Attorney General Jeff Sessions kicked off the New Year by reversing the Obama-era guidance for federal prosecutors to limit their enforcement of federal marijuana laws in states that have legalized marijuana for medical or recreational use. In what is almost certainly not a coincidence, Sessions’ announcement came days after California’s law legalizing recreational marijuana sales went into effect. Sessions’ action thus runs counter to the wishes of the majority of the people in the most populous US state, as well the people of the 28 other states (and DC) that have legalized some form of marijuana use.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Federal laws criminalizing marijuana and other drugs have failed to reduce drug use. However, they have succeeded in giving power-hungry politicians and bureaucrats what was, before 9-11, the go-to justification for violating our civil liberties. The federal war on marijuana has also wasted billions of taxpayer dollars. Far from reducing crime, outlawing drugs causes crime by ensuring criminals will control the market for drugs. Outlawing drugs also provides incentives for drug dealers to increase the potency, and thus the danger, of drugs, as higher potency products take up less space and are thus easier to conceal from law enforcement.
The US Constitution does not give the federal government any authority to criminalize marijuana. Thus, the question of whether marijuana is legal is one of the many issues reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment. If the Constitution gives Congress the power to ban marijuana, then why was it necessary to amend the Constitution to give Congress the power to ban alcohol?
Sessions’ usurpation of state marijuana laws is the type of federal intrusion into state issues usually opposed by conservatives. Sadly, too many conservatives are just as willing to sacrifice constitutional government and individual liberties for the war on drugs as they are for the war on terror.
Conservative hypocrisy is especially strong when it comes to medical marijuana. Many Americans have used medical marijuana for conditions such as cancer and glaucoma. Yet many conservatives who (properly) decry Obamacare’s mandate forcing every American to purchase health insurance cheer Jeff Sessions’ effort to deprive suffering individuals of the medical treatment of their choice. Cruel paternalism in healthcare policy is often associated with progressives, but unfortunately conservatives are just as guilty.
States that have legalized medical marijuana have fewer deaths related to opioid abuse. These states have also experienced a decrease in crime and black market activity. This is perhaps because some have found medical marijuana a viable alternative to opioids.
Laws outlawing marijuana criminalize peaceful behavior that, while potentially harmful to the individual, does not violate the rights of others. Therefore, these laws, like all laws authorizing government force against peaceful, if immoral, actions, are incompatible with a free society. Once again we see the hypocrisy of conservatives who decry progressives’ war on tobacco and fatty foods, yet support jailing marijuana users.
Federal laws outlawing marijuana violate the Constitution, justify violations of civil liberties, and increase violence. By criminalizing nonviolent behavior voluntarily chosen by individuals, drug laws undermine the moral principles underlying a free society.
President Trump should fire Jeff Sessions and replace him with someone who respects the Constitution and individual liberty. Also, officials from states with legal medical or recreational marijuana should refuse to cooperate with those tasked with enforcing federal marijuana laws. If President Trump and state officials stand up for liberty, the people will join them in saying no to Jeff Sessions.
The law is the law, Congress established it and it is the responsibility of Congress to address it if it needs addressing, simply selectively enforcing or not enforcing laws by personal whim is the purview of tyrants and dictators, not our elected and appointed officials.
Same as with immigration or election laws, they are what they are and need to be enforced that way until changed to something different by Congress if needed.
You are only correct on the surface. Yes, we cannot allow selective enforcement of laws, as you say that is the “purview of tyrants and dictators”. The one exception to that is when a law is clearly in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Every elected official, military member and police officer takes a two-headed and unfortunately contradictory oath, one to uphold the laws of their jurisdiction and the other to the U.S. Constitution itself. If these laws are in conflict with each other, they must choose the Constitution. Some would argue that it is not up to the individual to determine if a law is constitutional or not, but that is only partially true. Yes, some laws operate in grey areas where it is not immediately obvious whether they are constitutional or not. Others are immediately able to be judged by even the simple-minded among us.
When it comes to marijuana, or any other substance one might choose to put in their body, the U.S. Constitution grants absolutely no authority to the federal government. This is black letter law that needs no interpretation. Since intoxicating substances are not mentioned as being under federal authority, they are “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people” under the 10th Amendment. As Ron Paul points out, this is why prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment.
No, we cannot have bureaucrats or even elected officials picking and choosing which laws they will enforce, that truly is the death of “rule of law”. On the other hand, “rule of law” not only means the law must apply to everyone equally, but it also means the law MUST comply with the dictates of the supreme law of the land, which is the U.S. Constitution. Federal authority (or lack thereof) in this area is as clear as 2+2=4. No one needs a Supreme Court opinion to tell them that.
