Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That may or may not be true, nevertheless, Congress stills has the constitutional authority to regulate interstate and international commerce. What your individual State decides to do is entirely up to them. For example, marijuana for "personal use" has been legal in Alaska since 1974.
I agree, it should be up to the states, but federal authorities disregard state law at-will.
I also agree congress has the right to regulate interstate/national commerce, but when misguided legislation is the leading cause for violations in commerce laws, they should pull their heads out of their asses and correct the legislation.
Again, that will never happen. Criminalizing marijuana has become insanely profitable in the private sector. Plus, what are we going to do with a bunch of armed/unemployed plant nazis?
I agree, it should be up to the states, but federal authorities disregard state law at-will.
Not in Alaska they do not. No one has been arrested for "personal use" of marijuana in Alaska since 1974. It is still illegal to sell marijuana in Alaska, and it is certainly illegal to grow marijuana for commercial use, but nobody who grows their own marijuana for "personal use" has been arrested by local or federal law enforcement since 1974.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some_Random_Guy
I also agree congress has the right to regulate interstate/national commerce, but when misguided legislation is the leading cause for violations in commerce laws, they should pull their heads out of their asses and correct the legislation.
Again, that will never happen. Criminalizing marijuana has become insanely profitable in the private sector. Plus, what are we going to do with a bunch of armed/unemployed plant nazis?
You may consider it misguided legislation, obviously Congress does not.
Not in Alaska they do not. No one has been arrested for "personal use" of marijuana in Alaska since 1974. It is still illegal to sell marijuana in Alaska, and it is certainly illegal to grow marijuana for commercial use, but nobody who grows their own marijuana for "personal use" has been arrested by local or federal law enforcement since 1974.
Well good for Alaska, being the exception. Ask states like Oregon, California, Colorado, et al, how well they are doing regulating the use of the substance on the state level. I'll save you the suspense, not well. The ATF, FBI and DEA have been raiding state-legalized medicinal marijuana businesses from day one, regardless of how liberal the laws in those states are towards the use/sale of the substance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch
You may consider it misguided legislation, obviously Congress does not.
I don't care what congress thinks, clearly they are wasting [our] money on a fruitless effort. And they only continue to do so because we have a systemic belief in this country, dating all the way back pre-WW2, that marijuana is a devilish substance, when the reality couldn't be further from the truth.
I don't even touch the crap and I know its all propaganda B.S.
It is not any concern of mine. However, when you start packaging up those maple leaves and shipping them across State or national borders, then it becomes the concern of Congress and their constitutional authority to regulate interstate and international commerce.
That was not the comment of yours that I was responding to.
I realize that our federal government can regulate interstate commerce. I was thinking that your response would have been that if I grew my own crops, the government might step in at some point and claim that by growing my own, and not selling it on the market, I would be impacting the market, allowing the feds to regulate my crops anyway.
That was not the comment of yours that I was responding to.
I realize that our federal government can regulate interstate commerce. I was thinking that your response would have been that if I grew my own crops, the government might step in at some point and claim that by growing my own, and not selling it on the market, I would be impacting the market, allowing the feds to regulate my crops anyway.
If you grew your own crops, wholly for use within your own State, then Congress has no authority over you or your crops. Assuming your State allows marijuana to be grown and used for personal and/or medical purposes.
It is commercial growers that are most likely to run afoul of the feds or local law enforcement. People still get arrested in Alaska for growing marijuana, but it is always those who grow more than 25 plants (which makes it for "commercial use", not "personal use") or they are trying to sell marijuana (which is also illegal in Alaska).
Justice Thomas wrote a very good concurring opinion in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995) regarding the Commerce Clause.
Quote:
If we wish to be true to a Constitution that does not cede a police power to the Federal Government, our Commerce Clause's boundaries simply cannot be "defined" as being " `commensurate with the national needs' " or self consciously intended to let the Federal Government " `defend itself against economic forces that Congress decrees inimical or destructive of the national economy.' " See post, at 12-13 )Breyer, J., dissenting) (quoting North American Co. v. SEC, 327 U.S. 686, 705 (1946)). Such a formulation of federal power is no test at all: it is a blank check.
