[Merged] So much for states rights/Pot-2 steps forward ten steps back

[ZiprHead]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-takes-aim-legalized-marijuana-article-1.3736948?utm_content=buffer853c7&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw

"Attorney General Jeff Sessions is taking aim at legalized marijuana, according to an Associated Press report.

Sessions on Thursday announced the repeal a 2013 Obama-era policy that's protected legalized marijuana from federal intervention.

The policy change would allow for each state's U.S. attorneys to decide whether to aggressively enforce the federal marijuana law — even if the substance has already been made legal in their state."

 

[southernhybrid]

I was just going to start a thread on this topic but you beat me to it. One of the biggest problems with this threat is that it is not only cruel and draconian, since weed has very few known health hazards, when compared to alcohol, or cigarettes, not to mention many Rx. and OTC meds, killing the mj industry in the states that have made it legal, will destroy huge amounts of revenue for those states as well as the loss of jobs associated with it. That would result in mj sales to going back underground, probably resulting in more jail time for those who sell or use mj and are unfortunate to get caught.

So, let's see. Loss of jobs, loss of tax revenue and the added expense of prosecuting and jailing people involved in an industry that individual states have made legal is next on the agenda. So, it's okay to drink yourself to death, or to keep your own arsenal of guns, but dog forbid you use or sell a little mj, even when the state where you reside has made such activity legal. WTF! WTF is wrong with these people!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Saying you are for "state's rights" is political terminology for "we can't pass legislation for this at the Federal Level".

 

[Valjean]

It's rarely a matter of principle. If a community has an agenda or wants to preserve traditional values, it supports whatever authority will cater to its interests.
Sometimes an interest group will even appeal to both states' rights and Federal authority at the same time.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

As has been patiently explained time and time again in all the threads about the US Civil War, the only States' Right that the right wing has ever been interested in is the right to own slaves.

 

[dismal]

Sometimes I think it's too bad the writers of our Constitution didn't go to the trouble of listing the powers they wanted the Federal government to have. And then maybe writing something else in there that all the other powers are left to the states or the people.

 

[Horatio Parker]

As has been patiently explained time and time again in all the threads about the US Civil War, the only States' Right that the right wing has ever been interested in is the right to own slaves.

Except for the Fugitive Slave Act part.

 

[Axulus]

As has been patiently explained time and time again in all the threads about the US Civil War, the only States' Right that the right wing has ever been interested in is the right to own slaves.

And the right to restrict abortion access.

My only hope is that Jeff's personal war on marijuana will ignite more backlash against this administration in upcoming elections and maybe spur some real reform on federal marijuana law.

Really hoping to see more states legalize as well in this coming November's elections.

 

[RavenSky]

As has been patiently explained time and time again in all the threads about the US Civil War, the only States' Right that the right wing has ever been interested in is the right to own slaves.

and control women's bodies

 

[Elixir]

My only hope is that Jeff's personal war on marijuana will ignite more backlash against this administration in upcoming elections and maybe spur some real reform on federal marijuana law.

Really hoping to see more states legalize as well in this coming November's elections.

The horse has already left the barn (if you care to inform Jeff).
After seeing the effect, there's a good chance that Colorado would secede before caving to letting the Feds take away all their pot revenues. Very soon, CA will be in the same boat, and then... it's over.

 

[dismal]

My only hope is that Jeff's personal war on marijuana will ignite more backlash against this administration in upcoming elections and maybe spur some real reform on federal marijuana law.

Really hoping to see more states legalize as well in this coming November's elections.

The horse has already left the barn (if you care to inform Jeff).
After seeing the effect, there's a good chance that Colorado would secede before caving to letting the Feds take away all their pot revenues. Very soon, CA will be in the same boat, and then... it's over.

It's my understanding from past discussions here that they can't secede because military bases.

 

[whollygoats]

My only hope is that Jeff's personal war on marijuana will ignite more backlash against this administration in upcoming elections and maybe spur some real reform on federal marijuana law.

Really hoping to see more states legalize as well in this coming November's elections.

The horse has already left the barn (if you care to inform Jeff).
After seeing the effect, there's a good chance that Colorado would secede before caving to letting the Feds take away all their pot revenues. Very soon, CA will be in the same boat, and then... it's over.

It's my understanding from past discussions here that they can't secede because military bases.

