Could Path to Legal Marijuana Seal an Obama Victory?

[Nbadan]

The one issue that could reignite the Obama youth vote of 2008...so why is Obama so silent on this issue....

President Obama's puzzling silence on marijuana policy


The youth vote helped propel Barack Obama to the presidency, but that enthusiasm has declined sharply, writes Neal Peirce. One issue might reignite youthful enthusiasm: marijuana — partly its medical use, but especially Americans' right to recreational use free of potential arrest.

WASHINGTON — "Dance with the One that Brought You" is the title of a well-known song. But the Urban Dictionary offers a deeper meaning: "The principle that someone should pay proper fealty to those who have gone out of their way to look after them."

Barack Obama should pay attention. In 2008, young voters were enthused and turned out for him by the millions.

But now? The campus/youth enthusiasm factor has declined sharply. The deficiency seriously imperils Obama's re-election effort.

There's one issue, though, that might reignite youthful enthusiasm. That issue is marijuana — partly its medical use, but especially Americans' right to recreational use free of potential arrest and possible prison time.

Today's grim reality is that police continue to arrest youth for marijuana possession by the hundreds of thousands. But each arrest is a red flag of danger, threatening life prospects for a young man or woman suddenly saddled with a permanent "drug arrest" record that's easily located by employers, landlords, schools, credit agencies and banks.

Small wonder then that 62 percent of young Americans (ages 18 to 29) now favor legalizing marijuana, as a Gallup poll reported.

And it's not just youth these days. Gallup this year found 50 percent nationwide support for legalizing marijuana use — the most ever, up from a measly 12 percent in 1969 to 30 percent in 2000 and 40 percent in 2009.

A ballot measure to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana received 46.5 percent of the vote in California last year. Parallel measures are likely to be on the 2012 ballots in Colorado and Washington. Odd political bedfellows — Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Ron Paul, R-Texas — recently introduced a legalization bill and now have 19 co-sponsors. Paul even gets applause advocating legalization in Republican presidential debates.

...

This is clearly not the "change" Obama's enthusiastic supporters of 2008 expected. And it's deeply ironic. Ethan Nadelmann of the Drug Policy Alliance notes that if local police departments had been enforcing marijuana laws as harshly in the early 1980s as many do today, "there's a good chance a young Columbia student named Barack Obama could have been picked up — and not be in the White House today."

Nadelmann suggests that both the White House Drug Policy Office and the Justice Department enforcement divisions have been "co-opted" by holdover appointees deeply invested in anti-marijuana rhetoric and "let's just bust them" drug enforcement.

Facing the 2012 election, Obama is not likely to advocate, suddenly, marijuana decriminalization. But he could announce that it's time for a serious national dialogue on the issue, and that it will be a hallmark of his second term. He could express his dismay that 800,000 people, mostly young (and heavily black and Hispanic), are being arrested each year for marijuana possession — even as 50 percent of Americans favor legalization. He could focus on the massive costs of enforcement, the deep social costs of imprisonment. Let all America, youth included, join in the debate, he could urge.

A new openness to marijuana reform could help to reignite, on campuses and among high numbers of young people, the hope for "change" that really means something. Perhaps even prospects for the president's own re-election.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2017033938_peirce18.html

I'd like to see a Democratic Plank calling clearly for ending the drug war and stating the schedule they are going to do it on. This is not as radical as it sounds. The justification and legal rationale must be made clear. But it is not a radical idea in 2011. In fact, the respectable Law Enforcement Against Prohibition is calling for ending the drug war as the best policy, and they are an organization of conservative, main stream police and DEA officers of all parties. They were on the front lines and they say it causes more problems then it solves. So this is not a radical idea anymore in 2011. It's just inertia

[Nbadan]

The effects of associated risk on substance use...

Study: Why Teen Pot Smoking Could be a Good Thing (And What We Can Learn From Teens Who Choose Weed Over Beer)


The National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) released the results of its 2011 Monitoring the Future Survey of teen drug use, and guess what: Teens are using cigarettes and alcohol less, but they are smoking more marijuana. What's more, they're smoking more weed because they do not perceive it to be as harmful as did teens in the past. Teens' level of "associated risk" with marijuana use has gone done over time, and marijuana is, indeed, less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes: This could be an argument for more honest drug education in schools.

Associated risk is the danger or harm believed to be a consequence of drug use. If associated risk for a particular substance goes up, more people are reporting that they consider using that drug to be a threat. In other words, as associated risk goes down, more people are saying the drug in question is not that bad. According to the NIDA study, a decline in marijuana's associated risk contributed to teens smoking more pot, while drinking less alcohol and smoking fewer cigarrettes. Thus, many teens actually showed good judgement, by using available information to determine the danger posed by particular substances, and making smart decisions accordingly.

