Do you think Marijuana should be Legalized Federally in the US?

The states (which have the great majority of prisoners) have about a 16% rate of people with drugs as their most serious offense. (see Table 9 in the pdf below). Only 3.5% of prisoners are in prison for simple drug possession (meaning most are in for distribution or manufacturing drugs). The feds have about 49.5% of prisoners with drugs as their most serious offense (table 10). The states have about 1.3 million prisoners, the feds about 0.2 million prisoners. (see table 1).That means total, there are about 308,000 prisoners (208, 000 state, 100,000 federal) in for drug offenses. That's about 20% overall in prison for drug related offenses, with relatively few for simple drug possession (about 45,000 people nationwide in state prisons).

IMHO, if marijuana is legalized it's not going to change crime much, either way. I think we should watch the Colorado experiment a little while longer before we allow rec use everywhere. Marijuana should be rescheduled by the FDA so that it can be prescribed legally federally.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdf

 

Making the stuff illegal seems about as excessive as Prohibition was. On a personal level, though, I don't do drugs and would rather see people not even touch marijuana. But I wouldn't turn that desire into an overly restrictive law.

 

Sing it Donovan . . .
Hurdy Gurdy Man - Donovan


Mellow Yellow - Donovan

 

First, notice that you have not addressed the most important question, what makes you think these treaties apply? We will get to that here.

This treaty is the result of an illegal organization called the United Nations, started by the Rockefellers, the same family of Federal Reserve fame. An organization established to work around country laws and subvert constitutions. However that is but an aside, the real facts of the matter is how does these treaties even apply.

The first treaty was in 1961 but the Senate did not get around to ratification until 1967 by a vote of 88-0. Why the delay, we'll get to that. The second treaty was a "Protocol Amending" the 1961 treaty. The president sent to the Senate in May 1972 and the Senate ratified in September 1972 by a vote of 69-0. Now comes treaty three in 1988. The president sent this treaty to the Senate in June of 1989 with the Senate ratifying by "Division Vote" on November 22, 1989. Just what the heck is a division vote (a lie?):

Now what is extremely funny, there are no vote tallies at all on this consent. The final vote in the Senate by their records was vote 113 on November 21. There are no other votes recorded until Session 2 in January 1990. But that is another matter for another time and thread.

Back to the present and the question as yet unanswered. Where in the constitution is the power to effect this treaty?

Treaties are not amendments and if repugnant to the constitution hold no authority and are void on their faces.

Doesn't mention UN or any other treaty not ratified by three fourths of the states being law, it's just rhetoric and the plea of idiots.

 

Imagine that, all the little slaves allowed to consume alcohol. What's next, they going to be allowed to learn to read?

 

That's the ticket, a tax to stifle competition that doesn't pay the tax.

 

If based on your fake news articles, then it would seem so.



But by your implication, if one is reading a book, pauses and kills wife, then reading would be the cause.

 

You must be one of the suckers.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/19/news/colorado-marijuana-tax-revenue/index.html

 

Good afternoon, my time anyway. (-:

A small percentage of humanity are biologically predisposed to addictive behavior thus removing choice from the narrative. The path to addiction is often a very subtle thing, and by the time the addict becomes aware of their predicament it is too late. People become addicted to all sorts of things including gambling, sex, shopping etc. To believe that addiction is a matter of weak will is to be uninformed on the facts. Most people who use Alcohol, pot and even heroin (shocked me to find this out), use it responsibly, to judge all in a group by the actions of a small number within those groups is biased.

It is because of ignorance in our leaders as to how to effectively deal with the problem which has made the problem worse. The supply-side war on drugs is akin to pouring fuel on a fire, thinking it is water, and being perplexed as to why the fire exploded into an inferno! Ignorance of the issue by those in power is what has led to the failed policies that have made the problem worse.

I am sorry to hear that, no one should have to live like that.

 

Saying it is fake news does not make it fake news. Instead of labeling the news reports I posted as fake, how about objectively countering the claims made in the article?

How you arrived at that by anything that I have said is a mystery to me.

 

Marijuana is already recreationaly legal in Oregon and several other states as well as medicinal use.

 

In ready this information, it is clear the predisposition to addiction is a falsified myth, courtesy of many doctors and the Pharmaceutical Industry. It is ALL behavioral and more over psychological/mental. People neither use narcotics nor alcohol, because they are predisposed to do so. NO! Said people use alcohol and narcotics for recreational purposes and for emotional trauma and psychological trauma as a means to cope or hide their internal “pain”. I am not one to buy into the excuses given by either users or their benefactors, who are just as much of an emotional “vampire” as the addicts and users.

Also, in days of yore, the manner in which I view narcotics, alcohol, and other “addictions” was and still is referred to as “Tough Love”. If you make your bed, you have to lie in that same bed. In other words, NO EXCUSE IS ACCEPTABLE for marijuana usage in public. After all, this is the premise of my line of commentary. As I have stated time and again, I have no problem with being using narcotics or alcohol and sometimes both, as long as they keep their “habits” to themselves and remain behind closed doors. The problem begins when some of these same people bring their behaviors into “The Public Arena”.

The responses from “leaders” have nothing to do with ignorance, by and large. Said “leaders” know exactly what they are doing, which is to maintain their relevancy. It is every political, religious, and other types of person in “leadership” roles to maintain the grounds for their existence(s). It is these same types who are also complicit in the deterioration of society in general and as a whole. As to the “War on Drugs”, like “The War on Poverty”, it is a farce and ruse. There is no desire to eliminate, drugs, poverty and terrorism, because if these things were eliminated, the world as you and everyone else knows it, would come to its well-deserved end.

I did not mention the statement of the negative impact of the behaviors of some, on ALL Black people as a whole, for sympathy or empathy. I mentioned it to clarify the point of the usage of narcotics, marijuana being one, on the well-being of others. This is my main contention with Liberals/Progressives it seems that said types have no regard to others and their genuine well-being due to the inordinate selfishness of the Liberal/Progressive ideology. It is a shame that too many Black people follow such disgusting thinking, which is one of the reasons why in the areas that said types of Black people dwell, there a multiple social problems that accompany them.

 

Nah, I'll leave that up to you. Not sure what you link has to do with my comment, do you?

 

If it went over your head I fully understand.

 

Error

 

What an idiotic conclusion to a totally delusional statement. A vehicle with flashing lights and siren comes up behind you but you are the object of another's attention. I would say you have an opinion of a worth unjustly perceived. But thank you for letting us know the value of your contributions, all delusion.

 

Say what you please, but it is a well-known fact that when a Black person is present and police officers or sirens are present, that MOST White people automatically perceive or conclude that the sirens and the police are on seen because of said Black person. It is not my problem that you and others are have a tendency to deny or belittle the reality of your own so-called racial animist against Black people. This is also a reality when it comes to many immigrant blacks; they hold similar ideas about Black people who are the children of the former slaves of the United States of [North] America. In all honesty, they are worse than many bad Black folks from this country. All of the aforementioned comes from my own personal experiences. Take it or let it alone.

 

It doesn't matter the narcotic treaties we signed considers Marijuana a narcotic on par with opium and therefore save for medical use and research under government control bans the drug and only enforcement is left up to the nation in question and since we pushed to have this drug made a Class 1 Narcotic in the treaties we need to keep the ban in place. Further except for FDA approved medical uses not state level I would ban and crack down on the drug (production, sale and distribution) but leave personal growing for a medical issue (not sale or distribution) and small amounts carried up to State and local LE. Anyway you legalize it the street vendors who care less about the law will still sell it save now its cheaper since they would reduce the price a little and not charge the tax and LE won't bother since now its a tax evasion issue and small potatoes to going after hard street drugs. It happened in Colorado a couple distant cousins are pulling in $20k a month each selling pot and the LE don't care since its legal now as long as he doesn't sell to underage people he could make more doing that but well LE then would be an issue. This would likely be the case anywhere else if the tax is high say 50% their pot would be 50% cheaper and likely marked down a tad more for the same product its simple economics and LE rarely bothers the underground businessman whose a local and not being too obvious now for cash only under the table business why would pot be different?

 

You got your answer but it is not my fault you don't want to accept it. CBS, Crap Broadcasting System has been broadcasting crap for ever such as:

Imagine those lawyers, sorry legislatures, looking to rob someone, claiming they rob with such a small concentration, but this kid that wanted to commit suicide does so because he became mellow with barely over that which would get you a large fine. And imagine this whole pronunciation is endorsed by some liberal professor at Colorado University. Wonder how many idiots that had to call before one proclaimed he was an idiot. Good old fake news network.

But hey, why should CBS or CNN actually confirm something before they publish, fake news. They have an agenda, fake news.

But hey look,

Yeah, no fake news at all, just the progressive view that everyone else is always responsible for THEIR actions.

Now you are the one trying to plead they aren't fake news, prove it!!!

​

 

You fully stand under what? A porch, a tree limb? As you're not here, they couldn't go over my head. Perhaps you are delusional.

 

Sound to me like you have some sort of guilt complex. Are you falsely implying that no one ever looks up to see what type of emergency vehicle is making all that noise? And in reality, did anyone actually even notice you were there?

Black racism is because blacks want it that way. If they were to let it go they would feel an air of injustice that no one wants to atoll for actions of those long dead.

 

So you would be so kind as to tell another how they should lead their lives. Should we bow in your presence? Should we built alters for burnt sacrifices?

That's all we need in this world, another small minded soul that believes they are a god and can dictate another's life when more than likely they can't even manage their own.

 

Our nation declared it a opiate level narcotic in treaty which means it bears as much weight as the US Constitution itself and insisted it be included for us to sign it, so saying we by example should declare it illegal and crack down on it at least Federally isn't wrong its in fact consistent. Now if you go and amend the treaty so its no longer considered to be a dangerous narcotic then fine the government can then legalize it, but until then, it and all money from it is considered illegal under our international commitments by treaty. Seriously do you not get that treaty equals highest law of the land and therefore enforceable by the Federal government who so far has been kind in not doing so. I would argue they are in violation of US international commitments and need to act in accord with our obligations enforcing it and the FDA can for experimental medical study allow it for medical uses under their office and it would on paper be lawful.

 

People it's already legal in many states..

Seriously you are arguing about treaties being broken when it's already legal to over 200+ million Americans every day..

Lol..... For real.. Get a clue.

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/state-marijuana-laws-map-medical-recreational.html

 

Sadly when it comes to causality of addiction there is no consensus. From my POV to penalize all for the actions of some in the form of a continuation of prohibition is an overreaction. Prohibition makes the issue worse, not better. I think we need to try something new like harm reduction. By the way, I appreciate your concision and civility. You make some good arguments.