Guest Post by Kurt Schlichter
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who himself seems stoned much of the time, just announced that his Department of Justice is going to start enforcing the federal laws against pot again despite a bunch of states doing a bong hit version of bombarding Ft. Sumpter. Look, no one is more annoyed than I am that Sessions decided to megapunt on his duties with regard to Democrat corruption and the Trump/Russia/Idiocy pseudo-scandal, but he doesn’t deserve all the grief he’s now getting from agitated hopheads and fussy libertarians – to the extent there’s a difference.
Dude, you’re like, harshing my buzz, dude.
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.)
Sessions is right not to allow a cheesy end-run around a clear set of laws just because reforming those laws is going to be hard. And no, it’s not “prosecutorial discretion” to refuse to enforce the law. What the legalize-it crowd wants is no prosecution, which is the opposite of exercising discretion. The fact is that Sessions swore to enforce federal law. Pot is against federal law. It’s against federal law because our representatives in the House and Senate passed the laws and the president signed them. The people spoke. Remember that “I’m Just a Bill” Scholastic Rock cartoon?
Yeah, man, that cartoon bill looks like a big fattie joint. Heh heh. Dude, where are the Doritos?
See, if the people of this country pass a law thorough their elected representatives, it’s kind of central to the whole point of having a republic that the executive enforce those laws. You don’t cut corners by demanding that the executive branch just not enforce unpopular statutes. If you don’t like a law, here’s how you change it. You go pass another law that changes that law.
Heh heh, pass the dutchie, man!
Look, there’s a real problem here. Barack Obama’s DoJ didn’t help by kicking the dime bag down the road, and as a result lots of people are caught in this state-legal, federal-illegal twilight zone. These include casual stoners and investors in what one entrepreneur I spoke to insisted on referring to as “the cannabis space.”
Now, because people decided to try and game the system, we have confusion. Many states are asserting what I and many other folks think is their prerogative to make terrible decisions involving their own territory. Colorado is now pretty much Jamaica in the Rockies. My own state of California just legalized pot, as if we needed more lazy and boring people here.
States’ rights is an important concept – it’s sure nice to see some Democrats joining in on supporting it now for the first time since they last asserted states’ rights to enforce Jim Crow – but see, the federal government gets to control interstate commerce. Thanks to the liberals, the concept of “interstate commerce” is pretty much interchangeable with “any commerce.” Leaving aside the interstate movement of pot, the feds have a right, under the current understanding of the regulation of interstate commerce, to outlaw dope everywhere. But hey, if the vocal corps of hemp enthusiasts out there wants to advocate for the Supreme Court to overrule the expansive reading of the commerce clause in Wickard v. Filburn, I’ll totally inhale.
What’s a commerce clause, dude? Is it like, related to Santa?
The idea of changing the law by means of simply not enforcing it is worse than lazy – it’s undemocratic. There are a lot of people out there who think pot should stay illegal. No, they’re not hip or edgy, but they are American citizens and they have a right to be heard too. And they were heard – marijuana is against federal law. This idea disenfranchises them. I guess we tell them, “Well, we all decided that the law you support is uncool so we decided to repeal it without giving you a say.”
That’s not a democracy; that’s a dictatorship. Of course, good luck rousing the dazed and confused stormtroopers of the dictatorship of the pot-letariat from their moms’ couches and getting them to put down their bongs long enough to pick up their bayonets.
Huh? Hey, where’s my other shoe, dude?
The fact is that expecting Jeff Sessions to somehow provide us with an easy way around the Constitution by simply refusing to enforce a legitimately-passed law because some of usz don’t like it is obnoxious, and it’s a dangerous precedent. Actually, it’s not even a precedent. Barack Obama tried to do that with the so-called Dreamers, illegal aliens who ought to be dreaming of going back home. One of the many reasons WHY YOU GOT TRUMP was the sight of our Commander-in-Choom deciding, “Nah, I don’t like the law you got passed, so too bad.” Trump rightly refused to continue the charade, and threw the problem over to Congress, where it belongs.
