InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

alen121

08/29/13 3:23 PM

#137238 RE: Det_Robert_Thorne #137237

By SALON.COM...
Thursday, Aug 29, 2013 02:22 PM EDT
Feds step down on marijuana legalization

War on Drugs winding down? Obama administration announces will not block state legalization laws
By Natasha Lennard
Topics: marijuana, Medical Marijuana, Marijuana Legalization, federal law, James Cole, War on Drugs, Drugs, Colorado, Washington, News, Politics News

Feds step down on marijuana legalization (Credit: Shutterstock)


The threat of federal intervention has loomed large for states like Washington and Colorado, where voters have seen statewide marijuana legalization laws passed. In an important step down in the decades-old War on Drugs, Deputy Attorney General James Cole announced in a memo Thursday that the federal administration will not stand in the way of states where voters have supported legalizing marijuana either for medical or recreational use, as long as those states maintain strict rules involving distribution of the drug.

“We’ve got bigger fish to fry,” President Obama said of the shift in stance. “It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it’s legal.”

The Washington Post noted:


The memo directs federal prosecutors to focus their resources on eight specific areas of enforcement, rather than targeting individual marijuana users, which even President Obama has acknowledged is not the best use of federal manpower. Those areas include preventing distribution of marijuana to minors, preventing the sale of pot to cartels and gangs, preventing sales to other states where the drug remains illegal under state law, and stopping the growing of marijuana on public lands.

A Justice Department official said that Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. had called the governors of Colorado and Washington around noon Thursday to inform them of the administration’s stance.

Up until this point federal authorities, especially in certain areas of California, have raided and brought hefty federal charges against medical marijuana distributors and growers (deemed legal by state law). Whether the new federal stance will lead to to commuting of any convictions based on the previous federal illegality of marijuana distribution is a crucial question.

Chairman of advocacy group Marijuana Majority, Tom Angell, told Salon via email that while the announcement is a “step in the right direction,” plenty of concerns about the federal position on marijuana remain:

icon url

simmons420

08/29/13 3:27 PM

#137244 RE: Det_Robert_Thorne #137237

So Dixie in 5 states and canachew makeing a thc gum. I would have to say mjna is in all sectors of this market.
icon url

Elcappy1

08/29/13 3:35 PM

#137262 RE: Det_Robert_Thorne #137237

Exactly & very well written! Watch out for the dump... She went up way to fast!
icon url

ModerateMan

08/29/13 3:39 PM

#137266 RE: Det_Robert_Thorne #137237

What does that have to do with my post exactly?

The point is clear and it's perfectly valid. A certain poster who'll remain nameless, God forbid we call out bad calls and the person 'feels offended', came and said, that once .12 was hit, the ride would continue downward. The 'Holder reversal' occurred weeks ago already, why would you try and make it appear as if it is still relevant today? It seems to me, you don't comprehend that sourcing from a crop that's illegal could be difficult for a company, regardless if it intends to sell the crop or not. I would say the misconception is on your side of the table, sir. If a company wishes to extract something from something illegal, it would appear blatantly obvious that if what they're extracting is legal, and what they are extracting from is illegal, there exists a condition that needs altering. If you can't comprehend how having legalized marijuana would be beneficial to a company looking to extract certain things from it, I don't really know what else to tell you.
icon url

USMC56

08/29/13 3:47 PM

#137285 RE: Det_Robert_Thorne #137237

"but their contract doesn't make them any MMJ money in Colorado."

I suppose that you have a copy of or have at least read said contract? I would love if you could post a link. Thanks!