Drug Policy

RainDog

(28,784 posts)

9. Since the govt can no longer control information about this topic

Tue May 8, 2012, 08:44 PM

May 2012

support for legalization has grown.

It has always been bad policy - but, just as with slavery, bad policy remains for a long time if people do not fight against it.

The reality is that the federal govt seems to care little about whether or not something is good or bad policy until people start to make it too uncomfortable to continue that policy.

While I would hope that those who are elected to office are not moral cowards and will stand up for what is right, rather than what is demanded - history doesn't make that case for politicians.

What matters, in terms of the will of the people in this case, is that they have been able to go to the voting booth to indicate they know the policy is wrong. It's not about a majority vs rights - it's about people who have fought against bad law.

That's what matters in terms of the will of the people. The law was always bad, always based upon racism and lies. But the law stands until people stand up to bad law in too many examples in this nation.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

U.S. Supreme Court: Federal Law Does Not Pre-empt State MMJ Law [View all] RainDog May 2012 OP

What next? Gay marriage? MannyGoldstein May 2012 #1

Now if we can just get the feds to quit ignoring state laws. Lionessa May 2012 #2

Sadly, this administration shares that knack with its predecessors villager May 2012 #3

The executive branch and Congress need to respond to the will of the American people RainDog May 2012 #4

i agree but not because a majority of people, that's a slippery slope I won't go near. Lionessa May 2012 #5

I agree - but the reason a majority want the law to change is because of the science RainDog May 2012 #6

Well we hope that's the reason, but in the end it doesn't matter, Lionessa May 2012 #7

Since the govt can no longer control information about this topic RainDog May 2012 #9

Thanks for fighting the good fight RainDog. iscooterliberally May 2012 #24

thanks for those kind words RainDog May 2012 #26

That's pretty much what Arizona is arguing at the SC in regard to SB1070 CactusJak May 2012 #8

Yes, however the OPs title is inaccurate. Fed law does outrank State law for Lionessa May 2012 #10

it is indeed a very tough road to walk - if you are a federal truedelphi May 2012 #14

Arizona is arguing against human rights RainDog May 2012 #11

You say: truedelphi May 2012 #15

here's a link RainDog May 2012 #16

I see this as a win for human rights, not because of the origin of the law. I'm encouraged by it. freshwest May 2012 #12

Same hear. And a big shout out to raindog for truedelphi May 2012 #13

It's from Dec. 2011 RainDog May 2012 #17

I'd have never known if you hadn't. This is the first I heard. Thanks! freshwest May 2012 #20

Misleading headline -- Actually, as stated in the story, "The U.S. Supreme Court REFUSED TO REVIEW AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #18

Excuse me but doesn't the USSC refusal to review a case mean bupkus May 2012 #21

Of course that's what that means. In contrast, it does not mean (as improperly implied by the AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #23

Does This Mean DallasNE May 2012 #19

Federal agencies can make arrests in states. RainDog May 2012 #22

Even though Meiko May 2012 #25

Do you know that Arizona has had to vote for the same law three times? RainDog May 2012 #27

kick b/c I'm so pissed at what is going on now. n/t RainDog Dec 2012 #28