HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » What is the general feeli...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:46 PM

What is the general feeling on how the Obama Administration will react to WA and CO legalizing pot?

Continue to crack down hard?

Crack down harder?

The Colorado attorney general has asked Holder for feedback on the law. Crickets.

I bet the feds will change nothing.

Obama never takes the question of legalizing pot seriously and actually makes jokes about it.

It is not funny people in this country are in prison for simple possession of a weed that is safer than alcohol.

And for the record, I have never used pot.





15 replies, 983 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 15 replies Author Time Post
Reply What is the general feeling on how the Obama Administration will react to WA and CO legalizing pot? (Original post)
Logical Nov 2012 OP
AndyTiedye Nov 2012 #1
Logical Nov 2012 #2
Fumesucker Nov 2012 #3
Logical Nov 2012 #6
bluedigger Nov 2012 #10
Dubster Nov 2012 #4
Le Taz Hot Nov 2012 #5
Live and Learn Nov 2012 #7
immoderate Nov 2012 #8
bluedigger Nov 2012 #9
AndyTiedye Nov 2012 #12
bluedigger Nov 2012 #15
HopeHoops Nov 2012 #11
cherokeeprogressive Nov 2012 #13
easychoice Nov 2012 #14

Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:50 PM

1. They'll Double Down

They regard our protests, and even our VOTES on this issue, merely as evidence of the depth of "the problem".

Big Pharm wants the whole medical pot thing to go away, and the government is more than willing to help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyTiedye (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:52 PM

2. Tend to agree. n-t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:52 PM

3. There's a good chance they won't use nukes

Beyond that I'm not willing to speculate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:56 PM

6. Good one! :-)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:08 PM

10. They have always preferred chemical warfare for this particular fight.

Remember paraquat?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:54 PM

4. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:56 PM

5. I'm hoping like hell

this administration gets the message and eases off. Challenges to the scheduling are currently making their way through the courts as we speak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:57 PM

7. Obama will ignore it. Holder will be ticked off at the brash attempts

to limit his power and will make threats but the GOP will keep him too busy protecting his own hide to be able to do much about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:02 PM

8. Casual users and growers are not subject to arrest by the feds.

I'm hoping this will make a difference in enforcement, which before now was aimed at dispensaries.

---imm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:04 PM

9. I think they will be mostly passive.

They will concentrate law enforcement efforts on preventing interstate commerce of marijuana and leave intrastate activity largely alone. They don't really have the resources to aggressively pursue users, retailers, and growers on any scale likely to effectively discourage it. They could try to coerce the states by withholding Federal funding, like they did with transportation funding and speed limits and drinking ages, but I don't think they have any real leverage, as those were determined by legislative bodies rather than plebiscites. Long term, I think the Administration wishes for the States to lead on this issue, and force change at the national level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluedigger (Reply #9)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:24 PM

12. They Find the Resources to Shut Down Dispensaries and Bust Growers in California

They'll find even more for the states that have actually legalized it.

They could try to coerce the states by withholding Federal funding, like they did with transportation funding and speed limits and drinking ages,

I expect they will.

Long term, I think the Administration wishes for the States to lead on this issue, and force change at the national level.

No, they expect to force their will on the states. They do not want this to change at any level, ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyTiedye (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 02:14 PM

15. I guess I'm not quite as jaded as you seem to be.

(I rarely get to say that. )

As far as resources go, their aggressive war on mmj in California is a good example of why they can't expand beyond it. With the exception of sporadic and isolated prosecutions in other jurisdictions, their efforts have mostly ignored the many other states that have approved mmj. Further legalization reforms will result in ten fold of potential targets when pot is available at retailers other than dispensaries, not to mention users, suppliers, homegrowers, etc. They simply don't have enough field agents, prosecutors, judges, courts, detention centers, and prisons. Even with privatization, they are dependent on the states to lead in enforcement and punishment. It would be one big game of whack-a-mole and they would (will) lose. California has so far served as an example to discourage legalization, and it has been a failure overall.

As for national drug policy goals, there are certainly powerful institutional forces at work to fight this, I agree. I don't see any overt support from the President, but that is expected. He would have been a one termer, for sure, as the first black President that was pro-pot. That's just political reality, and why I think that the states and the people must and will lead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:19 PM

11. At this point, I'd like to see Obama get off AF-1 in WA or CO smoking a joint.

 

I doubt it would happen, but it would be cool.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:31 PM

13. Same old, same old. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 02:09 PM

14. Gil Kerlikowske drug czar,nazi & total creep

On May 13, 2009, Kerlikowske signaled that the Obama Administration would no longer use the term "War on Drugs", as it is counter-productive. The Obama Administration would instead demonstrate a favoring of treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce drug use.

In a May 22, 2009 interview on KUOW radio, he said any drug 'legalization' would be "waving the white flag" and that "legalization is off the charts when it comes to discussion, from my viewpoint" and that "legalization vocabulary doesn't exist for me and it was made clear that it doesn't exist in President Obama's vocabulary." Specifically about marijuana, he said, "It's a dangerous drug" and about the medical use of marijuana, he said, "we will wait for evidence on whether smoked marijuana has any medicinal benefits those aren't in."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gil_Kerlikowske

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread