U.S. allows states to legalize recreational marijuana within limits

gioua

Well-Known Member
HOPE this is not a joke



http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/29/us-usa-crime-marijuana-idUSBRE97S0YW20130829
\
(Reuters) - In a move marijuana advocates hailed as a historic shift, the Obama administration on Thursday began giving U.S. states wide leeway to experiment with pot legalization and started by letting Colorado and Washington carry out new laws permitting recreational use.
The Justice Department said it would refocus marijuana enforcement nationwide by bringing criminal charges only in eight defined areas - such as distribution to minors - and giving breathing room to users, growers and related businesses that have feared prosecution.
The decisions end nearly a year of deliberation inside President Barack Obama's administration about how to react to the growing movement for relaxed U.S. marijuana laws.
Advocates for legalization welcomed the announcement as a major step toward ending what they called "marijuana prohibition."
"Today's announcement demonstrates the sort of political vision and foresight from the White House we've been seeking for a long time," said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, an advocacy group.
"I must admit, I was expecting a yellow light from the White House," he said in a statement. "But this light looks a lot more green-ish than I had hoped. The White House is basically saying to Washington and Colorado: Proceed with caution."
Marijuana remains illegal and tightly controlled under federal law, even as about 20 states, plus the District of Columbia, allow the use of medical marijuana. Voters in Colorado and Washington legalized recreational use in groundbreaking ballot measures in November 2012.
Obama had signaled he did not want a new crackdown, telling ABC News in December: "It does not make sense, from a prioritization point of view, for us to focus on recreational drug users in a state that has already said that's legal."
The leeway for the states will go only so far, though, if Colorado, Washington or other states show they are unable to control the drug, the Justice Department said in a statement.
Forty-two percent of Americans age 12 or older have used marijuana at some point, according to a 2011 survey by the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Obama has said he used marijuana when he was young.
One opponent of marijuana legalization said his group would redouble efforts to spread word of the negative effects the drug can have on adolescents.
"This is going to really quicken the realization among folks that more marijuana in our communities is not a good thing," said Kevin Sabet, a co-founder of Smart Approaches to Marijuana.
EIGHT AREAS IN FOCUS
The Justice Department could have sued to block the Colorado and Washington laws from taking effect under the theory that they conflict with the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, the primary U.S. anti-drug law.
Coupled with the decision not to sue, the Justice Department sent a four-page memorandum to federal prosecutors nationwide outlining eight priority areas for marijuana enforcement.
While department officials said they are committed to enforcing federal restrictions on marijuana, prosecutors have now been told not to expend effort on cases unless they fall in one of the eight areas.

The areas include distribution to minors, situations when marijuana revenue is going to other criminal enterprises, trafficking across state lines and growing on public land.
The criteria mean, for example, that federal prosecutors will not charge a marijuana dispensary simply because it is large or profitable, said a Justice Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
But the criteria also stop short of guaranteeing immunity for anyone, leaving business and individuals open to prosecution if the case fits one of the eight areas, the official said.
Colorado and Washington will need to have regulatory systems to protect against those types of crimes, or else risk giving up the whole experiment, the department said in a statement.
Attorney General Eric Holder had a phone call on Thursday with the governors of Colorado and Washington to inform them of the decisions and told them there would be a "trust but verify" relationship between the Justice Department and the states, said the department official.
State officials said they shared Holder's concerns.
"This reflects a balanced approach by the federal government that respects the states' interests in implementing these laws and recognizes the federal government's role in fighting illegal drugs and criminal activity," Washington Governor Jay Inslee and Attorney General Bob Ferguson, both of whom are Democrats, said in a statement.
 

TheSnake

Well-Known Member
Looks like we all need to keep our skills up to par to combat the following waves of legal growers that will be poping up. LOL.

At the end of the day, its price and quality that sell bud. Best price and quality will always prosper. Legal or not.
 

curious2garden

Well-Known Mod
Staff member
tumblr_m2y387lKoN1r69opoo1_500.jpg

Well, how white of them and if you believe THAT I have some land in south Florida I'd like to talk to you about.
 

JackTheBongRipper

Well-Known Member
I don't get it. What does it mean "how white of them"? Or "if" I believe them? What's not to believe? It's a statement guiding future legalization. We'll have to wait and see if they do stop filing federal charges, but until then I don't get the disbelief.

I will admit I'm kinda slow sometimes. So, can someone shed some light? I think this is a step in the right direction. I don't see it as some weird ploy. I don't get it.
 

neosapien

Well-Known Member
I don't get it. What does it mean "how white of them"? Or "if" I believe them? What's not to believe? It's a statement guiding future legalization. We'll have to wait and see if they do stop filing federal charges, but until then I don't get the disbelief.

