Obama May Change Medical Marijuana Policy

[Ipsissimus]

Keep in mind this is on FOX News!
here on foxnews.com

Obama May Change Medical Marijuana Policy
Experts believe it is already clear the Obama administration will change the strategy, if not the law, on medical marijuana.Policy

AP
Saturday, February 07, 2009

The White House won't say it explicitly. Neither will the Drug Enforcement Administration. Yet there is a whiff in the air that U.S. policy is about to change when it comes to medical marijuana.

The message is clear, said UCLA professor Mark Kleiman, a former Justice Department official and an expert on crime and drug policy.

"It is no longer federal policy to beat up on hippies," said Kleiman.

Tell that to the DEA.

In California this past week, agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles and seized 500 pounds (225 kilograms) of pot.

"It's a little bit surprising, because I think current DEA management didn't get the message," said Kleiman. "The message is, this is no longer drug warrior time. We are not on a cultural crusade against pot-smoking."

California law permits the sale of marijuana for medical purposes, though it is still against federal law.

Thirteen states have laws permitting medicinal use of marijuana. California is unique among them for the presence of dispensaries, businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services. Legal under California law, such dispensaries are still illegal under federal law.

"Anyone possessing, distributing or cultivating marijuana for any reason is in violation of federal law," Sarah Pullen, a DEA spokeswoman in Los Angeles, said Thursday.

That may be the law, but it contradicts the medical marijuana position of the new president.

"The president believes that federal resources should not be used to circumvent state laws, and as he continues to appoint senior leadership to fill out the ranks of the federal government, he expects them to review their policies with that in mind," said White House spokesman Nick Shapiro, repeating past statements.

So on Friday, DEA officials in Washington declined to comment at all on the subject.

As a presidential candidate, Obama repeatedly promised a change in federal drug policy in situations where state laws allow use of medical marijuana.

"I think the basic concept of using medical marijuana for the same purposes and with the same controls as other drugs prescribed by doctors, I think that's entirely appropriate," Obama told the Mail Tribune of Medford, Oregon, in March.

A year earlier at a campaign stop in New Hampshire, Obama said: "I would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana users."

At age 47, Obama is part of a generation that had plenty of exposure to pot.

In his memoir, "Dreams from My Father," he described time spent as a youth struggling with questions about his race and identity, and turning to drugs -- including marijuana and cocaine -- to "push questions of who I was out of my mind."

The new president is unlikely to make any official change in policy before he has a new DEA chief and drug czar in place.

Yet experts believe it is already clear the Obama administration will change the strategy, if not the law, on medical marijuana.

Philip Heymann, a former deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration who is now a Harvard professor, said it's time for the agency to put more effort into fighting drugs more dangerous than marijuana.

"I do expect him to appoint an administrator who takes marijuana less seriously than is traditional for the DEA, as I think most Americans do," said Heymann.

Heymann said he expects the Obama administration will eventually instruct the DEA to emphatically scale back raids on dispensaries, and conduct such raids only in instances where investigators believe a business is abusing the dispensary system as a cover for other criminal behavior.

So last week's raids in California may be the last of their kind.

"The DEA's not likely to want to confront a new president," said Heymann. "It may simply be that they're behaving as they have traditionally, and they haven't anticipated the change Obama and his spokesman are signaling."

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

One of the few things from fox that i actually beleive...

 

[mr noodles]

until it really become a reality....duck and cover...we are still in enemy territory no matter where you live on planet earth .

even if its in the usa this will have a worldwide impact on the marijuana issue .

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Heymann said he expects the Obama administration will eventually instruct the DEA to emphatically scale back raids on dispensaries, and conduct such raids only in instances where investigators believe a business is abusing the dispensary system as a cover for other criminal behavior.

SEE,,, THIS IS HOW GOVERNMENT WORKS. WE WILL GIVE YOU WHAT YOU WANT, BUT ONLY IF WE CAN LOOPHOLE IT TO MAKE IT BENEFICAL FOR US AS WELL.....

 

[Chiefsmokingbud]

I can only hope that the the Gov't will realize one way to improve the economic crises is to legalize MJ and tax it

 

[Backwoods Bud]

I saw on CNN today that the DEA states that it will continue the raids as long as the law is on the books. Hmm, seems to me that Obama just needs to make a Federal MMJ law with the stroke of his pen. Just like he did with Gitmo.

 

[NiteTiger]

I'd rather see him use that pen to simply strike it from the Schedule, but it's a start at least!

 

[Ipsissimus]

It should be up to the states. This eliminates conflict, and allows good ideas to take root and spread by recognition of success. Frees up resources to boot. allows for more cultural variety.

 

[funkervogt]

Let's not forget that drug busts of all kind actually make money for the cops. Forfeiture laws will always drive this cycle.

 

[420oclock]

As a presidential candidate, Obama repeatedly promised a change in federal drug policy in situations where state laws allow use of medical marijuana.

Unless he keeps this promise, he has lost my vote in 2012.

 

[Guest]

Unless he keeps this promise, he has lost my vote in 2012.

What about ALL the OTHER promises?

 

[420oclock]

What about ALL the OTHER promises?

Many of his other promises mean nothing to me. I was unsure how I was gonna vote right up to going to vote. It was the "not interfering with the states" promise that swung me. I'm pissed. He coulda acted "Gitmo style".

 

[ed wood]

good read man
thanks

 

[B. Self Reliant]

Typical Federal Gov't BS. We're supposed to act grateful that he will channel the DEA's focus elsewhere? What a fuckin' asshole. Is he familiar with the founding principles of this country? You know, the ones that transformed us from a poor agrarian nation to the world's only remaining superpower? The federal gov't of the United States of America was specifically designed to refrain from dictating social policy. That is a job for the states (if anyone) and it was always meant to be.

I'd love to see some improvement, don't get me wrong, but in terms of the big picture, we're still under control of a government that grossly abuses it's power in almost every area of life.

 

[Thundurkel]

I'd love to see some improvement, don't get me wrong, but in terms of the big picture, we're still under control of a government that grossly abuses it's power in almost every area of life.

Me too!!! you left out mind control and media propaganda ...

 

[Thundurkel]

My buddy last nite had a friend who was freaked out saying he only has 2 years left to sell his crop cuz Obama is going to legalize it. I said "no he's, most likely it will stay medical marijuana and your buddy will just have to sell to the clubs" . His reply was " I know but thats gonna bring the value down to 1500 - 2000 a pound! " I said " so what? if you need more than that you are being greedy" I guess his boy lets lbs go for 4500 - 5000 each and that's FUCKING RIDICULOUS IMO!!!!!! I think it would be great to safely sell lb's for $1500 cuz by then we should all be going by square footage and not plant numbers and growing 2-3 lbs a month should be easy to accomplish IMO ... It's greedy fuckers like my buddy's friend that ruin the market...

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

I know but thats gonna bring the value down to 1500 - 2000 a pound! " I said " so what? if you need more than that you are being greedy" I guess his boy lets lbs go for 4500 - 5000 each and that's FUCKING RIDICULOUS IMO!!!!!!

putting your life at risk to make less than 100k in profits per year is ridiculous....

its not like people will lose money. once it becomes decrim//legalized MORE people will be using,,, and sense it will cost less money,, people will also be BUYING MORE.

im sure the bootleggers and the speakeasy owners thought the same thing..


yet we have hundreds of thousands of bars in this country,, and hundreds upon hundreds (if not thousands) of very successful breweries and distilleries....

did you know doctors used to prescribe whiskey ??

 

[IE2KS_KUSH]

This thread is so fucking funny!
Anyway,
my 2 cents here.
Obama is not going to do anything with regard to federal law. He can't. You can argue otherwise, but please, show me where the president has the authority to remove a controlled substance from the schedule of narcotics? He can't.
Who can?
Congress could authorize such action,
The AG could as well.
Congress is kind of tied up at the moment.
The new AG Eric Holder....well....
if you don't know, then go do some research.
His new "drug czar" appointment, the police guy from Seatle, I know that activists are jumping at the chance to point out "oh there see, it's change", I will let you figure it out I guess. Although he has made favorable statements for the use of MMJ, I don't believe that he will change federal law my friends.

Obama and his adminstration have very carefully taken a very unclear position on federal law with regard to MMJ, keep in mind, it is without question that they believe cannabis should remain illegal for everyone else. But they have been careful to leave the carrot of hope dangling in front of the drooling sheeple that want "change". Without directly coming out against it, and by having no intention on taking decisive action, he is riding that fine middle line so as not to upset the apple cart of the grassroots activists leftists, as well as not upsetting the status quo.
I suppose anything could happen, and you never really know what will happen, but you are going to have to do a hell of a lot of convincing here, if you are going to tell me that the man that made Eric Holder the AG, is going to be changing anything with the way the federal government enforces existing law with regard to cannabis period!

