Using Obama's successful lawsuit against Arizona enforce Federal laws will support ICE enforcement

[jc456]

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's S.B. 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement who wished to enforce federal immigration laws. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement.
Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

It went to the Supreme Court and SCOTUS found Arizona could not usurp Federal government's authority.

So Calif. refusal to obey Federal ICE activities are taken to SCOTUS and the case will NOT be heard as the
above decision upheld the right of the Federal Government over the State regarding immigration enforcement.

Congress has yet to write a bill and sign into law what is a Sanctuary City. Without a legal approved definition there is no legal way to determine which cities are Sanctuary and which ones aren't. It's arbitrary. Then they would have to write laws and sign them into law regarding what to do with Sanctuary cities. Until then it's just another Republican dog & pony show.

You can't be cited for speeding ticket if there is no written law regarding speeding. Nor would you be forced to pay a fine or penalized without that law.

Now if California did actually interfere into ICE deportations by writing state laws that would inhibit ICE agents from doing their jobs, there may be an issue for them. But Governor Brown is denying those accusations. We'll see?

“This is basically going to war against the state of California."Governor Brown says Jeff Sessions’ claim that California’s laws are endangering the public is a lie. “Simply, not true. And I call upon him to apologize to the people of California, to bringing the mendacity of Washington to California and trying to insert discord and division.” Sessions announced a lawsuit filed against the state for laws passed last year that he says prevents federal immigration agents from doing their job. A claim the governor denies.

Governor Responds To Sessions Immigration Lawsuit: "Basically Going To War"

Jeff Sessions has been known to LIE before. Several times under oath.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions may be facing perjury charges.

what is the definition of a sanctuary city or state? I know that Governor goofball stated california is a sanctuary state. therefore, he is governing the state as such. And as such sets precedence to the issue and the suit is therefore very legal. And, we know by video that the mayor of Oakland aided and abetted illegals during the last ice raid. I would have locked her sorry as for harboring criminals.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's S.B. 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement who wished to enforce federal immigration laws. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement.
Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

It went to the Supreme Court and SCOTUS found Arizona could not usurp Federal government's authority.

So Calif. refusal to obey Federal ICE activities are taken to SCOTUS and the case will NOT be heard as the
above decision upheld the right of the Federal Government over the State regarding immigration enforcement.

Do you see any difference between the sanctuary city situation and the legal pot situation?

The states cannot *usurp* federal authority when it comes to national security and border protection.

Aside from that primary control should remain at the local level. It should be the state to decide the bulk of their laws.

What’s the difference between the mayor warning against an ICE raid versus the mayor warning, now legal pot growers, against a federal raid on pot farms?

That’s soooo weird...look everybody....in a feeble attempt to blur the issue, Slade3200 is working his ass off to inject semantics.
Look, the GOP is doing what the good people of this nation have asked them to do...aggressively enforce immigration and deportation laws. That’s number one to good people right now...we want to see ALL energy exhausted there...THEN we’ll move on to lowlife stoners. TA-DA!

I’m not working my ass off at all, I haven’t even stayed a position on the matter. I’m asking a very simple and relevant question that you don’t seem to want to address. If there is a difference between the two then just simply state what it is. Try staying on subject for a change and stop injecting your partisan hate bullshit into every conversation.

I’ll play your game of riddles.
There is no difference, one is of greater priority right now. Only stoners, lowlifes and criminals want weed legalized. Sane people can see beyond the tip of their nose.

I’d argue that people who value personal liberty and freedom also support legalization of pot... also anybody with a sense of sanity. It is the most common sense thing to do to save our economy and defund criminals

Sooo, are we on to weed now?
You do realize that all the underground weed dealers are still in business...right? So there goes your hope to defund criminals.
You do realize that dispensaries are all cash businesses...right?
All cash businesses attract criminals...you know this...right?
What percentage of sales/income are the owners of dispensaries, whom are not Billy Graham types reporting? So there goes your hope to “save the economy”.

This is all so bizarre....so, you “kind of” support illegals and amnesty and you support the legalization of drugs? Hmmm, I’m certain you’re an awesome American...so predictable.