I will admit I'm kinda slow sometimes. So, can someone shed some light? I think this is a step in the right direction. I don't see it as some weird ploy. I don't get it.
It's politicians promising us something. What's not to get?
 

MojoRison

Well-Known Member
That's interesting, our politicians are running around bragging about who smoked and who didn't, all because an up and comer saw it fit to tell the truth {rare I know} about his past use and now everyone is jumping on the band wagon.

Winds of change?
 

JackTheBongRipper

Well-Known Member
It's politicians promising us something. What's not to get?
It's the attorney general stating that they are changing their priorities, which will result in less law suits, etc. It's actually a change in the entire stance the government has taken on weed.

Nevermind, you know what? Screw you guys:


:bigjoint: Heheheh....
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
It's the attorney general stating that they are changing their priorities, which will result in less law suits, etc. It's actually a change in the entire stance the government has taken on weed.

Nevermind, you know what? Screw you guys:


:bigjoint: Heheheh....
If you want to buy something, the thing to use is money. That was an IOU but not money. No law on the books = no change.
 

JackTheBongRipper

Well-Known Member
There are new laws though, the ones in WA and CO. And they are allowing them to stand without federal interference. If more states pass laws, federal law will eventually follow. Think of the years right after the repeal of prohibition on alcohol. It wasn't just a free for all, it took time for the states to change their laws. The ball is rolling now, how hard do you think it will be to reverse once it really gets going over the next 2-4 years? We won't be able to go back to making it illegal, it really can't go back to that now. Too much support and momentum.

New laws = Change
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
There are new laws though, the ones in WA and CO. And they are allowing them to stand without federal interference. If more states pass laws, federal law will eventually follow. Think of the years right after the repeal of prohibition on alcohol. It wasn't just a free for all, it took time for the states to change their laws. The ball is rolling now, how hard do you think it will be to reverse once it really gets going over the next 2-4 years? We won't be able to go back to making it illegal, it really can't go back to that now. Too much support and momentum.

Sorry.. damn phone.. my post is below..



New laws are all on the state level, which pretty much means so long as cannabis is a schedule 1 drug, the feds can and most certainly will still be arresting people for possession of cannabis..
The States can do all they want, doesn't change the simple fact that anyone who smokes cannabis is breaking federal law and can therefore be arrested ..
Nothing has changed.. oh, some politicians have said they aren't going to arrest you now? I've never met a politician who has never told a lie..

New laws = Change
..........
 

JackTheBongRipper

Well-Known Member
Guys I get it. It didn't really change anything legally, but first you change minds and perspectives, then people will vote with a more open mind, and then laws will change. It's the first baby step of a process, it's not full on 100% legalization tomorrow.

I guess I'm just excited that something different is happening.

Y'all must be a ton of fun at parties... heheh :mrgreen:
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
Guys I get it. It didn't really change anything legally, but first you change minds and perspectives, then people will vote with a more open mind, and then laws will change. It's the first baby step of a process, it's not full on 100% legalization tomorrow.

I guess I'm just excited that something different is happening.

Y'all must be a ton of fun at parties... heheh :mrgreen:
Lol.. I guess you could say I'm more of a realist and maybe a bit jaded.. but after going to Amsterdam and seeing how free we really aren't here in the us of a, yeah, it gets a bit depressing ..
Even in Germany, you know, the land of the Nazi, I saw less censorship on TV there.. saw titties on local TV during the day time.. I just watched a medical show about some man with a 200 pound scrotum and it was a cable channel, 10 at night, and they felt the need to blur out the mans testicles..
What's one have to do with the other you ask? Well, IMO, America prides itself on being the home of the brave and land of the free, and nothing could be further from the truth.. I for 1 am not going to get all excited by some politician throwing us a bone and call it victory..

And if you really think peoples opinions on cannabis have changed go to any online news source that has an article about marijuana in this country and read about 90% of the replies from people and you will see we've got miles to go still..
 

PeyoteReligion

Well-Known Member
Hey man, a step is a step, and that's just like my opinion man.

Its better that a swift kick in the rear, which is what I thought Wa and Co would get in response.
 

tharoomman

Well-Known Member
Yep, no new law on the books? Don't mean shit.

uuuuh, yes it does mean shit. How many of you thought we wouldn't see pot legalized for rec purposes for years and years? Now look. Get real peeps. This ain't the fucking 60's(No offense to the pro marijuana ones. Last time I said something like that stonedponeyRIP was pppiiisssseeeddd. So NO OFFENSE) We got sooooo many intelligent, highly educated, people working behind the scenes trying to get this to happen. It comes as NO surprise to me. Have ya'll not read the statistics on American's view on pot? Like I said, it ain't the 60's no more.
 
Top