Society Trump administration signals new war on drugs, crackdown on marijuana use

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,348
31,962
“I think there is a big difference between medical marijuana… versus recreational marijuana,” Sean Spicer said.

During his press conference on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer was asked whether the Trump administration plans to crack down on states like Colorado and Washington that have legalized recreational marijuana.

Spicer signaled that the Trump administration will break with the Obama administration’s policy of not enforcing federal law criminalizing marijuana in states that have taken a different approach.

“There are two distinct issues here — medical marijuana and recreational marijuana,” Spicer replied. “Medical marijuana — I’ve said before that the president understands the pain and suffering that many people go through who are facing especially terminal diseases and the comfort that some of these drugs including medical marijuana can bring them.”

But when the topic turned to recreational marijuana, Spicer conflated it with opioids and indicated the Trump administration is equally opposed to people using it.

“When you see something like the opioid addiction crisis blossoming in some the states in the country, the last we should be doing is encouraging people,” Spicer said. “There is still a federal law that we need to abide by when it comes to recreational marijuana and other drugs of that nature. So, I think there is a big difference between medial marijuana which the states where it’s allowed… have set forth a process to administer and regulate that usage, versus recreational marijuana and that’s a very, very different subject.”

In response to a follow-up question about whether “the federal goverment [is] going to take some sort of action around this recreational marijuana in some of these states,” Spicer said that while it’s “a question for the Department of Justice,” he does think “you will see greater enforcement of it.”

Spicer’s comments don’t bode well for those who support relaxing marijuana laws. Attorney General Jeff Sessions is staunchly anti-marijuana — he said last year that “good people don’t smoke marijuana” and called Obama-era drug policy reforms a “tragic mistake.”

His comments also represent a break from what Trump said during his campaign, when he said, “in terms of marijuana and legalization, I think that should be a state issue, state by state.”

But the Trump administration’s inconsistent interpretation of which issues are states’ issues and which are federal was on display during other parts of Thursday’s news conference.

Trump’s White House is for ‘states’ rights,’ except when it’s against them
Sean Spicer took three different positions on states’ rights in one press conference.thinkprogress.org

In a statement sent to ThinkProgress, Marijuana Majority chairman Tom Angell cited a Quinnipiac University poll that was released Wednesday and shows 71 percent of Americans oppose efforts to enforce federal marijuana laws in states that have legalized it.

“If the administration is looking for ways to become less popular, cracking down on voter-approved marijuana laws would be a great way to do it,” Angell said. “On the campaign trail, President Trump clearly and repeatedly pledged that he would leave decisions on cannabis policy to the states. With a clear and growing majority of the country now supporting legalization, reneging on his promises would be a political disaster and huge distraction from the rest of the president’s agenda.”

Trump administration signals new war on drugs, crackdown on marijuana use
 

Report

Posting Machine
May 14, 2016
838
4,757
“If the administration is looking for ways to become less popular, cracking down on voter-approved marijuana laws would be a great way to do it,”
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
62,256
57,338
I didn't thoroughly poor over the article, but “I think there is a big difference between medical marijuana… versus recreational marijuana” is an accurate statement.
 
M

member 3289

Guest
Good. Loser stoners are just gonna have to be more discreet about their dumb hobby
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
I didn't thoroughly poor over the article, but “I think there is a big difference between medical marijuana… versus recreational marijuana” is an accurate statement.

This was all Trump's campaign promises.
He's for medical marijuana.
He thinks that recreational should be up to the states.


Trump picked up an AG that is all about strict enforcement of federal laws and is personally against legalizing marijuana.


On the campaign trail, President Trump clearly and repeatedly pledged that he would leave decisions on cannabis policy to the states. With a clear and growing majority of the country now supporting legalization, reneging on his promises would be a political disaster and huge distraction from the rest of the president’s agenda.
Maybe I don't understand the DEA totally. But isn't the federal prosecution of violators of federal laws up to the Attorney General's office?
If the law is on the books, I still haven't understood how the DEA turns a blind eye to some legal weed and not others, as is the current situation.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,348
31,962
This was all Trump's campaign promises.
He's for medical marijuana.
He thinks that recreational should be up to the states.
This is signalling that they aren't going to respect state laws on recreational weed. Also you can't blame the AG, Trump appointed him.
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
This is signalling that they aren't going to respect state laws on recreational weed. Also you can't blame the AG, Trump appointed him.

I'm not blaming the AG. I'm saying this is expected. And I'd hope that, despite his own wants on marijuana, Trump was appointing an AG for the AG's total body of work. I don't think marijuana legalization in itself is the highest importance or precedence-making issue for an AG. So in essence, I'd hope that any AG wasn't appointed solely on his marijuana enforcement thoughts.

I support recreational marijuana legalization. But I also don't agree with states creating laws counter to federal laws, then blaming the federal government because federal laws are being enforced.

Again, I don't understand how current recreational marijuana dispensaries are even a go. The federal government refuses to enforce the law. Is that because Obama appointed a particular person? President Obama called up the head of the DEA or AG and said, "don't touch it bro"??

Either way, it seems to be a largely executive branch driven policy circumventing federal law. How can you justify enforcing federal marijuana charges in some places and then a mass level of turning a blind eye where the law is being broken otherwise? We'd have a problem with such unfair application of the law in almost every other case.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,348
31,962
I'm not blaming the AG. I'm saying this is expected. And I'd hope that, despite his own wants on marijuana, Trump was appointing an AG for the AG's total body of work. I don't think marijuana legalization in itself is the highest importance or precedence-making issue for an AG. So in essence, I'd hope that any AG wasn't appointed solely on his marijuana enforcement thoughts.

I support recreational marijuana legalization. But I also don't agree with states creating laws counter to federal laws, then blaming the federal government because federal laws are being enforced.

Again, I don't understand how current recreational marijuana dispensaries are even a go. The federal government refuses to enforce the law. Is that because Obama appointed a particular person? President Obama called up the head of the DEA or AG and said, "don't touch it bro"??

Either way, it seems to be a largely executive branch driven policy circumventing federal law. How can you justify enforcing federal marijuana charges in some places and then a mass level of turning a blind eye where the law is being broken otherwise? We'd have a problem with such unfair application of the law in almost every other case.
So you're completely against states rights when they conflict with federal laws? Just for clarification. Personally, I would agree that federal laws should override state laws, if they are upheld by an independent judiciary. This case is interesting, though, because there seems to be mass support for legalized recreational marijuana use, however, there seems to be no legal challenge possible, and government is intent on keeping it illegal.
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
So you're completely against states rights when they conflict with federal laws? Just for clarification.
Sounds like a loaded question.
The term "states rights" conjures several positions and arguments.

I believe that certain situations should use certain appropriate apparatuses of government.
Executive orders are sometimes appropriate, sometimes not.

In this case, Congress made the law. Congress should repeal the law.
There are many benefits to the forcing function that occurs via the governmental processes. States being required to push advocacy of their position to undo the law, fair application of the law, not creating unexpected outcomes in state vs federal lines (like the mass cash hoarding occurring right now because banks won't touch marijuana revenue).


Personally, I would agree that federal laws should override state laws, if they are upheld by an independent judiciary.
I'm pretty sure that in the last 100 years of marijuana prohibition there have been judicial challenges.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,348
31,962
Sounds like a loaded question.
The term "states rights" conjures several positions and arguments.

I believe that certain situations should use certain appropriate apparatuses of government.
Executive orders are sometimes appropriate, sometimes not.

In this case, Congress made the law. Congress should repeal the law.
There are many benefits to the forcing function that occurs via the governmental processes. States being required to push advocacy of their position to undo the law, fair application of the law, not creating unexpected outcomes in state vs federal lines (like the mass cash hoarding occurring right now because banks won't touch marijuana revenue).




I'm pretty sure that in the last 100 years of marijuana prohibition there have been judicial challenges.
Surely if Congress make a law then you would be for it overriding any local state law? This is what you're saying is the proper procedure here, despite not agreeing with the law, personally. I don't see how you can not agree that federal laws should override state laws if you're taking that stance here.

If there were legal challenges to weed prohibition, sorry, I was ignorant of them. Are there any current legal challenges going on?
 
D

Deleted member 1

Guest
Surely if Congress make a law then you would be for it overriding any local state law? This is what you're saying is the proper procedure here, despite not agreeing with the law, personally. I don't see how you can not agree that federal laws should override state laws if you're taking that stance here.
lol because you're too crafty for me sometimes and I walk into a corner with you in debates.

As best as I can tell, yes Federal law should override state law.
And with that, the Federal government should often get the hell out of the way because of that hamfisted power.

If there were legal challenges to weed prohibition, sorry, I was ignorant of them. Are there any current legal challenges going on?
No idea the details. There's 100 years out there and a quick google shows lots of challenges, of which I'm not educated on the precedence being set each time.


BTW, I did find out how marijuana law is not being enforced:
No federal challenge to pot legalization in 2 states - CNNPolitics.com
Justice Department policy.

"We want to thank the attorney general for working with the states on this and for finding a way that allows our initiative to move forward while maintaining a commitment to fighting illegal drugs."


But all I read when I see that is, "Thanks for the selective enforcement helping reduce our competition ". The marijuana being sold through high-profit state dispensaries is still an illegal drug.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,348
31,962
lol because you're too crafty for me sometimes and I walk into a corner with you in debates.

As best as I can tell, yes Federal law should override state law.
And with that, the Federal government should often get the hell out of the way because of that hamfisted power.



No idea the details. There's 100 years out there and a quick google shows lots of challenges, of which I'm not educated on the precedence being set each time.


BTW, I did find out how marijuana law is not being enforced:
No federal challenge to pot legalization in 2 states - CNNPolitics.com
Justice Department policy.

