Aa
Obama: Pot Users In Washington And Colorado Not A 'Top Priority'
President Barack Obama said prosecuting pot users in states that have legalized the drug won't be a top priority for his administration.
"We've got bigger fish to fry," Obama told ABC News' Barbara Walters. "It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it's legal."
Last month, voters in Colorado and Washington legalized recreational pot use for adults, though marijuana remains illegal under federal law.
The Obama administration suggested last week that it was considering plans to undermine the voter initiatives. In his interview with Walters, Obama did not say whether his administration would go after producers and suppliers of marijuana in those states. The administration has cracked down extensively on the medical marijuana industry in California, despite its legality under state law there.
A slim majority of Americans want the Department of Justice to leave pot smokers alone in the states where the drug has been legalized, according to a HuffPost/YouGov poll.
Obama himself smoked pot as a youngster in Hawaii, where he and his high school pals called themselves the Choom Gang.
"There are a bunch of things I did that I regret when I was a kid," he told Walters. "My attitude is, substance abuse generally is not good for our kids, not good for our society."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/obama-pot-washington-colorado_n_2299512.html
"We've got bigger fish to fry," Obama told ABC News' Barbara Walters. "It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it's legal."
Last month, voters in Colorado and Washington legalized recreational pot use for adults, though marijuana remains illegal under federal law.
The Obama administration suggested last week that it was considering plans to undermine the voter initiatives. In his interview with Walters, Obama did not say whether his administration would go after producers and suppliers of marijuana in those states. The administration has cracked down extensively on the medical marijuana industry in California, despite its legality under state law there.
A slim majority of Americans want the Department of Justice to leave pot smokers alone in the states where the drug has been legalized, according to a HuffPost/YouGov poll.
Obama himself smoked pot as a youngster in Hawaii, where he and his high school pals called themselves the Choom Gang.
"There are a bunch of things I did that I regret when I was a kid," he told Walters. "My attitude is, substance abuse generally is not good for our kids, not good for our society."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/obama-pot-washington-colorado_n_2299512.html
Yea! There are WAY more important things on his plate. I mean a BIG majority of people smoke pot and if the states legalized it, then so be it...He will have to address it sooner or later because Pot is still considered a class 1 drug and still federally against the law..(which by the way boggles my mind...)
This is his first public response to the issue, I don't know if it will set the tone or not, there are many things going on at the moment to change the Federal Controlled Substances Act
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) reached out to Gil Kerlikowske, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, on Thursday in an effort to find out how the federal government intends to deal with states like Colorado and Washington that have recently legalized marijuana possession.
In addition to seeking clarity about the administration's plans, however, Leahy also offered a solution to allow the government to extricate itself from the situation of having to enforce federal laws that consider marijuana to be an illegal substance.
"One option would be to amend the Federal Controlled Substances Act to allow possession of up to one ounce of marijuana, at least in jurisdictions where it is legal under state law," Leahy wrote.
The Federal Controlled Substances Act currently lists marijuana as a Schedule I drug, alongside heroin, LSD and ecstasy.
Voters in Colorado and Washington passed measures in November to legalize and tax the sale and possession of marijuana. The states' governors have since signed those initiatives into law, directly in opposition to federal restrictions on the substance. Marijuana policy advocates have expressed concerns that federal authorities will continue to ignore state laws and pursue their current agendas, which include frequent raids on marijuana growing facilities and other pot-related businesses.
The New York Times reported earlier this month that President Barack Obama's administration was weighing legal action against Colorado and Washington over their steps to legalize marijuana for recreational use. While administration officials have reportedly been mulling the best path forward, few specifics about their considerations have come out.
In his letter to Kerlikowske, Leahy said it's time for answers. The senator also announced that he plans to hold a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on the issue next year.
UPDATE: 1:30 p.m. -- Marijuana policy reformer Tom Angell, founder and chairman of Marijuana Majority, tells The Huffington Post that Leahy's idea makes progress on the issue, but that he is concerned with its scope.
"Sen. Leahy's proposal to have the federal government keep its hands off anyone who possesses an ounce or less of marijuana in accordance with state law would be a significant step in the right direction, but the Obama administration needs to respect every provision of these voter-approved laws," Angell said. "If the feds prevent the state-regulated systems for marijuana sales from being enacted, drug cartels and gangs will continue to dominate the marijuana market. Under this scenario, criminals who don't pay taxes will be the only ones selling marijuana to people who can possess an ounce."
Leahy's entire letter to Kerlikowske below:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/13/patrick-leahy-marijuana_n_2293601.html?utm_hp_ref=denver&ir=Denver
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) reached out to Gil Kerlikowske, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, on Thursday in an effort to find out how the federal government intends to deal with states like Colorado and Washington that have recently legalized marijuana possession.
In addition to seeking clarity about the administration's plans, however, Leahy also offered a solution to allow the government to extricate itself from the situation of having to enforce federal laws that consider marijuana to be an illegal substance.
"One option would be to amend the Federal Controlled Substances Act to allow possession of up to one ounce of marijuana, at least in jurisdictions where it is legal under state law," Leahy wrote.
The Federal Controlled Substances Act currently lists marijuana as a Schedule I drug, alongside heroin, LSD and ecstasy.
Voters in Colorado and Washington passed measures in November to legalize and tax the sale and possession of marijuana. The states' governors have since signed those initiatives into law, directly in opposition to federal restrictions on the substance. Marijuana policy advocates have expressed concerns that federal authorities will continue to ignore state laws and pursue their current agendas, which include frequent raids on marijuana growing facilities and other pot-related businesses.
The New York Times reported earlier this month that President Barack Obama's administration was weighing legal action against Colorado and Washington over their steps to legalize marijuana for recreational use. While administration officials have reportedly been mulling the best path forward, few specifics about their considerations have come out.
In his letter to Kerlikowske, Leahy said it's time for answers. The senator also announced that he plans to hold a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on the issue next year.
UPDATE: 1:30 p.m. -- Marijuana policy reformer Tom Angell, founder and chairman of Marijuana Majority, tells The Huffington Post that Leahy's idea makes progress on the issue, but that he is concerned with its scope.
"Sen. Leahy's proposal to have the federal government keep its hands off anyone who possesses an ounce or less of marijuana in accordance with state law would be a significant step in the right direction, but the Obama administration needs to respect every provision of these voter-approved laws," Angell said. "If the feds prevent the state-regulated systems for marijuana sales from being enacted, drug cartels and gangs will continue to dominate the marijuana market. Under this scenario, criminals who don't pay taxes will be the only ones selling marijuana to people who can possess an ounce."
Leahy's entire letter to Kerlikowske below:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/13/patrick-leahy-marijuana_n_2293601.html?utm_hp_ref=denver&ir=Denver
"but the Obama administration needs to respect every provision of these voter-approved laws," Angell said. "If the feds prevent the state-regulated systems for marijuana sales from being enacted, drug cartels and gangs will continue to dominate the marijuana market. Under this scenario, criminals who don't pay taxes will be the only ones selling marijuana to people who can possess an ounce."
I agree!
I agree!
Colorado U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette introduced legislation today that would exempt states from federal laws banning the sale, possession and use of small amounts of marijuana by adults. The bill so far is being co-sponsored by Colorado Democrat Jared Polis and Republican Mike Coffman as well as a number of other representatives from around the country.
The bill is known as the Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act.
It would spell out that any state that passes its own laws governing marijuana and/or medical marijuana would be exempt from certain sections of the Controlled Substances Act.
Colorado and Washington voters last week passed measures that legalize limited possession of marijuana and also legalize retail sales of marijuana. Voters in both states gave marijuana 10-point majorities.
In Colorado, the governor, the attorney general and both U.S. senators say they need guidance from the federal government before deciding how to proceed on implementation of the law.
Four of the state’s seven U.S. representatives have decided not to wait for guidance, but instead to offer some guidance of their own.
Polis, CD2, and Cofffman, CD6, are already backing the effort as cosponsors of DeGette’s bill, and a spokesperson for Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-CD7, said he is weighing the bill against similar options.
“He certainly isn’t opposed to the bill,” said Leslie Oliver. She noted that he signed the Polis letter (below) and wants to see what kind of reaction that gets before deciding on his next step.
“I am glad to see our elected officials, from the local and state levels up to the federal level, taking steps to respect the will of the voters,” said Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol co-director Mason Tvert.