Of course, Congress doesn’t want to deal with DACA, or dope, because these are controversial issues and it’s easier and safer to palm them off on Jeff Sessions, who doesn’t appear to be particularly busy anyway. But that’s a cop-out, and even people who think we ought to let dope smokin’ morons stumble about free and unhassled by the Man should demand that reform happen the right way – by a change in the law enacted through our democratic processes.
Look, I despise pot. It’s use for medical purposes aside, recreational dope smoking makes you tiresome and slothlike, instead of witty and suave like wine drinking does. Despite what the hemp-loving weirdos will tell you, it has serious health risks. Plus, science has established that marijuana is a gateway drug that inevitably leads to reggae – a musical genre whose listeners are too high to even notice that there is actually only one reggae song and that the musicians simply give it different titles to fool the fans.
Wait, like, reggae is what?
But there are strong arguments for letting states evaluate the costs and benefits and handle this issue themselves. One size never fits all; maybe Alabama has no use for kush, but California does since it’s a lost cause anyway. States should decide this for themselves, even if their decision is one I or you or others not in those states disapprove of. Oh, and by the way GOP, millennials hate you, but maybe getting behind moving these choices back to the states where they belong is a way to show them that our conservative principles are not completely at odds with their views. So as a matter of conservative policy and politics, it seems obvious that the feds should not remain in the position of having to try to play prosecutorial whack-a-mole with those “in the cannabis space.”
A lot of Americans in a lot of states want change, and they have a right to it if they can convince enough of their fellow citizens to go along with it. That’s the way to do it, not this borderline fascist notion that the executive gets to arbitrarily post ex facto veto laws that really loud, vocal groups disapprove of.
Congress, fix this. It’s your job. Stop blaming Sessions for doing his. He’s screwed up enough that there’s still plenty to blame him for.
Righteous, dude!
It’s unfortunate that Schlichter lathered up this column with his opinion about pot. The issue is that federal law conflicts with some state laws. While some state might successfully take the case to the Supremes and get Gonzales v Raich overturned, any congresscritter who’s bellyaching about Sessions’ plans without simultaneously agitating to pass federal legislation to legalize marijuana needs to be taken out and maimed. Sessions’ actions might prove to be the impetus to change the law. If that happens, Trump should run on “I legalized weed”.
Wrong… There are tens of thousands of Federal laws that are archaic, immoral, senseless, and even cruel…Most are not enforced for good reason. Marijuana’s medical benefits are proven, its regulation in the first place (plainly unconstitutional) came because of lobbying by DuPont and the alcohol producers, neither of which wanted competition. Telling us to lobby our congress critters is stupid–they don’t listen, don’t care, and are in the pocket of powerful lobbies. When I call my Congresswoman’s office on an issue, I can’t even get a straight answer, and they know I’m an attorney.
Medical marijuana is a great move toward taking power back from the Feds, and should be supported.
point–congress should not legalize pot,they should decriminalize it–
Why the fuck should a plant be illegal? You DO know the history behind it BECOMING illegal don’t you? Clear cut politics, Reefer Madness and Hearst’s many acres of TREES. Can’t have competition from Hemp, now can we?
It isn’t within the ascribed duties of the Executive Branch to decide which laws will and which will not be enforced. The President and his subject agencies are sworn under oath to enforce all of them and enforce all of them equally on everyone.
Obama issuing dictates to ignore marijuana laws is no different than his issuing directives to ignore immigration laws, if you support one you support the other since they are both illegal dictates from someone claiming the right to rule by dictate and that is what you are supporting or opposing.
Congress needs to address this issue, one way or the other, since they are the ones that make our laws and set the penalties for violating them.
Mr Schlichter is correct when he states that the Attorney Geneal’s job is to see that federal law is enforced; the problem here is that there are far too many federal laws and regulations and when they come into conflict with state laws, best is that the feds bow out per the “elastic clause” that grants great discretion to individual states.