According to the study, about 25% of teens surveyed said they tried marijuana at least once last year, a statistically significant rise of about 4% since 2007. Additionally, 6.6% of 12th graders also admitted to smoking weed daily.
18

http://www.alternet.org/story/153498/study%3A_why_teen_pot_smoking_could_be_a_good_thin g_%28and_what_we_can_learn_from_teens_who_choose_w eed_over_beer%29/

Most kids are pretty streetwise they see behind all the bullshit talk about the 'dangers of marijuana' use.....facts continuously show that marijuana use is the less harmful than cigarettes and alcohol and much less addictive than many of the legal prescription drugs used on school campuses ...that said I don't advocate use among teen nor daily use among adults...

[Winehole23]

signs point to "no"


President Obama gave an interview to Rolling Stone‘s Jann Wenner (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/ready-for-the-fight-rolling-stone-interview-with-barack-obama-20120425?page=2) this week and was asked about his administration’s aggressive crackdown (http://reason.com/blog/2011/10/06/doj-launches-coordinated-crack) on medical marijuana dispensaries, including ones located in states where medical marijuana is legal and which are licensed by the state; this policy is directly contrary to Obama’s campaign pledge to not “use Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws about medical marijuana.” Here’s part of the President’s answer:

I never made a commitment that somehow we were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana – and the reason is, because it’s against federal law. I can’t nullify congressional law. I can’t ask the Justice Department to say, “Ignore completely a federal law that’s on the books” . . . .


The only tension that’s come up – and this gets hyped up a lot – is a murky area where you have large-scale, commercial operations that may supply medical marijuana users, but in some cases may also be supplying recreational users. In that situation, we put the Justice Department in a very difficult place if we’re telling them, “This is supposed to be against the law, but we want you to turn the other way.” That’s not something we’re going to do.
Aside from the fact that Obama’s claim about the law is outright false — as Jon Walker conclusively documents (http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2012/04/25/obama-lies-about-federal-marijuana-law-to-rolling-stone/), the law vests the Executive Branch with precisely the discretion he falsely claims he does not have to decide how drugs are classified — it’s just extraordinary that Obama is affirming the “principle” that he can’t have the DOJ “turn the othe way” in the face of lawbreaking. As an emailer just put it to me: “Interesting how this principle holds for prosecuting [medical] marijuana producers in the war on drugs, but not for prosecuting US officials in the war on terror (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/us/politics/12inquire.html?pagewanted=all). Or telecommunications companies for illegal spying (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/politics/02fisa.html). Or Wall Street banks (http://www.propublica.org/article/why-no-financial-crisis-prosecutions-official-says-its-just-too-hard) for mortgage fraud (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/business/schneiderman-is-said-to-face-pressure-to-back-bank-deal.html?pagewanted=all).”


That’s about as vivid an expression of the President’s agenda, and his sense of justice, and the state of the Rule of Law in America, as one can imagine. The same person who directed the DOJ to shield torturers and illegal government eavesdroppers from criminal investigation, and who voted to retroactively immunize the nation’s largest telecom giants when they got caught enabling criminal spying on Americans, and whose DOJ has failed to indict a single Wall Street executive in connection with the 2008 financial crisis or mortgage fraud scandal, suddenly discovers the imperatives of The Rule of Law when it comes to those, in accordance with state law, providing medical marijuana to sick people with a prescription.
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/26/obama_justice_and_medical_marijuana/singleton/

[Winehole23]

Not to mention his official position that he will neither enforce nor defend the "Defense of Marriage Act."

[CosmicCowboy]

Yeah, no way O comes out for legalization. He even cranked up enforcement in California dramatically. It was no accident. Telling rolling Stone he is doing it "because it's federal law" is a fucking joke and shows what shitty journalists they are for not calling him on it. He certainly has no problem ordering DOJ to ignore immigration laws when he thinks it gives him an advantage politically.

[Winehole23]

which immigration laws?

[Winehole23]

interdiction/deportation are at all time highs

[CosmicCowboy]

interdiction/deportation are at all time highs

Numerically, but as you know it is selective and not enforced across the board.

[jack sommerset]

A lot cops that find an illegal they suspect of small crime like DUI without injury, shoplifting, some pot on them they usually call the deportation wagon to send them back to where they came from so they don't have to mess with paper work. They pass the buck so to speak. God bless.

[CosmicCowboy]

I'm not saying I disagree with that policy, just that it is selective enforcement.

[Winehole23]

Numerically, but as you know it is selective and not enforced across the board.so which laws were ignored?

[Winehole23]

and what is your source that Obama directed the DOJ to do so?

[CosmicCowboy]

so which laws were ignored?

Don't act dumb just for the sake of argument. An illegal resident that keeps their nose clean has zero chance of being deported.

[Winehole23]

surely you exaggerate

[Winehole23]

please don't play dumb, name which immigration laws you say Obama is telling the DOJ to ignore.

