Is this the begining of the end of prohibition

[OKTexas]

You need not be a stoner to recognize that the laws against marijuana need to be repealed. Both medicinal and recreational.

This should be addressed by congress, not the executive just pissing on the laws they are sworn to uphold. How much more lawlessness are you willing to accept from this administration?

In your subjective, personal opinion, not as a matter of fact.

If Congress believes its authority is being usurped by the Executive, the Legislative Branch is at liberty to act.

Otherwise, the Administration is free to interpret laws passed by Congress and enforce those laws accordingly – there’s nothing in the Constitution or its case law that compels the Executive to blindly enforce laws absent interpretation, and such interpretations are Constitutional until a Federal court rules otherwise.

The executive signs off on every law passed, if they have a problem with the way it is written a veto is the solution, not ignoring aspects they don't particularly like. Also when you can tell me there is no case law that isn't contrary to the constitution then case law could have sway on my opinion. However there is plenty of case law in support of existing drug laws so it would be your dear leader ignoring it, the courts have already spoken.

 

[OKTexas]

Prosecutorial discretion is a cornerstone of our legal system.

Prosecutorial discretion can only be used on a case by case basis, not as a license to excuse a whole class of criminals acts. The president is charged with the faithful execution of the law, nothing in the constitution gives him the authority to pick and chose, doing so is an abuse of power.

Nonsense.

As an example, it's illegal to "jaywalk" in NYC, but the NYPD has a standing policy to not enforce that law.

That is an example of selective enforcement not prosecutorial discretion. The constitution does not give the president the power to selectively enforce federal law. Prosecutors have the discretion to plea bargain a case taking into consideration circumstances or dismiss a case altogether, discretion is used after enforcement has taken place.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Prosecutorial discretion is a cornerstone of our legal system.

Prosecutorial discretion can only be used on a case by case basis, not as a license to excuse a whole class of criminals acts. The president is charged with the faithful execution of the law, nothing in the constitution gives him the authority to pick and chose, doing so is an abuse of power.

Nonsense.

As an example, it's illegal to "jaywalk" in NYC, but the NYPD has a standing policy to not enforce that law.

Correct.

And law enforcement entities – from the AG to the local sheriff’s department – are also at liberty to interpret the laws and enforce the laws in the context of prosecutorial discretion.

If legislative entities disagree with how their laws are being interpreted and enforced, they may amend and/or rewrite legislation to clarify their intent.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Some lawyer somewhere will invoke the 14th Amendment to defend his client against a marijuana possession charge and that will be the end of prohibition.

 

[Flopper]

This should be addressed by congress, not the executive just pissing on the laws they are sworn to uphold. How much more lawlessness are you willing to accept from this administration?

Prosecutorial discretion is a cornerstone of our legal system.

Prosecutorial discretion can only be used on a case by case basis, not as a license to excuse a whole class of criminals acts. The president is charged with the faithful execution of the law, nothing in the constitution gives him the authority to pick and chose, doing so is an abuse of power.

Every administration must pick and choose how federal resource will be used. In the 1950's communism was viewed as the greatest threat to the nation and that's where federal law enforcement were most focused. Drugs took a back seat until the late 70's and 80's. Terrorism became the focus in 1990's. There is never enough resources to do justice to all laws and it's the president's responsibility to decide how those resources will be best used.

As a practical matter, the DEA is very dependent on the help and support of local law enforcement and the community. Where marijuana usage and sales has been legalized locally the support for enforcing federal laws in regard to marijuana disappears.

 

[Avatar4321]

You need not be a stoner to recognize that the laws against marijuana need to be repealed. Both medicinal and recreational.

This should be addressed by congress, not the executive just pissing on the laws they are sworn to uphold. How much more lawlessness are you willing to accept from this administration?

you make a good point, however, why should the executive branch uphold unconstitutional laws? should a DA prosecute crimes that are unconstitutional?

yes, i am making the argument that prohibition on marijuana is unconstitutional.

Im curious about your argument. I know if I were the government, I'd be arguing interestate commerce clause, though if I was trying to argue it was unconstitutional id probably argue limited scope to the commerce clause. Im curious where you are falling on this.

 

[Avatar4321]

Some lawyer somewhere will invoke the 14th Amendment to defend his client against a marijuana possession charge and that will be the end of prohibition.

I would love to hear the reasoning behind it. Because I've got alot of clients who would benefit if it was overturned.

 

[thanatos144]

I will never vote to legalize pot in my state.

 

[Avatar4321]

I will never vote to legalize pot in my state.

Nor would I. but I might consider making it a summary offense rather than a misdemeanor.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The end of one kind, the beginning of another. Cities will be able to pass whatever kund of prohibition they want. Surprisingly Inglewood went for prohibition. In Colorado Springs, they went for prohibition too. Naturally individuals will practice whatever kind of prohibition they deem necessary. I, for instance, have zero tolerance.

Colorado Springs? I spent a month there one week. January, 2002 at the Broadmore for VAWA Conference. I, BTW, have zero tolerance for you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I will never vote to legalize pot in my state.

Why?

 

[bucs90]

You love getting high we get it. Jeez....

You need not be a stoner to recognize that the laws against marijuana need to be repealed. Both medicinal and recreational.

This should be addressed by congress, not the executive just pissing on the laws they are sworn to uphold. How much more lawlessness are you willing to accept from this administration?

By YOUR logic, the city cops should be hammering down on jaywalkers. Yep. Cant let one jaywalker slide. OH, and every speeder....EVERY speeder...even if it is only 1 mph over, MUST be stopped and ticketed.

By YOUR logic, discretion should not be allowed to those who "are sworn to uphold" the law. Right? I mean, if not, then which laws are we gonna allow them to be sworn to uphold and not?

You sound awfully tyrannical right now. This is a step towards MORE FREEDOM, not less.

You Tea Party types support that, right?

Or do you want cops cracking down on every single law in the books, EVERY single time they see one violated???

If the government is too big, and needs to be cut down to size....like you RW'ers say...then some services are gonna have to be cut. Weed enforcement by the Feds is, and SHOULD, be among the ones cut.

 

[bucs90]

This should be addressed by congress, not the executive just pissing on the laws they are sworn to uphold. How much more lawlessness are you willing to accept from this administration?

Prosecutorial discretion is a cornerstone of our legal system.

Prosecutorial discretion can only be used on a case by case basis, not as a license to excuse a whole class of criminals acts. The president is charged with the faithful execution of the law, nothing in the constitution gives him the authority to pick and chose, doing so is an abuse of power.

WRONG AGAIN

Its extremely common for Police Chiefs and Sheriffs to issue blanket enforcement policies to their men. Like telling police officers "We aren't going to write tickets for jaywalking. Period." Or "It is the policy of this department to issue only warnings for speeding of less than 5mph over the legal limit". Or like many cities passing texting-while-driving bans, chiefs saying they will only write warnings for the first year.

The single biggest protection we have against stupid and/or tyrannical laws is the DESCRETION granted to those who enforce it.

Executives....whether it be a mayor, police chief, sheriff, city attorney, or the friggin' President of the United States.........have the right to issue blanket policy guidelines for enforcement of law.

That is...unless you are ready for the tyrannical crackdown on all the laws on the books? You should be applauding the Feds on this move towards MORE freedom. Funny.....Im not shocked the TP types aren't doing that.

 

[eagle1462010]

Isn't it amazing....................

That when Obama and the Dems of the Federal Gov't finally believe in State's Rights it's to SMOKE A JOINT.......................

You just can't make this shit up.

The Irony.

LMAO................................

 

[Katzndogz]

Individuals simply have to enforce their own rules. If your kid uses pot throw them out. Don't let it in your home or your life. Practice shunning. Call the police. File complaints against your neighbors. Start some trouble. Work for bans in your city, homeowner's associations, apartment buildings, offices. If it's legal just hound them away until the only place they can be is their own little cities. Treat pot like cigarettes.

All this rolling over because a few potheads got a vote in two states is silly.

