Jeff Sessions: "Drugs Will Destroy Your Life," Recinds Cole Memo On Pot Legalization

a reply to: Archivalist

Well, I'm surprised I didn't keel over from all the binge eating, after getting high. I can't tell you how many "garbage plates" I ate, after I got stoned. Anyone ever ate a "garbage plate?" Then you know what I mean.

originally posted by: dothedew
3. Life will continue

Not for everyone.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Sessions is an ass.

You forgot the sugar lobby and the millions addicted to sweets.

Yeah, maybe Sessions could should after Starbucks next...there was a thread a few months back, a cop arrested someone for being under the influence of caffeine because they had cut her off or something....

FAQ, Jeff Sessions!

a reply to: Archivalist

Interesting, and man this is a hard read but children shouldn't be smoking pot, drinking alcohol, or taking opiod pills either so this very small case of three boys isn't an issue at all.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

That's how I wanna go.

On second thought, no it isn't.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Well if you were smoking up between the ages of 12 and 18, just consider yourself unlucky, I suppose. For THC to trigger an ischemic stroke in you would be like winning a small lottery sum or a scratch card.

However, that's far from impossible, and certainly not 0.

I like to remove jokes from the serious parts of the issues at hand here. I am pro-legalization and pro-regulation.

If both sides of legalization were willing to open itself fully to scrutiny from the other side, then I would imagine we would reach a compromise in a more immediate future.

a reply to: underwerks

And in somewhat response to this, I'm going to ask a question that everyone has thought at some point or another:

Why don't we take the proper agencies to court?

They're classification of the drug as schedule 1 goes COMPLETELY against their own patent showing it holds medicinal value. There are over 110 medical studies published on the positive benefits of Marijuana. They have granted rights to pharm companies to produce the drug synthetically. Crime stats show falling rates among states that have legalized. Opioid deaths and hospital visits have dropped since medical legalization. Arrests are offset by racist profiling.

Literally, the government is guilty of fraud and discrimination on several different levels. Surely there could be a suit that could be brought against them that could overpower their "it's illegal because we said so" argument.

a reply to: Archivalist

I understand about you wanting to remove "jokes" from the "serious parts" of the pot issue. But, c'mon, a handful of kids getting unlucky and dying from a ischemic stroke is tragic, but EXTREMELY rare. How many kids die each year from alcohol poisoning? You see the government concerned about that issue?

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: underwerks

And in somewhat response to this, I'm going to ask a question that everyone has thought at some point or another:

Why don't we take the proper agencies to court?

They're classification of the drug as schedule 1 goes COMPLETELY against their own patent showing it holds medicinal value. There are over 110 medical studies published on the positive benefits of Marijuana. They have granted rights to pharm companies to produce the drug synthetically. Crime stats show falling rates among states that have legalized. Opioid deaths and hospital visits have dropped since medical legalization. Arrests are offset by racist profiling.

Literally, the government is guilty of fraud and discrimination on several different levels. Surely there could be a suit that could be brought against them that could overpower their "it's illegal because we said so" argument.

In short, because the money behind making cannabis legal is dwarfed by the millions invested to keep it illegal. Pharmaceutical companies, including the makers of fentanyl donate incredibly large sums of money to politicians making sure it stays illegal.

As do police unions, private prison lobbyists, and alcohol and tobacco companies. And guess what? Jeff Sessions has accepted donations from every group I just listed.

This isn't a war on drugs, it's a war on people. Financed by the very same companies responsible for our current opiate epidemic. And yet claim to be concerned with our "safety".

That this administration doesn't care or doesn't care to know, says everything.

originally posted by: Archivalist
a reply to: Swills

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

In short, males between the ages of 12 and 18 for some reason, have an increased risk for types of stroke that can be triggered by acute marijuana usage.

While this sounds like something a parent would say, to keep a teen boy from smoking reefer, I assure you, the medical community has case studies in documentation and in scrutiny of peer review, that show this exact phenomena.

The 'kids' ALREADY have the pot.

They ALWAYS have.

They ALWAYS will.

Wrecking their life for it is the crime.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

In today's media and the current political climate, I wouldn't treat anything documented as a non-issue or it is going to be used as firepower against you, later.

If Dr. Sanjay Gupta testified for the Supreme Court that marijuana and THC has never contributed to a fatality... Then another doctor from the opposition is like hold on, look at these ischemic strokes, Gupta is lying! Then all of Gupta's credibility goes out the door, along with his argument. He couldn't recover that by saying 3/100,000,000 is so rare! Because then they'd get those 3 little boy's mothers crying on the stand. "It wasn't so rare for me and MY family!"

Seriously, take the argument with full transparency, or don't go at it at all.

originally posted by: Archivalist
a reply to: shawmanfromny
Seriously, take the argument with full transparency, or don't go at it at all.

