Jeff Sessions Rescinding Policy That Paved Way For Legalized Marijuana To Flourish

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Net neutrality is largely unknown. Once it takes effect people will be pissed.

I don't believe that. The last time NN was under attack, there was a concerted effort from the public to keep it.

Healthcare is not anywhere near as consensus in the public as medical marijuana nor did it have the states on its side the same way..

The nature of this will be much louder if enforced.

I hope you are right, but I"m not holding my breath. I've lost a LOT of faith in my fellow Americans over the last year or so.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Hey man trying to keep hope. Don't be a bummer man.

a reply to: luthier

Sorry. I tend to be more of a realist than a optimist. If my realism suggests that an optimistic outcome doesn't seem likely then I will stop hoping it will be true. I don't like getting my hopes up only for them to be dashed later and there isn't much I'm seeing to get my hopes up about the Trump admin. ESPECIALLY when it comes to Sessions. Trump is bad because he's a moron who dosn't know what he is doing. Sessions is a career politician who knows EXACTLY what he is doing and that is FAR more scarier.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

www.burlingtonfreepress.com...

Vermont giving the finger.

a reply to: luthier

Well it appears they are just continuing as is. It's not like they are issuing statements against Sessions' actions. Vermont looks to just be walking past its Republican members to continue to legalize; something that likely would have happened regardless of what Sessions is doing today. It may be good news in the long run, but it's not the kind of news I'm looking for to change my opinion.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: neo96

How about he just do his job?
That would be refreshing, a politician put into an appointed position that actually does his job.

He is. Pot is illegal under federal law is it not?
We on the right shoudn't call out Dems and Obama for picking and choosing which laws to enforce, and then do the same ourselves.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Not really.

The Republican govenor is a smart guy. He is legalizing home grows and possessions first. Which yeah good luck feds.

Meanwhile a bipartisan committee has been working to explore how to protect business from the federal government before setting up shop..knowing this was coming.

The fu was not delaying the vote.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

States rights...and stuff

But yeah the feds are looking at lawsuits from the 28 states currently..as well as jamming the docket with Marijuana "crimes"

a reply to: luthier

Perhaps it is a sign of the coming tide, but at the same time that is just one state. A blue one at that. I'm worried about the red ones and red leaning Americans' opinions towards this.

I just have so little faith in Americans these days... I need to see it to believe it and so far I've yet to see any serious pushback against what Sessions is doing. Sure a few statelevel protections here and there are great, but where is the concerted effort from Americans to stand up and say, "NO! This isn't what we want, Sessions! Take a seat or listen to us!"?

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Sessions doing his job will speed the process of legalization imo.
The fed will lose in court on this issue.
This imo is no different than the 18th amendment it did not work for alcohol and this will not work for pot.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Wardaddy454

States rights...and stuff

But yeah the feds are looking at lawsuits from the 28 states currently..as well as jamming the docket with Marijuana "crimes"

Yeah I know States rights, doesn't change the classification at the federal level now doesn't it.

You seem to misunderstand my position. I don't give a rats ass about pot, except for things like Silicon Valley talent leaving to start dispensaries, which seems to be the only new business startups in those states, but I digress.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Sessions doing his job will speed the process of legalization imo.
The fed will lose in court on this issue.
This imo is no different than the 18th amendment it did not work for alcohol and this will not work for pot.

Does the Attorney General write or change law?

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Does he decide where the focus of his resources can go?

Glad I live in CO you mofos ain't going to shut a single dispensary down...

a reply to: Wardaddy454

He can do his job and see that the law is enforced.
Enforcing the law will bring the lawsuits needed to change the laws or get pot rescheduled.
IMO this is the most chicken# way for him to do his job.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Man we agree for once.

I also think it will bring about nation wide legalization.

But at the unfortunate cost of jamming the docket with bs.

a reply to: underwerks

I'd say most cannabis businesses are owned by legitimate, tax paying people though.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply otherwise, just so we're on the same page.

My only point is that should weed continue to be legalized further and further, the cartels are going to get involved somehow. It's far too much of a cash cow for them to just write it off and throw their hands up. Are they involved right now? I doubt it, certainly not to a widespread extent anyway.

But I wouldn't count on them just walking away from a billion dollar industry and hoping they can make it up elsewhere.

Colorado says they won't change a thing!

DENVER — The U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado said Thursday there will be no immediate changes in marijuana enforcement after Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded a policy that paved the way for legalized pot to flourish in states across the country. “Today the Attorney General rescinded the Cole Memo on marijuana prosecutions, and directed that federal marijuana prosecution decisions be governed by the same principles that have long governed all of our prosecution decisions,” U.S. Attorney Bob Troyer said. “The United States Attorney’s Office in Colorado has already been guided by these principles in marijuana prosecutions — focusing in particular on identifying and prosecuting those who create the greatest safety threats to our communities around the state. “We will, consistent with the Attorney General’s latest guidance, continue to take this approach in all of our work with our law enforcement partners throughout Colorado.” Instead of the previous lenient federal enforcement policy, Sessions’ new stance will let federal prosecutors where marijuana is legal decide how aggressively to enforce longstanding federal law prohibiting it. Sessions’ plan drew immediate strong objection from Republican Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado, one of eight states that have legalized marijuana for recreational use. Colorado voters approved recreational marijuana in 2012. The first legal sales began on Jan. 1, 2014.

FOX31 Denver

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: underwerks

I'd say most cannabis businesses are owned by legitimate, tax paying people though.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply otherwise, just so we're on the same page.

My only point is that should weed continue to be legalized further and further, the cartels are going to get involved somehow. It's far too much of a cash cow for them to just write it off and throw their hands up. Are they involved right now? I doubt it, certainly not to a widespread extent anyway.

But I wouldn't count on them just walking away from a billion dollar industry and hoping they can make it up elsewhere.

Not really. Their speciality is black markets where the gang organization of underground networking has very little competition.

It's not like they took over app development. They may put money in to launder but they do that with anything including real estate.

I would expect to see them move to other underground money makers, and different drugs.

a reply to: luthier

Their specialty is getting rich. The drug trade is their bread and butter in pursuit of that aim. Again, expecting them to just walk away from 1/4 of their industry and call it a day is silly.

It's not like they took over app development. They may put money in to launder but they do that with anything including real estate.

Okay? I said I expect them to get involved in it. Using establishments for money laundering would be getting involved, would it not?

I would expect to see them move to other underground money makers, and different drugs.

They already have, and it's still not making up for what they've lost due to legalization.