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.
What is more dangerous is a government that has excessive power. The power to regulate what its citizens put into their own bodies is a VERY dangerous power for government to have. What's next? Making alcohol illegal? We tried that, and it certainly worked out pretty well, didn't it?
It's not the government's job to protect people from harming themselves. We can require sellers of marijuana to provide warning labels and such just like we do tobacco companies. I'm sure the local dealer selling illegal weed provides that info to people too, right? We can also then stop throwing people in jail for the "crime" of sitting at home, bothering nobody, and smoking a joint.
In the final analysis that is the only argument that is meaningful. It really doesn't matter if weed is healthy or not.
Governments have no right to tell me what I can eat, drink or smoke. Nor to tell me how I can spend my money or who I can have sex with (adults).
The problem is they have little chance of getting passed, regardless of public opinion.
Here's what typically happens:
03/16/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
03/03/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
02/27/2017 Referred to House Judiciary
02/27/2017 Referred to House Energy and Commerce
02/27/2017 Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By that time, enough corrupt lawmakers will have had a chance to kill it, so it dies.
PUBLIC OPINION DOES NOT MATTER WHEN IT COMES TO MARIJUANA!
I would like to ask you folks that are for legalization AND supports this move by Sessions:
If Sessions were to actually send in federal troops to start dismantling the established marijuana industry and making arrests, would you still rally behind him and those actions as you are doing now?
Hypotheticals are a waste of time. We all know that is not going to happen. In fact, I would be surprised if Sessions does anything on this topic.
So if 70% of Democratic voters support legalization why don't the Dem congressmen support it?
Sometimes democrats like to vocally support something but then do nothing to actually put their words in to action so that they have a bogeyman they can blame the republicans for. In this case people will blame republicans even if both sides fail to act. They would rather have people angry at republicans over illegal weed than satisfied with anyone over legal weed.
You and I cannot legitimately decide we do not agree with said law and proceed to ignore it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth
However, like Immigration, states cannot simply decide they no longer respect the law of the land.
Indeed, however, the law of the land says it is the DEA's job to schedule individual drugs. The head of the DEA reports to Sessions.
I think that Congress should proactively address the issue. However I also think that the executive branch (past and present) has already been given clear legal authority by congress to legalize cannabis, and has chosen not to, and falsely and deliberately given the public the impression that they "can't".
The Obama administration chose not to legalize cannabis because they didn't want to, not because they required Congressional action. Same with the Trump administration.
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.