Skip to comments.
New medical marijuana policy issued
Associated Press ^
| October 18, 2009
| Devlin Barrett
Posted on 10/18/2009 9:06:03 PM PDT by pleasenoobama
WASHINGTON The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws, under new policy guidelines to be sent to federal prosecutors Monday. Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state laws. The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: candycigarettes; dope; dopersrights; libertarians; marijuana; medicalmarijuana; potheads; statesrights; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 251-262 next last
I searched, but I couldn't find any other posts on this topic.
Basic gist of the article is that Obama has made it official policy not to enforce federal marijuana laws when it is used for medicinal purposes. What does everyone think?
To: pleasenoobama
To: pleasenoobama
“...as long as they conform to state laws.”
Good move.
3
posted on
10/18/2009 9:09:13 PM PDT
by
trumandogz
(The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
To: Magic Fingers
Here's the issue I see: I agree that there shouldn't be a federal ban on medicinal use of marijuana and that state law should reign supreme in this case, but if such a law exists, is it right for a president to be able to unilaterally force the federal government to ignore it? This seems to be granting an enormous amount of power to the president, power that wasn't explicitly granted to the executive branch by the Constitution.
4
posted on
10/18/2009 9:11:24 PM PDT
by
pleasenoobama
(Liberals lied, small government died)
To: All
The liberaltarians will be bowing before their new messiah now. He found a way to get them on his plantation.
Watch how much weed becomes "medical marijuana" now.
To: freedomwarrior998
Why are you opposed to State’s Rights?
6
posted on
10/18/2009 9:14:45 PM PDT
by
trumandogz
(The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
To: freedomwarrior998
“The liberaltarians will be bowing before their new messiah now. He found a way to get them on his plantation. “
Hardly. This is like a .000 batter getting a piece of it that goes foul. Momentary excitement then back to reality.
7
posted on
10/18/2009 9:20:13 PM PDT
by
Rebelbase
(This is the time of year when ACORNS fall.)
To: pleasenoobama
I can't stand BO or his lackeys. That said, I have no problem with the feds backing off and recognizing State's rights.
Maybe this will free up a little time to investigate the thieves in DC like Rangel.
8
posted on
10/18/2009 9:20:36 PM PDT
by
Lawgvr1955
(You can never have too much cowbell !!)
To: pleasenoobama
Why did the 18th amendment need to be passed to allow the federal government to regulate the use of ethanol as an intoxicant, but no similar change in the Constitution is needed for every other intoxicant? The only reason I can think is the majority of the adult population drank in 1919, but smaller numbers of people other intoxicants so they were easier to brush aside. That's not an argument based on Constitutional limitations of government, but rather raw power.
9
posted on
10/18/2009 9:21:38 PM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Soon everyone will win a Nobel Peace Prize for not being George Bush...well, except for George Bush.)
To: pleasenoobama
Basic gist of the article is that Obama has made it official policy not to enforce federal marijuana laws when it is used for medicinal purposes. What does everyone think?
I think it sounds exactly like the child and his DHS Crappy Nappy's policy on
NON-enforcement of our immigration laws. Sheriff Joe stuck a finger in the Feds eye over the weekend - DHS revoked Joe's 287g program, but went ahead with his crime suppression sweeps anyway.
Sheriff Joe Arpaio: I dont take orders from anybody.
Listening to a local host tonight and 95% of callers say "Keep it up Joe, We support you, and keep telling the Feds to go to hell."
10
posted on
10/18/2009 9:26:22 PM PDT
by
Cheerio
(Barack Hussein 0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
To: pleasenoobama
I’m surprised it took him 9 months. We all knew the crackhead was going to stop the war on drugs.
Look for him to do the same with Cocaine, after all he admits to having been a user. And I expect he will turn a lot of pushers out of jail.
11
posted on
10/18/2009 9:33:21 PM PDT
by
DannyTN
To: freedomwarrior998
"Watch how much weed becomes "medical marijuana" now."
But Dude, it's for my 'condition'.
