Jeff Sessions’ Coming War on Legal Marijuana

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Let us not forget how many people text while driving too.

Good point. Texting and driving has been compared to driving drunk in levels of danger.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Donald Trump said that Medical Marijuana has alot of good uses for people who are sick. On recreational he said that it is a state by state issue. (In other words he said he would leave it up to the states to decide.)

Whether or not he keeps his promise however, remains to be seen, but the video /interview below says alot on his stance on Marijuana.

Alcohol is already legal. We don't need to add any more temptations to that list. Marijuana is dangerous like all drugs. I don't buy that it has medical uses either.

a reply to: RedDragon
Doesn't matter if you buy it or not. It is a fact.

Just ask the parents who's children no longer suffer from seizures thanks to CBD for one example out of plethora of them.

originally posted by: GoShredAK
a reply to: RedDragon
Doesn't matter if you buy it or not. It is a fact.

Marijuana is a schedule 1 drug. This is what a schedule 1 drug is:

"Schedule I drugs are those that have the following characteristic according to the United States Drug Enforcement Agency: The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical treatment use in the U.S."

I'm not going to read any hokey hippy science. I'm not into health crystals or magnet therapy or any of that nonsense. The DEA is the top authority in the country and has decades of experience.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Everyone has to keep in mind that pot is here all the same. There is no shortage now or in the past, and legalization is the peoples will, good for public safety and economies. Public safety is a very real concern as a lot of the stuff from down south comes surrounded by axel grease, gear oil etc. Marijuana prohibition is and was a complete failure. Its illicit trade funds vast criminal undergrounds and has a hand in a lot of gang violence here in the US.

originally posted by: RedDragon
Alcohol is already legal. We don't need to add any more temptations to that list.

Ahhh so you think that you should legislate morality then? Because that's exactly what you are promoting with this line of BS. The problem with that line of thinking is that what other people put into their bodies has zero effect on you and thusly, insisting that your personal worldview is the one everybody should follow is ludicrous.

Marijuana is dangerous like all drugs. I don't buy that it has medical uses either.

You don't need to buy it. Nor do you need to imbibe if that is your preference. I can assure you though as someone suffering from chronic pain as a result of injuries I received serving my country, it's far safer and less damaging to my body, particularly my liver, than the bottles of pharmaceuticals they would prefer to load me up with every month. And as someone who also has a seizure disorder, January will mark 2 years since my last grand mal seizure. And it isn't because of the prescriptions my neurologist sends out every month either. Let's hope you never find yourself in a position where you can't access the best medicine for your conditions because someone nearly a century ago decided that cannabis was used by negroes to rape white women and therefore needed to be criminalized. Supporting the continued DEA schedule 1 status is tantamount to supporting systemic racism based on willful ignorance.

a reply to: RedDragon

DEA is the top authority eh? The organization must be run by gods and not infallible people who are susceptible just like anyone else to bribery or corruption. I do appreciate you not taking the time to actually research just how mutable the DEA's stance is on a variety of things and instead blindly believe that they have the express authority of GOD. Close-Mindedness and blind trust makes you easier to manipulate and control. I appreciate that.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

Ok. That is promising at least. At least that is something recent on the matter.

originally posted by: RedDragon

originally posted by: GoShredAK
a reply to: RedDragon
Doesn't matter if you buy it or not. It is a fact.

Marijuana is a schedule 1 drug. This is what a schedule 1 drug is:

"Schedule I drugs are those that have the following characteristic according to the United States Drug Enforcement Agency: The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical treatment use in the U.S."

I'm not going to read any hokey hippy science. I'm not into health crystals or magnet therapy or any of that nonsense. The DEA is the top authority in the country and has decades of experience.

So you will trust the government over actual scientists? Hey quick question. You DO know that science develops over time right? Like it isn't constant. The DEA has literally NOT consulted a science manual on this in, well ever.

You are on ATS; do some damn due diligence! The war on drugs is one of the longest lasting conspiracies against the American public in the country.

Leading Anti-Marijuana Academics Are Paid By Painkiller Drug Companies
War on marijuana unconstitutional, doctors testify in federal court Monday
Anti-Marijuana Legalization Advocates Violated Campaign Finance Laws
The shared roots of the War on Drugs and the War on Terror, in one chart

And that's just the tip of the ice berg. Check out Harry J. Anslinger and his buddy William Randolph Hearst and their tag team propaganda/Congressional bribery that resulted in Congress ignoring all scientific advise on the matter and listen to those two racist yahoos to make it illegal.

There is NOTHING on the up-and-up about the war on drugs, marijuana being illegal and the DEA's involvement. Oh yeah. They are only protecting their careers since if the War on Drugs gets kicked to the curb we'd no longer have any need for the DEA. Yeah so they along with police unions, private prisons, and prison guard unions regularly lobby Congress to keep marijuana illegal. No conflict of interest there or anything right?

a reply to: RedDragon

Can you try to deny ignorance here?

Why do we have a very expensive prescription drug called Marinol, that is derived from cannabis, essentially concentrated THC?

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Krazysh0t

We know his roots are NOT against it. We also know he had to play politics to get past the GOP DINO's, so he couldn'tjust lay it out there. So it might be a wee bit premature to go labeling Trump a War On Drugs psycho.

I heard him say he'd leave it up to the states. I live in Colorado and the sky hasn't fallen. Economy is booming. Lots of infrastructure improvements all over the place paid for by the Mary Jane tax revenue.

Even if Trump is against rec use, he's been VERY clear that he absolutely supports medical use. As a health care professional that's what most important to me. Patients having safe access to a natural medicine that's been proven to work, over and over again.

Would love to see it removed from the schedule I list...Sessions needs to get a damn grip. Not too happy with Trump picking him for AG, IMHO.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Oh yeah. They are only protecting their careers since if the War on Drugs gets kicked to the curb we'd no longer have any need for the DEA. Yeah so they along with police unions, private prisons, and prison guard unions regularly lobby Congress to keep marijuana illegal. No conflict of interest there or anything right?

I can't believe I neglected this particular point... Who the hell would trade job security, federal government benefits and pensions for doing the right thing in DC? If you can't expect ethics to exist in Congress how can you expect it from the agencies they oversee? If the DEA doesn't have to enforce Marijuana laws at the federal level anymore, they no longer need the number agents they currently have and therefore can not demand continually increasing budgets annually from Congress. It's a hellacious cycle of self perpetuation in which the prefer to maintain the status quo and justify their positions, staffing and budgets.

It's a massive conflict of interest at the end of the day for the DEA to hold the power to determine the scheduling of medication when that very schedule determines who they can go after and how much money they need to do their job. It's ridiculous.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So will Mr. Sessions be making the decisions about the policy, or would that be Mr. Trump?

It is Session who can send the Feds into the states and make arrests and seize assets with a swipe of his pen..

It sisters well with Trump's vindictiveness for the liberal states, his love of the Private Prison industry and his Law and Order Tyrant Shtick.

And this...

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump praised Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s anti-drug campaign — a bloodbath that has taken the lives of nearly 5,000 suspected drug dealers and users — in a phone call on Friday night, Duterte said.

www.latimes.com...

a reply to: peter vlar

Exactly. You got the picture there. Naturally they are going to fight tooth and nail to keep it illegal. They have a personal stake in the cause. That may be ok for private lobbying, but a government agency shouldn't be biased like that.

a reply to: RedDragon

It's illegal because of the method it's consumed by most people has been popularized to smoking.

It literally does improve your DNA Repair, which literally does fight cancer.

But you don't have to smoke it for this to happen. Among other various side good effects it has that are real for different conditions.

a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined


Pandora's financial box is already open on Marijuana, and the profits are overwhelming for some states already.


In other words, legality is on the rise, and will continue. When there is huge money to be made, on the state level, even the feds can't' really do anything about it.

originally posted by: Realtruth
a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined

In other words, legality is on the rise, and will continue. When there is huge money to be made, on the state level, even the feds can't' really do anything about it.

The Feds have only allowed it by not enforcing federal law on the states.

And YES...the Feds can do something about it...and make a pretty penny in the process by seizing bank accounts, cash and real-estate et al.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Realtruth
a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined

In other words, legality is on the rise, and will continue. When there is huge money to be made, on the state level, even the feds can't' really do anything about it.

The Feds have only allowed it by not enforcing federal law on the states.

And YES...the Feds can do something about it...and make a pretty penny in the process by seizing bank accounts, cash and real-estate et al.

Legally maybe they can, but they won't.

The money the states are making are clearing deficits and creating surplus in money. It's a trickle up effect. Feds don't have to provide bailout money for states begging for federal money, thus the feds keep more.

Simple business 101.

It would be foolish for the feds to do a onetime seize of assets, when they can profit in the long run, and the feds see this, or it would have stopped long before the states legalized it.

Like I said once the Genie is out of the bottle, it nearly impossible to put her back in, to much money being made and saved, on every level.

originally posted by: Realtruth

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Realtruth
a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined

In other words, legality is on the rise, and will continue. When there is huge money to be made, on the state level, even the feds can't' really do anything about it.

The Feds have only allowed it by not enforcing federal law on the states.

And YES...the Feds can do something about it...and make a pretty penny in the process by seizing bank accounts, cash and real-estate et al.

Legally maybe they can, but they won't.

The money the states are making are clearing deficits and creating surplus in money. It's a trickle up effect. Feds don't have to provide bailout money for states begging for federal money, thus the feds keep more.

States like Colorado and California don't need federal dollars. They both pay more into the Federal Coffers than they take out.

I also think you are assigning rational policy to an irrational administration.

Unlike legislation that would hopefully be moderated by sane thinkers in Congress...Sessions and Trump don't need their OK to do a crack-down. Federal law affords it right now.