Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Government United States News Politics

Marijuana Prosecution Not a High Priority, Says Obama 449

Hugh Pickens writes "VOA reports that President Obama says it does not make sense for federal authorities to seek prosecution of recreational marijuana users in states where such use is legal. 'As it is, you know, the federal government has a lot to do when it comes to criminal prosecutions,' said Obama during a television interview with ABC's Barbara Walters. 'It does not make sense from a prioritization point of view for us to focus on recreational drug users in a state that has already said that, under state law, that's legal.' When asked if he supported legalizing marijuana, the president said he was not endorsing that. 'I wouldn't go that far, but what I think is that, at this point, Washington and Colorado, you've seen the voters speak on this issue.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Marijuana Prosecution Not a High Priority, Says Obama

Comments Filter:
  • by larry bagina ( 561269 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @01:29PM (#42301915) Journal
    to call it "interstate commerce" if a person smokes a plant that naturally grows in his backyard, never actually engaging in commerce or crossing interstate lines.
  • Connecticut tragedy (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fyngyrz ( 762201 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @01:36PM (#42301975) Homepage Journal

    Without going into my position on this, let me simply put this thought on the floor:

    Here's mom. A schoolteacher. She's buying what look like (but of course aren't, because they work approximately like a revolver that doesn't need reloads, not a machine gun) military weapons. How likely is that? Possible, I'll grant you, but it's really unusual.

    My gut tells me it is more than slightly possible that mom was buying those weapons for her son, and that we may see, as we learn more, that son couldn't buy them himself. Or some variation on that theme.

  • by alostpacket ( 1972110 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @02:15PM (#42302299) Homepage []

    It looks like Federal prisoners account for 1% of the total incarcerations. So I think while what iggymanz (596061) is saying is correct overall, it doesn't have relevance to the current comment.

    Anyways, a very interesting read: []

  • by Mitreya ( 579078 ) <mitreya&gmail,com> on Saturday December 15, 2012 @02:32PM (#42302455)

    Of course, if the recreational users all started having half a million dollars in property to confiscate, we'd probably see a shift.

    Many recreational users already have that much (or more) property.

    Do you think all pot smokers are out of work 20 year olds who live in their parents' basement?

    Not at all, but I doubt that $0.5M+ pot smokers see the bulk of the anti-drug enforcement. There is a high risk to accidentally stumble upon someone with connections.

    Plus other upstanding citizens may see that drug war (especially war on pot) is senseless when they notice their neighbors being arrested. As of now, I assume many pretend that only "bad" people are arrested for drug-possession crimes.

  • Oblig post (Score:5, Interesting)

    by houghi ( 78078 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @02:41PM (#42302529)

    Breaking The Taboo - Film []
    Narrated by Oscar winning actor Morgan Freeman, "Breaking the Taboo" is produced by Sam Branson's indie Sundog Pictures and Brazilian co-production partner Spray Filmes and was directed by Cosmo Feilding Mellen and Fernando Grostein Andrade. Featuring interviews with several current or former presidents from around the world, such as Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, the film follows The Global Commission on Drug Policy on a mission to break the political taboo over the United States led War on Drugs and expose what it calls the biggest failure of global policy in the last 40 years

  • by gtbritishskull ( 1435843 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @04:06PM (#42303031)

    Ahhh... the classical slippery slope argument. If we make this not-so-bad drug legal, then eventually we will make all the bad ones legal, and once that happens then it is guaranteed that we will eventually legalize raping babies.

    If Pot is legalized, then Phillip-Morris SHOULD start growing marijuana and selling them. They are a business and a new market is opening up in their field. They would be stupid not to try to add it to their product line. Does that mean that cocaine, heroine, and LSD will be legalized? No. There are A LOT of people who believe that pot should be legalized but harder drugs should not be. They will most likely prevent harder drugs from being legalized for a long time (not arguing the merits of legalizing all drugs or not, just saying that your slippery slope argument is bullshit).

  • by gtbritishskull ( 1435843 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @04:20PM (#42303099)

    California's laws are bullshit to begin with. Legalized for "medical use" my ass. I have been there and seen the "doctors" who will give you a prescription IN THE DISPENSARY. If they want to legalize it, then they should. But, if they actually want to follow the laws on the books, then a lot of those dispensaries are breaking the spirit of the law if not the letter. If Obama starts going after people in Washington and Colorado, then I might say that he has overstepped (since the have actually legalized it). Maybe you want to pretend that California legalized it because legalization is your goal, but the California laws are bullshit and I can't fault Obama for fulfilling his DUTY to enforce the laws. I think what he has done has actually helped the legalization cause because it has shown how California's laws are fucked up (so that other states won't try the same half-assed laws).

    Btw, I am in favor of legalizing pot. I am not in favor of halfway legalizing it and then doing half-assed enforcement. We should enforce the laws that we have. If we don't think they should be enforced, then we should change them. I want pot to be legal in fact, not just in practice.

  • by BrendaEM ( 871664 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @06:20PM (#42303769) Homepage

    Do you think the jails, court costs, and police work are free?
    We cannot afford to jail and arrest such a great amount of the population.

    How much of you tax money do you want invested in a losing, pointless, discriminatory war?

  • by budgenator ( 254554 ) on Saturday December 15, 2012 @10:14PM (#42305001) Journal

    Considering the havoc that a few over-achieving, narcissistic and predatory businessman have reeked on our economy, maybe a little tempering of the ambition would be a good thing.

If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton