Start making those medicinal brownies
Here’s a commonsense decision from the Justice Department that should be welcomed by several groups, including the less-government libertarians. Attorney General Eric Holder has told his prosecutors to stop going after people who use marijuana for medical purposes if they are not violating state laws.
The government’s top lawyer said that in 14 states with some provisions for medical marijuana use, federal prosecutors should focus only on cases involving higher-level drug traffickers, money launderers or people who use the state laws as a cover.
Even in states that have laws allowing marijuana use for medical purposes, the Bush administration insisted on using federal laws to conduct raids. That was not only impractical but also a philosophical contradiction since conservatives are supposed to favor local control.
The new edict may not pave the way for de-criminalizing marijuana use, as some advocates hope. But it will get the feds out of the stupid business of arresting cancer patients using marijuana to ease after-chemo nausea.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
27 comments Add your comment
Peadawg
October 20th, 2009
12:44 pm
Just think of how many jobs would be created and how many new businesses would pop up if marijuana was legalized…hhmmmmm. Alcohol can mess w/ your senses just like marijuana can, yet alcohol is legal and marijuana isn’t….it doesn’t make any sense.
Concerned Parent
October 20th, 2009
12:44 pm
Marijuana appears to provide relief from pain, nausea, and other symptoms, with fewer ill effects and a greater margin of safety than many other classes of drugs. In particular, marijuana appears to be far safer than the narcotic drugs commonly administered for pain, and safer even than the non-narcotic drugs such as aspirin, ibuprofen and related compounds that are responsible for a few hundred fatal poisonings each year (_httpX//www.acponline.org/journals/annals/15sep97/nsaid.htm_).
In 2008, the American College of Physicians stated: “Evidence not only supports the use of medical marijuana in certain conditions but also suggests numerous indications for cannabinoids. Additional research is needed to further clarify the therapeutic value of cannabinoids and determine optimal routes of administration. The science on medical marijuana should not be obscured or hindered by the debate surrounding the legalization of marijuana for general use.” (http//www.acponline.org/advocacy/where_we_stand/other_issues/medmarijuana.pdf)
Who in our great State will have the political courage, wisdom, and foresight to start the discussion about medical marijuana in Georgia?
jt
October 20th, 2009
12:47 pm
Sorry to ruin your buzz Cynthia but nothing has changed. This is a white house official speaking about a memo clarrifying Holder’s new position.
“At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.
In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or involvement in other crimes.
And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.”
In other words, they will continue Bush-era policies when they find it expedient to do so in the future — but they want praise and obeisance from the Left for paying lip service to Transformative Change now. It’s the Obama way!
Lip service is all the left gets. Ha Ha.
Concerned Parent
October 20th, 2009
12:53 pm
The link above should has a typo. It should be:
http//www.acponline.org/journals/annals/15sep97/nsaid.htm
Jimmy62
October 20th, 2009
1:07 pm
Obama should work on changing bad laws, not ignoring existing ones. His job as President is to execute the law. He doesn’t get to decide what laws to follow and what laws to ignore. If he wants to change marijuana law (which he should, any moral person should), then he should get his congressional supermajority to act on it.
Who knows what laws he might decide he just doesn’t feel like upholding next? We’ve already seen how if you are black and militant, then you can stand outside a polling station with a baseball bat threatening people and get away with it. So obviously Obama and his Justice Department only execute laws when they feel like it. Disturbing, and not at all what the office of President is supposed to be doing.
Concerned Parent
October 20th, 2009
1:14 pm
Jimmy62, you’re right, it is the President’s job to execute the law. Part of that process is to set priorities. President Obama has determined that prosecuting legal users of marijuana should not be a priority; that is well within his purview as President. This is a good step in the right direction; medical mj users are now less burdened by fear of prosecution and can focus on getting the health care they need. This decision means that America is a better place today than it was yesterday. Progress comes in small steps; let’s see how this works out, and then we the People can advise Congress about any laws that need to be changed.
ctucker
October 20th, 2009
1:17 pm
Jt writes: In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or involvement in other crimes.
jt, I’m all for the feds prosecuting those who use firearms illegally, launder money, etc
Jack
October 20th, 2009
1:21 pm
The use of marijuana is racial and it’s also Bush’s fault.
