Jump to content

Sessions — you idiot


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

THEN CHANGE THE !@#$ING LAW!

 

The law should be struck down because it’s unconstitutional.

 

This law proves that we’ve an oligarchy as numerous polling outlets show that the majority of Americans support legalization but it matters not to politicians because many are being paid by heroin dealers (big pharmaceutical companies) to keep it illegal. 

 

Changing the the law is difficult but it has been happening, state-by-state. But you argue on behalf of an oppressive federal government. You must love regulation — I don’t.  

7 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Tell me one person who died by driving fast?  Not driving off the road, or hitting a tree, post, another vehicle, etc.  Just by driving fast.

 

Tell me one person who has died from falling! It’s never the fall that kills them, it’s ALWAYS the ground. Falling is completely safe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

The law should be struck down because it’s unconstitutional.

 

This law proves that we’ve an oligarchy as numerous polling outlets show that the majority of Americans support legalization but it matters not to politicians because many are being paid by heroin dealers (big pharmaceutical companies) to keep it illegal. 

 

Changing the the law is difficult but it has been happening, state-by-state. But you argue on behalf of an oppressive federal government. You must love regulation — I don’t.  

 

Tell me one person who has died from falling! It’s never the fall that kills them, it’s ALWAYS the ground. Falling is completely safe. 

 

Another faux libertarian chimes in.

 

Maybe now you're getting.  Making and changing laws is a cumbersome process by design.   

 

Don't like the law?  Work on changing it through the established process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The_Dude said:

 

The law should be struck down because it’s unconstitutional.

 

This law proves that we’ve an oligarchy as numerous polling outlets show that the majority of Americans support legalization but it matters not to politicians because many are being paid by heroin dealers (big pharmaceutical companies) to keep it illegal. 

 

Changing the the law is difficult but it has been happening, state-by-state. But you argue on behalf of an oppressive federal government. You must love regulation — I don’t.  

You're a typical liberal disguising himself as a "Libertarian". I can assure you that you aren't the first liberal to attempt this tact here, Mr. Baskin. The very fact that you want the courts to strike the law down instead of having it changed by Congress is very telling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Another faux libertarian chimes in.

 

Maybe now you're getting.  Making and changing laws is a cumbersome process by design.   

 

Don't like the law?  Work on changing it through the established process.

 

Actualy this law doesn’t even require a congressional vote to repeal. It can literally just be reclassified at any time from its wrongful place as a schedule 1 drug to not. 

Edited by The_Dude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You're a typical liberal disguising himself as a "Libertarian". I can assure you that you aren't the first liberal to attempt this tact here, Mr. Baskin. The very fact that you want the courts to strike the law down instead of having it changed by Congress is very telling.

 

If you think I’m a liberal it’s because you don’t know me. 

 

But it that’s what a lot of people do — you try to dictate your opponents views when you find their argument better than yours. Common tactic amongst the plebs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

Actualy this law doesn’t even require a congressional vote to repeal. It can literally just be reclassified at any time from its wrongful place as a schedule 1 drug to not. 

 

So if it were that simple, why did Obama elect to go down the illegal route of telling DoJ not to enforce an existing law instead of getting his pen and phone out to reclassify pot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Um, yes.  You made the argument for binding decisions made by a strong central authority that ignore or supersede laws.  

 

Actually, I made the argument against that. So again, Tom, no. 

 

Marijuana was NOT outlawed with any kind of process whatsoever. 

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

So if it were that simple, why did Obama elect to go down the illegal route of telling DoJ not to enforce an existing law instead of getting his pen and phone out to reclassify pot?

 

It’s an oddity that a liberal president supported states rights ain’t it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

Actualy this law doesn’t even require a congressional vote to repeal. It can literally just be reclassified at any time from its wrongful place as a schedule 1 drug to not. 

 

No, it's explicitly illegal under 21 USC 812.  That explicitly puts cannabanoids on Schedule 1...so you can't just "reclassify" it, Congress has to rewrite the code.

 

And the law explicitly states that, too..."Schedule 1 shall, unless and until amended, consist of the following drugs..."

3 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

Actually, I made the argument against that. So again, Tom, no. 

 

"Sessions should use common sense" is exactly that argument.  You're arguing for executive decision overriding legislation.

 

6 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

Marijuana was NOT outlawed with any kind of process whatsoever. 

Controlled Substances Act of 1970, passed by the House and Senate, and signed by Nixon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

If you think I’m a liberal it’s because you don’t know me. 

 

But it that’s what a lot of people do — you try to dictate your opponents views when you find their argument better than yours. Common tactic amongst the plebs. 

You believe that laws you don't like should be struck down by the courts rather than repealed. You also are willing to let "scientists" direct your belief/non-belief in GW. You are against tax cuts and won 't even discuss energy independence. The most damning evidence though is that you are in bed with Tiberius.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

....I’m over 30. 

 

The constitution does not grant the federal government the authority to arbitrarily illegalize flowers. In addition — the absurdity of the whole thing is quite obvious. How is Marijuana a schedule 1 drug when it’s an undisputed fact of the medicinal value of the plant. Your government arbitrarily made medicine illegal and you’re defending it? Amazing. The constitution does not grant that authority and it can’t be swept under the rug with the ‘elastic clause,’ because it is neither necessary or proper. 

 

The Constitution grants the federal government the authority to regulate commerce between the states. So yes, it does have the authority to arbitrarily make flowers illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question is, "What are going to be the consequences of this?"

 

I don't think anything will happen. It is too much of an ingrained way of life and produces way too much tax money for the states that have legalized it. Real political suicide, IMO. It is not like the hardliner anti-pot folks will ever vote Democrat (in any significant number). However, there are plenty of centrists and libertarians who voted for Trump, and Trump expressly stated it should up to the states. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Ya, Hitler Lite 

 

scapegoat immigrants, muslims, black athletes and want to deport millions, while cutting health care for all his supporters. He's a total POS 

You care to comment on the lowest unemployment figures for African Americans ever ?     

 

Thank you Trump ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

You care to comment on the lowest unemployment figures for African Americans ever ?     

 

Thank you Trump ??

What did Trump do to make that happen? Seems more likely he inheriated a good economy at a good time in the business cycle 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

Actualy this law doesn’t even require a congressional vote to repeal. It can literally just be reclassified at any time from its wrongful place as a schedule 1 drug to not. 

 

 

The funny thing to me is that (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong) nearly everyone you're arguing with actually supports decriminalization, if not outright legalization of marijuana. Also, the stance that Sessions is taking on the issue is very likely to help create the groundswell of popular support that congress will require before they act on addressing the legislation once and for all.

 

The fact is that at this particular point in time, any states that have enacted policy that permits growing, selling, or smoking marijuana have done so in defiance of federal law. Just because we may disagree with the law, does not make us immune to the ramifications if we're caught in violation of that law.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GG said:

 

Tell me one person who died by driving fast?  Not driving off the road, or hitting a tree, post, another vehicle, etc.  Just by driving fast.

If a tire blows out or someone pulls into your lane what do you think is going to happen if you are driving 150mph? Check liveleak or YouTube if you want to see numerous crashes and deaths. 

 

You claimed driving 150mph is safer than smoking a plant, it’s not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...