[CosmicCowboy]

please don't play dumb, name which immigration laws you say Obama is telling the DOJ to ignore.

You are kidding, right? I can't believe you are playing this chumpishly dumb just to argue with me.

http://www.usimmigration.com/memo-outlining-deportation.html

[Winehole23]

secure communities. how hard was that?

you're awfully touchy about saying what you mean...

[CosmicCowboy]

secure communities. how hard was that?

you're awfully touchy about saying what you mean...

Like I said...what was the fucking point of arguing against something you knew to be true just because I said it? Thats Chumps shtick and it doesn't become you.

[Winehole23]

I didn't know what you were talking about. You weren't specific and I'm not a mind reader.

[johnsmith]

I still like to believe that as a younger, more open minded generation comes into power and influence in DC, that we will eventually have legalized Marijuana.

I'm starting to think I was wrong, but in my defense, the worst generation EVER (baby boomers) still hold the biggest stick in America.

On a side note, hopefully no one learned anything from baby boomers and we can move on with America once they all die.........which can't be soon enough.

[CosmicCowboy]

pfft. Chumphole

[Winehole23]

There's nothing at the included link about political directives from the WH. These may be reasonably inferred, but that doesn't mean they happened. All prosecutors exercise discretion in the use of limited time/resources. Across the board enforcement of every violation out there isn't realistic.

[Winehole23]

Fact of there matter is there's more immigration enforcement now than there ever has been.

[Winehole23]

Sad to say, same goes for the drug war.

[johnsmith]

Since Baby Boomers are the worst generation ever, can we blame the WW2 generation for it?

[CosmicCowboy]

There's nothing at the included link about political directives from the WH. These may be reasonably inferred, but that doesn't mean they happened. All prosecutors exercise discretion in the use of limited time/resources. Across the board enforcement of every violation out there isn't realistic.

Do you live under a fucking rock?

http://www.rubypowerslaw.com/deportations-plummet-under-obamas-new-immigration-policy/

Deportations Plummet Under Obama’s New Immigration Policy by Ruby Powers • February 28, 2012 • Immigration Law • 0 Comments


President Obama’s efforts to tighten the leash on U.S. immigration enforcement have caused a sharp drop in the number of deportations, according to a report by the Syracuse University Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. In the last three months of 2011, following the administration’s directive to curb deportations of illegal immigrants without criminal records or who came to the United States as a child or student (among other discretionary factors), deportations have plummeted.

The number of deportation proceedings instituted from October to December 2011 by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plunged to 39,331, a 33-percent decline from the 58,639 filings documented the previous quarter. “Filings are typically lower at this time of year, but even adjusting for this seasonal drop-off and for late reporting,” the report noted, “there appear to have been over 10,000 fewer deportation filings than would have been expected last quarter.”

The chief priority of the administration’s June 17, 2011 directive was to restrict most deportations to those immigrants with criminal records. “It makes no sense to spend our enforcement resources on these low-priority cases when they could be used with more impact on others, including individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes,” Cecilia Muñoz, Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, wrote last August in a White House blog post. ”This means more immigration enforcement pressure where it counts the most, and less where it doesn’t,” she added. “That’s the smartest way to follow the law while we stay focused on working with the Congress to fix it.”

However, according to Syracuse University researchers, there is “little evidence” that immigrants with criminal records are representing a higher ratio of overall deportations. In fact, during the purported timeframe, only 1,300, or 3.3 percent, were to be deported as alleged “aggravated felons.” Conversely, from July to September 2011, 3.8 percent were alleged “aggravated felons,” while six months ago the proportion was 4 percent. The researchers added:

An additional 4,193 were charged by ICE for other alleged criminal activity last quarter. When considered together with alleged “aggravated felons,” the proportion of filings in the last quarter seeking deportation on grounds of any alleged criminal activity was still less than one out of seven (14%). And even this small slice is continuing to decline. Two years ago, slightly more than one of six (17.3 percent) were alleged to have engaged in criminal activity as the grounds ICE cited for seeking removal.

“People have heard about these policy changes but largely haven’t seen any difference,” asserted Frank Sharry, executive director of immigration advocacy group America’s Voice.

Many critics have alleged that President Obama’s June 2011 directive was largely political, particularly considering deportations have reached record levels, averaging 400,000 per year, under the current administration. Astoundingly, that’s double the annual average during President Bush’s first term and 30 percent higher than the average when Bush left office. Due to those record numbers, along with Obama’s failure to implement so-called “comprehensive immigration reform,” there has been an ignition of criticism among the Hispanic community — a growing portion of the Democratic voter base.

“Latino immigrant voters know that the Alabama and Arizona laws didn’t come about from Democrats. They’re aware the Obama administration is fighting those laws. They know that Republicans blocked the DREAM Act. They know that Mitt Romney is talking about massive self-deportation,” Sharry said. “And they’re angry and disappointed that the Obama administration promised a legislative breakthrough, didn’t deliver it, but has delivered on record deportations.”