 

[busybee01]

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's S.B. 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement who wished to enforce federal immigration laws. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement.
Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

It went to the Supreme Court and SCOTUS found Arizona could not usurp Federal government's authority.

So Calif. refusal to obey Federal ICE activities are taken to SCOTUS and the case will NOT be heard as the
above decision upheld the right of the Federal Government over the State regarding immigration enforcement.

rce immigratio
Correction. The entire law was not thrown out. Certain parts were retained. I think the part that requires state and local police not to cooperate with ICE will survive. The federal government can deputize local police entities to enforce immigration but they admit that they cannot force them to do it. There is a rational for the law.

 

[busybee01]

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's S.B. 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement who wished to enforce federal immigration laws. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement.
Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

It went to the Supreme Court and SCOTUS found Arizona could not usurp Federal government's authority.

So Calif. refusal to obey Federal ICE activities are taken to SCOTUS and the case will NOT be heard as the
above decision upheld the right of the Federal Government over the State regarding immigration enforcement.

Do you see any difference between the sanctuary city situation and the legal pot situation?

The states cannot *usurp* federal authority when it comes to national security and border protection.

Aside from that primary control should remain at the local level. It should be the state to decide the bulk of their laws.

What’s the difference between the mayor warning against an ICE raid versus the mayor warning, now legal pot growers, against a federal raid on pot farms?

That’s soooo weird...look everybody....in a feeble attempt to blur the issue, Slade3200 is working his ass off to inject semantics.
Look, the GOP is doing what the good people of this nation have asked them to do...aggressively enforce immigration and deportation laws. That’s number one to good people right now...we want to see ALL energy exhausted there...THEN we’ll move on to lowlife stoners. TA-DA!

No they are not. Americans overwhelmingly support DACA and legalization of illegals. A full 25% of voters voted against the other candidate. These voters went for Trump.

 

[healthmyths]

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's S.B. 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement who wished to enforce federal immigration laws. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement.
Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

It went to the Supreme Court and SCOTUS found Arizona could not usurp Federal government's authority.

So Calif. refusal to obey Federal ICE activities are taken to SCOTUS and the case will NOT be heard as the
above decision upheld the right of the Federal Government over the State regarding immigration enforcement.

Do you see any difference between the sanctuary city situation and the legal pot situation?

The states cannot *usurp* federal authority when it comes to national security and border protection.

Aside from that primary control should remain at the local level. It should be the state to decide the bulk of their laws.

What’s the difference between the mayor warning against an ICE raid versus the mayor warning, now legal pot growers, against a federal raid on pot farms?

That’s soooo weird...look everybody....in a feeble attempt to blur the issue, Slade3200 is working his ass off to inject semantics.
Look, the GOP is doing what the good people of this nation have asked them to do...aggressively enforce immigration and deportation laws. That’s number one to good people right now...we want to see ALL energy exhausted there...THEN we’ll move on to lowlife stoners. TA-DA!

No they are not. Americans overwhelmingly support DACA and legalization of illegals. A full 25% of voters voted against the other candidate. These voters went for Trump.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's S.B. 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement who wished to enforce federal immigration laws. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement.
Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

It went to the Supreme Court and SCOTUS found Arizona could not usurp Federal government's authority.

So Calif. refusal to obey Federal ICE activities are taken to SCOTUS and the case will NOT be heard as the
above decision upheld the right of the Federal Government over the State regarding immigration enforcement.

Do you see any difference between the sanctuary city situation and the legal pot situation?

The states cannot *usurp* federal authority when it comes to national security and border protection.

Aside from that primary control should remain at the local level. It should be the state to decide the bulk of their laws.

What’s the difference between the mayor warning against an ICE raid versus the mayor warning, now legal pot growers, against a federal raid on pot farms?

That’s soooo weird...look everybody....in a feeble attempt to blur the issue, Slade3200 is working his ass off to inject semantics.
Look, the GOP is doing what the good people of this nation have asked them to do...aggressively enforce immigration and deportation laws. That’s number one to good people right now...we want to see ALL energy exhausted there...THEN we’ll move on to lowlife stoners. TA-DA!

