cannabisnews.com: Obama Should Take Marijuana Off The Forbidden List
function share_this(num) {
tit=encodeURIComponent('Obama Should Take Marijuana Off The Forbidden List');
url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/28/thread28777.shtml');
site = new Array(5);
site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
return false;
}
Obama Should Take Marijuana Off The Forbidden List
Posted by CN Staff on February 07, 2016 at 05:34:57 PT
By Ilya Shapiro
Source: Newsweek
USA -- I’ve been quite hard on President Barack Obama for his abuse of executive power—and will soon file another brief in the 26-state challenge to his immigration action—but there are certainly things that he or any president can do to protect and secure our liberty without violating the Constitution.One such executive action would be to “declassify” marijuana: remove it from the list of controlled substances (or at least move it further down the list, which would have significant positive legal effects).
I explain in this video: http://youtu.be/UK3ZMXkcxSkIn case you don’t have time to watch, here’s a transcript:While legalizing marijuana as a matter of federal law would take an act of Congress, President Obama can decriminalize it. He can do this by moving it out of Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, which is reserved for substances of no medical purpose and a high potential for abuse, and therefore have high criminal penalties attached to their mere possession.Virtually all marijuana-related arrests are handled by state and local law enforcement. The Drug Enforcement Administration simply lacks the resources to enforce the federal ban across all 50 states. That’s why the Justice Department decided not to fight the legalization of marijuana in the handful of states that have taken that step.President Obama, without rewriting any laws or going outside of his constitutional authority, can direct the attorney general to start the process of reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule IV or V substance, or declassifying it altogether.Reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule III substance or lower would have significant benefits for the budding marijuana industry and individual users. For example:The Internal Revenue Code prohibits the deduction of business expenses that relate to Schedule I or Schedule II trafficking.The Gun Control Act of 1968 prevents the sale of ammunition and firearms to the unlawful users of “any controlled substance.”A conviction for possessing a controlled substance can bar students from getting loans. And the rules are even stricter for public housing.Declassifying marijuana would solve all of these problems.But even merely reclassifying it would make it easier for legal businesses to access the full economy and reduce violent crime.Marijuana deregulation sits squarely within the control of the executive. The president should use his executive powers to allow for intelligent enforcement of drug policy without eroding the rule of law.I guarantee that if President Obama does this, he won’t be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.Ilya Shapiro is a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute and editor-in-chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review. This article first appeared on the Cato Institute site.Source: Newsweek (US)Author: Ilya ShapiroPublished: February 6, 2016Copyright: 2016 Newsweek, Inc.Contact: letters newsweek.comWebsite: http://www.newsweek.comURL: http://drugsense.org/url/AQpgal8rCannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #13 posted by FoM on February 11, 2016 at 13:43:16 PT
Hope
I made a mistake and downloaded Windows 10 and since I am on a bandwidth limit I got a $475 bill for one month. They allowed peep to peer use of my computer. I uninstalled it. I have my normal outrageous monthly bill for our Internet from Verizon of $200 a month and dare not watch more then one or two short Youtube videos a month. If you haven't had 10 for over a month you can uninstall it.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by Hope on February 11, 2016 at 10:29:45 PT
Thanks, The GCW
I made the mistake of letting Cortana into my computer and now it won't connect to the internet, and for now, anyway, I'm stuck with a cranky old tablet with no spell check and several issues. I knew those errors were in my last comment, but no way, no how, would it let me get to them to correct them. So I just posted it anyway. And researching anything is much harder, for me, anyway, than it is on a computer with a real keyboard.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by The GCW on February 10, 2016 at 22:40:38 PT
Hope,
This, including some of the comments, helped Me understand it better:How Hillary Clinton Might Actually Win In N.H., Even Though She Lost Big http://www.npr.org/2016/02/10/466283748/how-hillary-clinton-is-actually-winning-in-n-h-even-though-she-lost-big
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by Hope on February 10, 2016 at 14:56:14 PT
Wait.
I'm not understanding this. This has nothing to do with the Electoral College I've been grousing about all day.This is freaking delegates to the freaking conventions.I would really appreciate someone sharing some light on this political process that is so important to our cause right now.I've got to calm down. I'm so deligjted with ysyetday's voter turnout for Senator Sanders-
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by Hope on February 10, 2016 at 10:16:05 PT
Our good Senator Sanders swept up the popular vote
But Hillary got more delagates!The Electoral College sucks!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by John Tyler on February 10, 2016 at 07:28:29 PT
Bernie won big
Bernie won big in New Hampshire. Polls show the American public is for cannabis legalization by 58%. Bernie is for cannabis legalization. Hillary is still at the “it needs more study” level. (That seems to be a problem with quite a few Democrats. I am not sure what their problem is, but I suspect it is who their campaign contributors are.) Hillary has got to get over this and take a stand for cannabis legalization now, before it is too late.
