if that will make enough impact to stop the Feds as discussed by Spicer, etc.

originally posted by: Monger
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Thank God you're around to interpret the administration's words like the Torah. Otherwise we might never know what they really meant to say.

No interpretation is needed.

Spicer spoke plain English, stating the obvious.

There are federal laws on the books.

It is the DOJ's duty and responsibility to enforce these laws.

The only way to change the law is through passing a bill through both houses of congress and then signed into law by the president, as always.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

why do you take federal laws to mean going after cartels?

could it not mean going after legal dispensaries like has happened before?
did his comment exclude the medical industry?
i must have missed it

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Gryphon66

Welcome to white Christendom. Your opinion and rights don't matter. And you guys thought that was just for black people. Hang on.

What kind of racist, bigoted nonsense is this?

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: underwerks

Trump said that he thought legal marijuana was quote:

bad

And you want to make a federal case out of it, when he clearly advocated the enforcement of state's rights when it came to cannabis.

So are you seriously denying the white house said today they are ramping up prosecution in places where recreational is legal?

Sean Spicer suggested Thursday that the Trump administration will enforce federal marijuana laws in states where recreational pot is legal.

www.oregonlive.com...
Have you even listened to the press conference? You keep denying something that was explicitly stated by the Trump admin.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
I'm triggered

Yeah, that's obvious.

originally posted by: TinySickTears

i say it needs to be legal at the federal level.

Correct, but Trump still has to deal with whiny conservative dinosaurs with this front for now, especially if he wants re-election (which he does).

The general model I've seen with Bush & Obama is, they soft-peddle until about a month after re-election, and then their true colors come out.

Obama should have been the one to deal with ending the War On Drugs as it we know it post re-election, but his Identity Political war was his ambition. Assuming Trump is all die hard about both the economy and the Mexican cartels, then he might be the first one to actually begin such proceedings (as opposed to merely paying lip hypocritical service to it like Obama).

Maybe this will become A Constitutional Issue for the States. I would have to brush up on my history but I think repeal of alcohol prohibition started with the states. I would love to see federal power challenged.

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.

Article 10 U.S. Contitution

a reply to: underwerks

oh well dont go making good points....
thats not what we do around here lately

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: TinySickTears

i say it needs to be legal at the federal level.

Correct, but Trump still has to deal with whiny conservative dinosaurs with this front for now, especially if he wants re-election (which he does).

Judging by the mini-revolt happening at the_donald over this issue, going after cannabis isn't going to help with re-election efforts.

originally posted by: Monger

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: TinySickTears
There hasn't been a single raid on one dispensary in a state that voted for recreational marijuana.

Yet.

Feds Raid Pot Dispensaries in Washington, Where the Drug is Legal


As state laws decriminalizing marijuana begin to take effect (and grow in number), proponents of access to the drug have been holding their breaths to see how the feds would react. And in Washington State, it looks like several medical marijuana dispensaries found out the answer today as the Drug Enforcement Administration confirmed a series of raids in the Seattle area.

2013 source

a reply to: TinySickTears

what if the job involves operating heavy machinery.....so what

What do you mean so what?

If someone is an employee of the state and that state had decided not to allow people who work for the state to smoke marijuana then that is state's rights working in action.

The beauty of that is, with state's rights you can have one state do what I just mentioned, and another state do the exact opposite.

It's called democracy.

I don't disagree that marijuana should be rescheduled at the federal level. And you know what? I don't think Trump does, either.

But like Trump, I like to think of the practicality of how I the indivdual can solve a problem. In the case of marijuana, I don't think seeing it rescheduled is an obtainable goal overnight, and all your rhetoric in between isn't helping you get closer to your goal.

If Trump advocates enforcing state's rights when it comes to recreational marijuana, then what everybody needs to do is to campaign for medical/recreational marijuana in their states. The more states hop on board, the easier it will be for the DOJ and the DEA to reschedule marijuana.

But all of this whining, crying, and downright mob mentality in this thread isn't going to bring the United States any closer to seeing legal marijuana.

Baby steps.

a reply to: TinySickTears

Because under the state rights interpretation of 'things', federal law enforcement generally only comes into play when dealing with international/interstate crimes. Yes, the DEA sets the Scheduling and all that BS, but actual intrastate penalty specifics and enforcement should be all internal state to state.

Is how I've always looked at the concepts anyways.

Take the FBI, unless its official level corruption, or kidnapping, or terrorism (which is designated national security), they generally dont come into play unless a criminal enterprise crosses state lines.

The DEA, international drug routes are definitely their thing. Yes they have offices across the nation. Yes they can be sent in to bust a dispensary, as that's how Clinton & Bush tried to handle the early rising tides, but how often do they go around in a city running their own drug house raids independent of the Police?

a reply to: Monger

I never go in there, but its the "Old Guard" scum internally, and the oldie's Christians externally to be delt with. It really starts wit the Old Guard because I blame their social engineering of our society to DEMONize it and this whole trend we've all seen our whole lives.

a reply to: Monger
So I've looked into the Canada and Uruguay legalization a bit. The INCB, those are the people that ensure nations are compliant to international drug treaties, have actually given Uruguay several warnings about treaty violations due to their lack of criminalization for non-medical use. They are working with Uruguay to find a solution to these problems. But Uruguay is still not punishing people for recreational use.

The stance from Canada seems to be that because the UN have not punished Uruguay yet then it's all right for them. Also the idea that the UN laws could change in regards to the whole issue, like I said. The UN will need to change in order for it to be all right at the international level.

The chance for the UN law to change could come this Spring at the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Drugs in New York. If the UN laws do not change then I believe the INCB will begin issuing warnings to Canada just like Uruguay if they proceed. Possibly with the same response of nothing being done though... Alternatively the UN could decide to crack down on legalization. This meeting will set their international drug policies for the next decade.

Not to flat out equate the two but it seems to me like the immigration issue in the US. There are illegal immigrants that could be deported legally at any minute but they haven't been deported yet. The same appears to be the case with legalization. Just because no action has been taken against Uruguay yet doesn't mean it's not a problem to the international community.

I don't claim to know for sure but that is how it appears. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see what Canada does being used as a model in the US if it works.

Are the legal dispensaries still struggling to find banks that will take their cash? I have read stories where these dispensaries have huge amounts of cash sitting around because they can not get any banks that will allow them to deposit this money, because it is still illegal at the federal level.

I wonder what happens when the war on cash comes into full force here in the states?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Come on, man. You know damn well the GOP establishment only cares about "states rights" when they aren't in power. History is clear.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

I do agree that the legalization movement has gained too much momentum. I hope the Trump administration does try to crack down on it....because then Trumps opponents will have a great reason to protest....and they will get a lot of help even from people that support him in most areas.