As for everything else in the thread, man I was rolling! Very funny stuff, some very predictable and boring, some petty.
I will say this though, once people are willing to duke it out, and calling each other names, and making conspiracy theory references to the "Bush Regime" and making Hitler comparissons, that's about where reasonable discussion ends. Obviously we are all passionate about what we believe, but we should all try to respect each other.
Just my experience, but usually when you have to derail a thread into the "Bush/Hitler" realm, or start to call names, or challenge to a fight, your point was likely not very good, or you are not informed enough to expand beyond the boring sound bite that you are just regurgitating.
Just my 2 cents.
P.S.
Using/growing cannabis, and being a staunch conservative, are not mutually exclusive. I happen to be of the opinion, (at the risk of derailing this thread) that until such time that a strong conservative (A REAL ONE) leader takes charge, we will not see any eh hmm... "CHANGE", with regard to federal laws on cannabis. I know many think that is crazy, maybe it is but it is what I believe.
I think it's more crazy to believe that the party of more, bigger, government, more laws to protect you from you, is going to reign in ANY federal agency, and advocate less government involvement, it flies in the face of the Democratic party core belief system.
But we will see,
or as I believe, we won't.
How many years now and counting for prohibition? How many of those years have we had a democratic controlled congress? Any guesses? Many many more than republicans, but yet, cannabis is still a sched 1 controlled substance? How can this be? Hope it doesn't slip their mind again! Ew what bad luck that would be! With a democratic prez and congress! LOL

 

[foo_bird]

wow i came here to see what you all thought about this
http://hightimes.com/legal/ht_admin/5072
but fisticuffs over the net wow

foo

 

[N707]

This thread is so fucking funny!
Anyway,
my 2 cents here.
Obama is not going to do anything with regard to federal law. He can't. You can argue otherwise, but please, show me where the president has the authority to remove a controlled substance from the schedule of narcotics? He can't.
Who can?
Congress could authorize such action,
The AG could as well.
Congress is kind of tied up at the moment.
The new AG Eric Holder....well....
if you don't know, then go do some research.
His new "drug czar" appointment, the police guy from Seatle, I know that activists are jumping at the chance to point out "oh there see, it's change", I will let you figure it out I guess. Although he has made favorable statements for the use of MMJ, I don't believe that he will change federal law my friends.

Obama and his adminstration have very carefully taken a very unclear position on federal law with regard to MMJ, keep in mind, it is without question that they believe cannabis should remain illegal for everyone else. But they have been careful to leave the carrot of hope dangling in front of the drooling sheeple that want "change". Without directly coming out against it, and by having no intention on taking decisive action, he is riding that fine middle line so as not to upset the apple cart of the grassroots activists leftists, as well as not upsetting the status quo.
I suppose anything could happen, and you never really know what will happen, but you are going to have to do a hell of a lot of convincing here, if you are going to tell me that the man that made Eric Holder the AG, is going to be changing anything with the way the federal government enforces existing law with regard to cannabis period!

As for everything else in the thread, man I was rolling! Very funny stuff, some very predictable and boring, some petty.
I will say this though, once people are willing to duke it out, and calling each other names, and making conspiracy theory references to the "Bush Regime" and making Hitler comparissons, that's about where reasonable discussion ends. Obviously we are all passionate about what we believe, but we should all try to respect each other.
Just my experience, but usually when you have to derail a thread into the "Bush/Hitler" realm, or start to call names, or challenge to a fight, your point was likely not very good, or you are not informed enough to expand beyond the boring sound bite that you are just regurgitating.
Just my 2 cents.
P.S.
Using/growing cannabis, and being a staunch conservative, are not mutually exclusive. I happen to be of the opinion, (at the risk of derailing this thread) that until such time that a strong conservative (A REAL ONE) leader takes charge, we will not see any eh hmm... "CHANGE", with regard to federal laws on cannabis. I know many think that is crazy, maybe it is but it is what I believe.
I think it's more crazy to believe that the party of more, bigger, government, more laws to protect you from you, is going to reign in ANY federal agency, and advocate less government involvement, it flies in the face of the Democratic party core belief system.
But we will see,
or as I believe, we won't.
How many years now and counting for prohibition? How many of those years have we had a democratic controlled congress? Any guesses? Many many more than republicans, but yet, cannabis is still a sched 1 controlled substance? How can this be? Hope it doesn't slip their mind again! Ew what bad luck that would be! With a democratic prez and congress! LOL

Spot on my friend, spot on!
I'm glad to see that there are others that have an attention span greater than that of a goldfish.
I love the ambiuity that flows from Obama's sphincter. He really has sucessfully danced around the majority of fire brought on him. I'll give him speach cred, but he has not shown me anthing in way of intelligent progress via proactive means. All of his highlights so far have risin from questions....not exactly the quality I look for in the leader of our nation. We are long over due for someone with enough testicular mass to actually put fourth an opinion without having to back the into a croner with mics and cameras.