“I’m proud of the way our bipartisan congressional delegation has come together to back the will of voters,” said Republican attorney and marijuana reform advocate Rob Corry.
“I hope this bill gets through the House and Senate quickly and gets signed by the president,” Corry said.
Polis, DeGette and Rep. Ed Perlmutter also sent a letter to officials today asking the federal government not to interfere in states that legalize marijuana.
“Today I am proud to join with colleagues from both sides of the aisle on the ‘Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act’ to protect states’ rights and immediately resolve any conflict with the federal government,” said Rep. DeGette in a press release. “In Colorado we’ve witnessed the aggressive policies of the federal government in their treatment of legal medicinal marijuana providers. My constituents have spoken and I don’t want the federal government denying money to Colorado or taking other punitive steps that would undermine the will of our citizens.”
Coffman said in the release that while he opposed the legalization of marijuana, he feels an obligation to support the will of voters, who in his district supported the measure.
“I voted against Amendment 64 and I strongly oppose the legalization of marijuana, but I also have an obligation to respect the will of the voters, given the passage of this initiative, and so I feel obligated to support this legislation,” he said in the release.
“Residents of Colorado and Washington have made it clear that the public is ahead of the federal government in terms of marijuana legalization,” said Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer in the release issued by DeGette. “It’s time for Congress to pass legislation – such as the ‘Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act’ – that allows states to implement their own laws in this area without fear of federal interference.”
Oregon voters shot down a measure that would have legalized marijuana in that state.
More from DeGette’s press release:
“The federal government’s failure to develop a reasonable approach towards the varying state marijuana use laws has made this legislation necessary,” said Rep. Sam Farr (CA-17). “From increased raids on legal dispensaries to denying defendants in court the right to present evidence of their legal marijuana use, the federal government has chosen to trample on state rights rather than work with them as a partner to address this issue.”
Polis today sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder and Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator Michele Leonhart asking that they take no action against people whose activities related to marijuana are in compliance with state law.
In addition to Polis, the letter was signed by: Steve Cohen, D-TN; DeGette, Ed Perlmutter D-CD-7; Barney Frank D-MA; Earl Blumenauer,D-OR; Jerrold Nadler, D-NY; Jan Schakowsky, D-IL; Sam Farr, D-CA; Jim Moran, D-VA; Chellie Pingree, D-ME; Adam Smith, D-WA; Barbara Lee, D-CA; Dennis Kucinich, D-OH; Raúl Grijalva, D-AZ; Robert C. Scott, D-VA; and John Conyers, D-MI.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/16/respect-states-and-citize_n_2146823.html
@MrsP, yes I agree as well
The bill is known as the Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act.
It would spell out that any state that passes its own laws governing marijuana and/or medical marijuana would be exempt from certain sections of the Controlled Substances Act.
Colorado and Washington voters last week passed measures that legalize limited possession of marijuana and also legalize retail sales of marijuana. Voters in both states gave marijuana 10-point majorities.
In Colorado, the governor, the attorney general and both U.S. senators say they need guidance from the federal government before deciding how to proceed on implementation of the law.
Four of the state’s seven U.S. representatives have decided not to wait for guidance, but instead to offer some guidance of their own.
Polis, CD2, and Cofffman, CD6, are already backing the effort as cosponsors of DeGette’s bill, and a spokesperson for Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-CD7, said he is weighing the bill against similar options.
“He certainly isn’t opposed to the bill,” said Leslie Oliver. She noted that he signed the Polis letter (below) and wants to see what kind of reaction that gets before deciding on his next step.
“I am glad to see our elected officials, from the local and state levels up to the federal level, taking steps to respect the will of the voters,” said Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol co-director Mason Tvert.
“I’m proud of the way our bipartisan congressional delegation has come together to back the will of voters,” said Republican attorney and marijuana reform advocate Rob Corry.
“I hope this bill gets through the House and Senate quickly and gets signed by the president,” Corry said.
Polis, DeGette and Rep. Ed Perlmutter also sent a letter to officials today asking the federal government not to interfere in states that legalize marijuana.
“Today I am proud to join with colleagues from both sides of the aisle on the ‘Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act’ to protect states’ rights and immediately resolve any conflict with the federal government,” said Rep. DeGette in a press release. “In Colorado we’ve witnessed the aggressive policies of the federal government in their treatment of legal medicinal marijuana providers. My constituents have spoken and I don’t want the federal government denying money to Colorado or taking other punitive steps that would undermine the will of our citizens.”
Coffman said in the release that while he opposed the legalization of marijuana, he feels an obligation to support the will of voters, who in his district supported the measure.
“I voted against Amendment 64 and I strongly oppose the legalization of marijuana, but I also have an obligation to respect the will of the voters, given the passage of this initiative, and so I feel obligated to support this legislation,” he said in the release.
“Residents of Colorado and Washington have made it clear that the public is ahead of the federal government in terms of marijuana legalization,” said Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer in the release issued by DeGette. “It’s time for Congress to pass legislation – such as the ‘Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act’ – that allows states to implement their own laws in this area without fear of federal interference.”
Oregon voters shot down a measure that would have legalized marijuana in that state.
More from DeGette’s press release:
“The federal government’s failure to develop a reasonable approach towards the varying state marijuana use laws has made this legislation necessary,” said Rep. Sam Farr (CA-17). “From increased raids on legal dispensaries to denying defendants in court the right to present evidence of their legal marijuana use, the federal government has chosen to trample on state rights rather than work with them as a partner to address this issue.”
Polis today sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder and Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator Michele Leonhart asking that they take no action against people whose activities related to marijuana are in compliance with state law.
In addition to Polis, the letter was signed by: Steve Cohen, D-TN; DeGette, Ed Perlmutter D-CD-7; Barney Frank D-MA; Earl Blumenauer,D-OR; Jerrold Nadler, D-NY; Jan Schakowsky, D-IL; Sam Farr, D-CA; Jim Moran, D-VA; Chellie Pingree, D-ME; Adam Smith, D-WA; Barbara Lee, D-CA; Dennis Kucinich, D-OH; Raúl Grijalva, D-AZ; Robert C. Scott, D-VA; and John Conyers, D-MI.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/16/respect-states-and-citize_n_2146823.html
@MrsP, yes I agree as well
It is terrific that they worked together on this bill.
I hope it is enough to get Obama off the hook with whomever he is beholden to. The fact that he hasn't pulled the Feds back is telling and I can only surmise that his reluctance is not his own. A friend of mine who adores Obama (not Mrs.P this time) thinks it is because Obama is a Constitutional scholar and will not interfere with Federal law. I am more cynical than that.
I love the way the people and their representatives have worked to decriminalize pot and who are working on this legislation. It just shows that people can work together and make changes.If Obama doesn't approve it, there will be some serious disappointment.
I hope it is enough to get Obama off the hook with whomever he is beholden to. The fact that he hasn't pulled the Feds back is telling and I can only surmise that his reluctance is not his own. A friend of mine who adores Obama (not Mrs.P this time) thinks it is because Obama is a Constitutional scholar and will not interfere with Federal law. I am more cynical than that.
I love the way the people and their representatives have worked to decriminalize pot and who are working on this legislation. It just shows that people can work together and make changes.If Obama doesn't approve it, there will be some serious disappointment.
Although nobody would love to see it legalized throughout the US, than me, I'll be the skeptic.
Obama said he would make pot low priority when he was first elected in 2008.
In the fall of 2011, the Feds raided legal ( by state standards) growers, dispensaries and Oaksterdam, a local school that teaches how to grow and sell mj.
All of the above were bringing in much needed revenue including taxes locally as well as following state law.
Our local police and sheriffs were not happy.
Obama said he would make pot low priority when he was first elected in 2008.
In the fall of 2011, the Feds raided legal ( by state standards) growers, dispensaries and Oaksterdam, a local school that teaches how to grow and sell mj.
All of the above were bringing in much needed revenue including taxes locally as well as following state law.
Our local police and sheriffs were not happy.
"If Obama doesn't approve it, there will be some serious disappointment."
YES it will...
"Obama said he would make pot low priority when he was first elected in 2008.
In the fall of 2011, the Feds raided legal ( by state standards) growers, dispensaries and Oaksterdam, a local school that teaches how to grow and sell mj.
All of the above were bringing in much needed revenue including taxes locally as well as following state law.
Our local police and sheriffs were not happy. "
NO BUENO Mr. President!....