No they are not. Americans overwhelmingly support DACA and legalization of illegals. A full 25% of voters voted against the other candidate. These voters went for Trump.

Negative
Trump won 30 states and 2,623 counties on an aggressive “**** ILLEGALS” platform.
But suddenly we all ******* love illegals huh? Funny shit.
Think of how ******* retarded that sounds.
You’re claiming that “most Americans” don’t support constitutional adherence?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” want to support federal criminals?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” prefer to fund foreigners when we have plenty of our own to fund?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” are fine with the mass degradation of neighborhoods and communities caused by thirdworld minded filth?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” prefer to live among dependent thirdworlders that don’t speak our language?
STOP for a minute bud and listen to how ******* stupid it all sounds...no one sane can possibly believe that shit.

 

[Slade3200]

Do you see any difference between the sanctuary city situation and the legal pot situation?

What’s the difference between the mayor warning against an ICE raid versus the mayor warning, now legal pot growers, against a federal raid on pot farms?

That’s soooo weird...look everybody....in a feeble attempt to blur the issue, Slade3200 is working his ass off to inject semantics.
Look, the GOP is doing what the good people of this nation have asked them to do...aggressively enforce immigration and deportation laws. That’s number one to good people right now...we want to see ALL energy exhausted there...THEN we’ll move on to lowlife stoners. TA-DA!

I’m not working my ass off at all, I haven’t even stayed a position on the matter. I’m asking a very simple and relevant question that you don’t seem to want to address. If there is a difference between the two then just simply state what it is. Try staying on subject for a change and stop injecting your partisan hate bullshit into every conversation.

I’ll play your game of riddles.
There is no difference, one is of greater priority right now. Only stoners, lowlifes and criminals want weed legalized. Sane people can see beyond the tip of their nose.

I’d argue that people who value personal liberty and freedom also support legalization of pot... also anybody with a sense of sanity. It is the most common sense thing to do to save our economy and defund criminals

Sooo, are we on to weed now?
You do realize that all the underground weed dealers are still in business...right? So there goes your hope to defund criminals.
You do realize that dispensaries are all cash businesses...right?
All cash businesses attract criminals...you know this...right?
What percentage of sales/income are the owners of dispensaries, whom are not Billy Graham types reporting? So there goes your hope to “save the economy”.

This is all so bizarre....so, you “kind of” support illegals and amnesty and you support the legalization of drugs? Hmmm, I’m certain you’re an awesome American...so predictable.

Wow, now you’re just sounding dumb. All the underground weed dealers are still in business?! Really? Right cause granny would rather get her edibles from a guy on a street corner over going into a despensory.

You are right with the cash element of the weed businesses which only exists like it does because it is still a federal crime. If it was legalized nationally and properly regulated like the tobacco industry then those problems go away. And the gangs that make all their money of the drug trade take a big hit. And the kids getting thrown in jail and getting criminal records for smoking and selling weed don’t have those issues anymore. If you can’t see the benefits to legalization then you are blind

 

[Slade3200]

This is all so bizarre....so, you “kind of” support illegals and amnesty and you support the legalization of drugs? Hmmm, I’m certain you’re an awesome American...so predictable.

I don’t support illegally entering our country. I’ve been pretty clear on that. Those who did should be held accountable and our immigration system needs to be improved.

As for legalizing drugs, how is that Anti-American? I though we were the land of the free? What’s free about drugs being illegal? Should we do the same for cigarettes and alcohol?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Red states passed more than 200 laws from 2009 until 2017 instructing their city and state employees to ignore federal gun regulations.

Oh cons you want your cake and to eat it too. The level of whining now is really getting out of hand though.

There's this thing called the 2nd Amendment.....you should check it out.

 

[healthmyths]

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's S.B. 1070, a state law intended to increase the powers of local law enforcement who wished to enforce federal immigration laws. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement.
Arizona v. United States - Wikipedia

It went to the Supreme Court and SCOTUS found Arizona could not usurp Federal government's authority.

