Weed

[Fuzzboy]

Observed something on campus this morning. I see it happen all the time and it always infuriates me. I'm walking through the student center and there's a guy who sees his friend. He's a good 100 feet from him and shouts " Yo Phil! We blazin tonight, word?!".  Phil responds " hells yeah!" , followed by a putting a joint to the mouth gesture. I smoked heavy for several years. I mean, I went months at a time without there being a moment when I wasn't awake and stoned. I never once felt the urge to glorify it in front of a crowd of a hundred people. These guys obviously smoke on the reg together all the time. Are they that desperate for attention that they have to announce it to a bunch of strangers who don't give a shit and probably are all thinking about what a huge tool he is?

My opinion: they were doing it to be funny, although I'm sure they got fucking toasted shit later on that day

[ZBomber]

Nah, they were probably just being standard college douche bags who think putting any kind of substance in your body is something cool and new and revolutionary and everyone within ear range needs to know about it.

[jcmistat]

It should be legalized for the fact you can't know the effect it will have. Sure people can discern the positives and negatives but you'll never know if you don't try. If it's truly a problem than make it illegal and things will go back to normal.

[slycordinator]

Even when you know the effect, the stuff should be legal. If we think we should ban everything with known deleterious effects, then we should go and ban sugar consumption by people with diabetes mellitus and peanut consumption by anyone who's had anaphylaxis to it.

[El Barto]

Article about Obama's war on pot.  https://www.dallasobserver.com/2011-10-20/news/obama-s-war-on-weed/

Despite telling everybody his DOJ was going to back off when he got elected,  he's actually gone after them quite a bit harder than Chimpy did.  Raids have increased.  They're threatening banks that house accounts for dispensaries with money laundering charges.  They're bullying landlords with seizure threats if they lease property to dispensaries or grows.  They're threatening media outlets for running pro-pot advertisements (which has the intended effect of stifling discussion).  The IRS is finding ways to stick people with evasion by disallowing standard deductions.  Ashcroft certainly liked to threaten Cali stoners,  but aside from busting Tommy Chong just for the trophy aspect,  he didn't really go out of his way to interfere too much; he was more concerned about T&A than pot.

This really just further solidifies my opinion that Obama honestly is a worthless piece of shit.   

[Scheavo]

How much is Obama actually involved in all of that? Perhaps he's more concerned with the economy, wall street, and international affairs to be hands-on regarding marijuana... and the fact that he's not being hands-on could allow for people to basically start doing things he doesn't agree with.

I've discovered something rather disturbing about American politics over the past like... 5 years. Everything that the government does, at any time, is blamed on the President, when in fact the President has very limited power, and is not a monarch. The way everyone behaves, it's like the President has the power of a king, who can pass laws they want, who can do whatever they want, to get things done. I'm sure the House of Rep's absolutely love this scape-goating.

*edit*

I mean, you know my position on weed, so obviously I disagree with what the government is doing. But the problem is with the laws, not the person and people who enforce those laws. It's corruption of the government when public servants serve their own interests over the laws they are supposed to be enforcing. Change the laws.

[El Barto]

The attorney general is a cabinet level position.  He sets the DOJ's priorities on behalf of the president.  In any case,  the US attorney's office in Cali has said that they're operating with Dickhead's blessing. 

[Scheavo]

Well then, I still have to say the major problem is with the laws himself. Sir Dickhead is obligated to enforce the laws of the land, and the law of the land is pure bullshit. I mean, you and I can probably both agree that the amount of "medical" marijuana user's is pure bullshit (there are people who actually benefit from it medically, but those people are far outnumbered by people just getting the card to bypass the law).

I blame Congress more than I blame Obama, because Congress has the power to just end the entire "War on Drugs," and end the fucking bullshit at it's source.

[antigoon]

The whole of Congress didn't say in their campaigns that medical marijuana busts would be a waste of DOJ resources.

[El Barto]

Add to that,  this is a law that nobody wants enforced.   In this case,  the people of California certainly seem pretty happy with their arrangement.  While he might be obliged to enforce the law of the land,  the president has always exercised discretion in how laws are enforced.  His maniac predecessor didn't seem to care too much, except in soundbites.

[Scheavo]

Add to that,  this is a law that nobody wants enforced.   In this case,  the people of California certainly seem pretty happy with their arrangement.  While he might be obliged to enforce the law of the land,  the president has always exercised discretion in how laws are enforced.  His maniac predecessor didn't seem to care too much, except in soundbites.