That's the thing, you can't. As long as cannabis is classified as a Schedule 1 drug, it's illegal to perform tests on it.

It's kind of a catch 22. You need the studies to show the safety of cannabis so it can be removed from it's schedule 1 status, but as long as its schedule 1 you aren't allowed to perform any studies.

It's set up so it's almost impossible to remove cannabis from its schedule 1 classification.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Ok, but what do I do about the dead kids? Sober up buddy, come back and read my posts tomorrow.

Generally, I feel the less laws the better and the smaller the government the better.

However, if a law exists, it should be enforced. If it's a bad law, it should be repealed. I am against just ignoring laws whether it be illegal drugs or illegal immigration.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Archivalist

Interesting, and man this is a hard read but children shouldn't be smoking pot, drinking alcohol, or taking opiod pills either so this very small case of three boys isn't an issue at all.

I agree.

But ultimately Sessions isn't the problem. Well he is, directly, but not in the way most people think.

Mary J is a Schedule 1 drug. Everyone already knows that. Everyone already believes it's bulll#. But who labels it a Schedule 1 drug? THE MOTHER-FLIPPING DEA.



Even fewer people know that. Why we allow a non-partisan board to schedule drugs is beyond my understanding. It's creating power in government REMOVED from the people as it puts government in power (unelected ABC).


I feel this is a touchpoint DT2020 could really pull from. Imagine it. He could secure 2020 with a nationwide marijuana rescheduling. Back to Sessions.

I believe he has the ultimate say on the scheduling and it would be in his power to change it (questionable, but doable, maybe reverseable). But he's not going to do that. He's Jeff-goodoleboy-Sessions. He's literally ancient and was raised believing MJ was a bad girl to be around.

Now back to Trump. THIS could be an avenue for Trump to break from Sessions and ultimately get rid of him, putting the blame or onus on the different stance on MJ. This would also provide cover for Trump against any obstruction or appearance of obstruction (the current kind) that could arise from firing Sessions.

Thoughts?

originally posted by: Archivalist
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Ok, but what do I do about the dead kids? Sober up buddy, come back and read my posts tomorrow.

What dead kids? Hoe many are there? What are their names?

a reply to: Archivalist

I couldn't agree with you more, and sadly, its not exclusive to this topic either. Both "sides" perpetuate hyperbole and half truths.

Have people died from marijuana use? Well, yes. Its problematic to write it off as being "so rare it might as well be zero!"

Along the same lines, using argumentative questions like "Has anyone heard of medical benefits using heroin?" and then trying to make a case for certain compounds in Cannabis is equally problematic for what should be obvious reasons.

Cannabis is a wonderful and incredible plant, but it is not infallible nor is it a cure-all. Discrediting our own arguments for legalization and regulation with hyperbole and half-truths does little more than fuel the people who fight against it. In some cases, it can even have deleterious effects in tangentially related topics.

a reply to: underwerks

Have you read all legislation involved with handle, distribution, and testing of controlled substances?

It's a lot more than a few paragraphs on the internet, unfortunately.

The catch 22 you are speaking about is a simplification of a much larger process. Marijuana is being tested right now in dozens of laboratories across the country. Are they taking buds off the bush? Probably not. Most are likely analyzing it's derivatives, composites, and organic compound interactions within it.

What the public as a whole wants - Descheduling, and what the reality of the situation is - A heated climate of economics and lobbying influenced by parties of conflict. (Alcohol, tobacco, etc...)

My own personal tinfoil hat theory, is that alcohol and tobacco are waiting for grassroots people to build the backend infrastructure for widescale marijuana distribution and sale. Until the backbone is down and the calf is fatted and ready to eat, they are keeping legislation from allowing marijuana to eat their bottom line. Once the distribution backbone for marijuana is in place, alcohol companies will either buy up the dying tobacco companies and use them as a straw to suck up those grassroots marijuana distributors or they will just directly go after and buy all of the marijuana distribution on their own.

Yep, alcohol and tobacco is tick tock lobbying and biding it's time. Once they can snatch up the distribution backbone for marijuana, that is currently being painstakingly built by individual and local companies in the legalized states... That is when the law will start changing. When big alcohol can step in, and for the smallest amount of investment, reap the biggest profit.

I'd almost be willing to guarantee that's how it is going to go down.

Petty arguments about legislative classification are too narrow and micro focused to fix the larger issue.

We are bought and sold by money. If you want to point to today's Skynet, today's basilisk? Well, I'd say it is money. Money is an interesting antagonist. It's an artificial intelligence and machine so advanced... It doesn't even need it's own mind. It is using yours, and mine, and everyone's. Money itself, is a computer built to tear apart man, and man is the processor, man is powering the machine responsible for it's own destruction.