So Calif. refusal to obey Federal ICE activities are taken to SCOTUS and the case will NOT be heard as the
above decision upheld the right of the Federal Government over the State regarding immigration enforcement.

Do you see any difference between the sanctuary city situation and the legal pot situation?

The states cannot *usurp* federal authority when it comes to national security and border protection.

Aside from that primary control should remain at the local level. It should be the state to decide the bulk of their laws.

What’s the difference between the mayor warning against an ICE raid versus the mayor warning, now legal pot growers, against a federal raid on pot farms?

That’s soooo weird...look everybody....in a feeble attempt to blur the issue, Slade3200 is working his ass off to inject semantics.
Look, the GOP is doing what the good people of this nation have asked them to do...aggressively enforce immigration and deportation laws. That’s number one to good people right now...we want to see ALL energy exhausted there...THEN we’ll move on to lowlife stoners. TA-DA!

No they are not. Americans overwhelmingly support DACA and legalization of illegals. A full 25% of voters voted against the other candidate. These voters went for Trump.

Negative
Trump won 30 states and 2,623 counties on an aggressive “**** ILLEGALS” platform.
But suddenly we all ******* love illegals huh? Funny shit.
Think of how ******* retarded that sounds.
You’re claiming that “most Americans” don’t support constitutional adherence?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” want to support federal criminals?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” prefer to fund foreigners when we have plenty of our own to fund?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” are fine with the mass degradation of neighborhoods and communities caused by thirdworld minded filth?
You’re claiming that “most Americans” prefer to live among dependent thirdworlders that don’t speak our language?
STOP for a minute bud and listen to how ******* stupid it all sounds...no one sane can possibly believe that shit.

From a CBS POLL...

The responding sample was then weighted based
on gender, age, race, education, 2012 and 2016 Presidential vote.
So once again BIASED in number as the GOP voter was outnumbered!
The above percents of 1,654 people polled show 645 Dems to 545 GOP!
Nation Tracker: Americans weigh in on Trump immigration remarks, first year in office

Again is it any wonder we don't believe polls, the MSM,etc.

Also that crap about more Dems then GOP... not true!
See the recent gallup poll..MORE GOP than Dems!
Party Affiliation

 

[BrokeLoser]

That’s soooo weird...look everybody....in a feeble attempt to blur the issue, Slade3200 is working his ass off to inject semantics.
Look, the GOP is doing what the good people of this nation have asked them to do...aggressively enforce immigration and deportation laws. That’s number one to good people right now...we want to see ALL energy exhausted there...THEN we’ll move on to lowlife stoners. TA-DA!

I’m not working my ass off at all, I haven’t even stayed a position on the matter. I’m asking a very simple and relevant question that you don’t seem to want to address. If there is a difference between the two then just simply state what it is. Try staying on subject for a change and stop injecting your partisan hate bullshit into every conversation.

I’ll play your game of riddles.
There is no difference, one is of greater priority right now. Only stoners, lowlifes and criminals want weed legalized. Sane people can see beyond the tip of their nose.

I’d argue that people who value personal liberty and freedom also support legalization of pot... also anybody with a sense of sanity. It is the most common sense thing to do to save our economy and defund criminals

Sooo, are we on to weed now?
You do realize that all the underground weed dealers are still in business...right? So there goes your hope to defund criminals.
You do realize that dispensaries are all cash businesses...right?
All cash businesses attract criminals...you know this...right?
What percentage of sales/income are the owners of dispensaries, whom are not Billy Graham types reporting? So there goes your hope to “save the economy”.

This is all so bizarre....so, you “kind of” support illegals and amnesty and you support the legalization of drugs? Hmmm, I’m certain you’re an awesome American...so predictable.

Wow, now you’re just sounding dumb. All the underground weed dealers are still in business?! Really? Right cause granny would rather get her edibles from a guy on a street corner over going into a despensory.

You are right with the cash element of the weed businesses which only exists like it does because it is still a federal crime. If it was legalized nationally and properly regulated like the tobacco industry then those problems go away. And the gangs that make all their money of the drug trade take a big hit. And the kids getting thrown in jail and getting criminal records for smoking and selling weed don’t have those issues anymore. If you can’t see the benefits to legalization then you are blind

Your circle talk is comical. I just schooled you on how you’re wrong in my last post. You’re right about one thing...granny and white collar, wealthy pussies get their weed from dispensaries...it feels like a more decent, legal act to them in obtaining it that way..for that they’ll pay $85 in cash for “medicinal”. Granny and attorney Joe represent the 1%.
Meanwhile the 98%’ers, DaShawn and Gustavo still go to their same old underground dealer for half the price. Come on man....pull your head out...simple shit here bud.
Look, all laws exist to protect filthy humans/Liberals from themselves. If lowlifes could do drugs in the privacy of their own homes and not impose their filth and financial responsibilities on others I’m sure there would be no such laws. Think once bud.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Red states passed more than 200 laws from 2009 until 2017 instructing their city and state employees to ignore federal gun regulations.

Oh cons you want your cake and to eat it too. The level of whining now is really getting out of hand though.

View attachment 181429

You are adverse to work like most conservatives. I've posted this numerous times, search this site. The information is readily available by a simple net search.

I'm guessing you are too lazy and aren't very interested in reading or absorbing facts like most of your cohort.

 

[healthmyths]

Red states passed more than 200 laws from 2009 until 2017 instructing their city and state employees to ignore federal gun regulations.

Oh cons you want your cake and to eat it too. The level of whining now is really getting out of hand though.

View attachment 181429

You are adverse to work like most conservatives. I've posted this numerous times, search this site. The information is readily available by a simple net search.

I'm guessing you are too lazy and aren't very interested in reading or absorbing facts like most of your cohort.

You us an avatar of IssacNewton which really shows you how dumb YOU ARE!
Of course it is available by a simple net search! But idiots like you depend on people like me to counter and when you are totally discredited you shut up!
My comments that I usually put on as I did with the first comment HAVE links so people don't have to believe me because I am more of a scholar evidently than you are!

In 1687, he published his most acclaimed work, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), which has been called the single most influential book on physics. In 1705, he was knighted by Queen Anne of England, making him Sir Isaac Newton.Aug 1, 2017

Isaac Newton

NOW for some idiot like you to ***** and moan about YOU having to prove YOUR comments and then have the gall to use Isaac Newton avatar .... talk about stupid!

Do your scholar activities and don't depend on people to simply believe your crap.
Prove to me with YOUR links you idiocy! Prove IT Other wise:

 

[healthmyths]

http://gunwars.news21.com/2014/eight-states-have-passed-laws-voiding-federal-firearms-regulations/

More than three-quarters of U.S. states have proposed nullification laws since 2008. More than half of those bills have come in the last two years after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. All but three have been introduced since President Barack Obama took office.

Read the article very closely and you will comprehend the rationale for opposing Federal mandated gun laws!

 

[IsaacNewton]

Red states passed more than 200 laws from 2009 until 2017 instructing their city and state employees to ignore federal gun regulations.

Oh cons you want your cake and to eat it too. The level of whining now is really getting out of hand though.

View attachment 181429

You are adverse to work like most conservatives. I've posted this numerous times, search this site. The information is readily available by a simple net search.

I'm guessing you are too lazy and aren't very interested in reading or absorbing facts like most of your cohort.

You us an avatar of IssacNewton which really shows you how dumb YOU ARE!
Of course it is available by a simple net search! But idiots like you depend on people like me to counter and when you are totally discredited you shut up!
My comments that I usually put on as I did with the first comment HAVE links so people don't have to believe me because I am more of a scholar evidently than you are!

In 1687, he published his most acclaimed work, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), which has been called the single most influential book on physics. In 1705, he was knighted by Queen Anne of England, making him Sir Isaac Newton.Aug 1, 2017

Isaac Newton

NOW for some idiot like you to ***** and moan about YOU having to prove YOUR comments and then have the gall to use Isaac Newton avatar .... talk about stupid!

Do your scholar activities and don't depend on people to simply believe your crap.
Prove to me with YOUR links you idiocy! Prove IT Other wise:
View attachment 181544

You can tell how weak a person's argument is by how large the font they use. Laughable.

You're lazy, just live with it.

 

[healthmyths]

Red states passed more than 200 laws from 2009 until 2017 instructing their city and state employees to ignore federal gun regulations.

Oh cons you want your cake and to eat it too. The level of whining now is really getting out of hand though.

View attachment 181429

You are adverse to work like most conservatives. I've posted this numerous times, search this site. The information is readily available by a simple net search.

I'm guessing you are too lazy and aren't very interested in reading or absorbing facts like most of your cohort.

You us an avatar of IssacNewton which really shows you how dumb YOU ARE!
Of course it is available by a simple net search! But idiots like you depend on people like me to counter and when you are totally discredited you shut up!
My comments that I usually put on as I did with the first comment HAVE links so people don't have to believe me because I am more of a scholar evidently than you are!

In 1687, he published his most acclaimed work, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), which has been called the single most influential book on physics. In 1705, he was knighted by Queen Anne of England, making him Sir Isaac Newton.Aug 1, 2017

Isaac Newton

NOW for some idiot like you to ***** and moan about YOU having to prove YOUR comments and then have the gall to use Isaac Newton avatar .... talk about stupid!

Do your scholar activities and don't depend on people to simply believe your crap.
Prove to me with YOUR links you idiocy! Prove IT Other wise:
View attachment 181544

You can tell how weak a person's argument is by how large the font they use. Laughable.

You're lazy, just live with it.

Oh wow! Another pithy observation! Thank goodness the Real Newton wasn't such a lame ignoramus as you are evidencing.

Again... where is your PROOF for your stupid statement that font size is an indirect ratio to an argument's strength?

 

[Slade3200]

I’m not working my ass off at all, I haven’t even stayed a position on the matter. I’m asking a very simple and relevant question that you don’t seem to want to address. If there is a difference between the two then just simply state what it is. Try staying on subject for a change and stop injecting your partisan hate bullshit into every conversation.

I’ll play your game of riddles.
There is no difference, one is of greater priority right now. Only stoners, lowlifes and criminals want weed legalized. Sane people can see beyond the tip of their nose.

I’d argue that people who value personal liberty and freedom also support legalization of pot... also anybody with a sense of sanity. It is the most common sense thing to do to save our economy and defund criminals

Sooo, are we on to weed now?
You do realize that all the underground weed dealers are still in business...right? So there goes your hope to defund criminals.
You do realize that dispensaries are all cash businesses...right?
All cash businesses attract criminals...you know this...right?
What percentage of sales/income are the owners of dispensaries, whom are not Billy Graham types reporting? So there goes your hope to “save the economy”.

This is all so bizarre....so, you “kind of” support illegals and amnesty and you support the legalization of drugs? Hmmm, I’m certain you’re an awesome American...so predictable.

Wow, now you’re just sounding dumb. All the underground weed dealers are still in business?! Really? Right cause granny would rather get her edibles from a guy on a street corner over going into a despensory.

You are right with the cash element of the weed businesses which only exists like it does because it is still a federal crime. If it was legalized nationally and properly regulated like the tobacco industry then those problems go away. And the gangs that make all their money of the drug trade take a big hit. And the kids getting thrown in jail and getting criminal records for smoking and selling weed don’t have those issues anymore. If you can’t see the benefits to legalization then you are blind

Your circle talk is comical. I just schooled you on how you’re wrong in my last post. You’re right about one thing...granny and white collar, wealthy pussies get their weed from dispensaries...it feels like a more decent, legal act to them in obtaining it that way..for that they’ll pay $85 in cash for “medicinal”. Granny and attorney Joe represent the 1%.
Meanwhile the 98%’ers, DaShawn and Gustavo still go to their same old underground dealer for half the price. Come on man....pull your head out...simple shit here bud.
Look, all laws exist to protect filthy humans/Liberals from themselves. If lowlifes could do drugs in the privacy of their own homes and not impose their filth and financial responsibilities on others I’m sure there would be no such laws. Think once bud.