And the medical marijuana industry wasn't what it was today.

The whole of Congress didn't say in their campaigns that medical marijuana busts would be a waste of DOJ resources.

So what? The President may agree with that, but that doesn't mean he has the full authority to just ignore the law. Like I already pointed out, the "Medical Marijuana" industry is mostly a joke, and those that actually need it is overshadowed by a bunch for 20 year olds with insomnia. It's not the President's job to effectively rewrite laws, it's his job to enforce them. If Obama promised to effectively rewrite a law, he was wrong - that's Congresses job, so start going after your congressmen to address this issue.

[El Barto]

With infinite resources,  the "he can't ignore the law" argument would be an interesting one.  In the real world it isn't.  Every day,  LEAs allocate resources based on priorities,  and the DOJ is no different.  With finite resources,  you can't enforce every law.  You prioritize.  He's choosing to have resources allocated to something he said before wasn't of much priority,  and also something that the state of California doesn't particularly want him meddling in.

[Scheavo]

This is  like getting angry at a referee for calling passing interference, becuase they can't always catch passing interference.

After Obama said he was going to let states decide, people took it upon themselves to them take advantage of that. He's going after the people who are trying to take advantage of that, and until he busts an old lady with glaucoma, I'm not gonna really say he's any better or worse than his predecessor. His predecessor didn't have the situation he has, so it's ridiculous to compare the two.

Can't we just agree that the law shouldn't be the law, and that the best solution is to get congress to abolish the law?

[El Barto]

The referee is a false analogy.  It's a matter of available resources.

And while I agree that people are taking advantage of the situation,  if his DOJ is preventing the old lady with glaucoma from getting her bud,  then I think it's a problem.  Contrary to what he says,  they're not going after big commercial enterprises,  although I don't see why that would even matter.  They're stifling the entire program by undermining all facets of it. 

Of course we agree that congress is full of shit in this regard,  but that's not going to change.  Plenty of presidents have chosen what laws to enforce and how vigorously to enforce them.  Chimpy's issue was porn.  Nobody else seems to care about federal obscenity statutes.  Honestly,  I'm kind of puzzled why you're defending him.

[Scheavo]

Because he's only doing his sworn duty? I don't want a cop who only enforces the law's he wants to enforce. I don't want a President who only enforces the law's he wants to enforce. The best reason I can give you as to why I believe this is to read Kant's "What is Enlightenment." It strikes me as a perversion and a corruption of the government to allow private interests to corrupt the public's desires.

Here's a weird argument: since Obama is stringently enforcing the law, he's pissing people off, and at the same time making us realize what a giant waste of resources the entire ordeal is. By actually enforcing the laws that are on the books, it allows people to realize how bullshit some of those laws are, which will turn into their repeal. If Obama wasn't enforcing the law, it would simply create a bigger industry, and then come the next Republican president, and you'd see a crackdown which would have even worse consequences, and we'd be stuck with the law people forgot was actually in place, becuase we forgot it was there, and never did anything about it.

Now, I agree it's a waste of resources, but unless Obama dismantles the entire War on Drugs, we're already talking about a waste of resources, and Obama doesn't have that power. What we're really talking about is how to direct resources that are already wasted. I mean, if they weren't going after the marijuana industry, what would the DEA target... crack, cocaine, lsd, ecstasy? Is that really a better use of resources, or just a different way of wasting them? Or if it's porn... do you really consider that a better use of resources? I'd rather dismantle the DEA, and stop the waste of resources from ever happening.

[slycordinator]

Because he's only doing his sworn duty? I don't want a cop who only enforces the law's he wants to enforce.

And I want cops to consider whether an infraction is worth enforcing. Like I want a guy who runs a red light to get a ticket, but I don't want a guy who went across the "stopping line" at a stoplight by a few inches and didn't enter get into the opposing lane of traffic or even the crosswalk to get one. Oh and you could argue that it's not his/her place to decide (since that's for a judge) but in the end enforcing every little thing like that would only result in us wasting lots of time/money over a bunch of little stuff.

[Scheavo]

Because he's only doing his sworn duty? I don't want a cop who only enforces the law's he wants to enforce.

And I want cops to consider whether an infraction is worth enforcing. Like I want a guy who runs a red light to get a ticket, but I don't want a guy who went across the "stopping line" at a stoplight by a few inches and didn't enter get into the opposing lane of traffic or even the crosswalk to get one. Oh and you could argue that it's not his/her place to decide (since that's for a judge) but in the end enforcing every little thing like that would only result in us wasting lots of time/money over a bunch of little stuff.

Intentionally buying, growing, or selling something isn't comparable to not being able to be perfect. Is going 45 mph in a 35 mph zone really all that big of a deal? I could easily argue that cops shouldn't worry about things like that, because they could be doing something more vital and important, but I don't think a cop should be the one making that decision.

Imagine your local cops didn't care too much about you going 45 mph in a 35 mph zone (I've lived in places where they don't); since the law on the books still says 35 mph is the speed limit, you might get lulled into a false sense of security going 45 mph in that zone. Then all it takes is one new cop, or one cop that decides he wants to pull someone going 45mph in that 35 mph zone, and you get screwed. Obama changing how the law is enforced doesn't change the law, and all it means is that once someone new comes in and decides they want to enforce the retarded drug war laws in order for them to start enforcing it. A lot of people would end up getting fucked in the process, becuase they wrongly thought they were safe.

I mean, I agree with you that you can get to a point where it becomes ridiculous; Obama could decide to put a lot of effort into preventing jaywalking, for instance. But either way, the DEA is going to exist, and the War on Drugs is going to exist.

[El Barto]

Since we were discussing this back in November, 200+ dispensaries have shuttered in California amid threats of federal prosecution.  The recent Oaksterdam bust in particular had a tremendous chilling effect, since it was really targeting the operator who was one of Cali's bigger activists.  Moreover, it would appear that they're coordinating their efforts to scare the bejeezus out of states that might want to enact similar legislation of their own.  Delaware appears to have backed off out of concern that state employees in charge of regulation would fall into the crosshairs of Dickhead's DOJ, per DOJ memos. 

Honestly, I'm having a hard time coming up with a single example of where this asshole's even tried to the president he claimed he would. 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/26/obama-still-unclear-on-medical-marijuana/

[Scheavo]

Ya, I gotta say, this is a weird one for me. Seemed like it took a little while for Holder to come out and say that Obama would let states decide, making it seem as if it was an official decision, but now it appears that was completely false.

His statement about the Drug War recently was disheartening too. Hopefuly, he was actually serious about being open to the facts and the debate, but he made some pretty ridiculous claims.

[El Barto]

What's troubling is that their initial policy was to only act when there was a violation of both state and federal laws.  This made the states very happy.  It was of course bullshit, and now you have coalition of state AG's asking WTF.  All the while, Dickhead continues to act like everything's exactly how he said it would be, while he pushes this rather surprising agenda all over the place. 

[senecadawg2]

Since I wasn't in the conversation back in November, I feel the need to insert my two cents... Legalize it (along with other drugs), and ensure safe sale, with high taxes.

[Nekov]

Since I wasn't in the conversation back in November, I feel the need to insert my two cents... Legalize it (along with other drugs), and ensure safe sale, with high taxes.

Exactly this. I was in Amsterdam a couple weeks back and I can tell you it works perfectly.

[Rathma]

I heard the Netherlands is changing their policy so foreigners can't get weed, but I may be way off. Maybe it's mushrooms.

[cramx3]

Legalize, regulate, and tax it. I am a normal user and a productive member of society. Its a shame people can legally get shit faced on alcohol but can't relax on a j.

[Nekov]

I heard the Netherlands is changing their policy so foreigners can't get weed, but I may be way off. Maybe it's mushrooms.

You're spot on. Starting May they are requiring people wanting to buy weed to show a residence card. They implemented this law because they were getting over 2 million tourists every weekend and their infrastructure could not hold. They are hoping that not allowing foreingers to but weed will dicrease that number.

[Scheavo]

I heard the Netherlands is changing their policy so foreigners can't get weed, but I may be way off. Maybe it's mushrooms.

You're spot on. Starting May they are requiring people wanting to buy weed to show a residence card. They implemented this law because they were getting over 2 million tourists every weekend and their infrastructure could not hold. They are hoping that not allowing foreingers to but weed will dicrease that number.

Probably more than they're going to like, I'll bet.

[El Barto]

I heard the Netherlands is changing their policy so foreigners can't get weed, but I may be way off. Maybe it's mushrooms.

You're spot on. Starting May they are requiring people wanting to buy weed to show a residence card. They implemented this law because they were getting over 2 million tourists every weekend and their infrastructure could not hold. They are hoping that not allowing foreingers to but weed will dicrease that number.

Probably more than they're going to like, I'll bet.

Indeed.  Although I thought it was just an Amsterdam thing, and not a national initiative.  If that's the case, and the dopers can do their thing outside of the capital, I'd say it's a good move and should improve things for everybody. 

[Nekov]

I heard the Netherlands is changing their policy so foreigners can't get weed, but I may be way off. Maybe it's mushrooms.

You're spot on. Starting May they are requiring people wanting to buy weed to show a residence card. They implemented this law because they were getting over 2 million tourists every weekend and their infrastructure could not hold. They are hoping that not allowing foreingers to but weed will dicrease that number.

Probably more than they're going to like, I'll bet.

Indeed.  Although I thought it was just an Amsterdam thing, and not a national initiative.  If that's the case, and the dopers can do their thing outside of the capital, I'd say it's a good move and should improve things for everybody.

I think the problem was in another city that's closer to Germany.

[the Catfishman]

I heard the Netherlands is changing their policy so foreigners can't get weed, but I may be way off. Maybe it's mushrooms.

You're spot on. Starting May they are requiring people wanting to buy weed to show a residence card. They implemented this law because they were getting over 2 million tourists every weekend and their infrastructure could not hold. They are hoping that not allowing foreingers to but weed will dicrease that number.

Probably more than they're going to like, I'll bet.

Indeed.  Although I thought it was just an Amsterdam thing, and not a national initiative.  If that's the case, and the dopers can do their thing outside of the capital, I'd say it's a good move and should improve things for everybody.

I think the problem was in another city that's closer to Germany.

yup, they are experimenting with it along the border (also in the city I live in, Nijmegen) but there are heavy protests from the coffeeshop owners and users. I'm guessing this whole deal will not go through in its current form since our (conservative right wing(for our standards)) gov just fell last week and we will have new elections in September and will probably end up with a more progressive (left or right) cabinet.

[kirksnosehair]

That's going to kill tourism in Amsterdam.  Every single person I know who has ever been there has been there precisely because it was legal to buy weed.

As for Obama's policy here in the states:  It's bullshit.  And very, very disappointing, like a LOT of things about him.  Not even sure if I'm going to vote this year. 

[El Barto]

There are reasons to hit up Amsterdam other than legal drugs.  A semi-regular here did just that a few months ago.  Nice scenery and interesting culture.  That said, this would still have a tremendous effect on tourism there, and probably be the beginning of the end for a helluva lot of their tourism related industry.

[cramx3]

That's going to kill tourism in Amsterdam.  Every single person I know who has ever been there has been there precisely because it was legal to buy weed.

As for Obama's policy here in the states:  It's bullshit.  And very, very disappointing, like a LOT of things about him.  Not even sure if I'm going to vote this year.

Not to turn this into a presidential debate, but vote ron Paul. I believe he wants to legalize weed. He won't get the republican nomination but hopefully he still gets on the ballet. If you weren't going to vote anyway then what the hell. That's how I feel.

[eric42434224]

Every single person I know who has ever been there has been there precisely because it was legal to buy weed.

Hey, lets spend a grand, and several days, to do something I can do for 10 bucks in my living room!

[Ryzee]

Every single person I know who has ever been there has been there precisely because it was legal to buy weed.

Hey, lets spend a grand, and several days, to do something I can do for 10 bucks in my living room!

To be fair being in Amsterdam, which is a lovely city, and hitting up all of the awesome coffee shops and trying all of the different strains of herb they have there is a bit different of an experience then taking bong rips in your living room.  If they really do go through with this no weed for tourists thing then I'm really glad I got a chance to experience it.

[eric42434224]

Every single person I know who has ever been there has been there precisely because it was legal to buy weed.

Hey, lets spend a grand, and several days, to do something I can do for 10 bucks in my living room!

To be fair being in Amsterdam, which is a lovely city, and hitting up all of the awesome coffee shops and trying all of the different strains of herb they have there is a bit different of an experience then taking bong rips in your living room.  If they really do go through with this no weed for tourists thing then I'm really glad I got a chance to experience it.

Of course the experience is different no doubt.  But it isnt an experience that is worth that kind of time and money.  Seriously.
But if you are going to also experience the country/culture/people/etc. then I can 100% dig that.