The meat of the whole piece is the comment on why was it necessary to pass an amendment to ban alcohol if they can ban MJ by fiat. Mr. Paul’s comments are spot on and will likely carry through to the Supreme Court as a State’s Rights issue. As i should.
My thought is that there did not need to be an amendment to ban alcohol. Congress could have just passed a law to ban alcohol just as they did for drugs. That amendment was overreach .
State Rights; same as our a0-called civil war.
The various Ted Talks about medical marijuana opened my eyes, i.e.
at 4:30 or so (and the many others) that talk about end of life pain treatment giving control back to people who are losing control of their life (we all lose control when we die). For that reason alone, it is justified legal or not. As to recreational use, like alcohol, it can be like pressing the “easy button” to relaxation for health reasons similar to meditation, i.e. it is not going to the gym that makes us stronger, it’s the rest after. So to the mind must reach deep states of rest every day somehow. Sure beyond that is self abuse, just like alcohol. Since I live in ground zero of California legal pot, Santa Cruz, with 5 outlets up day 1, I can say Jeff didn’t dent the business here. Sure SMELLS like people are exercising their “new rights” sho ’nuff all over town.
Sidebar questions.
Has gang turf drug related violence decreased in the States that legalized pot?
If no, is that a local law enforcement problem or a federal one?
Should certain occupations be strictly drug tested for cannabis use? If some, which one’s?
– I wonder what Rand used for pain relief from the broken ribs blindside episode? Ron’s a Dr.
-Maybe Pops wrote him a script for some medical grade ganja.
Yeah, a nice deep cannabis cough will do wonders for busted ribs.
Limited thinking.
You can ingest it too, Meth head. Have you ever heard of baked goods w/ the extracted oils?
You take issue with a simple little fun pun. Snappy come back.
Do you watch TV too? Or more specifically, that LibProg show titled: “This is Us”?
There’s an alternative to it, over on BET. It’s called “We Be Them”
Kinda like your moniker.
Edit above: However if that was Mr. Ron (or Rand) that be, then apologies are in order. Mea culpa. If I could delete it in an attempt to take it back, I would, but do not have that power. I’ll learn from it.
I respect both Rand and Ron for what they (you) stand for.
And, for what it’s worth, I vehemently defended Rand when the story broke of the blindside he took, when another poster questioned his toughness. I too, have sustained cracked ribs, and it’s not fun. So it that, there is common ground. Peace.
Most if not all of the places that will be effected are blue states. I believe that this is going to be used as a cudgel or at the very least as leverage against these places for their immigration stance and sanctuary policies.
I hadn’t thought of that aspect, you may be correct. It would explain Sessions’ reversal of his previous stance. Unfortunately, you don’t fix one evil (illegal immigration) with another (denial of states and individual rights). If that is their plan, it sure is a chicken shit one, but par for the course I guess.
How ’bout this, Sessions is continuing with another move from the playbook….leading a provocative attack to distract the left – taking the heat off Trump for the actions contained in the Q anon series? He’s already been portrayed as less than sharp (by the Trump admin) only to go on the attack in vital areas. Drug use was both allowed to occur AND prosecuted under the past pieces of shit administrations – for a purpose….meaning Trump knows a nation can enforce rules, the same rules (like DEA, Border Patrol, et al) we’ve been told are both sacrosanct AND impossible to enforce leaving many – even the good Mr. Paul, to perhaps get to cozy with his most nihilist emotion? Or, Trump’s just ‘harshing your mellow dude’.
Sure, if you buy into the theory that Trump is playing 4-D chess while everyone else sits around like a bump on a log. Is it possible? Sure, almost anything is. Problem with most theories like that is they can neither be proved or disproved until after the fact, floating one out there isn’t a legitimate argument either way.
If he ends up being some Machiavellian uber-genius that actually brings down the deep state, I’ll be happy as a pig in shit, but it still wouldn’t make all his rabid supporters correct at this current time. Getting the right results from the wrong process doesn’t validate your process.
I love how everyone blasts government as being corrupt and inept until their chosen messiah comes along, then suddenly the guy is some savant. Better check your confirmation bias. Nice ad hom to finish off your argument by the way.
Likewise, as you ‘pre-suppose a specific answer to a prior question’ fucker…..you assign a position rather than consider an alternate view. Old, tired views from another ‘thinker’.