Feds raid Washington Marijuana stores

[hamellr]

Originally Posted by GJJG2012

Even if legal, there could be control/restrictions that could keep huge #s of govt people employed. Our president is either very anti-MJ, or must do what behind the scenes people tell him to do. US govt plan: forced phony education, forced fake rehab, 6 mos probation (jail for 2nd use in 6 mos?). Read details at learnaboutsam dot com

Did you not catch the news yesterday?

Attorney General Holder goes after mandatory drug sentencing with federal prisons overflowing - The Washington Post

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by rockyinyourradio

Not to get too far off topic, but I live in a state where despite measures to take some of the necessary ingredients to make meth harder to come by in large quantities, meth is still a major problem here in Oklahoma. Is it that bad in Washington state? I would think with weed basically legal now, that more would use that instead of meth. Personally, I think all who deal in meth need to have the book thrown at them. The devil's drug IMHO.

I agree with you. However, the reason one doesn't impact the other is because weed users and meth users are usually quite different people. Meth users will smoke weed but most weed users seem to steer clear of meth in my experience.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by rantiquity

State enacting their own laws pertaining to marijuana is not a state rights, it is and has been a federal law which includes marijuana in the list of illegal drugs. It people want marijuana legal than change the federal law and not circumvent it.
I believe in states right when it's a state right issue, marijuana is not.

It is a states right. the only laws states are not permitted to enact are those which go against the federal constitution but as this is not a constitutional issue, such laws can be written. In this way, the federal government does not have the authority to "force" a state to do anything. What the feds can do is use other means such as withhold federal funding for certain things. Much the same way as was done with the highway system. States could set the legal drinking age to 18 if they wanted but they would likely lose federal funding for highways. That's how it works. The federal government isn't superior to a states. Each is dominant in it's own sphere.

[CarawayDJ]

Originally Posted by GJJG2012

The anti-cannabis laws have been a violation of the US Constitution since 1937. The Supreme Court violates the US Constitution by refusing to use dictionary definitions. Thus every right can become a prohibition. Congress cheated in passing this so-called law, also.

The US Constitution was written to limit the power of the Federal govt. When Congress prohibited, then repealed, prohibition of alcohol, they used Constitutional amendments both times. When cannabis was made illegal, they used the foreign non-word marijuana, with the hope nobody would know what they were talking about (it was always called cannabis in pharmacies). Also, Congress skipped all committees except the last (Ways & Means), so a fair debate could be avoided. No Constitutional amendment was made, either.

The Supreme Court said they have a right to regulate "marijuana" under the Commerce clause. The problem with that is when I look in a dictionary under regulate, it does *not* say "to prohibit". Also, the Supreme Court says intrastate (in state) & interstate (out of state) are the same thing.

US Supreme Court also ruled selling at a profit, selling at cost, selling below cost, and giving it away are all the same, dealing, a business. Other Feds disagree! IRS last I knew said a business can't be called a business unless it makes a profit most years.

In Oklahoma, with some of the most extreme MJ laws anywhere, prosecutors compare laws to decide if Federal or state law (if not county or municipal laws?) would allow the biggest penalty, then they are prosecuted in whichever court can hand out the longest sentence. One person I heard about got 100 years for possession of 2 ounces!

Our alcohol laws are part Federal, part state, part county, & part municipal. Why don't the Feds claim it should be 100% Federal? It seems this is commerce, too. We can't change Federal law if Supreme Court can invent new definitions to nullify any new law that helps the public. Also, most Democrats and Republicans repeatedly vote against the Constitution & general public, after generous payments from special interest groups. Please vote Libertarian if you want best chance for a longer and better life.

Best wishes to all.

Perhaps I'm going off on a tangent here, but your post reminds me of a great myth us Americans have about our constitution; that it has remained relatively unchanged. While the words have not changed, or even been amended much, the meanings of those words have been substantially changed through judicial interpretation. I'm all for a living document, but one that "lives" through the people voting and not subject to the ideology of a handful of justices on the Supreme Court.

[wannaB1too]

Originally Posted by KamGT

I don't get it. The put fluoride in our water to kill us. They put MSG in our food to give us neurotoxicity, and they put high fructose corn syrup in all food to hault our metabolism, make us fat and sick; but they are protecting us from a plant? I forgot to mention that they don't want us to know what's in our food, let us smoke cancer sticks(no problem at all), and let us drink all the liver poison we want. Why would they care so much about a plant that has been growing for thousands of years? They waste so much money on this nonsense and our country is in major debt and dependence to other countries. This could solve our oil, textiles and medical problems if it were not for the selfishness and greed of this country. Very sad.

Completely 1000 % concur.

[rantiquity]

The States are ABOVE the federal govt - 4 ways the constitution says so 1. Most importantly we have the tenth amendment which says a power not given to the feds belongs to the states or the people.

"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."

2. The electoral college. People wonder why it exists - why don't we just vote directly for the president. It's because the states are independent countries. In a presidential election you vote for your electors who go to washington and choose the prez. Even presidential elections are done at the state level.

3.The amending process as outlined in Article 5 of the constitution. It says the states have final say on any proposed amendment. Congress can vote yes on the proposed amendment but THEN it goes to the states and 3/4 of them must ratify it.

4. The Supremacy Clause in Article 6 of the constitution.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

The key thing here is the phrase "made in pursuance thereof". Only constitutional federal laws are above state laws. Who decides whether a law is constitutional? The constitution doesn't say which means by the tenth amendment, the states have the authority to nullify federal laws. It makes no sense anyway to let the feds decide the constitutionality of their own laws as they will and do rubber-stamp everything.