12
posted on
10/18/2009 9:35:16 PM PDT
by
444Flyer
("Every society honors its live conformists and its dead troublemakers."--Mignon McLaughlin)
To: pleasenoobama
If you want to change the law, change the law. Just like if you want the constitution to read differently, change it. How hard is this to understand?
Then again, my dog in this fight is that the federal government has no regulation over drugs in the first place, as it is missing from the enumerated powers of the constitution, and should be deferred to the states... But it just galls me that rather than change the laws, they just simply choose to ignore them.
Liberals would be up in arms if a conservative did that.
13
posted on
10/18/2009 9:35:46 PM PDT
by
kingu
(Party for rent - conservative opinions not required.)
To: pleasenoobama
Well, he is going to do that same with illegal aliens too.
So this is a bad idea. Enforce the fricking law or change it.
But he will have the full weight of the US government confiscating your property and rights.
To: trumandogz
Why are you opposed to States Rights? Authoritarians, regardless of location on the spectrum, are alergic to autonomy of any scope. It gives them a reaction anywhere from mild irritation to anaphalactic shock.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
15
posted on
10/18/2009 9:38:35 PM PDT
by
The Comedian
(Evil can only succeed if good men don't point at it and laugh.)
To: freedomwarrior998
Well, it makes sense. Obama the Dope supports dope.
16
posted on
10/18/2009 9:39:59 PM PDT
by
darkangel82
(I don't have a superiority complex, I'm just better than you.)
To: pleasenoobama
The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws, under new policy guidelines to be sent to federal prosecutors Monday Paying taxes are among the "don't care" items in the Obama White House.
17
posted on
10/18/2009 9:42:56 PM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(The character assassination of Rush Limbaugh is worse than what the Left accused Joe McCarthy of.)
To: Magic Fingers
Funny how he wants to make all flavored cigarettes(that aren’t menthol) and candy cigarettes illegal.
18
posted on
10/18/2009 9:44:06 PM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(The character assassination of Rush Limbaugh is worse than what the Left accused Joe McCarthy of.)
To: pleasenoobama
Wonder if I could get a pack of “medical” cigarettes without paying all the tax...
19
posted on
10/18/2009 9:45:18 PM PDT
by
babygene
To: freedomwarrior998
20
posted on
10/18/2009 9:45:18 PM PDT
by
hsmomx3
(GO STEELERS!!!!!!!!!!!!)
To: pleasenoobama
...as long as they conform to state laws... What other "state laws" can we conform to without federal interference?
Prop 8? Prop 187?
Why just this one?
-PJ
21
posted on
10/18/2009 9:45:19 PM PDT
by
Political Junkie Too
(Comprehensive congressional reform legislation only yields incomprehensible bills that nobody reads.)
To: pleasenoobama
“I agree that there shouldn’t be a federal ban on medicinal use of marijuana and that state law should reign supreme in this case, but if such a law exists, is it right for a president to be able to unilaterally force the federal government to ignore it?”
If state law reigns supreme, isn’t that what the feds should be doing?
To: DannyTN; All
I knew a man who had a serious Cocaine problem. He told me that if marijuana was legal he would mostly use that and stay away from the Cocaine. Crack was easier to get than good weed where he lived. He was severely sexually and physically abused as a child. Used drugs to kill his pain. He is dead now, cocaine destroyed his lungs, and he got AIDS from sharing works. Age 43.
To: pleasenoobama
I guess even a broken clock is right every now and then.
24
posted on
10/18/2009 9:55:59 PM PDT
by
Left2Right
("Starve the Beast!")
To: Magic Fingers
If state law reigns supreme, isnt that what the feds should be doing?
I have a general objection to the executive branch being allowed to override the legislative branch by arbitrarily refusing to enforce laws that are on the books. It would be tragic if a president instructed the federal government to blatantly ignore (for examples) federal immigration laws or some civil rights laws because it wasn't a "productive use of resources". The president should not be afforded this sort of power.
