Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Scelly9]

metric system standardization

lolnope. America: We're special.

_{The same way mentally retarded people are.}

[Reelya]

Metric or Imperial makes no difference at all, unless you're NASA. In which case it wastes billions of dollars when you get it wrong.

[i2amroy]

Metric system would have saved all this. Wonder what will be first, metric system standardization in the USA, or legalization in the USA.

As I mentioned earlier, "medical marijuana" (which for many intents and purposes functions the same, since it's so easy to get a license and there are laws that say you can grow your own if you are X miles away from a dispensary, of which there are only like 10) is already legal in both California and Arizona.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Of course, the federal government can still arrest you for using medical marijuana if they care enough to.

[i2amroy]

Of course, the federal government can still arrest you for using medical marijuana if they care enough to.

I believe the current opinion expressed by federal agencies is "that the enforcement of federal criminal laws against those complying with state medical marijuana laws would not be an enforcement priority" or something similar to that. Basically as long as you aren't a widespread distributer then they are fine with you using it and that "enforcement against patients and those caring for them would not be a priority".

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Of course, the federal government can still arrest you for using medical marijuana if they care enough to.

I believe the current opinion expressed by federal agencies is "that the enforcement of federal criminal laws against those complying with state medical marijuana laws would not be an enforcement priority" or something similar to that. Basically as long as you aren't a widespread distributer then they are fine with you using it and that "enforcement against patients and those caring for them would not be a priority".

The DEA and federal agents have been attacking Washington and California's dispensaries and grow-ops like never before, so I disagree wholeheartedly. If anything making it legal in states makes those states more of a target for those efforts, as we've seen.

[GlyphGryph]

That was their stance until Obama decided it was actually a major priority.

And is one of the things I'm most upset with him about. What a dick.

[Eagleon]

I sort of agree that there can't be that sort of overlooking of federal law, though. It either has to be reformed to be state-coded or the DEA has to do their job, otherwise there's all kinds of questions like "why was this dispensary seized, but the one on the other side of the street run by the son of the guy that organized the raid left alone?" Same thing for cops choosing whether or not to enforce it. Executive branch is separate for a very, very good reason.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I don't think cops can actually enforce federal drug law at all, that's the DEA's jurisdiction. It just so happens that federal and state drug laws are usually concurrent.

[GlyphGryph]

Aside from the fact that I find federal drug laws pretty much blatantly unconstitutional and that it should be state coded... They weren't enforcing it this heavily before, so it's hard to argue that they "have" to do it now.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Aside from the fact that I find federal drug laws pretty much blatantly unconstitutional and that it should be state coded... They weren't enforcing it this heavily before, so it's hard to argue that they "have" to do it now.

Erm, "before" we didn't have public dispensaries and known factory-like grow-ops springing up, as it wasn't permitted by states like Washington and California. I'd argue the rate going up is in direct correlation to the increase in the amount of targets.

[Eagleon]

I don't think cops can actually enforce federal drug law at all, that's the DEA's jurisdiction. It just so happens that federal and state drug laws are usually concurrent.

They can certainly make an arrest for a violation of federal law. 'Jurisdiction' just covers whether they'll investigate or pass along if they get a call.

Aside from the fact that I find federal drug laws pretty much blatantly unconstitutional and that it should be state coded... They weren't enforcing it this heavily before, so it's hard to argue that they "have" to do it now.

So say it was something like racial segregation. Deciding to take their sweet time shutting down segregated schools in a state whose senator had donated to their cause wouldn't be at all shady? It's up to the courts and the people to decide if something is unconstitutional, not the positions enforcing the laws.

edit: What I would love to see is more acceptance of activism by local and federal police. My impression has been that a great majority of police officers want to see marijuana legalized, just from the point of view that they're ruining so many lives over something less harmful than alcohol. Speaking out is difficult when you're in a position of authority like that, because it calls into question your neutrality in enforcing those laws.

[GlyphGryph]

You seem to be contradicting yourself here.

Executive branch is separate for a very, very good reason.

And that reason is, in part, to act as a check on the legislature and the courts. Which is exactly what people are arguing should happen here - they shouldn't be acting as the legislatures lap dog to act against states where the activity is perfectly legal locally. You can argue whether or not this sort of check should be the case, but it obviously IS the case.

And don't see WHAT that has to do with corruption, which is obviously bad, happens regardless, and seems entirely unrelated to the system discussed here. Or are you trying to argue that its acceptable for the DEA to forego pressing charges against the rich and powerful, which they often do, but acceptable for them to override the will of the people in a democratic society?

Because that seems like an awfully odd position to take.

[Neonivek]

Aside from the fact that I find federal drug laws pretty much blatantly unconstitutional and that it should be state coded... They weren't enforcing it this heavily before, so it's hard to argue that they "have" to do it now

I think the reason why Drug laws have been made federal over state is a rather simply deduction.

Drugs are often not isolated. By making drug laws federal it means that Trafficing is illegal.

[Eagleon]

You seem to be contradicting yourself here.

Except the laws against it are federal. States can make all the laws they like legalizing whatever, but the reason federal laws exist is to give the country as a whole something to say about it. If Idaho were to legalize ritual sacrifice, the federal government would be able to step in and say 'No, killing people is bad,' and that is a good thing. If they didn't listen, the federal police would be within their rights and responsibility to come in and stop the ritual sacrifices as well as they could. Blending the check upwards (obeying state laws at a federal level or ignoring federal laws in favor of state ones) is a very bad idea. Corruption is just one reason why.

Also,

Or are you trying to argue that its acceptable for the DEA to forego pressing charges against the rich and powerful, which they often do, but acceptable for them to override the will of the people in a democratic society?

Because that seems like an awfully odd position to take.

Why would you do this? Yes, obviously, burn all the poor people and feed the rich gold-frosted cake. The DEA should violate all the state laws everywhere for no reason and I hate the constitution. And puppies. And their fuzzy ears.