Holder promises to enforce U.S. drug laws if Prop. 19 passes

[reloader]

Can you believe this A hole, the hell with the will of the people!
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-marijuana-holder-20101016,0,5547626.story

 

[Pappy]

Can you believe this A hole, the hell with the will of the people!
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-marijuana-holder-20101016,0,5547626.story

He honestly doesn't know what the repercussions of Prop 19 passing would be so this is just chest thumping IMO.

 

[tdavie]

Bottom line is they can NOT arrest everyone who is going to be demonstrably smoking pot if Prop. 19 passes.

Although I'm not a US citizen, I've taken several courses in US history, and have always wondered about the supremacy of states rights. Is there anything in the constitution which defines, uh the level of disobedience an individual state can engage in? Does US federal marijuana law trump state law in regards to pot legalization? I'm assuming that there is no clear answer to this?

thanks

Tom

 

[momofthegoons]

This has been "the issue" here in Michigan ever since the legalization for medical use. Although the people of the state voted for legalization, there was no provision for dispensing. So, the local authorities feel within the law arresting caregivers and sometimes patients. We recently had a large bust of caregivers and local people who were trying to run a dispensary type storefront. Because they were also growing, not just dispensing, they were arrested. Until Michigan fills in the loop holes, there will always be an excuse for arrest, based on federal law.

 

[caseball2051]

I personally think that MA is preparing to legalize as well. This year we are voting to do away with some of the alcohol taxes, and to cut our sales tax in half. I dont really understand why this is happening. State funding has already been cut substantially in many areas due to the economy.

I think this paves the way for MA to legalize in the coming 2-3 years. Theyll need a new money tree and the govt will be able to see the potential for more tax dollars.

And as far as state rights vs federal rights go, thats a debate thats been raging since the 1700s. Its kinda like being a 20something year old and living under your parents roof still. You have to follow your rules, but there are grey areas. Im nogt sure if thats a fitting analogy, but it made sense in my head.

 

[Plotinus]

The government said the same thing when alcohol prohibition was being repealed. It's all bark, no bite.

The DEA employs something like 5000 - 5500 field agents nationwide. When every Californian over the age of 21 can grow his own marijuana plot, that's not enough agents to shut down the Los Angeles market, let alone all of California.

Let the Feds bitch and moan; they've already lost.

 

[collegerower]

All this is just talk until it passes. Its too close to call, so it still could go either way.

I disagree with the other member from mass because I feel the old people around here would never let it happen. People are talki.g about it, but its way more than 3 years away. Plus if cali says no, I can't imagine mass saying yes

 

[caseball2051]

All this is just talk until it passes. Its too close to call, so it still could go either way.

I disagree with the other member from mass because I feel the old people around here would never let it happen. People are talki.g about it, but its way more than 3 years away. Plus if cali says no, I can't imagine mass saying yes

I was posting just personal hopes/my logic on it all. I hope Im right though. Alot of it is circumstantial. It would need prop 19 to pass and the sales tax and alcohol tax to go through for MA. If all of tha thappened the govt will need money from something. And 2 years will be an ample time for studies on CA and its new legaliztion laws.

it was speculative, but it makes sense. at least to my vaped day today.

 

[collegerower]

Sorry man, I hope I wasn't too harsh. Everyone can have their opinions.

Enjoy the vape. I havnt vapped in over a month because I am looking for work so I wish I could join you.

 

[lwien]

All this is just talk until it passes. Its too close to call, so it still could go either way.

To close to call?

Latest poll:
52% pro
41% con

11 point spread. Pretty significant. Now we just got to get those that polled positive to vote.

 

[collegerower]

I was just reading a poll that had prop 19 loosing. I will look around again and see if I can find it again.

http://cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2010/10/06/Pollsters-Discuss-Prop-19-and-Its-Prospects

That's what I was reading.

 

[SSS]

the government couldn't possibly afford to combat legalized marijuana. we know it and so do they. holder is all talk.

go california!

 

[tdavie]

I've read polls that have Prop. 19 winning or losing. The actual results don't interest me so much, because little or no polling methodology has accompanied the polls (sample size, orientation of polling firm, exact phrasing of questions, target audience of poll, etc). I am interested in the reported margin of difference between yes/no and how polls are trending over time.

I hope it will pass (it can). I'd like it to pass. Only a few more weeks.

If Holder really wants to fight the results of Proposition 19, should they be to his disagreement, then he is a dinosaur even though he has been in office a short amount of time.

Tom

 

[Plotinus]

Here's a poll aggregator for those who are curious: http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/geo/CA

Prop 19 is about 3/4ths down the page. They had a bad poll on Oct 04, but otherwise they're trending between 5 - 10 points ahead. Looks good to me.

 

[charliedontsurf]

Here's a poll aggregator for those who are curious: http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/geo/CA

Prop 19 is about 3/4ths down the page. They had a bad poll on Oct 04, but otherwise they're trending between 5 - 10 points ahead. Looks good to me.

That was also the most recent poll.

I think the no-on-19 morons are filing into the churches and retirement homes and brainwashing the elderly and impressionable, and will turn the tide against reason.

But shit, I thought Mccain was gonna win, so what do I know?

 

[Plotinus]

True, it was. But if you dig into the crosstabs, you'll notice two things about the most recent poll:

1. It used the smallest sample size (600, compared to 700 - 1000 of the other polls)
2. It was a poll of registered voters, while the others were polls of likely voters

So it was the most recent, but also the most poorly done, with the highest margin of error. Good news for us.

It's interesting to note that "likely voters" as a category are generally older and more conservative, especially in a midterm election year. You would think a likely voter measure would produce results that were worse for prop 19, but it seems the opposite has been true. I wonder why this is...are we finally getting support from those crazy ass tea partiers?

 

[Rick]

More and more, when an 'official' says something, there is only one reply. "What else could he/she say?"
The Obama folks MUST act tough, especially now with it looking like a 'patriot landslide' in a few short weeks. They MUST say what they did through Holder.
But they know and we know it is here to stay. Everybody is right saying it would be physically impossible to enforce.
The big bugaboo is not really "morality" but rather they cannot figure how the big money changers can get in on this green wave. Those guys only want in if the little guys can't get the goods/service another way. The little guys can make this stuff and the big shots who really run things are very pissed off about that so they say NO still.
This is really getting interesting. Proud to be born in Oakland, California.

 

[lwien]

I was just reading a poll that had prop 19 loosing. I will look around again and see if I can find it again.

http://cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2010/10/06/Pollsters-Discuss-Prop-19-and-Its-Prospects

That's what I was reading.

Ah........a list-o-polls. Very interesting. Still looks good for prop 19, eh.

 

[Pappy]

All this is just talk until it passes. Its too close to call, so it still could go either way.

To close to call?

Latest poll:
52% pro
41% con

11 point spread. Pretty significant. Now we just got to get those that polled positive to vote.

Hope you're right but polls and studies were invented to employ unemployable morons.

 

[Beezleb]

All this is just talk until it passes. Its too close to call, so it still could go either way.

To close to call?

Latest poll:
52% pro
41% con

11 point spread. Pretty significant. Now we just got to get those that polled positive to vote.

Hope you're right but polls and studies were invented to employ unemployable morons.

and to potentially persuade others too but I think it has a lot to do with how a person views the poll. The data may or may not be representative of a population viewpoints as polls are easily skewed by how they ask the questions and other tactics designed to lead towards a finding. Add in a pact like mentality so to speak type of benefit at points as well but just generically speaking. There are lots of advantages and disadvantages to polling depending on your point of view hehe.

Not saying that is the case here. I am just commenting generically on polling.

 

[tuttle]

You also have to keep in mind for a CA prop to win a 'Yes' vote, it on average will have to have a 10 point pad going into the election. There is a very well established (and very annoying) tradition in this state of if you don't know the prop or are undecided, vote no instead of just under voting on that prop.

 

[OO]

i want to see california fight for state's rights, i'm worried though that they will cave as a state when the fed threatens to cut federal funding to the state.

i want to see california as a self sustainable economy, keep the free market open, but stop hogging federal tax money.

federal tax money is for protecting the citizens, and the citizens of cali don't think that their money is going to protecting them, they think it's being wasted. and in many instances, it is, because of ineffective laws.

 

[lwien]

There is a very well established (and very annoying) tradition in this state of if you don't know the prop or are undecided, vote no instead of just under voting on that prop.

Interesting. Why would this state, though, be any different than any other state in this regard.