Members big_cat Posted November 7, 2012 Members Share Posted November 7, 2012 why don't you like weed? you'd laugh even harder at those demarco stills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fool Evolved Posted November 7, 2012 Members Share Posted November 7, 2012 they hate pot because it makes them bored of hating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TomCTC Posted November 7, 2012 Members Share Posted November 7, 2012 Originally Posted by Hiwatt Bob Voter turnout was high as {censored}. Golfclap, Mr. Hiwatt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members arthurdent'd Posted November 7, 2012 Members Share Posted November 7, 2012 I am arthurdent'd, and I approve this message, oh look....it's 4:20 I'll be right back. mile high city represent yo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members k tone Posted November 7, 2012 Members Share Posted November 7, 2012 Gov. John Hickenlooper. Say that name 3 times when you are high without laughing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members big_cat Posted November 7, 2012 Members Share Posted November 7, 2012 Originally Posted by arthurdent'd I am arthurdent'd, and I approve this message, oh look....it's 4:20 I'll be right back. mile high city represent yo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members arthurdent'd Posted November 7, 2012 Members Share Posted November 7, 2012 Denver is a strange town, a palpable aggregation of transplanted rich kids from everywhere else in the country, and many other countries, that live their Cherry Creek magazine culture fantasy out while surrounded with homeless people and illegals that do their bidding for scraps.But I'm not from round these parts, just a casual witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 9520575 Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 Originally Posted by LSDis4me ^ Supreme Court will nullify the state laws. The reason I'm unsure about this is the current precedence set in 2005 in Gonzales v. Raich, which did not overturn CA medical Marijuana laws. Also, Holder has stated his unwillingness to waste time on going after medical marijuana users. Holder has refused to publicly condemn the colorado amendment to the sate constitution, despite receiving pressure to do so. The DEA is legally obligated to uphold federal laws, but Obama has shifted focus in dealing with states that legalize Marijuana. There has been no challenge to MA's decriminalization laws by the Feds. More State have legalized medical use of marijuana. Medical marihuana and recreational violate the same federal law, I don't see why the court precedence set already, will apply differently. The Congress can continue to ban marijuana, the states can legalize it. Its illegal, but the court and people who arrest you won't be local officials. What I do see coming is a bunch of towns passing anti marijuana measures, making illegal in that town or district. Then you have a situation where the local police could arrest you, the DEA, or FBI could arrest you but the state trooper, wouldn't. Which is currently an issue in CA, where certain areas have more restrictions, while others have looser laws. We'll see what happens in CO. But the main law obstructing marihuana reform in the US isn't just the Controlled Substances Act it is the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. There a 183 countries signed to that treaty, you have to change that first, before any movement for reform on a federal level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LSDis4me Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 Originally Posted by arthurdent'd Denver is a strange town, a palpable aggregation of transplanted rich kids from everywhere else in the country, and many other countries, that live their Cherry Creek magazine culture fantasy out while surrounded with homeless people and illegals that do their bidding for scraps. But I'm not from round these parts, just a casual witness. My adolescence, describe'd Cherry Creek High School. Lived in Capital Hill while going to school at Metro. Originally Posted by 9520575 The reason I'm unsure about this is the current precedence set in 2005 in Gonzales v. Raich, which did not overturn CA medical Marijuana laws. Also, Holder has stated his unwillingness to waste time on going after medical marijuana users. Holder has refused to publicly condemn the colorado amendment to the sate constitution, despite receiving pressure to do so. The DEA is legally obligated to uphold federal laws, but Obama has shifted focus in dealing with states that legalize Marijuana. There has been no challenge to MA's decriminalization laws by the Feds. More State have legalized medical use of marijuana. Medical marihuana and recreational violate the same federal law, I don't see why the court precedence set already, will apply differently. The Congress can continue to ban marijuana, the states can legalize it. Its illegal, but the court and people who arrest you won't be local officials. What I do see coming is a bunch of towns passing anti marijuana measures, making illegal in that town or district. Then you have a situation where the local police could arrest you, the DEA, or FBI could arrest you but the state trooper, wouldn't. Which is currently an issue in CA, where certain areas have more restrictions, while others have looser laws. We'll see what happens in CO. But the main law obstructing marihuana reform in the US isn't just the Controlled Substances Act it is the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. There a 183 countries signed to that