PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Drug Czar on Legal Pot in CO and WA: "...federal law will continue to be enforced"




Lucille
11-30-2012, 02:12 PM
Like Lady MacDeath (http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/29/hillary-clinton-reminds-a-hurting-latin) said, there is just too much money in it!

U.S. Drug Czar on Legal Pot in Colorado and Washington: It's "very clear that federal law will continue to be enforced"
http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/30/us-drug-czar-on-legal-pot-in-colorado-an


Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske went on American Public Media's Marketplace Thursday to respond to the legalization of recreational marijuana in Colorado and Washington state.

"What really troubles me," Kerlikowske said, "is that in Washington state, which really prides itself on independence, it was $6 million of outside money that was raised in order to advocate for legalization. Pretty hard to compete against $6 million in outside money."
[...]
Interviewer Kai Ryssdal then asks Kerlikowske about the "change of heart" the Obama administration seems to have had about medical marijuana. "The president came in saying, in essence, 'We have better things to do with our time.' Now in the last two years, there has been more vigorous enforcement of drug control laws."

Kerlikowske's response is that the federal government said it would not go after medical marijuana users, and has in fact not gone after them. But "there has been nothing that I have seen or heard from the Department of Justice that says 'Look we're not going to continue to enforce federal law,'" Kerlikowske said of medical marijuana growers and sellers. "And we're going to continue to take a hard look at those people who are involved in making money on essentially a violation of federal law."

Ryssdal then asks Kerlikowske the question on every drug reformer's lips: Will Washington crack down on legal pot in Colorado and Washington?

"There are questions in front of the Department of Justice," Kerlikowske said. "They've made some statements, and it has been very clear that federal law will continue to be enforced. And I think we'll wait and see what those decisions are from the attorney general and the Department of Justice." (Listen to the full interview here.)

Yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said this about Colorado and Washington: "This is an ongoing debate. We are formulating our own response to the votes of two of our states as you know — what that means for the federal system, the federal laws and law enforcement."

Also:

Municipal Governments in Michigan Reject Marijuana Decriminalization--and Democracy
Flint and Detroit voters approve marijuana decriminalization, their city governments ignore them.
http://reason.com/archives/2012/11/29/municipal-governments-in-michigan-reject

Police Union Says No One in Law Enforcement Supports Legalizing Pot
http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/30/fop-executive-director-says-no-one-in-la

AGRP
11-30-2012, 02:21 PM
"...we're going to continue to take a hard look at those people who are involved in making money on essentially a violation of federal law."

They admitted it right there. It's about $$$.

AGRP
11-30-2012, 02:32 PM
Theres too much money to be made by throwing people in cages over a plant to be concerned about liberty.

HOLLYWOOD
11-30-2012, 02:37 PM
It's always about money... to get the money, you must create the environment to justify it. The Money Train to government; control, oppression, and theft.

10th Amendment takes presedence over a tyrannical government department(s).

Origanalist
11-30-2012, 02:41 PM
Ol' Gil is coming back to haunt you Washington.

Acala
11-30-2012, 02:42 PM
The tide has turned and the Federal government is going to lose this one. They don't have the resources to fight the drug war without the state's cooperation and they know it. Once it becomes clear that the movement is going to spread, the Feds will call off the war on pot to save face.

Origanalist
11-30-2012, 02:46 PM
The tide has turned and the Federal government is going to lose this one. They don't have the resources to fight the drug war without the state's cooperation and they know it. Once it becomes clear that the movement is going to spread, the Feds will call off the war on pot to save face.

I hope you're right. But I have a hunch they may not, they can't afford to have people thinking they can ignore the federal govrnment.

Occam's Banana
11-30-2012, 03:17 PM
"What really troubles me," Kerlikowske said, "is that in Washington state, which really prides itself on independence, it was $6 million of outside money that was raised in order to advocate for legalization. [...]"

Something tells me this guy would not be at all troubled - not even the tiniest little bit - if that $6 million of "outside" money had been raised to advodate AGAINST legalization.

So either I'm being too cynical or this guy is a braying hypocrite. My money is on the latter.


"[...] Pretty hard to compete against $6 million in outside money."

And what the hell is this supposed to mean? Would it have been easier to compete against $6 million in "inside" money?

This is textbook case of dodge-the-issue obfuscation employed by establishment hacks when they have no valid arguments to make.

