|
Nope and if they try they'll lose all their political capital and get bogged down for 4 years doing nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 06:50 |
|
Yinlock posted:actually they have a majority so they'll be fine and just blame the democrats for it as usual What are they going to do? It's already Schedule I federally. The states will immediately sue and an injunction will be put on any enforcement until the trial is over years later during which time more and more legalization will be rolled out. Kick up enforcement and raid state-legal dispensaries? Good luck.
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2016 23:19
|
|
Reading over the last page it seems like you guys still think it is the late 90s? Weed legalization has a higher approval rating than any individual politician in office right now even when you get to the state by state levels afaik.Yinlock posted:rolled out from where, the gop who want everything to be the same as a hundred years ago? Rolled out from the state legislatures who have been passing legalization bills. It's already more than half the states that have some kind of medical weed at least isn't it? e: 28 states have passed some form of marijuana legalization. 10 more and that's 3/4ths. This is a nonstarter for the federal gov't I think. Roylicious has issued a correction as of 19:16 on Dec 16, 2016 |
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 19:11
|
|
zen death robot posted:Sessions is an rear end in a top hat and Trump is an authoritarian so say goodbye to your weed Okay, but what could they actually do? At most they can order the DEA to pursue heavy enforcement but without local PD cooperation that's going to be very ineffectual.
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 19:26
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:What legislatures have written and passed legalization bills without having their hands forced on the issue? Idk what point you're trying to make here. GlyphGryph posted:They can shut down the legal market and drive the whole thing back underground. Which brings back all the crime issues and social unrest and side effects, except this time it gets blamed on weed being legal. It's interesting that somehow they wield the executive authority to totally shut it down whereas a decade or so ago when the DEA was raiding medical clinics all the time there were still tons of medical patients getting weed from clinics. Like I said, they could tell the DEA to exclusively focus on getting legal weed clinics shut down and even if they take that insane step they still couldn't do what you're saying. Definitely not without local PD cooperation which I don't think will be forthcoming. Roylicious has issued a correction as of 19:44 on Dec 16, 2016 |
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 19:41
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:You seem to think state legislatures will fight for legal weed, but there are no state legislatures that actually support legal weed yet. You seem to think that once the laws are now on the books it'll be a simple matter to roll them all back on Trump and Pence's say so. There's a few states where that exact thing is prohibited in the state constitution. Also, clearly weed legalization is popular among the voters. What state politician is going to risk pissing off his base and ending their career in order to appease the federal government? CA, for example, as much as it is a dumb state isn't going to just lie over on this.
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 19:51
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Many of them are going to roll over because it gives them an excuse to get the outcome they want and blame Trump instead of themselves. Well I think that you think people hate weed like it is still 1999  Idk how many state politicians are going to want to attack weed legalization, destroy jobs, and decrease state revenues in order to appease Trump just because secretly deep down they just hate weed and are looking for an excuse to gut legalization. Especially given that, like I said, support for legal weed in the states in question is more approved of than any individual politician afaik. It would mean an incredibly good chance of losing their seat in the next election and that's the #1 thing they are trying to avoid. GlyphGryph posted:Weed is still illegal, all they need to do is give the go ahead for the Feds to enforce it. The state laws literally don't matter if that happens. And that's not strictly true depending on the jurisdiction. Many sheriff departments aren't beholden whatsoever to the federal gov't and only enforce state laws. Realistically here is what would happen if the federal gov't pursues heavy anti-weed enforcement: they'll get sued by a state and then an injunction will be put on further DEA action against state-legal stuff until it makes its way through the courts. Worst case the SCOTUS declares all the state laws in question null and void but that isn't going to be something that happens very quickly. e: also you're describing a situation that has already happened and all it did was make the dispensaries play whack-a-mole with the Feds. Certainly didn't stop the burgeoning market and I think this time around there will be less cooperation from local PD which would make enforcement basically impossible. Roylicious has issued a correction as of 20:05 on Dec 16, 2016 |
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 20:00
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:You are making some fundamentally flawed assumptions here, and reality disagrees with you quite strongly. You seem to believe that if a politician goes against something that passed with overwhelming popular support they wouldn't be at risk to lose their seat in the next election. Which, to me, seems to be the flawed assumption. But if I were a politician I'd probably tell Trump and Pence to pound sand rather than pursue their policies for no gain to myself. What would my motivation even be as that hypothetical politician? Grr weed is bad? Who cares if it is bad or good, tax money is up and the voter base is appeased. Maybe I'm just naive though I could be wrong. quote:The real risk is politicians seeing an opportunity to shift policy back a decade and turn popular sentiment against legalization. But why? They just hate weed? Politicians do things they think would be beneficial to themselves and their career. This seems like a giant unpopular fight for no purpose. Roylicious has issued a correction as of 20:16 on Dec 16, 2016 |
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 06:50 |
|
Hmm well you could be right of course who knows what the future holds. I don't think it'll be as easy as that though.GlyphGryph posted:Well, first, politicians do actually have beliefs. They aren't perfectly emotional, self-interested robots. Maybe I'm too jaded 
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 20:36
|
|