Sessions Just Confirmed He’s Going After States With Legalized Marijuana, Claims It Causes “Violence

Activist Post ^ | 2/28/2017 | Melissa Dykes

[HomerBohn]

While Trump may claim he’s for states rights, Attorney General Jeff Sessions just pissed on the opinions of about 71% of Americans who do not believe the federal government should attempt to ram federal laws down the throats of states where voters have legalized marijuana.

After Press Secretary Sean Spicer essentially warned everyone last week that the Trump administration plans to crack down on states with recreational marijuana laws, AG Sessions backed that up on Monday with some bizarre statements that prove the guy actually believes Reefer Madness was a documentary.

Via Politico:

“Most of you probably know I don’t think America is going to be a better place when more people of all ages and particularly young people start smoking pot,” Sessions said during an exchange with reporters at the Justice Department. “I believe it’s an unhealthy practice and current levels of THC in marijuana are very high compared to what they were a few years ago.”

“We’re seeing real violence around that,” Sessions said. “Experts are telling me there’s more violence around marijuana than one would think and there’s big money involved.”

. If there is any “violence” around marijuana, it’s due entirely to the black market created by the phony drug war, not the actual drug itself, as pointed out by chairman of the drug policy reform group Marijuana Majority Tom Angell:

By talking about marijuana and violence, the attorney general is inadvertently articulating the strongest argument that exists for legalization, which is that it allows regulated markets in a way that prohibition does not.

Prohibition keeps drug cartels in business and needlessly puts thousands of Americans behind bars.

But then again, that must be why Sessions also reversed the DOJ plan to phase out the for-profit prisons last week; they’re going to need somewhere to put all those non-violent drug offenders once the federal crackdown on a benign plant legalized in over half the country begins.

[moehoward]

Another BS article bolstered by a few cherry picked quotes.

Sessions will NEVER go after legalized states. NEVER.

[cashless]

Pick a better fight, Jeffy.

[TheStickman]

Since I started using cannabis as medicine in 2015 I’ve noticed the prohibitionists make arguments against states exercising their rights as enumerated in the Constitution. In fact, many of them write exactly like progressives with false stereotypes, posting meme’s with Cheech & Chong as if that’s what ALL cannabis users do & look like. If you are using cannabis responsibly, the prohibitionists will call you lazy, declare you have no motivation & just sit around smoking cannabis all day long. Sheesh...who in the hell can afford do to that? I can’t. I have too much work to do.

The hatred of some prohibitionists reminds me of the progressives wearing vagina hats, declaring their hatred for our amazing President Trump...minus the hats, mostly. Many seem offended in the extreme at the mere notion someone could use cannabis as medicine just as progressives hate us for believing in the Constitution—like someone was going to force them to use it against their will. It’s ridiculous, IMO.

[stars & stripes forever]

[Perhaps he care about the developing brains of our yutes?]

Marijuana damages youth. Young users (all economic levels) go in and out of Rescue Missions and treatment centers like a revolving door.

[blueunicorn6]

Ask your dealer for free marijuana.

Then, you’ll understand what marijuana is all about.

[HomerBohn]

Keep an eye on Colorado.

[kelly4c]

Do you really think that’s a good thing for our society though? If they do legalize most states, in 20 years time we will see the socioeconomic effects overall and if we’re still alive we can all talk about it then. Looking forward to it. Hey, Cocaine was once allowed and had medicinal uses. Will it be next? I just kind of find it hard to grasp that adult conservatives are for legalizing drugs though. We got enough problems already.

[TheStickman]

“Keep an eye on Colorado.”

I do regularly plus I have family there who are not cannabis users who keep me informed on the issue as it relates to the Boulder area where they’ve lived for 20+ years.

[kelly4c]

Lots of things are plants. And none of them are meant to be ground up, rolled into paper and inhaled.

[nathanbedford]

Precisely my point. If you concede Roe vs. Wade and the whole line of privacy cases on sodomy, contraception, you have essentially abandoned the Constitution and the power of the state as opposed to the federal government and surrendered to an unelected branch of the government at that.

If you concede the federal government the right to regulate marijuana, you might as well concede the federal government the right to define marriage or to define divorce. Whoops, it seems they already have.

Please have a look at my reply #52.

I think it is very bad constitutional doctrine to work backward from the result we want. If we do not like abortion we say it is a states matter. If we do not like marijuana, in this case we say it is a federal matter. I think the analysis should proceed from the Constitution outward rather than the other way around.

I think the matter of marijuana is a states' matter and should be a states' matter just as the regulation of alcohol was a state matter requiring a federal constitutional amendment to effect federal prohibition.

I think we have to be careful how we frame the question. Is it a question of whether the state has the power to refrain from prohibiting marijuana? The answer is clearly yes. Is the question whether the federal government has the power to regulate marijuana when the state declines? Under today's distortion of the Constitution, probably yes.

Should it? No. Not under constitutional grounds of a federal system and not under policy grounds. I do not want the federal government to usurp privacy any more than I want it to usurp our natural liberty to pursue happiness even if some of us have a rather distorted notion of how to do it.

The state has the constitutional authority to regulate marijuana, but to do so is a proven policy loser.

[Ken H]

Are we a nation of laws?

You tell me Mr. Law & Order. Do you advocation strict enforcement against grannies illegally buying prescriptions from Canada?

The Letter (and Spirit) of Drug Import Laws - It's illegal (nudge, nudge) to buy prescriptions drugs (wink, wink) from other countries

[Ken H]

I think you’re right.

[Ken H]

advocation advocate

[Hugh the Scot]

What is your point?

I just VERY CLEARLY described the difference between making a plant illegal and the states passing laws which regulate it’s consumption as a drug. If you have a problem with substance abusers, deal with the abusers, don’t try to outlaw a plant.

If you have a problem with criminals, deal with the criminals or outlaw guns for everybody?

You totalitarians are all alike.

[JimRed]

Sessions is only indicating his intention to enforce existing laws.

IOW, doing his job.

[JimRed]

Watch Colorado over the next year or so, then draw conclusions.

Look at it now. O'Reilly the other evening said that when he recently visited Denver he noticed a huge increase in "homeless" looking types wandering about.

[JimRed]

When these users start dying of cancers related to this nasty substance, there should be no public funding of their plight.

More to the point, when the heavy users have toked themselves into unemployability there should be no public funding of their choice of lifestyles. No welfare, section 8, EBT, etc.

[kelly4c]

I must have responded to just one of your posts and you assumed I saw all of them cause I’m not following the reply. I don’t even know what a “totalitarian” is. But OK it doesn’t sound too bad :) I just know that drugs are bad, unless prescribed and therefor monitored by a physician and even then people get addicted but what can ya do, suffer with chronic pain? There’s always a damned if you do....etc. Pot use should not be given the green light of approval, it’s just instinctive. Maybe not to those who see it as harmless but to others who know the harm it can cause. Medicinal? Fine. I don’t agree with recreational legalization. OPens up a can of worms.

[Ken H]

More to the point, when the heavy users have toked themselves into unemployability there should be no public funding of their choice of lifestyles. No welfare, section 8, EBT, etc.

I agree, but it should still be up to states rather than fedgov to decide mj legalization, per the 10th Amendment. Agreed?

[Ken H]

Pot use should not be given the green light of approval, it’s just instinctive.

So which does the Constitution leave that decision to, the states or fedgov?