The same reason the Dakotas and Montana cannot secede? Too many holes in the ground? Just count the buried silos.

 

[Elixir]

It's my understanding from past discussions here that they can't secede because military bases.

The same reason the Dakotas and Montana cannot secede? Too many holes in the ground? Just count the buried silos.

Well, Cheyenne Mountain is certainly a hole in the ground, but I don't think DoD will readily let go of (or bury) it any time soon. But CO is not going to give up its pot revenues, no matter what nonsense Jeff spouts.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I remember the days when conservatives used to criticize the democrats for "the nanny state", where government supposedly knew better than it's citizens. As has been mentioned, states rights only seems to become an issue when it involves taking away freedom to contradict Christian "biblical values".

 

[Tom Sawyer]

My only hope is that Jeff's personal war on marijuana will ignite more backlash against this administration in upcoming elections and maybe spur some real reform on federal marijuana law.

Really hoping to see more states legalize as well in this coming November's elections.

The horse has already left the barn (if you care to inform Jeff).
After seeing the effect, there's a good chance that Colorado would secede before caving to letting the Feds take away all their pot revenues. Very soon, CA will be in the same boat, and then... it's over.

It's my understanding from past discussions here that they can't secede because military bases.

Can't the people and equipment on those military bases either drive a few hours down the road or be treated as discarded salvage by the new country and taken?

 

[Elixir]

I remember the days when conservatives used to criticize the democrats for "the nanny state", where government supposedly knew better than it's citizens. As has been mentioned, states rights only seems to become an issue when it involves taking away freedom to contradict Christian "biblical values".

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
So unless your religion is the First Church of Evangelical-Bashing, there's nothing that says you have the right to contradict "Christian Biblical Values".

 

[Horatio Parker]

My only hope is that Jeff's personal war on marijuana will ignite more backlash against this administration in upcoming elections and maybe spur some real reform on federal marijuana law.

Really hoping to see more states legalize as well in this coming November's elections.

The horse has already left the barn (if you care to inform Jeff).
After seeing the effect, there's a good chance that Colorado would secede before caving to letting the Feds take away all their pot revenues. Very soon, CA will be in the same boat, and then... it's over.

It's my understanding from past discussions here that they can't secede because military bases.

They just have to be careful not to open fire on them.

 

[dismal]

It's my understanding from past discussions here that they can't secede because military bases.

Can't the people and equipment on those military bases either drive a few hours down the road or be treated as discarded salvage by the new country and taken?

Someone else will have to explain. I can't recall exactly what properties it is of military bases that makes secession impossible and-or unadvisable. At a minimum, you're supposed to stop arguing about secession when they are invoked.

 

[whollygoats]

Well....I dunno about military bases, but it was pointed out to me that if the Dakotas seceded from the union, they'd be in possession of the third largest collection of nuclear ICBMs in the world.

Which would then be well within easy strike distance of anywhere in North America.

I think that is the reason that the US would be reluctant for northern fly-over states to exit the union.

 

[bilby]

Well....I dunno about military bases, but it was pointed out to me that if the Dakotas seceded from the union, they'd be in possession of the third largest collection of nuclear ICBMs in the world.

Which would then be well within easy strike distance of anywhere in North America.

I think that is the reason that the US would be reluctant for northern fly-over states to exit the union.

You think that the current owners of those (the US DoD) wouldn't remove the warheads, and probably the rockets too, before the transition to independence is complete?

Or that, in the event of a sudden secession with no warning period during which they could be removed, that the DoD wouldn't just go and get them anyway (if necessary, brushing aside whatever forces the states might try to use to prevent that)?

The end of the Cold War and collapse of the USSR didn't result in any long-term increase in the number of nuclear weapons states. According to Wikipedia, Ukraine inherited about 5,000 nuclear weapons in 1991, but by 1996, Ukraine had agreed to dispose of all nuclear weapons within its territory. The warheads were disassembled in Russia. Kazakhstan inherited 1,400 nuclear weapons from the Soviet Union, and transferred them all to Russia by 1995. Belarus had 81 single warhead missiles stationed on its territory in 1991. They were all transferred to Russia by 1996.

Presumably, in the event of secession by the Dakotas, a similar transfer of warheads (and delivery systems) to the rump of the USA would take place.