In response, the President has embarked on a political campaign to recover previous support from this pivotal sector of the American electorate.

“What we’ve been able to do is, administratively, we’ve said — let’s reemphasize our focus when it comes to enforcement on criminals and at the borders, and let’s not be focusing our attention on hard-working families who are just trying to make ends meet,” Obama said in an interview last week. “We’ve administratively proposed to reform the ‘three and 10″ program so that families aren’t separated when they’re applying to stay here in this country.”

In emphasizing his newly coined ”five more years” campaign slogan, the President assured a Hispanic audience that he would use his second term to push immigration reform. “My presidency is not over,” Obama indicated, responding to a question about his failure to actualize an immigration bill. “I’ve got another five years coming up. We’re going to get this done.”

Moreover, the President rejected the notion that he broke a campaign promise, while passing the blame to Republicans who were unwilling to embrace any “sensible solutions” on the issue. “So far, we haven’t seen any of the Republican candidates even support immigration reform,” Obama charged, targeting his potential opponents in the upcoming presidential contest.

Political analysts and commentators have predicted that the Hispanic vote will be critical for Obama’s reelection bid, as the minority’s rising population has become an increasingly chief component of the American electorate. While many Hispanics who supported Obama in 2008 may refrain from voting Republican, their disappointment over Obama’s immigration efforts may deter them from even voting at all come November 6.

Considering the persistently stale economy — which has led to a sharp drop in Obama’s approval ratings — the President will rely heavily on minority voting groups, observers predict. As the Los Angeles Timesreported last October, the President has commenced an “all-out push to rebuild his popularity” with Hispanics, which has been “diminished by the weak economy and a lack of progress toward revamping the nation’s immigration system.”

“The excitement isn’t there like it was,” asserted Ana Canales, a volunteer and the county chairwoman for the Democratic Party of Bernalillo County in New Mexico, where the Obama campaign has accelerated efforts to recruit Hispanic voters. “There are a lot of people who are saying, ‘We’re not going to vote.’ We have a lot of work on our hands … to make sure those Latinos understand that he [Obama] is working for us.”

[Winehole23]

Policy has political angles. Fair enough. What does secure communities have to do with the OP?

[CosmicCowboy]

Policy has political angles. Fair enough. What does secure communities have to do with the OP?

WTF? I made a perfectly acceptable and true statement and you took issue with it just to be a bitch.



Yeah, no way O comes out for legalization. He even cranked up enforcement in California dramatically. It was no accident. Telling rolling Stone he is doing it "because it's federal law" is a fucking joke and shows what shitty journalists they are for not calling him on it. He certainly has no problem ordering DOJ to ignore immigration laws when he thinks it gives him an advantage politically.

GFY

[Winehole23]

Do you live under a fucking rock?

http://www.rubypowerslaw.com/deporta...ration-policy/ (http://www.rubypowerslaw.com/deportations-plummet-under-obamas-new-immigration-policy/)Because I'm not on the same page as you and can't read your mind?

Very doubtful.

[Winehole23]

Answering with dismissive hostility and verbal abuse every time you're questioned hardly helps your persuasiveness, but hey, it's a free country.

[Winehole23]

WTF? I made a perfectly acceptable and true statement and you took issue with it just to be a bitch.

GFYIt was unclear and unspecific. Sorry to inconvenience you with a request to clarify. I know it was a big hassle. Hope you enjoy your day, too.

[Winehole23]

I still like to believe that as a younger, more open minded generation comes into power and influence in DC, that we will eventually have legalized Marijuana.

I'm starting to think I was wrong, but in my defense, the worst generation EVER (baby boomers) still hold the biggest stick in America.

On a side note, hopefully no one learned anything from baby boomers and we can move on with America once they all die.........which can't be soon enough.
Don't trust anyone over 30!

[boutons_deux]

4 Industries Getting Rich Off the Drug War


http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/22/4-industries-getting-rich-off-the-drug-w

[boutons_deux]

Obama Lies About Federal Marijuana Law to Rolling Stone

http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2012/04/25/obama-lies-about-federal-marijuana-law-to-rolling-stone/

[Winehole23]

the Jann Wenner interview with Obama is excepted and linked at #3, Don't you ever read through before you respond?

[TeyshaBlue]

the Jann Wenner interview with Obama is excepted and linked at #3, Don't you ever read through before you respond?

Why start now?:lol

[Winehole23]

hope springs eternal, but yeah

[johnsmith]

don't trust anyone over 30

Well, that rules me out then since I'm already over 30. I think the more appropriate phrase would be "don't trust anyone that was born between 1945 and 1960.

Mostly because they're idiots.

[Winehole23]

Good thing I was born in 1967. A few years earlier and I might have been congenitally greedy, selfish and stupid...

[TeyshaBlue]

Good thing I was born in 1967. A few years earlier and I might have been congenitally greedy, selfish and stupid...

I gotcha covered. :tu

[z0sa]

Well, that rules me out then since I'm already over 30. I think the more appropriate phrase would be "don't trust anyone that was born between 1945 and 1960.

Mostly because they're idiots.

:lol why not just say "dont trust baby boomers"?

[IWantsACuatro]

Oh Portugal, how I miss you so.

[Blake]

WTF? I made a perfectly acceptable and true statement and you took issue with it just to be a bitch.




GFY

Bitches and trolls!

[jack sommerset]

It wouldn't hurt Obama to promise he would legalize pot, his fans don't seem to mind his "promises" errr lies he has made in the past. God bless

[spursflow]

I don't know that MJ legalization will solidify his re-election, but it would be a good thing. The deficit is one of the real issues, this could ease it, especially in CA.

I think people fail to realize how many people won't vote for legalization. As popular as MJ seems and as much as it seems to be more accepted.. its really not. Check out voter poles for your local area in regards to MJ legalization. (If you've had a recent vote like my area has). It's very surprising.

[z0sa]

I don't know that MJ legalization will solidify his re-election, but it would be a good thing. The deficit is one of the real issues, this could ease it, especially in CA.

I think people fail to realize how many people won't vote for legalization. As popular as MJ seems and as much as it seems to be more accepted.. its really not. Check out voter poles for your local area in regards to MJ legalization. (If you've had a recent vote like my area has). It's very surprising.

I would almost guarantee it's the parents and middle aged people and grandparents who are SO afraid of their kids being able to pick up a joint off the street for a buck... oh wait...

I was watching Dragnet last night and it's funny, in the very first episode of the "second series" (1967-1970) they are after kids doing LSD and go over all these facts about how a single kilo could turn all of LA county's 7 million (at the time) into a bunch of lunatics, how people constantly flashback, etc... and then, they went after pot in the same episode as the 'gateway' drug that people use before they take acid.. I mean, basically straight out of a government propaganda booklet was all this shit..

well guess what, few people relatively have done LSD, and the majority people who smoke pot don't get hooked on other drugs.. These are established facts now. Yet I bet most parents would say and use the exact same argument Joe Friday was using 45 fuckin years ago and has been proven false and a scare tactic..

[Nbadan]

Wow....you musta been stoned if you made it through an episode of Dragnet..

[CosmicCowboy]

I would almost guarantee it's the parents and middle aged people and grandparents who are SO afraid of their kids being able to pick up a joint off the street for a buck... oh wait...

I was watching Dragnet last night and it's funny, in the very first episode of the "second series" (1967-1970) they are after kids doing LSD and go over all these facts about how a single kilo could turn all of LA county's 7 million (at the time) into a bunch of lunatics, how people constantly flashback, etc... and then, they went after pot in the same episode as the 'gateway' drug that people use before they take acid.. I mean, basically straight out of a government propaganda booklet was all this shit..

well guess what, few people relatively have done LSD, and the majority people who smoke pot don't get hooked on other drugs.. These are established facts now. Yet I bet most parents would say and use the exact same argument Joe Friday was using 45 fuckin years ago and has been proven false and a scare tactic..

Are you serious? A majority of baby boomers have smoked pot.

[z0sa]

ummm I didn't say otherwise dude. What I said/implied was that people who smoke pot don't automatically get hooked on other drugs like the propaganda has been saying for half a century. IMHO that's what scares those parents and grandparents most: not their kid smoking a joint, but doing acid or heroin 6 months after they smoke pot because they're looking for a stronger high. Do people with a tendency towards addiction move on to stronger shit? Yeah. But for most that is just not how it works tbh.

[Wild Cobra]

Is this question coming up because there is a fear that Paul may be the republican nomination, after the convention?

[z0sa]

Wow....you musta been stoned if you made it through an episode of Dragnet..

explain?

[Winehole23]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/gary-johnson-and-the-end-of-marijuana-as-a-fringe-issue/256565/

[CosmicCowboy]

ummm I didn't say otherwise dude. What I said/implied was that people who smoke pot don't automatically get hooked on other drugs like the propaganda has been saying for half a century. IMHO that's what scares those parents and grandparents most: not their kid smoking a joint, but doing acid or heroin 6 months after they smoke pot because they're looking for a stronger high. Do people with a tendency towards addiction move on to stronger shit? Yeah. But for most that is just not how it works tbh.

Well duh. The reefer madness bullshit was debunked 50 years ago and those pot smoking baby boomers are the parents/grandparents you are referring to.

[z0sa]

-_-

The problem is that regardless whether a majority of baby boomers have smoked pot or not, and regardless of the facts, the majority thinks it's a gateway drug. And it's not. Do you understand my position now?

PS if this were not the case, pot would be legal now. Propaganda and Big $$ can only go so far if everyone in the USA knows it's harmless. Take a look at the article WH23 just posted for how the public perception has changed just since the early 90's. Which is just the problem. People who are against legalization can't really point to any detrimental health or psychological effects, so they call it a gateway drug and assert that a kid who picks up pot is probably going to do something else stronger and much more dangerous.

pps some of this is anecdotal and me venting, just throwing it out there... this country wastes too much money on imprisoning druggies who would never harm anyone else 1/10 of what alcohol causes.

[CosmicCowboy]

I totally agree. I have voiced the opinion in here before that marijuana should be legalized, locally grown, and taxed.

[CosmicCowboy]

question:

Is there an easy test (like a breathalyzer) to see if you are stoned?

[z0sa]

I totally agree. I have voiced the opinion in here before that marijuana should be legalized, locally grown, and taxed.

:tu

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I totally agree. I have voiced the opinion in here before that marijuana should be legalized, locally grown, and taxed.

I have always found it somewhat ironic that the south and immediate American frontier has been so much for the nations drug policy. Tennessee, Kentucky, the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, etc are all prime locations to grow marijuana. The decline of the tobacco industry has been a hit that some sections have never recovered from.

Areas outside of Louisville, KY have had the cycle of poverty trapping them for generations. Yet those dumbfucks consistently support policies that are not in their best interests.

Social control is a bitch i guess.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

question:

Is there an easy test (like a breathalyzer) to see if you are stoned?

No but there aren't breath tests for DMT either. There are still field sobriety tests.

I fail to see how their lack of ability to control means that all behavior associated with the activity merits banning.

[baseline bum]

I totally agree. I have voiced the opinion in here before that marijuana should be legalized, locally grown, and taxed.

I can't say I'd be all that excited about Texas grown weed tbh. Once I got out to Cali and started smoking their shit I couldn't believe the difference in quality.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I can't say I'd be all that excited about Texas grown weed tbh. Once I got out to Cali and started smoking their shit I couldn't believe the difference in quality.

Are you talking dirt farmer indigenous stuff? The hydroponic homegrown stuff or the mexican red hair bricks?

[leemajors]

I can't say I'd be all that excited about Texas grown weed tbh. Once I got out to Cali and started smoking their shit I couldn't believe the difference in quality.

People have been bringing cuttings of those same plants back here and growing them for years sir :lol

The thing we don't have b/c of our policies is those nifty Eureka vapor pens that use hash oil :depressed

[baseline bum]

Are you talking dirt farmer indigenous stuff? The hydroponic homegrown stuff or the mexican red hair bricks?

I remember smoking red hair and it wasn't shit compared to the chronic and the humboldt county shit I started smoking in Cali. One or two big hits and I was good on those.


People have been bringing cuttings of those same plants back here and growing them for years sir :lol

The thing we don't have b/c of our policies is those nifty Eureka vapor pens that use hash oil :depressed

Yeah, but did they bring that wet foggy weather with them to grow it in? :lol

[CosmicCowboy]

It's not the weather, it's the genetics. Good stuff can be grown organically in Texas. You're just are remembering the Mexican dirt weed thats always around.

[baseline bum]

It's not the weather, it's the genetics. Good stuff can be grown organically in Texas. You're just are remembering the Mexican dirt weed thats always around.

CC, you ever smoke some shit called Airplane around 77-78? I was reading a hilarious story about it the other day.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

bb, yeah that mexican red hair schwag is just shit. Only redeeming factor is that you can get a lb for the same price as a oz of the better stuff.

[CosmicCowboy]

CC, you ever smoke some shit called Airplane around 77-78? I was reading a hilarious story about it the other day.

Naaa...I was already out of the game by then. I only played till I graduated from college. I rolled with some big players back in the day. Had a pound of Thai pot which I paid an astronomical price of $400 a LB. that was so good you couldn't roll a J with it. Had to use a one hit hash pipe or you would be drooling in the corner.

[Wild Cobra]

I totally agree. I have voiced the opinion in here before that marijuana should be legalized, locally grown, and taxed.
How much would you grow?

[Wild Cobra]

question:

Is there an easy test (like a breathalyzer) to see if you are stoned?
that's one of the problems I believe are keeping it from being legalized. My information is old, so it might be different now, but the tests I know of are just a positive/negative. They don't indicate levels to determine intoxication.

Again, things may have changed.

[CosmicCowboy]

How much would you grow?

Just depends how they set up the laws. I have the land/water/facilities to go big time if I wanted. Harvest would be really labor intensive, so it's not going to be grown like corn in Iowa.

[boutons_deux]

The Top Five Special Interest Groups Lobbying to Keep Marijuana Illegal


Last year, over 850,000 people in America were arrested for marijuana-related crimes. Despite public opinion, the medical community, and human rights experts all moving in favor of relaxing marijuana prohibition laws, little has changed in terms of policy.

There have been many great books and articles detailing the history of the drug war. Part of America’s fixation with keeping the leafy green plant illegal is rooted in cultural and political clashes from the past.

However, we at Republic Report think it’s worth showing that there are entrenched interest groups that are spending large sums of money to keep our broken drug laws on the books:

1.) Police Unions: Police departments across the country have become dependent on federal drug war grants to finance their budget. In March, we published a story revealing that a police union lobbyist in California coordinated the effort to defeat Prop 19, a ballot measure in 2010 to legalize marijuana, while helping his police department clients collect tens of millions in federal marijuana-eradication grants. And it’s not just in California. Federal lobbying disclosures show that other police union lobbyists have pushed for stiffer penalties for marijuana-related crimes nationwide.

2.) Private Prisons Corporations: Private prison corporations make millions by incarcerating people who have been imprisoned for drug crimes, including marijuana. As Republic Report’s Matt Stoller noted last year, Corrections Corporation of America, one of the largest for-profit prison companies, revealed in a regulatory filing that continuing the drug war is part in parcel to their business strategy. Prison companies have spent millions bankrolling pro-drug war politicians and have used secretive front groups, like the American Legislative Exchange Council, to pass harsh sentencing requirements for drug crimes.

3.) Alcohol and Beer Companies: Fearing competition for the dollars Americans spend on leisure, alcohol and tobacco interests have lobbied to keep marijuana out of reach. For instance, the California Beer & Beverage Distributors contributed campaign contributions to a committee set up to prevent marijuana from being legalized and taxed.

4.) Pharmaceutical Corporations: Like the sin industries listed above, pharmaceutical interests would like to keep marijuana illegal so American don’t have the option of cheap medical alternatives to their products. Howard Wooldridge, a retired police officer who now lobbies the government to relax marijuana prohibition laws, told Republic Report that next to police unions, the “second biggest opponent on Capitol Hill is big PhRMA” because marijuana can replace “everything from Advil to Vicodin and other expensive pills.”

5.) Prison Guard Unions: Prison guard unions have a vested interest in keeping people behind bars just like for-profit prison companies. In 2008, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association spent a whopping $1 million to defeat a measure that would have “reduced sentences and parole times for nonviolent drug offenders while emphasizing drug treatment over prison.”


http://truth-out.org/news/item/8854-the-top-five-special-interest-groups-lobbying-to-keep-marijuana-illegal

======

The War on Drugs/Marijuana is all about money, not about morals, or anything else. The PIC is heavily invested in the War and will buy enough politicians (they're all cheap) to keep the war going.

[spursncowboys]

I have always found it somewhat ironic that the south and immediate American frontier has been so much for the nations drug policy. Tennessee, Kentucky, the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, etc are all prime locations to grow marijuana. The decline of the tobacco industry has been a hit that some sections have never recovered from.

Areas outside of Louisville, KY have had the cycle of poverty trapping them for generations. Yet those dumbfucks consistently support policies that are not in their best interests.

Social control is a bitch i guess.
:lol
I know it's hard for you to understand but it's called beliefs. ethics. moral compass. Maybe they don't believe being a drug dealer is what they want to accomplish in life. What they thought their god wanted them to do in life. Maybe. Who knows? Lets' all do drugs, have sex with whomever and whatever we want, while assuming no responsiblity for disintegration of our social norms.

With that said,alot of the states you just said has the highest mariajuana growth in america.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol
I know it's hard for you to understand but it's called beliefs. ethics. moral compass. Maybe they don't believe being a drug dealer is what they want to accomplish in life. What they thought their god wanted them to do in life. Maybe. Who knows? Lets' all do drugs, have sex with whomever and whatever we want, while assuming no responsiblity for disintegration of our social norms.

With that said,alot of the states you just said has the highest mariajuana growth in america.

How do you think that social control is manifested?

[boutons_deux]

Drug czar: There are no good reasons to legalize marijuana

R. Gil Kerlikowske, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, on Tuesday denied there was any reason the United States should regulate marijuana the same way it regulates alcohol.

“There are no good reasons to legalize marijuana,” he said at an event hosted by the Center for American Progress.

“I often hear about tax, regulate and control as an answer,” Kerlikowske continued. “And then I look at prescription drugs — which as I mentioned take over fifteen thousand lives a year, let alone the number of people who come into emergency departments and the number of people that are treated — and prescription drugs are already taxed, are already regulated, are already controlled and we do a very poor job of keeping them out of the hands of abusers and young people.”

“So I don’t see that we would do a very good job with a substance that can easily evade the tax scheme because it doesn’t take rocket science to grow marijuana.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/02/drug-czar-there-are-no-good-reasons-to-legalize-marijuana/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29&utm_content=Google+Reader

[Nbadan]

Good article on this topic...

What Is President Obama’s Problem With Medical Marijuana?