I like Hillary (even with all of her issues) and I like Bernie (maybe more). I, along with 58% of the public, want cannabis re-legalized. Come on Hillary, put it all together.
Did you notice, Denver, the mile HIGH city won the Super Bowl. So much for the amotivational syndrome.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by Sam Adams on February 08, 2016 at 10:18:24 PT
Hillary
One more note on Clinton - remember that marijuana arrests nearly TRIPLED under Clinton the First. The federal war on medMJ was initiated by Clinton the 1st - remember how he ordered the DOJ to prosecute doctors recommending cannabis?and of course Clinton brought in Larry Summers in the late 90's to change the banking laws and enable the $2.5 trillion heist from the working classes to the Wall Street elite. Go Bernie go!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by Sam Adams on February 08, 2016 at 10:15:09 PT
feds
yes observer, of course our Spokesperson-in-Chief is not going to rescue us. He's just going to sail off into the sunset and start a new, gray-haired version of the Choom Gang.This presidential election is starting to heat up! What happening with Bernie so far is amazing to me. He's gotten so much farther than Nader or the Libertarian candidates I liked. MUCH farther! He's going to win NH easily tomorrow.I don't much hope for change from our current regime - I don't foresee major changes in this country until terrible stuff happens - economic and environmental (coastal flooding) catastrophe. Humans don't change the way they think or their prevailing attitudes until they have a traumatic emotional experience. And the rich elite haven't had one yet!However, Bernie's campaign will certainly be satsifying! Just today I read that Hilary is pissed because women aged 18-34 support Bernie by 2 to 1 over her! The feminists are upset, Gloria Steinham doesn't want women to vote for a man under ANY circumstances! If she was a man talking about women she'd be widely branded a bigot by the way.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by observer on February 07, 2016 at 15:12:39 PT
Executive Orders
When it comes to stealing traditional freedoms, trashing the Bill of Rights; Presidents are all over that, creating new Executive Orders (dictates) with glee. Presidents, since the 1930s joyfully renew communistic, freedom-stealing Executive Orders extending some lying "Emergency" - since FDR's time. You remember which "emergency" that is, right? It is the "emergency" (since 1933) which is the "reason" why all presidents always extend the extra government powers and resources. Government stresses this and more are always needed. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/State_of_national_emergencyhttp://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/22/president-obama-states-of-emergency/16851775/So, of course those (freedom/money -stealing) Executive Orders are issued without a second official thought - an act as simple and elemental as breathing air, or walking, say.On the other hand, an Executive Order to give back to people some tiny sliver of their traditional rights and freedoms? Well, that's just unthinkable! Unmentionable! Such thoughts never occur to government, and if they do, are never to be mentioned aloud, by government. To summarize. Executive Orders are good, noble, righteous, and ethical when a president uses them to loot your gold and other property, and prevent, prohibit and restrict you from doing peaceful things which you could do before. Those are good.Executive Orders are wicked, bad, unthinkable, and certainly unmentionable, if the ungrateful and revolting rabble (i.e., the voters/taxpayers) should suggest they be used to restore traditional freedoms. Those are bad.Got that?
http://drugnewsbot.org
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by SoupHerb on February 07, 2016 at 12:00:22 PT:
Political Clamoring
B.O. already said no but, if he did it it would take a population of votes away from Hills because she already promised to down schedule cannabis to enable more research...
Is there a plan or are they both blowing smoke? I don't believe any of the Candidates are on any other page than to stay with the same ol' catering to special interests(prohibition). We'll see.
It is bizarro this situation exits at all! All about the money, that's crazy. All about safety, still crazy. It is a big business issue by desire and they control the program(s).
The people have been screaming for years and are still practically being ignored! The black market for cannabis is still alive and well and there is absolutely zero common sense coming from the political arena other than people making it happen themselves...that's is mean.
The war exists and will not end until a common sense resolution appears at the Federal level, which of course bought and paid for by the politicians very special interest supporters. I'm not proud of being part of the support of "the black market" but i really have no choice.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by Had Enough on February 07, 2016 at 11:38:37 PT
2nd time around...
Hope we don't have to do a third time around...58% the last time around...while the Governors received 47 to 48% apiece...Again as we have seen for decades here before...more people voted in favor of cannabis than for the governors... : )
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by FoM on February 07, 2016 at 07:02:44 PT
Paint with Light
It is the only sensible path!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by Paint with light on February 07, 2016 at 06:09:53 PT
Good ideas
I dropped by to post this article but it is already up.Reclassify or declassify.The only sensible path.Legal like it should be.
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment