Scott Adams tells you how Jeff sessions may have started the process toward making weed legal

Twitter ^ | 4 Jan 2018 | Scott Adams

[Magnatron]

Scott Adams has an interesting take on Sessions' recent announcement regarding federal pot laws enforcement. It's interesting on a couple of levels. It implies that Sessions is doing that 4D chess thing that the pro-Sessions people like to think, and if that's so, it makes me wonder (and desperately hope) that the Freep Sessions-cheerleading-section are right about his ability to work at a higher level than we Never-Sessions people can appreciate.

...but I dream.

[MortMan]

If you wish to repeal a bad law, enforce it exactly as written.

[linear]

This assumes a rational and functioning legislature.

[MortMan]

No, it assumes a public that will demand that their irrational and malfunctioning legislators get off their duffs and do what is required.

[raiderboy]

The key here is to totally enforce federal drug law rather than ignore Federal drug laws. States are subordinate to Federal drug laws and may not run out on their own under the doctrine of preemption. The first thing is to start the “no Knock” take down of these drug sellers stores in Colorado and slam these weed shop owners in the federal pen for 20 years. I can’t wait to see these new California pot shops getting ran sacked by DEA!! It will make me so happy. State law does NOT preempt Federal law here — It never has and it never will. Session is now a hero to the people of this country !! Crush narcotic sales!!

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Sessions headed the DOJ in 2012?

[Uncle Miltie]

Political Win: Democrats.

[MortMan]

Unless President Trump does something like post a couple of tweets about being required to enforce the law the way congress wrote it...

He plays a different game. I’m not sure about Sessions.

[Pikachu_Dad]

It is already illegal.

You need the Congress to change their laws.

Or you need the feds to reschedule weed

[Magnatron]

State law does NOT preempt Federal law here — It never has and it never will.

Except for that pesky thing called the 10th Amendment...

Did you miss putting in a /sarc tag?

The Constitution says nothing about drug enforcement, therefore, it must be left to the States under the 10th.

[ProudGOP]

State law does NOT preempt Federal law here

The highest law in the land, State or Federal, is the Constitution. There is nothing in the Constitution about the Federal Governments ability to create and enforce drug laws (i.e. 10th amendment) unless the drugs would cross state boundaries (i.e. interstate commerce)

It always amazes me when Conservatives want a small Federal government except for the part of the Federal government that enforces the laws they agree with.

[gdani]

Session is now a hero to the people of this country !!

Well, at least to those who don't value small government, the Tenth Amendment, freedom & capitalism.

[Fhios]

It’s all about sanctuary state/cities. Another law that Congress wants the President to ignore when they can fix it themselves by coming up with an acceptable bi-partisan piece of legislation.

[RKBA Democrat]

... which further assumes that said legislators will get off their duff after the public demands they do so, notwithstanding countless examples of when they haven’t.

Politics is a scam and we’re suckers for playing.

[bert]

no, sessions kicked the can down the road to SCOTUS where is absolutely needs to be.

[BigEdLB]

Sanctuary cities involved the constitution where the Feds are supposed to regulate immigration. Pot is a true 10th amendment issue. The constitution doesn’t regulate pot

[Agamemnon]

..but I dream.

Scott's in a pot haze of his own here.

Federal Anti-pot laws are not bad laws. They just haven't been enforced effectively and States have been allowed to flout them.

And if your real goal is to disqualify the number persons eligible for DACA consideration due to their breaking of Federal law by smoking pot, the number of eligible DACAs likely drops from ~ 800,000 to ~100,000.

Trump says OK to DACA getting guaranteed funding for the wall and end to chain migration in exchange for a mere ~100,000 eligible DACAs who were smart enough to keep their noses clean (that is, unless the other DACAs are caught doing cocaine.)

His narrative fails on the basis of its premise that Federal pot laws are bad laws. They are not.

FReegards!

[Uncle Miltie]

Pot smokers are so illogical that any fiddling for any purpose other than a direct and full repeal of pot laws will merely cause them to show up to vote (D) no matter how stupefied they are at the time.

Don’t underestimate these dolts. The marginal voter on pot issues is a wasteoid who either will or will not vote depending on whether you’ve angered him enough to get off the couch.

[RKBA Democrat]

Liberty for me but not for thee, which in the long run becomes liberty for no one. And Lord knows we have our fair share of quislings wearing a “conservative” cloak.

Politics is a scam and we’re suckers for playing.

[raiderboy]

To those that demand law and order. Where was all this 10th amendment bull crap during Roe Vs wade and the civil rights movement by these pot heads. I didn’t see that by the communist left then. Did you? The left thinks there is no 10th Amendment— Fine!! Suck it up butter cup.