But they weren’t. Two years later, the Obama Administration is cracking down on medical marijuana dispensaries and growers just as harshly as the Administration of George W. Bush did. In 2011, the Department of Justice revised its guidance to U.S. Attorneys, allowing them to target any medical marijuana activity except for ill patients and their immediate caregivers. The Drug Enforcement Administration has made it clear that “medical marijuana is not medicine,” and even called it a “mortal danger.” The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms has banned the sale of guns to medical marijuana patients. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has told public housing authorities that they can’t rent to medical marijuana patients. And the Internal Revenue Service has reiterated its position that medical pot businesses cannot deduct expenses related to an illegal drug. Fearing federal intervention, many banks are now dropping medical marijuana dispensaries as customers.

In many states, U.S. Attorneys have advised state and local officials to back away from plans to create rules and regulations that would codify the medical pot industry, in some cases raising the possibility that lawmakers could be prosecuted for promoting drug use that is legal under state law. As a result, dispensary openings in states like Delaware, Arizona and Washington have been delayed. Colorado has abandoned a plan to provide legal financing for medical marijuana operations, and a northern California sheriff has been ordered to stop tagging plants as legitimately grown for medical use. In Oakland, the city council was forced to abandon a plan for creating warehouse-sized medical marijuana growing facilities. At the same time, U.S. Attorneys have been seeking the closure of dispensaries in California and Colorado without any demonstration that there are violations of state law. There are no public government statistics about the scale of these efforts, but an medical marijuana advocates say publicly announced Obama Administration raids on ostensibly medical marijuana operations are happening at a greater clip than in the second term of George W. Bush.

This has created a clear disconnect between the policy on the ground, and the public statements of officials in Washington. Back in December, Attorney General Eric Holder reiterated his claim that only medical marijuana operators that are behaving outside state law would be targeted by federal officials. (His statement was brilliantly hard to parse: “If in fact people are not using the policy decision that we have made to use marijuana in a way that’s not consistent with the state statute, we will not use our limited resources in that way,” he testified before Congress.) More recently, Obama told Rolling Stone, “The only tension that’s come up—and this gets hyped up a lot—is a murky area where you have large-scale, commercial operations that may also be supplying medical marijuana users.”

This isn’t the whole story...



http://swampland.time.com/2012/05/03/what-is-president-obamas-problem-with-medical-marijuana/?xid=gonewsedit&google_editors_picks=true

[Nbadan]

Good article on this topic...

What Is President Obama’s Problem With Medical Marijuana?


But they weren’t. Two years later, the Obama Administration is cracking down on medical marijuana dispensaries and growers just as harshly as the Administration of George W. Bush did. In 2011, the Department of Justice revised its guidance to U.S. Attorneys, allowing them to target any medical marijuana activity except for ill patients and their immediate caregivers. The Drug Enforcement Administration has made it clear that “medical marijuana is not medicine,” and even called it a “mortal danger.” The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms has banned the sale of guns to medical marijuana patients. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has told public housing authorities that they can’t rent to medical marijuana patients. And the Internal Revenue Service has reiterated its position that medical pot businesses cannot deduct expenses related to an illegal drug. Fearing federal intervention, many banks are now dropping medical marijuana dispensaries as customers.

In many states, U.S. Attorneys have advised state and local officials to back away from plans to create rules and regulations that would codify the medical pot industry, in some cases raising the possibility that lawmakers could be prosecuted for promoting drug use that is legal under state law. As a result, dispensary openings in states like Delaware, Arizona and Washington have been delayed. Colorado has abandoned a plan to provide legal financing for medical marijuana operations, and a northern California sheriff has been ordered to stop tagging plants as legitimately grown for medical use. In Oakland, the city council was forced to abandon a plan for creating warehouse-sized medical marijuana growing facilities. At the same time, U.S. Attorneys have been seeking the closure of dispensaries in California and Colorado without any demonstration that there are violations of state law. There are no public government statistics about the scale of these efforts, but an medical marijuana advocates say publicly announced Obama Administration raids on ostensibly medical marijuana operations are happening at a greater clip than in the second term of George W. Bush.

This has created a clear disconnect between the policy on the ground, and the public statements of officials in Washington. Back in December, Attorney General Eric Holder reiterated his claim that only medical marijuana operators that are behaving outside state law would be targeted by federal officials. (His statement was brilliantly hard to parse: “If in fact people are not using the policy decision that we have made to use marijuana in a way that’s not consistent with the state statute, we will not use our limited resources in that way,” he testified before Congress.) More recently, Obama told Rolling Stone, “The only tension that’s come up—and this gets hyped up a lot—is a murky area where you have large-scale, commercial operations that may also be supplying medical marijuana users.”

This isn’t the whole story...



http://swampland.time.com/2012/05/03/what-is-president-obamas-problem-with-medical-marijuana/?xid=gonewsedit&google_editors_picks=true