Posted on 01/10/2009 1:17:51 PM PST by IbJensen
Esquire magazine recently reported that representatives from Barack Obama's administration team admit the president-elect will give strong consideration to decriminalizing marijuana by the end of his tenure in office.
Those remarks follow comments issued last summer by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts), who introduced H.R. 5843 -- an act to remove federal penalties for the use of marijuana by "responsible adults." According to CNN, the liberal lawmaker "doesn't think it's the government's business to tell you how to spend your leisure time."
Lending the Esquire article additional credence is an interview with Obama, recorded in January 2004, during which the then-U.S. Senate candidate expressed interest in decriminalizing the personal use of pot. (See YouTube video)
As someone who is very much aware of how this drug has harmed so many people from my generation, I adamantly disagree with this "floating" proposal. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency lists marijuana as "a Schedule 1 controlled substance, meaning it has a high potential for abuse."
It's irresponsible for members of the incoming administration to float this idea and to send such a message to millions of young Americans -- although I'm sure many supporters of medical marijuana use would disagree. But I think they should reconsider. Currently more than 50 head shops in San Francisco act as fronts for marijuana distribution in that city. According to The O'Reilly Factor, these shops not only attract petty crime but other non-desirable activity as well.
Anyone who knows anything about drug abuse knows that marijuana has been a "gateway" drug for many of those who use and abuse hard narcotics. Many people are first exposed to that dark world through a few puffs of a supposedly "innocent" marijuana cigarette.
Marijuana desensitizes people -- and its everyday use makes people lazy and unproductive. And it's addictive! I have personally seen this substance harm friends from school days past. Perhaps that's why I am so upset that consideration would be given to decriminalizing its use.
Still, Congressman Frank garnered support from seven other Democratic House members in sponsoring his legislation. Included in that group was Rep. Barbara Lee from California's District 9 (Berkeley and Oakland). By voicing her support, Lee -- a member of the House Black Caucus -- made light of the recreational use of a drug that is destroying the lives of hundreds of her own constituents.
If Lee wants to act responsibly and do something constructive, she should target the drug dealers in her district who are irreparably damaging the lives of untold numbers of people. Ironically, though, Congresswoman Lee's tact is to say that present drug enforcement laws are "inhumane" and "immoral."
Similarly, if president-elect Obama wants to act responsibly, he should immediately retract this reckless proposal being "floated" by his advisors.
If it really helps “pro-pot voters” to forget to vote during each future election, then I’m for it.
You're probably confusing decriminalization with legalization. Decriminalizing marijuana will not make it legal. Even if it was legalized though, that doesn't mean employers won't test for it. Some employers will not allow cigarette smokers to work for them, even if they smoke only when off work and not on company property. These polices have been tested in courts and the employers have won. If they can do this to people who smoke cigarettes, a legal product, they can do it to people who smoke pot even if pot is legalized.
“Because of the persistence of the substance, it makes casual use and employment mutually exclusive.”
Nonsense. Most pot smokers are employed. Look at the government statistics on this. The overwhelming majority are full time employed. Only a small percentage are unemployed. Plenty of casual pot smokers smoke a little weed in the evenings and/or on weekends and do a great job at work. You're just way off base here.
If I'm "way off base here," why do you need to send out a strawman to make your argument? That wasn't my point, and the rest of your post makes it clear that you knew that.
If someone tries to take my Budweiser away, I swear I'll exercise my 2nd Amendment rights.
Leave my booze alone. And my cheesburgers. And cigars. And chemically and genetically enhanced vegetables of all kinds. There.
Decriminalizing pot at the federal level won't make it legal. It really wouldn't make much difference at all since most simple possession arrests are not made by federal officers under federal law. Decriminalization just means taking the threat of jail away. Several states have decriminalized pot. They just fine people for it. In most states that have decriminalized it is no longer a criminal offense, not a misdemeanor or felony anymore. It's a “violation” or an “infraction,” and people are just ticketed for it like they would be for a speeding violation. It is not legal though. And the bottom line is that per capita marijuana use in states that have decriminalized it is about the same as it is in states that haven't decriminalized it. In the grand scheme of things it really doesn't make any difference in the number of users whether possession of a small amount is a “violation” or “civil infraction” or a misdemeanor crime.
Personally, I will be glad to see the demise of the dead raccoon under the front porch of the federal marijuana laws. Too dang expensive, too dang punitive, and not just unconstitutional, but erosive to the rest of our legal system.
Let’s be done with it.
the president-elect will give strong consideration to decriminalizing marijuana by the end of his tenure in office.
Bout time
Didn’t the US sign some treaty that addressed this? But O don’t follow no stinking treaties. Legalize “blow” too dufus.
agreed
I’m going to get blasted but here goes...pot should be decriminalized...the whole war on drugs was ill advised, didn’t work and has seriously undermined our rights. Obviously, There are many non-violent offenders who use pot in jail right now...stupid waste of money.
In fact, the Constitution specifically forbids infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. Has that stopped government from top to bottom from infringing upon that right?
I have to tell you, it’s this guy’s business and he can do as he pleases, but I hate, hate the fact that people are always trying to run your life...a few beers on the weekend does not effect a job...what ever happened to privacy? If I found out such a policy existed, I would not do business with this owner. Wow, it’s like prohibition all over again...if it’s fun they don’t want you to do it...and no I don’t smoke pot or drink much for that matter. I just think when I’m not working I should be able to and it’s no ones business.
I guess I’m one of those who hopes he does. I’ll never use it, but I sure hate having so much money spent trying to stop something that can’t be stopped.
Some of PEBO’s jobs may be growing, transporting, and selling pot.
I hadn’t thought of that!!
I’ll support it. Cannabis should have never been criminalized.
I doubt he will do ....Far too much money is gotten from busting people, rehabs etc . Then there are the fines & the money lawyers make....I just can’t see 0 doing it. He may talk about it but when it comes down to it I doubt it ever happens anytime soon.
Major kudos for both of your posts. Liberty is not for wimps.
And why not legalize marriage between same sex couples, or perhaps a man and his animal?
Speeding is one law I can do without.
.......Speeding is one law I can do without....
Disregard it
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.