Matt Collins
11-30-2012, 03:20 PM
Yes, this makes sense, nothing unexpected here.

Prohibition was ended because state governments repealed their prohibition laws and then quit devoting state resources to enforcing it. BTW state LEOs are NOT required to enforce federal law believe it or not.

So the state governments quit enforcing it, and the Feds didn't have the resources to do it.

Pretty soon the whole concept of prohibition crumbled and that's that.


So the feds talk a good game, and they will try and make examples out of some, but they simply dont have the resources to enforce all of the drug laws on the books.

AGRP
11-30-2012, 03:20 PM
And what the hell is this supposed to mean? Would it have been easier to compete against $6 million in "inside" money?

This is textbook case of dodge-the-issue obfuscation employed by establishment hacks when they have no valid arguments to make.

There is really no reason in refuting an idiotic statement like that. FRN's are "outside money" and they wouldnt exist without them.

Origanalist
11-30-2012, 03:22 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e3/Gil_Kerlikowske_official_portrait_small.jpg/220px-Gil_Kerlikowske_official_portrait_small.jpg

Richard Gil Kerlikowske (born November 23, 1949) is the current Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, a position generally referred to as the United States "Drug Czar". He assumed office on May 7, 2009.

Kerlikowske graduated from the University of South Florida in Tampa and the Executive Institute at the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Academy. He has served as Chief of Police in four cities and worked in the United States Justice Department. His longest term as a Chief of Police was between July 2001 and March 2009 in Seattle, Washington.

Career

Kerlikowske was drafted into the Army in 1970, and was stationed in Washington, D.C.. Part of his responsibility was saluting then-President Richard Nixon as he boarded the presidential helicopter[1] and was awarded the Presidential Service Badge.[3] He began his law enforcement career in 1972 as a police officer for the St. Petersburg Police in Florida. He served as Chief of Police in Fort Pierce, Florida and Port St. Lucie, Florida. He later served as police commissioner for Buffalo, New York for about a year and a half.

He served as a member of the United States Justice Department, where he oversaw community policing grants. His work in Washington D.C. earned praise from then-Attorney General Janet Reno and then-First Lady Hillary Clinton.[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gil_Kerlikowske#Career
-------------------

Oh yeah, this guys a real *team* player.

Origanalist
11-30-2012, 03:26 PM
Yes, this makes sense, nothing unexpected here.

Prohibition was ended because state governments repealed their prohibition laws and then quit devoting state resources to enforcing it. BTW state LEOs are NOT required to enforce federal law believe it or not.

So the state governments quit enforcing it, and the Feds didn't have the resources to do it.

Pretty soon the whole concept of prohibition crumbled and that's that.


So the feds talk a good game, and they will try and make examples out of some, but they simply dont have the resources to enforce all of the drug laws on the books.

That sounds great, but you can't compare the federal government of the thirties to todays behemoth. I hope people that think this are right though.

MozoVote
11-30-2012, 03:41 PM
Alcohol prohibition took several years to reverse. If I recall properly, New York repealed it's state level enforcement in 1925. Other states slowly followed. I think Colorado was one of them. When you're looking back in history at events from 80 years ago, it's easy to think things unravelled quickly. But to people living in that era, it probably felt like a long time and took vigorous campaigns.

California voters passed the Compassionate Care Act in 1996 for medicinal use of marijuana. That may feel like a long time ago, but it took several failed state referendums after that, to get to this stage on legalization.

There will be more bumps in the road. But we may see one or both major parties endorse reform in 2016, just like Roosevelt did in 1932 for alcohol.

tod evans
11-30-2012, 03:58 PM
I would like to turn this douche-bag upside down and pack an 8-ball up each pinched nostril with my boot heal....



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e3/Gil_Kerlikowske_official_portrait_small.jpg/220px-Gil_Kerlikowske_official_portrait_small.jpg




Fuck You Gil!

Acala
11-30-2012, 04:26 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e3/Gil_Kerlikowske_official_portrait_small.jpg/220px-Gil_Kerlikowske_official_portrait_small.jpg
Career

Kerlikowske was drafted into the Army in 1970, and was stationed in Washington, D.C.. Part of his responsibility was saluting then-President Richard Nixon as he boarded the presidential helicopter[1] and was awarded the Presidential Service Badge.

He's a square, man.

JK/SEA
11-30-2012, 04:38 PM
hey Dick, come on out to Hempfest next year!...maybe you could give us a speech...lol...