I agree with conservatives on many issues but this one makes no sense. They will fight the legalization of a safe substance just as hard as they will same sex marriage and abortion. The thing is, there is no religious ban on marijuana usage so it can't be fought from that angle. They are for personal liberties until it comes to something pleasurable then they fight it tooth and nail. Just like alcohol and tobacco, marijuana should be a personal choice as long as one doesnt get behind the wheel while under the influence. We need a serious libertarian candidate who will bring back the principles this country was founded on.
Because when unknowledgeable conservative politicians go to their fellow conservatives for advice on marijuana, the conservative cop will tell them, "Don't legalize it because it's a gateway drug". The conservative doctor will tell them, "The medical community has no need for medical marijuana."
I agree with conservatives on many issues but this one makes no sense. They will fight the legalization of a safe substance just as hard as they will same sex marriage and abortion. The thing is, there is no religious ban on marijuana usage so it can't be fought from that angle. They are for personal liberties until it comes to something pleasurable then they fight it tooth and nail. Just like alcohol and tobacco, marijuana should be a personal choice as long as one doesnt get behind the wheel while under the influence. We need a serious libertarian candidate who will bring back the principles this country was founded on.
I think your confusing the ideas of social engineering from Progressive Republicans and Progressive Democrats, with real Conservative, live & let live attitude. All the Tea Party candidates I've heard on their position. They all felt it was less dangerous than alcohol and saw no reason for it to be banned.
I'm Conservative, and I've been known to grow some mean stinky
"..the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."
"Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing."
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
"Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death."
"You smoke a joint and you're likely to kill your brother."
"Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."
No wonder approval for legalizing marijuana keeps going up. More and more people are finding out the above info, are outraged to discover why marijuana was banned and want to correct that outrageous, dark mistake in history by legalizing it. It's also interesting to know that the above reasons were taken more seriously than listening to the American Medical Association, who opposed banning marijuana.
No wonder approval for legalizing marijuana keeps going up. More and more people are finding out the above info, are outraged to discover why marijuana was banned and want to correct that outrageous, dark mistake in history by legalizing it. It's also interesting to know that the above reasons were taken more seriously than listening to the American Medical Association, who opposed banning marijuana.
actually the AMA was decieved by the liberals and was NOT opposed to ban marijuuana....until they found out.....
Dr. James Woodward, a physician and attorney, testified too late on behalf of the American Medical Association. He told the committee that the reason the AMA had not denounced the Marihuana Tax Law sooner was that the Association had just discovered that marihuana was hemp.
Few people, at the time, realized that the deadly menace they had been reading about on Hearst's front pages was in fact passive hemp. The AMA understood cannabis to be a MEDICINE found in numerous healing products sold over the last hundred years.
Congress banned hemp because it was said to be the most violence-causing drug known. Anslinger, head of the Drug Commission for 31 years, promoted the idea that marihuana made users act extremely violent. In the 1950s, under the Communist threat of McCarthyism, Anslinger now said the exact opposite. Marijuana will pacify you so much that soldiers would not want to fight.
actually the AMA was decieved by the liberals and was NOT opposed to ban marijuuana....until they found out.....
Dr. James Woodward, a physician and attorney, testified too late on behalf of the American Medical Association. He told the committee that the reason the AMA had not denounced the Marihuana Tax Law sooner was that the Association had just discovered that marihuana was hemp.
Few people, at the time, realized that the deadly menace they had been reading about on Hearst's front pages was in fact passive hemp. The AMA understood cannabis to be a MEDICINE found in numerous healing products sold over the last hundred years.
Congress banned hemp because it was said to be the most violence-causing drug known. Anslinger, head of the Drug Commission for 31 years, promoted the idea that marihuana made users act extremely violent. In the 1950s, under the Communist threat of McCarthyism, Anslinger now said the exact opposite. Marijuana will pacify you so much that soldiers would not want to fight.
Actually, marijuana was not criminalized federally until 1956. It was a controlled substance after the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. If you had a federal tax stamp you could grow marijuana, and many farmers did from 1941 through 1945 after the Japanese cut off our hemp supply with their invasion of Malaysia in 1941.
Harry Anslinger was actually the Director of the Bureau of Narcotics under the Department of the Treasury. While Mr. Anslinger certainly opposed marijuana he acknowledged that it would be impossible to enforce the federal law restricting marijuana.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
