Great idea. Now, all that has to happen is 50 (57?) states pass their version of the law.
This should NEVER EVER happen on a national scale. And, as ‘Rats tend to do, EVERYTHING they propose has some backdoor agenda, and this one is aimed at putting another nail in federalism.
I was just going to say exactly that. Let each state decide its own drug laws.
Keep the feds out completely.
>>>This should NEVER EVER happen on a national scale. And, as ‘Rats tend to do, EVERYTHING they propose has some backdoor agenda, and this one is aimed at putting another nail in federalism.<<<
Actually, the nail has already been hammered. Obama has essentially declared another federal law (about marijuana) null and void, in the same manner as he declared the Defense of Marriage Act null and void. No debate. No vote. Just a decree from the executive branch.
This sadly reminds me of what I can recall dimly from my History of Rome class back in college. Augustus becomes the supreme ruler, and, ironically, his first decree is the re-establishment of the Republic. (I’m probably wrong about this, but I think my gist is close to the mark.) Obama has decreed that states can violate a federal law. He’s acting like a dictator - in this case, a benevolent dictator, but a dictator nonetheless. He’s not advancing the ideal of limited government and shared power among the states - he’s advancing the idea that the federal government is the ultimate arbiter of what can and can’t be done.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it. (Bad joke...)
It was n a national scale when the outlawed it. Why should it not be a national repeal?
While I'm not for legalized drugs, I think that the Feds have overstepped their Constitutional limits with so many of the laws out there that the two States that started it may have done a good thing by telling the feds that their law has no jurisdiction. The idiot in D.C. may only be trying to keep attention away from the dichotomy being played out and being missed/ignored by so many in the MSM.