 

[bucs90]

Isn't it amazing....................

That when Obama and the Dems of the Federal Gov't finally believe in State's Rights it's to SMOKE A JOINT.......................

You just can't make this shit up.

The Irony.

LMAO................................

Its so ironic, its hard to even interpret it. I mean really, you put it perfect.

This is a move to allow more freedom, more states rights. And the tea party idiots are mad about it? All of a sudden, they WANT the government enforcing all laws to the letter of the law, with no discretion.

So, do they not believe the shit they preach? OR, are they willing to throw their beliefs out the window just to smear the black guy in the White House?

 

[Katzndogz]

Isn't it amazing....................

That when Obama and the Dems of the Federal Gov't finally believe in State's Rights it's to SMOKE A JOINT.......................

You just can't make this shit up.

The Irony.

LMAO................................

A drugged society is a compliant society. Especially when the authorities can start the drug use early.

 

[bucs90]

Individuals simply have to enforce their own rules. If your kid uses pot throw them out. Don't let it in your home or your life. Practice shunning. Call the police. File complaints against your neighbors. Start some trouble. Work for bans in your city, homeowner's associations, apartment buildings, offices. If it's legal just hound them away until the only place they can be is their own little cities. Treat pot like cigarettes.

All this rolling over because a few potheads got a vote in two states is silly.

Yeah right. Lots of people think the answer to all lifes little problems is "call the police" and "file complaints on your neighbors".

The cops aren't the annoyance and nuisance patrol. Try that tactic, and you'll end up being charged for misuse of 911, or you'll be the caller ID number "that cried wolf" and they'll just stop coming.

Lots of rich folks in gated communities (Uh-hum, Buckhead, GA) try that tactic, to make the police their personal little HOA security guard.

And quite of few of them got a ticket for misuse of 911.....a couple even took the ride to county.

 

[OKTexas]

You need not be a stoner to recognize that the laws against marijuana need to be repealed. Both medicinal and recreational.

This should be addressed by congress, not the executive just pissing on the laws they are sworn to uphold. How much more lawlessness are you willing to accept from this administration?

By YOUR logic, the city cops should be hammering down on jaywalkers. Yep. Cant let one jaywalker slide. OH, and every speeder....EVERY speeder...even if it is only 1 mph over, MUST be stopped and ticketed.

By YOUR logic, discretion should not be allowed to those who "are sworn to uphold" the law. Right? I mean, if not, then which laws are we gonna allow them to be sworn to uphold and not?

You sound awfully tyrannical right now. This is a step towards MORE FREEDOM, not less.

You Tea Party types support that, right?

Or do you want cops cracking down on every single law in the books, EVERY single time they see one violated???

If the government is too big, and needs to be cut down to size....like you RW'ers say...then some services are gonna have to be cut. Weed enforcement by the Feds is, and SHOULD, be among the ones cut.

Well shit, then let's just eliminate the legislative branch since they seem to have no function and just let your dear fucking leader decide what should be an offense. The US Constitution says of the president, "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed", tell me what about that do you not understand?

You bitch and cry when other portions of the Constitution are violated but you have no problem with this, which makes you a hypocrite, I hold everyone to the letter of the Constitution regardless of the circumstance, that makes me consistent.

 

[eagle1462010]

Isn't it amazing....................

That when Obama and the Dems of the Federal Gov't finally believe in State's Rights it's to SMOKE A JOINT.......................

You just can't make this shit up.

The Irony.

LMAO................................

Its so ironic, its hard to even interpret it. I mean really, you put it perfect.

This is a move to allow more freedom, more states rights. And the tea party idiots are mad about it? All of a sudden, they WANT the government enforcing all laws to the letter of the law, with no discretion.

So, do they not believe the shit they preach? OR, are they willing to throw their beliefs out the window just to smear the black guy in the White House?

I support the Tea Party Patriots so consider me in the party of Idiots. While I'm glad you see the Irony of it all, you simply see it on the opposite spectrum.

The Irony is that finally Obama is concerned with State's Rights as he hasn't given a damn about them in the past.