Jimmy62
October 20th, 2009
1:25 pm
Concerned Parent: Ignoring written laws is NEVER a good thing. What if Obama decides they should no longer enforce written federal laws on kidnapping? I’m sure that would upset you, wouldn’t? We have lawmakers to make laws, it’s NOT Obama’s job to decide which of those to follow and which not to. There are lots of laws that he could decide to ignore that would upset you. Your outside-of-the-legal-system feeling that ignoring certain drug laws is a great thing might differ with my opinion. But that’s the thing, they are opinions, not laws. We have written laws. They should be enforced all the time or changed, not enforced only when Obama and yourself think it’s cool to do so.
I’m sure Obama doesn’t like some of the federal election fundraising laws. He should just ignore those for the next election, but enforce them against Republicans. Hey, we’ve already got the precedent that “Concerned Parent” ad Cynthia are cool with Obama decided what laws get enforced and which don’t, so why not?
Again, I am 100% for legalizing marijuana and treating it like tobacco. I am also 100% for enforcing the law as written.
lmno
October 20th, 2009
1:34 pm
The A&E channel ran an excellent documnetary last night about Humbolt County California. The problem they have is that people are turning a large percentage of the homes in their county into grow houses. These are usually rental units and they completely destriy the houses in the process from the moisture involved.
One of the interviewed expressed his doubts on his town’s future. He basically said that if things stay the way they are, then the town is destroyed by greedy growers who bring with them violence and destruction. On the other hand, if it were legalized, there would be no reason for the grow houses, as it would be produced in factories in the open, and the 10% of their houses that are already grow houses would be eliminated which would also destroy their economy.
Its kind of like Amsterdam. They have a problem because of the millions of tourists who come to Amsterdam just to smoke legally. These tourists are not the kind of tourists that Amsterdam wants in that they usually are loud, obnoxious, young people who come just to party. On the other hand, they are now dependent on that tourism.
In the end, I guess it just doesn’t work to legalize it in small areas while keeping it illegal everywhere else. THe only way it would work is to make it legal throughout the US.
The Law and 420 Reasons to Keep It | Constant Conservative
October 20th, 2009
1:47 pm
[...] Responses to the recent decision to not enforce certain federal laws pertaining to marijuana use have been all over the place. Some think that this is beginning of a new approach to addressing drugs here in the US based on the the political realities of popular support. Some see it as embracing federalism and states’ rights. Others see it as simply the right thing to do to help all the cancer patients. [...]
I'm Tommy from the T.V. show Cheaters
October 20th, 2009
1:59 pm
MMMMMM…..Barack Hussein Obama, sucks. Where are those CSPAN healthcare debates around a big table like you promised Mr. President? How about the promise of the 5 days of public comment and review before signing bills? Transparency? I don’t think so, I think he has been eating the special brownies.
Chris Broe
October 20th, 2009
2:03 pm
Pot is for losers. Period. I’ve never met an interesting pot smoker. Ever. (exception that proves the rule: Rx)
Funny how it took a simple balloon boy to punk Fox News. He “Dan Rather’d” them. They should all resign.
Thank you, Balloon Boy.
Like the Hindenberg, when the balloon boy’s helium contraption fell to earth, and it became obvious that Fox News had bitten the big weenie, the country gasped, “Oh, the Hume-Hannity’s”.
I love the balloon boy.
Fox Fibbers are not journalists. Their contribution to news is nothing more than the unscooped fibber evidence of an all-hoax diet. (Real squat and squawk).
If you believed Fox News, you’d be convinced that our president is Osama Bin Laden, and he’s turning our economic system into a cross between socialism and ant farms.
Fox News Alert: “The balloon boy is puking again. We go live………..”
Road Scholar
October 20th, 2009
2:10 pm
The dilemna is that states have laws that allow the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes while the Feds don’t allow any use. Based on the conservatives mantra, states rights should override federal dominance. Is that how conservatives feel in this case?
lmno
October 20th, 2009
2:18 pm
” I’ve never met an interesting pot smoker”
How do you know when you’ve met one?
Chris Broe
October 20th, 2009
2:25 pm
That’s easy: the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers T-shirt
Paul
October 20th, 2009
2:26 pm
With the CIA investigation, the Administration’s position is the Attorney General has a responsibility to follow the law.
With this case, the AG has discretion to not follow the law.
Kevin
October 20th, 2009
2:48 pm
This is my “Agree with Cynthia Once a Month” post.
There. I said it.
Turd Ferguson
October 20th, 2009
3:18 pm
Dismantle the DEA or roll it into The ATF. Nixon first established the DEA in 1972, Im thinking. Think of all the wasted Billions that couldve gone into Wars, Poverty, Legalized Drug Sales, Immigration, Abortion etc.
Its time we faced facts and one of the most glaring is Drugs will never be stopped. Anyone with any sense can enter most any bar anytime and within same night get high! The Genie is out of the bottle.
“I was gonna wash my car
but then I got high…”
Joey Greco
October 20th, 2009
3:31 pm
Tommy Habeeb—I fired you from Cheaters a couple of years ago. That’s why you’re doing that loser knock-off show Stag that few stations will run.
Joan
October 20th, 2009
3:32 pm
Chris: I thought it was Wolf Blitzer who did the interview with balloon boy. Isn’t he CNN?
About the marijuana–absolutely, keep Americans dopey and happy, and they will continue to vote for liberals–until their smokin’ money dries up.
Concerned Parent
October 20th, 2009
3:41 pm
Hi, Joan-
Keep Americans dopey and happy? Like President Clinton and President Bush and President Obama and Michael Phelps and John Wayne and Governor Schwarzenegger and Louis Armstrong and thirty million other Americans who say they use marijuana in any given year?
jconservative
October 20th, 2009
4:15 pm
Road Scholar
“The dilemna is that states have laws that allow the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes while the Feds don’t allow any use. Based on the conservatives mantra, states rights should override federal dominance. Is that how conservatives feel in this case?”
We political conservatives would say yes, that is how we see this case.
I would think that the social conservatives (liberals disguised as conservatives) would say forbid marijuana use regardless of
whose law is being used.
Legalize
October 20th, 2009
4:24 pm
Georgia should have legalized marijuana years ago! We have street gangs cutting the ears off kids and fighting the cartels for drugs and money, who is the prohibition making safe? NOBODY!!
Children, police officers, politicians, journalists and lawyers are being murdered by the cartels to protect their marijuana incomes, and the only way we have to end these murders is to undercut their prices with legally grown weed, this will eliminate two-thirds of their incomes and save the lives of THOUSANDS of innocent people!
Legalize – Save Lives!!
Randall W. Capps
October 20th, 2009
5:12 pm
What does this have to do with anything? what 4:20, again?
I’m surprised there wasn’t a recipe at the end of the piece. I hesitate to call it an news worthy article.
No wonder the AJC is loosing money. This is one reason why. Jimmy62 is right.
I wonder what trendy subject tomorrow’s piece will be?
TnGelding
October 20th, 2009
10:02 pm
It’s a step in the right direction. Now let’s ban cigarettes and make addicts roll their own. Bottom line, we simply can’t afford this stupid, unwinnable war on drugs, and never could. Let’s turn a drain on the treasury into much needed revenue.
Concerned Parent
October 21st, 2009
8:31 am
I want to apologize for including John Wayne and President Bush in my earlier post. Although I had found a quote from Mr. Wayne suggesting he may have used marijuana on one occasion, a little more research has found that he was generally against marijuana usage and would probably not wish to be listed as a person who had used marijuana. I also fell into the error of including President Bush, about whom it has been speculated that he may have used marijuana, but he has never acknowldged such use. To any whom I may have offended by inclusion of these two great Americans, please accept my sincere apology.