That said, laws against marijuana consumption are a waste of time, law enforcement objectives, etc. Stoners are preferable to drunks every time, sez I. “[W]itty and suave like wine drinking does”? Oh please! Don’t Bogart that Mad Dog 20-20, my friend! But of course he refers not to a Jive-Seven-With-the-Taste from-Heaven ghetto dweller fortified wine, but rather to perhaps a Hannibal Lecter “nice chianti” or a nicely aged Chateau Lafite.
You don’t like reefer, fine, don’t smoke it, but it wouldn’t hurt to recognize the fact that the pot train left the station long, long ago. That’s a fact, Jack, and the sooner it’s recognized, the better. Mr Sessions has better things upon which to concentrate and it’s past time that he does so.
The Feds had to pass a constitutional amendment to ban booze. Which amendment did they pass giving them the privilege to ban the growing and use of a plant? Federal drug laws are unconstitutional. I never got asked about drug laws. No one I know has ever been asked. All laws should have a sunset clause, so that the mistakes of previous generations will not last forever.
I doubt you were ever asked about the Bill of Rights either, but I suspect you want it followed by everyone anyway.
We don’t create an entirely new body of laws every few years, we live with what has been created in the past till we change it if we deem it worthwhile to so do.
And changing those laws is near impossible. The drug war has been going on over 100 years. These laws are unconstitutional on the Federal level, PERIOD.
Actually, I would prefer the Articles of Confederation. The Anti Federalists were right.
It’s not just p@t that’s in view here. Most of these states are also flagrantly disobeying immigration laws.
I only got part way through this pile of horse shit. I couldn’t stand another word. So the gmen can name you a terrorist any time they wish and strip you of every right ‘guaranteed’ to you by the constitution and this joker wants to debate this chickenshit? Smoke, stuff or snort whatever you want into your body because you’re a sovereign individual and you don’t need permission from any bought and paid for hack politician. Then live by their credo: just don’t get caught doing it.
This is another black and white issue that Dopers want to color grey, have a fit and claim that a few old fashioned reactionaries are taking moral issue with a god given medicinal herb that the majority of people approve of so just F’off & die. Dope is a synapse clogging drug that damages peoples brains (taste, hearing, thinking, libido etc), especially if their brain is still developing (under about 25 years old, it causes the creation of excessive Endorphin Receptors which leads to Addictive Personalities). Dope is more damaging to lungs and chromosomes (ie birth defects now & in future generations) than cigarettes. Of course Dopers vary from the “casual adult drinkers” to “wino/drunks”; if we could somehow control Dope like Alcohol and allow the adults to purchase this drug but rigorously outlaw the possession and use by youth and abusers, I wouldn’t be quite so dogmatic; but even with tight controls, I’d expect the drug problems in America would soon produce the proverbial hockey-stick graph.
No wonder the liberal Dopes have so much voter support from the public. Good luck if you Dopes ever have to teach a math or science class at an academy, lead a large group of military men on a difficult dangerous mission, or some other task requiring dependable, dedicated sober leadership and individuals. If Dopes think I don’t know shit, I’ve busted plenty of Dopes under the influence; some Dopes stupidly led the OSI to a whole ring of fellow Dopes. It’s no wonder that civilian Dope’s IQs are dropping.
I support the legislative legalization of medicinal marijuana. While Sessions might oppose it, I am pretty sure Trump would sign it if it made it to his desk. I vehemently oppose trashing the rule of law by leaving the laws on the books, but ignoring enforcement. That applies to Pot, immigration/invasion issues, and a multitude of other issues.
I wonder if the author, or anyone else here for that matter, even knows what a law is factually. Or the difference between a law and a statute. Or what jurisdiction is and how it legitimately arises. Or the difference between legitimate government and the state. Or what delegated powers are. Or sovereignty. Or pretty much anything that really matters.
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?
Schlichter is a statist thug. Fuck off you worthless piece of shit. Obviously this dumb motherfucker has never inhaled. Pour yourself another drink and go to to hell.
every morning sessions and every other decision maker in the law enforcement apparatus at the federal,state,and local level must decide what laws to focus on because there are so many laws that they cannot all be enforced,so either this is a political play or trump is for this–
The Bad Guys make a lot of money off Dopes.