A key moment in the War on Drugs

[T.O.M.]

The votes in Colorado and Washington to legalize marihuana for recreational use are a real turning point in the war on drugs, in my opinion.  The Feds will have liimited options on how they respond. 

Option 1. They can attack at the very start, and go after any dealer under the federal statutes, and end up with a serious state's rights vs. federal law issue.  (This could create a new cash crop in Washingto and Colorado to eliminate interstate commerce and get rid of federal jurisdiction.)
Option 2.  Take no action, and allow the sales to go on, but continue to enforce the laws on the books in other locations.  Big problem in that selective enforcement never plays well in court, especially in front of a jury.
Option 3.  Congress takes action and changes federal laws with respect to marihuana possession and sales.

A judge I have great respect for told me about 10 years ago that he expected to see marihuana legalized, licensed, and taxed like alcohol in his lifetime, given the changes in attitude among the general public on the issue.  The governor of Colorado said as much in a press conference about the results of the election.

Should be interesting to watch how it plays out... 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

the users will play a role in the outcome.  behave maturely sensibly would be good if unexpected. they can kill it as quick as the feds

[T.O.M.]

the users will play a role in the outcome.  behave maturely sensibly would be good if unexpected. they can kill it as quick as the feds

Don't know about that, as there are a ton of idiots drinking alcohol and acting stupid, but no one talks about banning booze these days...

[makattak]

Don't know about that, as there are a ton of idiots drinking alcohol and acting stupid, but no one talks about banning booze these days...

Already ingrained.

I think C&SD is making an analogy more to concealed carriers, rather than alcohol. Blood in the streets hasn't happened so other states are having real problems convincing their citizens that they are uniquely incapable of handling concealed weapons.

[Dannyboy]

(This could create a new cash crop in Washingto and Colorado to eliminate interstate commerce and get rid of federal jurisdiction.)

Didn't the Supreme Court already nix that idea with Raich?

[Jamisjockey]

I predict the DOJ will do everything to kill the initiatives.  State's rights is a slippery slope for this administration. 

[MicroBalrog]

This reminds me somewhat about my visit to Amsterdam with my father when I was 17.  I did not of course use any drugs, but I have seen quite a few people who did.

I will post the sordid story here in a few.

[T.O.M.]

Didn't the Supreme Court already nix that idea with Raich?

Yes, to a degree, in that Raich nixed the "personal medicinal use" as a defense, and held that the federal statute extended the jurisdiction to marihuana in those cases for logic that, frankly, I miss.

I was thinking more in terms of state sponsored marihuana farms.  Reason being that if Colorado and Washington are going to permit personal use for recreation, the only way to dodge the federal law would be to license and tax the product that is wholly grown, developed and processed in the State.  That's where it could get really interesting...

By the way, I got a very polite PM telling me that I was spelling marihuana wrong.  I spell it this was because that is how Ohio law spells it.  18 years of habit, and I can't spell it with a "j" without thinking about it.

[MicroBalrog]

Do we trust the government to produce weed?

I don't.

[Balog]

Yes, to a degree, in that Raich nixed the "personal medicinal use" as a defense, and held that the federal statute extended the jurisdiction to marihuana in those cases for logic that, frankly, I miss.

I was thinking more in terms of state sponsored marihuana farms.  Reason being that if Colorado and Washington are going to permit personal use for recreation, the only way to dodge the federal law would be to license and tax the product that is wholly grown, developed and processed in the State.  That's where it could get really interesting...

By the way, I got a very polite PM telling me that I was spelling marihuana wrong.  I spell it this was because that is how Ohio law spells it.  18 years of habit, and I can't spell it with a "j" without thinking about it.

Products produced and comsumed entirely in state are still subject to interstate commerce regulation per my understanding o current case law on the matter.

[makattak]

Products produced and comsumed entirely in state are still subject to interstate commerce regulation per my understanding o current case law on the matter.

Wickard v. Filburn

[T.O.M.]

Products produced and comsumed entirely in state are still subject to interstate commerce regulation per my understanding o current case law on the matter.

In a state, yes.  My thought is "what if it is produced under license of the state itself?"  Make it a true state's rights vs. federal government issue...

The other thing I'm curious to see is if the congresscritters from Colorado and/or washingto introduce legislation consistent with the obvious will of their constituents...

[kgbsquirrel]

The votes in Colorado and Washington to legalize marihuana for recreational use are a real turning point in the war on drugs, in my opinion.  The Feds will have liimited options on how they respond. 

Option 1. They can attack at the very start, and go after any dealer under the federal statutes, and end up with a serious state's rights vs. federal law issue.  (This could create a new cash crop in Washingto and Colorado to eliminate interstate commerce and get rid of federal jurisdiction.)
Option 2.  Take no action, and allow the sales to go on, but continue to enforce the laws on the books in other locations.  Big problem in that selective enforcement never plays well in court, especially in front of a jury.
Option 3.  Congress takes action and changes federal laws with respect to marihuana possession and sales.

#3: Unless the congresscritters see their own states go the way of WA/CO don't expect them to stick their necks out like that. Hell, you have Doctor's pumping out studies for the medical use of canibanoids and they still wont take it off Schedule 1.

#2: Selective enforcement doesn't seem to be an issue for them when it comes to illegal immigration.

#1: I would think they'd have a harder time and/or have to expend more of their personal resources without having State and Local assets helping them out, but then again I'm not really informed on just how much the DEA relies on those assets in it's enforcement.


Just an FYI, the CO state and locals will still burn you at the stake for DUI if you toke and drive. Just felt like that needed to be said. I do see the Fed trying to go #1 and then when it looks like they'll lose big in the courts and State's Rights will become case-law they'll suddenly drop it to prevent such an outcome and flip to #2.

[Tallpine]

Option 4.  Take no action, and allow the sales to go on for a while until everybody gets used to the idea, and then crack down like a ton of bricks.

 

[Frank Castle]

Option 5.  Take no action and tax the hell out of it. ( like cigarettes )

[Stetson]

Option 5.  Take no action and tax the hell out of it. ( like cigarettes )

That's the goal here.  They are talking about the tax revenue being used for schools and infrastructure but they mentioned general fund and I've seen how that doesn't help the schools.  The district I live in has gone way down in quality.  Friends that I went to HS with who are teachers here will not send their kids to public schools here.

[French G.]

They will crush the front-running users and sellers to scare the rest back into hiding. This admin tolerate states' rights? That's unpossible!