You didn’t school shit. What kind of fantasy land are you living in? You keep dodging the simple point that legalization is more true to liberty and a free society. You dodge my question about alcohol and cigarettes, and you fail to acknowledge a basic understanding of the effects that legalization will and has already had on the economy and criminal justice system. You’re over your head and you really don’t understand how legalizatizatuin has effected state economy’s. No it’s not the 1% granny’s and lawyers that go to dispensaries. You just made that shit up. Nice try, but you fail

 

[BrokeLoser]

I’ll play your game of riddles.
There is no difference, one is of greater priority right now. Only stoners, lowlifes and criminals want weed legalized. Sane people can see beyond the tip of their nose.

I’d argue that people who value personal liberty and freedom also support legalization of pot... also anybody with a sense of sanity. It is the most common sense thing to do to save our economy and defund criminals

Sooo, are we on to weed now?
You do realize that all the underground weed dealers are still in business...right? So there goes your hope to defund criminals.
You do realize that dispensaries are all cash businesses...right?
All cash businesses attract criminals...you know this...right?
What percentage of sales/income are the owners of dispensaries, whom are not Billy Graham types reporting? So there goes your hope to “save the economy”.

This is all so bizarre....so, you “kind of” support illegals and amnesty and you support the legalization of drugs? Hmmm, I’m certain you’re an awesome American...so predictable.

Wow, now you’re just sounding dumb. All the underground weed dealers are still in business?! Really? Right cause granny would rather get her edibles from a guy on a street corner over going into a despensory.

You are right with the cash element of the weed businesses which only exists like it does because it is still a federal crime. If it was legalized nationally and properly regulated like the tobacco industry then those problems go away. And the gangs that make all their money of the drug trade take a big hit. And the kids getting thrown in jail and getting criminal records for smoking and selling weed don’t have those issues anymore. If you can’t see the benefits to legalization then you are blind

Your circle talk is comical. I just schooled you on how you’re wrong in my last post. You’re right about one thing...granny and white collar, wealthy pussies get their weed from dispensaries...it feels like a more decent, legal act to them in obtaining it that way..for that they’ll pay $85 in cash for “medicinal”. Granny and attorney Joe represent the 1%.
Meanwhile the 98%’ers, DaShawn and Gustavo still go to their same old underground dealer for half the price. Come on man....pull your head out...simple shit here bud.
Look, all laws exist to protect filthy humans/Liberals from themselves. If lowlifes could do drugs in the privacy of their own homes and not impose their filth and financial responsibilities on others I’m sure there would be no such laws. Think once bud.

You didn’t school shit. What kind of fantasy land are you living in? You keep dodging the simple point that legalization is more true to liberty and a free society. You dodge my question about alcohol and cigarettes, and you fail to acknowledge a basic understanding of the effects that legalization will and has already had on the economy and criminal justice system. You’re over your head and you really don’t understand how legalizatizatuin has effected state economy’s. No it’s not the 1% granny’s and lawyers that go to dispensaries. You just made that shit up. Nice try, but you fail

I didn’t dodge your question at all...stay focused...remember, I said we can’t have that no boundaries, anything goes society you Lefties desire so much because you can’t be trusted to make good decisions...decisions which don’t cost and affect others....you must be saved from yourselves through law and order. If we had a nation of good, decent people we wouldn’t have half the laws we have...lowlife, filthy ***** ruin it for all of us.
“You’re over your head and you really don’t understand how legalizatizatuin has effected state economy’s.“
Your premise is typical LefTard shit....”Hey let’s make heroin legal so the government can make money on it.”
That always the play, the angle used for dirty, lowlife, immoral ***** and addicts to get their fix legally and without criminal repercussions.
Are you thinking we should legalize anything so long as .gov can work an angle and make money? **** it, let’s legalize prostitution and have .gov regulate it...cocaine and heroin as well...**** it.
Your “but, but, but cigarettes and alcohol” bullshit.....you sound like my teenager....”but dad, since you let me go to birthday parties, why shouldn’t you let me go to kegers?”
Think boundaries bud.