Sessions: US Prosecutors Won't Take On Small Time Marijuana Cases

Patch

Federal law enforcement lacks the resources to take on "routine cases" and will continue to focus on drug gangs and larger conspiracies, Sessions said. The comments come after the Trump administration in January threw the burgeoning marijuana legalization movement into uncertainty by reversing the largely hands-off approach that prevailed during the Obama administration, saying federal prosecutors should instead handle marijuana cases however they see fit.

This is better than what was being said in January.

Of particular interest are problems that federal authorities have tried for years to tackle, like illegal marijuana-growing operations on national parklands and gangs that peddle pot along with more harmful drugs. Some law enforcement officials in pot-legal states argue the legal trade has caused unintended problems like black-market marijuana growing and dealing by people who don't even try to conform to the legal framework.

I agree that we should clean up the parks. I do not agree that having legal programs have led to illegal growing cause they were already growing illegally.

I do think this is a step in a direction we should go but in a wise manner.

My number one problem with legalization is using in the public and letting others smell your own business and advertisement. Imo This is not a product that needs advertising and i believe that there should be regulation against using in public because of unseen forces that can be negative but that is for another thread.

a reply to: howtonhawky

The two changes he made to his feelings on it are "illegal marijuana-growing operations" and "pot along with more harmful drugs".

Both of those things are already illegal and enforced in the states where marijuana is legal.

He is just showing how little he knew about the subject before he ran his identity-politic mouth in the first place.

originally posted by: howtonhawky
Patch

Federal law enforcement lacks the resources to take on "routine cases" and will continue to focus on drug gangs and larger conspiracies, Sessions said. The comments come after the Trump administration in January threw the burgeoning marijuana legalization movement into uncertainty by reversing the largely hands-off approach that prevailed during the Obama administration, saying federal prosecutors should instead handle marijuana cases however they see fit.

This is better than what was being said in January.

Of particular interest are problems that federal authorities have tried for years to tackle, like illegal marijuana-growing operations on national parklands and gangs that peddle pot along with more harmful drugs. Some law enforcement officials in pot-legal states argue the legal trade has caused unintended problems like black-market marijuana growing and dealing by people who don't even try to conform to the legal framework.

I agree that we should clean up the parks. I do not agree that having legal programs have led to illegal growing cause they were already growing illegally.

I do think this is a step in a direction we should go but in a wise manner.

My number one problem with legalization is using in the public and letting others smell your own business and advertisement. Imo This is not a product that needs advertising and i believe that there should be regulation against using in public because of unseen forces that can be negative but that is for another thread.

Here in So Cali I can legally grow 5 plants @ My home. I have not yet, but plan to. The Cali Sun should produce killer kush....why should I buy, what I can grow.

a reply to: kurthall

So do you think it is a small bit of relief to hear the feds will not mess with small time operations?

Im sorry, but Sessions should leave weed alone and focus on the important things..what a toad.

For Christ sakes, legal weed hurts nobody. As a former heavy drinker...it (alcohol) was party too every negative occurence in my life.

psst, Jeff...forget weed and focus on the ball numbnut

a reply to: Abysha

there is a bit more too it than that.

They are reserving the right to regulate (via strong arm) the shops. imo

a reply to: howtonhawky

This January our Attorney General threatened to violate the 10th amendment by ignoring states' rights to legalize marijuana. If it is a crime to threaten my neighbor, then how is it not a crime to threaten the states who chose to legalize marijuana. Jeff Sessions is a criminal and should be tried, convicted, and imprisoned.

a reply to: Abysha

That, and it doesn't really appear that he's changed his stance all that much anyway.

It remains to be seen whether prosecutors will seek to punish state-sanctioned pot businesses. Some have indicated they have no plans to do so. "Those are the kinds of things each one of those U.S. attorneys will decide how to handle," Sessions said.

That's from the OP article.

"In deciding which marijuana activities to prosecute under these laws with the Department's finite resources, prosecutors should follow the well-established principles that govern all federal prosecutions," considering the seriousness of a crime and its impact on the community, Sessions told prosecutors in a one-page memo.

That's from January when the policy was changed.

I read that as he's leaving the door open to it, and leaving it up to the US Attorneys to decide. Like he said in January.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Do states have the right to legal weed?

Does the feds prohibition supersede the states and is that legal?

It seems to me that the due process was done when they prohibited the substance.

a reply to: Shamrock6

It is a big change when the attorney says that he will not prosecute small time cases.

He even went further and stated that the focus would be on gangs and growing in state parks.

a reply to: howtonhawky

The US government have been aggressively intimidating countries all over the world to uphold the illegal status of cannabis for over 50 years.

They should now take the lead in ending the mess they created in the first place... The US Federal government now needs to abandon their failed war on a plant altogether...Be a positive example to the rest of the world and 'officially' abolish all laws against the personal use, possession and cultivation of the cannabis plant.

a reply to: howtonhawky

States absolutely have the right to legalize weed. The 10th amendment identifies a state's right to ignore federal bans. It's that simple.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Oops, double post.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I wish you were correct but they used the constitution to prohibit weed.

The only way i see is to end prohibition.

a reply to: howtonhawky

Well, that prohibition violates the 9th Amendment.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

I have the inherent right to consume what I choose so long as I'm not hurting anyone or taking their rights away in the process. I don't have to be told that it's my right. The 9th amendment was written for a purpose...to defend individual liberty. I say based on that, the federal ban should be considered void, and I think the 29 states who have elected to challenge that ban have made their opinion clear.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Well you are on track but i do not see that they construed the amendments to prohibit weed.

They are allowed to prohibit based on public safety.

Now it becomes an educational problem to reverse the demonetization of the plant.

a reply to: howtonhawky

Sessions needs to grow a pair, step into the 19th century (at least) and realize that a free society doesn't have laws against partaking in a naturally growing plant.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: howtonhawky

Sessions needs to grow a pair, step into the 19th century (at least) and realize that a free society doesn't have laws against partaking in a naturally growing plant.

I agree with you but then i don't cause i believe that we are not as much of a free society as you make us out to be.

I do how ever want to be free but if a major retailer can discriminate sells and most deem it to be legal then we are not free.

a reply to: howtonhawky

I understand that is public perception, but that is not a valid reason. If we are to educate the public, we should be teaching them about individual rights, personal responsibility, the power of the Bill of Rights (especially the 9th and 10th), and the illegality of the federal ban against your choice to consume what you please. If we compromise on the truth of the matter, we compromise on declaring what our inherent rights are.

All or nothing. "Give me liberty or give me death." That was the attitude behind our revolution. We owe it to our founders to preserve that sentiment. Even if you don't consume marijuana, it's our duty.

So what do you all say to the ole term put on the plant? Devils Pitchfork

How about the word assassin being derived from the word hashish?