"We want to thank the attorney general for working with the states on this and for finding a way that allows our initiative to move forward while maintaining a commitment to fighting illegal drugs."


But all I read when I see that is, "Thanks for the selective enforcement helping reduce our competition ". The marijuana being sold through high-profit state dispensaries is still an illegal drug.
That seems like a political move, the selective enforcement, so as to not piss off selective states by legalizing nationwide. It will be interesting to see if this renewed enforcement pushes new national legislation of legalization. It's still a blow for the average person and could come back to bite Trump in the arse, or at least Republicans at local elections.
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
77,179
141,823
I'm fine with recreational marijuana being illegal federally.somehow legal marijuana costs twice the price of illegal marijuana.it is the only thing ever to come off the black market and get more expensive.if the feds crackdown on it but the states refuse to send people to jail for it what's the big deal? They just need to make it super easy to get a medical card and make recreational possession a small fine to game the system
 

Hauler

Been fallin so long it's like gravitys gone
Feb 3, 2016
49,472
61,531
The War on Drugs is a stupid conversation.

I don't know what the solution is, but locking non-violent offenders up has proven to be incredibly ineffective in fixing the problem.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,348
31,962
I'm fine with recreational marijuana being illegal federally.somehow legal marijuana costs twice the price of illegal marijuana.it is the only thing ever to come off the black market and get more expensive.if the feds crackdown on it but the states refuse to send people to jail for it what's the big deal? They just need to make it super easy to get a medical card and make recreational possession a small fine to game the system
Many people are being sent to jail for weed.
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
77,179
141,823
no one ever wanted legalization in the first place all the pro pot activists were ever after was decriminalization. there is no money in decriminalization.legalization is a way of allowing it to become a legit business with commercial production and retail stores.the money is huge and goes to the right people.all stoners wanted was not to go to jail.everyone already had a hookup .some greedy fuckers figured out a way to make it in to big business
 

Wild

Zi Nazi
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
94,953
137,842
Legalize it. Tax it. Move on to far more important issues.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
62,256
57,338
no one ever wanted legalization in the first place all the pro pot activists were ever after was decriminalization. there is no money in decriminalization.legalization is a way of allowing it to become a legit business with commercial production and retail stores.the money is huge and goes to the right people.all stoners wanted was not to go to jail.everyone already had a hookup .some greedy fuckers figured out a way to make it in to big business
The stoners I know don't just want to not go to jail. They all want pot to be completely unregulated. That's the biggest issue I have with Canada potentially legalizing it. People who don't smoke say "Sure. Legalize it and treat it like booze." People who do smoke say "I'm not paying more than I pay now. I want to grow it in my basement for free, and of course I can drive high. It's just weed."
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
77,179
141,823
The stoners I know don't just want to not go to jail. They all want pot to be completely unregulated. That's the biggest issue I have with Canada potentially legalizing it. People who don't smoke say "Sure. Legalize it and treat it like booze." People who do smoke say "I'm not paying more than I pay now. I want to grow it in my basement for free, and of course I can drive high. It's just weed."
you should never pay more for something once it is legalized.that makes no sense.anyone who is a rsponsible adult should never drive high or drunk or impaired by cold medicine etc.growng it in your basement is most definitly not free and health canada allowed it for many years already.health canada used to mail us weed for 5 bucks a gram.now that is not happening and stores want 14 bucks a gram.people on disability and pensions cant pay that kind of increase.it creates a situation where people are still buying illegal weed on the street because it is cheaper.it is still 150oz = $5.37 a gram .exact same oz in a store range between 240-280 but single grams are 14 bucks.it is a total mess
 
M

member 1013

Guest
The only car accident I've ever been in I wasn't high OR drunk

Therefore it's safer for everyone on the roads if I am.

Total JK
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
62,256
57,338
you should never pay more for something once it is legalized.
You're aware that beer is about 40 bucks a case, right?

growng it in your basement is most definitly not free
Most stoners don't think very far ahead, and health Canada allowed medical marijuana use, not recreational.

it creates a situation where people are still buying illegal weed on the street because it is cheaper.it is still 150oz = $5.37 a gram .exact same oz in a store range between 240-280 but single grams are 14 bucks.it is a total mess
Those stores are also selling illegal weed. They had a big crackdown on them here about a month ago. Any Health Canada, weed card stuff they do is just window dressing. According to Health Canada and the RCMP, if it isn't dropped at your house by Canada Post it isn't legal. The same thing happened out your way a year and a half ago or so too, iirc.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
62,256
57,338
The only car accident I've ever been in I wasn't high OR drunk

Therefore it's safer for everyone on the roads if I am.

Total JK
You know I love you, but I'm not sure you should be allowed to drive anyways.
 

jason73

Auslander Raus
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
77,179
141,823
You're aware that beer is about 40 bucks a case, right?
i am not aware of this as i do not drink and last time i bought a case it was 18 bucks.how would you feel if beer tripled in price over the next few years like weed did? would you be happy about 120 dollar cases of beer or be outraged?