treaty, you have to change that first, before any movement for reform on a federal level. This could all be true. And of course with the international drug treaty, the US is the primary force behind it. Much of South America wants out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 9520575 Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 Oh the US needs to deal with the treaty . They need to be the leader, we as advocates need to elevate the discussion.redoing the treaty isn't even on the radar, most advocates are totally unaware. Grassroots movement needs to focus on that treaty, IMHO. LOCAL AND STATE LAWS, then the treaty. The federal laws, follow from that treaty. {censored}ing JFK... one of the worst presidents ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LSDis4me Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 ^ Glenn Greenwald (my favorite political blogger) had a column last week on the worst civil liberties president:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...erties-historyI'm gonna avoid taking the bait on your JFK comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members soapbladder Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 Originally Posted by LSDis4me Decriminalization means that its still illegal, but the law isn't being enforced. For example, driving 5-10 MPH over the speed limit on the freeway is illegal, but you're probably not going to get pulled over for it. Legalization is quit different. And the issue is, as Aristotle noted, a matter of states rights. Federal law supersedes state law. For example, a state can't pass a law allowing for slavery and expect it to hold up. The supreme court will decide against states legalization of marijuana for recreational purposes. They have to. The way the issue has to be resolved is for the Controlled Substances Act to be revised. Congress ain't gonna do that. Obama didn't even support marijuana legalization when he had the chance, and in fact, had his DEA shut down the dispensaries in California for no good reason (not even Bush had done that). That is mos def not what decriminalization means in practice. It means rather than dealing with something in the criminal sphere, it is dealt with in the administrative sphere. I.E. you would get a ticket for violating an ordinance but it would not be dealt with by the criminal justice system. So no time in the pokey or a misdemeanor/felony. As a trade off, the fines can be be set arbitrarily high, and you have far fewer constitutional protections in the administrative setting. Decriminalization also doesn't directly contradict federal law by usurping congress' powers under the Constitution's commerce clause like a regime of regulation/taxation would. The commerce clause has historically been interpreted expansively, and this doesn't fall near the margins of that power. For example the commerce clause has been interpreted to ban private manufacture of machine guns made for personal use, not for sale. Although the current Court is hostile to an expansive interpretation (look no further than the Obamacare decision), it is unlikely that the conservative SC would use marijuana as its issue to make a stand on. (If they were smart they would, because it would allow them to roll back a justification for many types of regulation, before the applauding lefties knew what hit them.) The new laws are mostly a signal to the Feds that they are out of touch enough that people are starting to organize effectively around the issue. AND local law enforcement does not have to enforce the fed's laws for them. FWIW 5-10 mph over the speed limit is not a crime either, which is why most traffic violations are dealt with in administrative tribunals. Another good tip: You can also be arrested and detained for up to 48 hours in police custody pursuant to ordinance violations (including no seatbelt), so don't get smart with Johnny Law without a very good reason. SB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mr benn Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 Go Denver! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jisatsu Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 Feels good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MadCapLaughs Posted November 8, 2012 Members Share Posted November 8, 2012 Originally Posted by guitardustin Prepare yourself for even more annoying potheads wandering the streets of Colorado. How fun. You are more than welcome to stay the {censored} in your {censored}ty little corner of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members arthurdent'd Posted November 9, 2012 Members Share Posted November 9, 2012 My adolescence, describe'dCherry Creek High School. Lived in Capital Hill while going to school at Metro.This could all be true. And of course with the international drug treaty, the US is the primary force behind it. Much of South America wants out. I live in Cap Hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LSDis4me Posted November 9, 2012 Members Share Posted November 9, 2012 ^ Wax Trax still there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members arthurdent'd Posted November 9, 2012 Members Share Posted November 9, 2012 ^ Wax Trax still there? sure is, I just picked up a bunch of 70's Neil Young and P-Funk a week or 2 ago, love that place! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LSDis4me Posted November 9, 2012 Members Share Posted November 9, 2012 Wax Trax was the hub of the punk rock scene in Denver throughout the 80s, and for awhile, it was a great scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.