Colorado and Washington voters approve cannabis legalization (your move, feds)

[Roger_Murdock]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-usa-marijuana-legalization-idUSBRE8A602D20121107

This should be interesting.

[myrkul]

"interesting" In the Chinese curse sense, yes. Would have been even wilder if Romney had been elected.

[RodeoX]

So can a non-resident buy weed in these states now?
Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed (  ). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? 

[Roger_Murdock]

Just posted this over at drugwarrant.com:

I am so glad it was two states rather than just one. A single state could have been dismissed as an outlier (and it would have also been more easily targeted by the feds for retaliation). But two is a trend. (“Wait, I thought two was a coincidence and three was a trend?”) Yeah, yeah that’s the saying (*glares at Oregon*), but when the something is a first in the country’s history, I think two should qualify, don’t you? Cannabis relegalization has been recognizably inevitable for a while to anyone who was paying attention. But after last night, its inevitability is recognizable even by the people who AREN’T paying attention, i.e., the same people who are most likely to oppose reform. It’s getting very hard to ignore the fact that the wind has shifted. That’s going to trigger some cognitive reshuffling among a lot of people. No one wants to be the last person to get the joke.

myrkul: what do you think the feds can / will do about it?  I'm cautiously optimistic that the answer to both is "not much" - particularly when you consider the continuing stampede of public opinion.

[myrkul]

Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed (  ). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? 

Use ≠ addiction. Simple as that.

myrkul: what do you think the feds can / will do about it?  I'm cautiously optimistic that the answer to both is "not much" - particularly when you consider the continuing stampede of public opinion.

Well, look at what they've been doing to MedMJ dispensaries. More of that, I assume.

[Roger_Murdock]

Sure, but that only gets them so far, and I think it will quickly become politically untenable. Good piece from Jacob Sullum over at reason:  http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/07/colorado-and-washington-have-legalized-m

[RodeoX]

Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed (  ). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? 

Use ≠ addiction. Simple as that.

I totally agree. But i am using the language on the permit application. That's why I added the eye roll, lol.

[myrkul]

Sure, but that only gets them so far, and I think it will quickly become politically untenable. Good piece from Jacob Sullum over at reason:  http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/07/colorado-and-washington-have-legalized-m

Looks about right.

The DEA can raid state-legal pot shops, as it has done with medical marijuana dispensaries, but the number of potential targets will be considerably larger once the market officially expands to include recreational users.

Also, most conceal carry licensees make you state that you are not addicted to weed (  ). If I live in these states how can I be denied a right based on my use of a legal substance? Any thoughts? 

Use ≠ addiction. Simple as that.

I totally agree. But i am using the language on the permit application. That's why I added the eye roll, lol.

Well, yeah. You can state you are not addicted, even if you use.

[segabtc]

Supremacy Clause will allow the Feds to do what they will. When state and federal law conflict, federal law always wins! Yeah yeah yeah, I know, I hate that also, but it is until public opinion gets so bad that the feds will have to change their laws.

[Elwar]

The interesting thing about Colorado is that the establishments selling the MJ will be state government facilities.

So the Feds would literally be attacking the states.

This should be interesting.


On the conservative side, do you defend states rights and say that those dispensaries should be able to sell pot?

On the liberal side, do you defend statism and say that the Federal government should be able to shut those shops down?

[segabtc]

definately gonna get the popcorn out for this one. this should be really interesting to watch. In Cali, feds are going after the landlords who RENT out the buildings to legal state businesses. So yeah, how is the federal government gonna come in and take away tax revenue from the state and federal government.  

EDIT: Legalize it, tax the shit out of it and make that money only earmarks as paying down the national debt and any senator or house of rep. that proposes to change or amend that law will immediately be removed from office, loose all benefits and pensions and made to live on minimum wage and only healthcare will be medicare! These people that you elect dont do what you tell them to do, vote them out! Dont care if your rep or dem! 

[myrkul]

The interesting thing about Colorado is that the establishments selling the MJ will be state government facilities.

So the Feds would literally be attacking the states.

This should be interesting.

Oh yes, very much so. What's the rules on non-residents, do you know?

[Roger_Murdock]

Supremacy Clause will allow the Feds to do what they will. When state and federal law conflict, federal law always wins! Yeah yeah yeah, I know, I hate that also, but it is until public opinion gets so bad that the feds will have to change their laws.

I'll see your supremacy clause and raise you the tenth amendment. Oh right, the feds ignore the latter but not the former. Still, the feds aren't as powerful as you think. Take a look at the Jacob Sullum piece I linked to above. This is big. It's the beginning of the end for cannabis prohibition.

[RodeoX]

I was really surprised to see the fed going after Cali's pot dispensaries recently. I think that is going to end soon. No one wants to go after pot anymore. Christ, the last three presidents were pot smokers. Do they think society would have been bettered had they been arrested? Would any of them have been elected with a drug arrest on their record?  

[myrkul]

I was really surprised to see the fed going after Cali's pot dispensaries recently. I think that is going to end soon. No one wants to go after pot anymore. Christ, the last three presidents were pot smokers. Do they think society would have been bettered had they been arrested? Would any of them have been elected with a drug arrest on their record?  

When you become a politician, they remove the part of your brain that detects hypocrisy.

[segabtc]

When you become a politician, they remove the part of your brain that detects hypocrisy.
[/quote]


LOL SO TRUE!!!!!

[RodeoX]

I was really surprised to see the fed going after Cali's pot dispensaries recently. I think that is going to end soon. No one wants to go after pot anymore. Christ, the last three presidents were pot smokers. Do they think society would have been bettered had they been arrested? Would any of them have been elected with a drug arrest on their record?  

When you become a politician, they remove the part of your brain that detects hypocrisy.

I thought they removed all but the brain stem? They can smile, look at cameras and memorize brief phrases like "job creator" or "green energy". Or maybe is was the weed?  

[myrkul]

Hmm.

http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/07/dea-responds-to-legal-weed-in-colorado-a

[TheButterZone]

So,
"FTFY." -DEA

Civil War II, Constitutional Convention, and subsequent SCOTUS gutting (a la Slaughterhouse to the 14th A) to commence.

[TECSHARE]

I have said it before and I will say it again. This is how it will play out. The states will legalize marijuana and individuals and groups will put millions of dollars of capitol into building businesses in various places. It will be in the form of land, vehicles, and other assets. The fed will stand by and let this industry grow. Then from time to time the federal government will swoop in and skim off some of the cream from these businesses via federal drug seizure laws, confiscating assets, cash, and property. They will treat it as their own little piggy bank based on ambiguity between state and federal law. This is already in progress to a certain extent.