House Votes To Allow Medical Marijuana Arrests

http://publicbroadcasting.net/opb/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=934980&sectionID=1


House Votes To Allow Medical Marijuana Arrests


By Capitol News Connection Staff

WASHINGTON, D.C. 2006-06-29 The US House rejected an attempt Wednesday to block federal drug agents from arresting people who use marijuana legally under state medical marijuana laws.

Oregon is one of 11 states allowing marijuana use under a doctor's supervision for certain illnesses.

Last summer, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal agents can crack down on users and growers -- even in states with medical marijuana laws.

Oregon Republican Greg Walden joined 258 other lawmakers in opposing the measure. He said the vote was a tough call, given Oregon's support for medical marijuana.

Greg Walden: "Oregon has voted for medical marijuana. Federal prosecutors haven't been in trying to upend that, so I don't think it's the time to pass that."

Walden says he could change his view if federal agents do choose to prosecute in Oregon.

The state's other four representatives -- all Democrats -- backed the measure.

FUCK THE HOUSE.

Hopefully the Senate won't be retarded. (One can dream.)

wait... they're using legally, but can still be arrested for it?

WTF??

^ legal under state law, illegal under federal law

i see... is that not that insanity?

Jakus, not at all. It's kind of insanity to have federal laws at all, but certainly not insane to have local laws that local enforcement look at and federal laws that the local enforcement don't look at. This brings us a bit closer to a democratic process.

Seems like states should not make their own laws if the federal laws trumps it every step of the way 8(

Jakus said:

i see... is that not that insanity?

Click to expand...

Its the DEA for crying out loud. The same guys who tried to take on the UN drugs ppl when they were considering using mdma for medical purposes.

i see now. It all sounds very beaurocratic(sp?) and... well, american.

poor america

Matt_Himself said:

Seems like states should not make their own laws if the federal laws trumps it every step of the way 8(

Click to expand...

most medical marijuana laws passed by the states are voter initiatives. their constitutionality isn't questioned when they are passed.. only when they are challenged.

besides, only federal cops enforce federal laws... state and local cops have to follow local laws.

see now. It all sounds very beaurocratic(sp?) and... well, american.

Click to expand...

yeah, not like in australia where they have the same exact system 8(

Each of the States and territories of Australia that are self-governing are separate jurisdictions, and have their own system of courts and parliaments. The system of laws in each State are influential on each other, but not binding. Laws passed by the Parliament of Australia, and common law made by federal courts (such as the High Court of Australia) are federal laws, and apply to the whole of Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Australia

Click to expand...

Portillo said:

Its the DEA for crying out loud. The same guys who tried to take on the UN drugs ppl when they were considering using mdma for medical purposes.

Click to expand...

The DEA is only acting out of desperate self-preservation as the US slowly moves toward the inevitable decriminalization of all drugs--and of which medical marijuana sanctioned by the vote of citizens is a major stepping-stone...

Think about it...when there is longer such a thing as a "drug crime," the only place where DEA cowboys will find work is in the B-circuit rodeo...

I guess states' rights don't matter anymore. Why is it that republicans are always talking about the dangers of big government and then they wipe their ass with the 10th amendment?

They can take our marijuana, but they can never take our freedom!! Oh wait scratch that.

States rights! Fascists..

For all of you bitching here, you obviously haven't had much American history.... As much as this whole thing is very disappointing for what it represents, the Constitution/US Gov't has always been set up so that Federal law trumps state law. It was intended to allow states to have jurisdiction over matters that the Federal government didn't wish to regulate or didn't feel were proper to regulate. States' rights are one thing (and they are not being eroded here), but CA directly contradicted a federal law that was already in place. "States' rights" are the guarantee that states may legislate matters over which the federal government has no jurisdiction or chooses not to legislate, not that the states may make any laws they please. When a state goes and makes a law that blatantly contradicts a federal law, you're going to have the exact same outcome every time. What is essentially being asked here is to remove federal government entirely, and why would we do that? Unless you really wanted each state to be a sovereign nation of its own, I suppose, but I know I don't.... This is exactly the same as if California had decided to make murder legal and then the federal government said no. It may be unfortunate, but that's how it is. For any drug law changes to be made, there's going to need to be a national lobby for it.

^^^Do you have a shred of compassion for anyone?

I didn't post this article to start a debate about state's rights. I posted it to further illustrate the fact that the federal government would rather have people suffer than have to admit that their drug policy is unjust.

"Unfortunate" my ass. It's an outrage.

I think its the federal Government's last burst to try to convince the other states that they shouldn't legalise it. By saying "No matter the state laws you will lose" they make it seem lake the 11 states are bad. I think we should have national votes, after all this is a democratic republic, we should have our opinions voiced because not all representatives will voice them.

But seriously these are Medical Patients!, not your average, old, hippie trying to fight the man, these people have genuine problems.