YES it will...
"Obama said he would make pot low priority when he was first elected in 2008.
In the fall of 2011, the Feds raided legal ( by state standards) growers, dispensaries and Oaksterdam, a local school that teaches how to grow and sell mj.
All of the above were bringing in much needed revenue including taxes locally as well as following state law.
Our local police and sheriffs were not happy. "
NO BUENO Mr. President!....
Obama's response to complaints was that it was against federal law and he could not change that.
So the question remains, does he have any control over what the Feds do or not?
So the question remains, does he have any control over what the Feds do or not?
NO BUENO Mr. President!....
Woohoo Mrs. P!! I knew you were objective and didn't really think our President is G-d. :-)
You know I like him but as all politicians seem to do, he can disappoint.
So the question remains, does he have any control over what the Feds do or not?
He does, but what will it cost him to use that control?
Really wish I could be a fly on the wall of some of these meetings.
"Woohoo Mrs. P!! I knew you were objective and didn't really think our President is G-d. :-)
You know I like him but as all politicians seem to do, he can disappoint. "
OF COURSE he can disappoint. I'm no naive lil girl. It's just his disappointment (TO ME) are less than his accomplishments...lol...HOWEVER, he has a few disappointments that I will NOT hesitate to call him out on.
"He does, but what will it cost him to use that control?"
With something like this, it shouldn't matter....He should let the state do what the people voted for and decriminalize it federally..I mean according to the Feds pot is more dangerous than cocaine or heroine...That is INSANE.....
You know I like him but as all politicians seem to do, he can disappoint. "
OF COURSE he can disappoint. I'm no naive lil girl. It's just his disappointment (TO ME) are less than his accomplishments...lol...HOWEVER, he has a few disappointments that I will NOT hesitate to call him out on.
"He does, but what will it cost him to use that control?"
With something like this, it shouldn't matter....He should let the state do what the people voted for and decriminalize it federally..I mean according to the Feds pot is more dangerous than cocaine or heroine...That is INSANE.....
Obama says he won’t prosecute pot smokers in two states
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-says-won-t-prosecute-pot-smokers-two-154809684.html
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-says-won-t-prosecute-pot-smokers-two-154809684.html
From your Mrs P's link:
The president, however, will leave open the door for federal authorities to arrest people who grow, transport and sell marijuana in those two states, despite new state laws to the contrary.
How contradictory is that ?
The president, however, will leave open the door for federal authorities to arrest people who grow, transport and sell marijuana in those two states, despite new state laws to the contrary.
How contradictory is that ?
I'm just confused. How can it be legalized state wide, but illegal federally. That doesn't make sense to me......help?
"How contradictory is that ? "
VERY!....Maybe they mean grow, transport and sell Illegally!....But yea it IS VERY contradictory....
VERY!....Maybe they mean grow, transport and sell Illegally!....But yea it IS VERY contradictory....
"There are a bunch of things I did that I regret when I was a kid," he told Walters. "My attitude is, substance abuse generally is not good for our kids, not good for our society."
YAY!!!
How about that??? Something I support the pres on...I hope he holds his ground (sorry guys!)
That's the problem trying to pass something like this...it's more a statement, a message than anything else..being that it remains illegal federally...and the boss has the power to keep it that way, or make some kind of change.
Go Obama Go! ;)
YAY!!!
How about that??? Something I support the pres on...I hope he holds his ground (sorry guys!)
That's the problem trying to pass something like this...it's more a statement, a message than anything else..being that it remains illegal federally...and the boss has the power to keep it that way, or make some kind of change.
Go Obama Go! ;)
Sure substance abuse isn't good for kids, be it beer, wine or pot.
Nobody is talking about giving it to kids, just because we want it legalized.
Sending people to jail for pot isn't good for society either.
Nobody is talking about giving it to kids, just because we want it legalized.
Sending people to jail for pot isn't good for society either.
grrrr.
Well, from your point of view I guess this stand he is taking is something to celebrate.
From my point of view:
"My attitude is, substance abuse generally is not good for our kids, not good for our society."
Freaking hypocrite-he isn't talking about the Drug companies and the harm they do society...or alcohol...he is appeasing some folks, this is no moral issue-haha sure, prez
Well, from your point of view I guess this stand he is taking is something to celebrate.
From my point of view:
"My attitude is, substance abuse generally is not good for our kids, not good for our society."
Freaking hypocrite-he isn't talking about the Drug companies and the harm they do society...or alcohol...he is appeasing some folks, this is no moral issue-haha sure, prez
"If the feds prevent the state-regulated systems for marijuana sales from being enacted, drug cartels and gangs will continue to dominate the marijuana market."
I guess this is ok ?
That is what this says to me.
MJ is here to stay legal or not, decriminalized or not.
I guess this is ok ?
That is what this says to me.
MJ is here to stay legal or not, decriminalized or not.
I also see the issue around minors as a completely seperate issue. I also see substance abuse as a health issue. I continue to maintain that locking up users of any drug does absolutely nothing to solve the issue. It is not a deterrant - education is.
I hate that the Cartel will benefit from it as much as I hate that people who are decent folk will go to prison for growing it. (I believe that Medical MJ is in the same category in terms of Fed. law.)
Here is my question to those of you who would like to see drug use remain illegal (and I ask this question fully respectfully, not sarcastically)
What exactly does keeping drug use illegal accomplish?
Here is what we know.
Putting a drug user or addict in prison is exceedingly expensive, and does almost nothing to rehabilitate. So is punishment for drug use the right course of action?
Keeping drug use illegal actually prevents some from seeking treatment if they have crossed the line into abuse. This is particularly true of those who have children or are pregnant.
Do we want to lock up teens/young adults (or anyone for that matter) for experimentation?
Where is the actual crime? Who does an individuals drug use harm (from a legal perspective)
Keeping drugs illegal to use sets up a violent black market. Criminal enterprise such as cartels and organized gangs are the only ones who profit.
Do we want our police to spend money and resources arresting users? Is that a good use of their time and our tax dollars?
I too am a mom. I do NOT want my child using drugs, and plan to do what I can to prevent that. I also do not want him to abuse alcohol, or smoke. I know I can help influence his decisions through education. However, should he experiment or even become addicted, I want him to be able to seek treatment, and have the opportunity to have a life without a felony conviction. That can haunt you forever, and I don't believe this sort of action should. People can move forward, and should be given the opportunity to do so.
Now, dealers are a whole different story. I would use the resources saved by legalizing drug use to go after them - full force and without mercy, particularly those who would sell to minors. That is and should remain a crime.
This is how I see it. I'm curious as to others opinions on these points.
What exactly does keeping drug use illegal accomplish?
Here is what we know.
Putting a drug user or addict in prison is exceedingly expensive, and does almost nothing to rehabilitate. So is punishment for drug use the right course of action?
Keeping drug use illegal actually prevents some from seeking treatment if they have crossed the line into abuse. This is particularly true of those who have children or are pregnant.
Do we want to lock up teens/young adults (or anyone for that matter) for experimentation?
Where is the actual crime? Who does an individuals drug use harm (from a legal perspective)
Keeping drugs illegal to use sets up a violent black market. Criminal enterprise such as cartels and organized gangs are the only ones who profit.
Do we want our police to spend money and resources arresting users? Is that a good use of their time and our tax dollars?
I too am a mom. I do NOT want my child using drugs, and plan to do what I can to prevent that. I also do not want him to abuse alcohol, or smoke. I know I can help influence his decisions through education. However, should he experiment or even become addicted, I want him to be able to seek treatment, and have the opportunity to have a life without a felony conviction. That can haunt you forever, and I don't believe this sort of action should. People can move forward, and should be given the opportunity to do so.
Now, dealers are a whole different story. I would use the resources saved by legalizing drug use to go after them - full force and without mercy, particularly those who would sell to minors. That is and should remain a crime.
This is how I see it. I'm curious as to others opinions on these points.
"MJ is here to stay legal or not, decriminalized or not. "
Truth!
Truth!
And medical MJ is an entirely seperate issue, and a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. There are tons of prescription meds that do a lot of good, but can also be abused. MJ for medical purposes should be legal and easily available for those purposes.
MJ for medical purposes should be legal and easily available for those purposes
---- ----------- ----- ------------------------------------
Yes, but Federal law as it stands does not make that distinction, no?
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