25
posted on
10/18/2009 9:58:37 PM PDT
by
pleasenoobama
(Liberals lied, small government died)
To: a fool in paradise
“Funny how he wants to make all flavored cigarettes(that arent menthol) and candy cigarettes illegal.”
Oh, he’s a meddling, Marxist control freak all right...it’s the non-meddling aspect of his med marijuana position that I favor (my only minor point of agreement with him so far...other than his statement that he didn’t deserve the farcical Nobel Peace Prize).
To: freedomwarrior998
The liberaltarians will be bowing before their new messiah now. Nationalized health care plus quack nostrums...
Perfect fit.
27
posted on
10/18/2009 10:14:20 PM PDT
by
Mojave
(Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
To: KC_Conspirator
So this is a bad idea. Enforce the fricking law or change it. Leftists hate the rule of law. They love rule by fiat though.
28
posted on
10/18/2009 10:22:10 PM PDT
by
Mojave
(Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
To: freedomwarrior998
The liberaltarians will be bowing before their new messiah now. He found a way to get them on his plantation.OMG! I know, right? What's up with that 10th Amendment? What were those old dudes thinking when they wrote that moldy old thing?
State's rights? Phhhhhhlllbt! Who needs freedom when there are people doing stuff we totally don't approve of?
We should totally do whatever those guys in Washington thinks we should. That's what we pay them for, right?
A top-down government is gonna be awesome! We don't have to do anything - except pay crippling taxes to support it. They're gonna take care of everything for us! National Health Care. National Education. Oooh! And consistent firearms laws!
Hey, by the way: Could you point me to the nearest National Services kiosk? I need to renew my National ID card, sign the kids up for year-round school and turn in my neighbors for harboring an illegal .22. Those things are dangerous, don'tcha'know?
29
posted on
10/18/2009 10:38:41 PM PDT
by
mountainbunny
(Mitt Romney 2012: Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead!)
To: pleasenoobama
“Mo’ money, mo’ money, mo’ money!”
30
posted on
10/18/2009 10:38:50 PM PDT
by
onedoug
To: 444Flyer
But Dude, it’s for my ‘condition’.
***
“All I need is some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I’m fine ...”
31
posted on
10/18/2009 11:40:01 PM PDT
by
Lmo56
To: pleasenoobama
Obama just bought the pothead vote. Nothing complicated to figure out there.
Whether it cost him other votes is yet to see, but this might tick off the Mexican cartels if everyone starts growing their own.
If he suddenly sends Mexico a stimulous package like he did Hamas, you'll know he's on top of it.
32
posted on
10/18/2009 11:47:49 PM PDT
by
4woodenboats
(..And this ride is the Obamanation, with the highest freefall in the world...and still growing!)
To: trumandogz
"Why are you opposed to States Rights?"
lol! what else has 0 done for state's rights?
this isn't about state's rights, it's about doping people up.
they're trying to transfer sensitive secrets to China, attack marriage, and increase drug use.
All part of the plan to destroy America.
33
posted on
10/19/2009 12:11:29 AM PDT
by
chuck_the_tv_out
( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
To: kingu
If the federal law defies the Constitution, or goes beyond enumerated powers, it isn’t a law.
34
posted on
10/19/2009 1:17:22 AM PDT
by
djsherin
(Government is essentially the negation of liberty.)
To: pleasenoobama
***but if such a law exists***
Then it’s unconstitutional and shouldn’t be enforced.
35
posted on
10/19/2009 1:18:11 AM PDT
by
djsherin
(Government is essentially the negation of liberty.)
To: KC_Conspirator
How many people do you know that have been arrested by the feds for smoking marijuana? Almost never happens. Enforcement of the marijuana laws is done 99% by the state and local law enforcement. The feds spend their resources going after the big boys, generally, except the Bush administration made it a point to go after those involved with medical marijuana. So the question is, where do you want the feds to spend their limited resources? Do you really want to go after people who are being prescribed marijuana by their doctors?
To: pleasenoobama
And if the legislative branch passed a “law” that ordered the confiscation of all firearms and the president refused to enforce that “law”, would it still bother you?
37
posted on
10/19/2009 1:24:32 AM PDT
by
djsherin
(Government is essentially the negation of liberty.)
To: chuck_the_tv_out
Permitting States to set their own medical marijuana laws is a steep in the right direction and respects the State’s Rights.
However, if you are a Nanny State Sycophant, I could see why you would love to see the Federal Government enforce laws that would further prohibit the types of medications people may use under a prescription from their personal doctor.
38
posted on
10/19/2009 1:57:33 AM PDT
by
trumandogz
(The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
To: pleasenoobama
“Sure Mr.Soros, these cargo planes can haul tons of pot. Why we even have some land available, if your interested.
I sure am glad the federal government is showing how compassionate it is now that our leader,the magnificent one, is in power...after all it's what the American people want....it's what they voted for.....”
39
posted on
10/19/2009 2:39:29 AM PDT
by
Doogle
(USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
To: pleasenoobama
Maybe the first wise decision from this administration. Whatever you think about marijuana, stop throwing money at it and stop throwing people in jail for it.
40
posted on
10/19/2009 3:25:03 AM PDT
by
Sender
(It's never too late to be who you could have been.)
To: Mojave; freedomwarrior998
>Nationalized health care plus quack nostrums...
41
posted on
10/19/2009 3:34:15 AM PDT
by
Palin Republic
(Palin - Bachmann 2012 : Girl Power!)
To: pleasenoobama
I’m okay with this. I don’t favor pot use, but hey, this is a state issue.
42
posted on
10/19/2009 3:55:02 AM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(DEFINITION: rac-ist (rA'sis't) 1. Anyone who disagrees with a liberal about any topic.)
To: Palin Republic
This will free up a bunch of law enforcement resources to go after criminals other than the “victimless” sort. And jail space too. Long overdue.
43
posted on
10/19/2009 4:14:30 AM PDT
by
imjimbo
(The constitution SHOULD be our "gun permit")
To: trumandogz
Ditto. Obama just moved state’s rights forward. Likely for all the wrong reasons, but it works for me.
44
posted on
10/19/2009 4:22:21 AM PDT
by
1010RD
(First Do No Harm)
To: Palin Republic
You want Obama’s nationalized health care plus quack nostrums...
Got it.
45
posted on
10/19/2009 4:23:44 AM PDT
by
Mojave
(Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
To: a fool in paradise
Black market = good. Normal markets = bad
46
posted on
10/19/2009 4:25:33 AM PDT
by
1010RD
(First Do No Harm)
To: pleasenoobama
You are right, we do have an imperial Presidency, but Congress let it happen. They gave up the power and the President took it.
This is the natural result of the federalization of all things - increased bureaucracy and regulation first, then the centralization of power in a single man (the front for oligarchy) and legislation by whim.
47
posted on
10/19/2009 4:27:45 AM PDT
by
1010RD
(First Do No Harm)
To: imjimbo
This will free up a bunch of law enforcement resources to go after criminals other than the victimless sort. Really? How many federal arrests, prosecutions or incarcerations have there been of patients who have strictly complied with California's medical marijuana laws since the enactment of Proposition 215?
You just got suckered by Obama.
48
posted on
10/19/2009 4:28:56 AM PDT
by
Mojave
(Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
To: freedomwarrior998
The liberaltarians will be bowing before their new messiah now.
yes, realy looks like that huh /s:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/oath-keepers-pledges-to-prevent-dictatorship-in-united-states-64690232.html
49
posted on
10/19/2009 4:38:58 AM PDT
by
traviskicks
(http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
To: gleeaikin
He told me that if marijuana was legal he would mostly use that and stay away from the Cocaine. Crack was easier to get than good weed where he lived. Not only that but Cocaine stays in the system @72 hours, Marijuana @ weeks. If he was drug tested at work he'd have to stay away from the MJ.
Marijuana is a Plant. I get a kick that the government makes vegetation illegal.....
50
posted on
10/19/2009 4:39:09 AM PDT
by
libertarian27
(Ingsoc: Life, Liberty and the Department of Happiness)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 251-262 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson