ALL TRUMP!!! ALL THE TIME!!!

wait a god damn minute... you're telling me that you, Rav and myself are currently situated in the same hell hole?

Possibly lol, they blocked off Robertson Blvd, and all side streets about 100' out. At least Trump understands he needs to be careful in public.

Yea I'm sure Trump is worried about some nobody on FFXIAH threatening him.

Also Trump personally reads all these shitty posts to see what the opposition thinks.

California is the resistance. Full of self important *** Vic you would fit right in !

Robertson BLVD? I used live out there in Baldwin Hills/Culver City/Mar Vista.

But he was Phoenix last night as well. Didn't know he was in LA.
Whenever the President is in LA, Wilshire BLVD always seemed to be a nightmare.

Neither of these is a rational argument.

You need to give specific reasons on why to criminalize cannibis while also decriminalizing alcohol.

We can not rely on belief, social acceptance or personal opinion as none of those is a rational thought. Laws and regulations need to be based on rational thoughts with specific goals in mind. To do otherwise just makes someone a hypocrite.

We can break down the entire debate into two questions, first being "Should we criminalization recreation substances"?

The list is rather vast and includes stuff you wouldn't think belongs, though it is a recreational substance.

Caffeine
Sugar
Nicotine
Alcohol
Cannibis
Heroine
Cocaine
Meth

The last can get exhaustive depending on how we classify "recreational", but things like Caffeine and Sugar definite belong as neither Coffee nor Donuts are required for us to live and both are ingested for the positive chemical reactions they create.

The second question is "If yes to the first, to what degree should we criminalize"?

This is the "why" of it all, we allow Caffeine for reason X, we disallow Heroine for reason Y. This must be rational, you can't say "I use Caffeine therefor it's fine, I don't have a problem with Alcohol so that's fine too, I absolutely hate those *** pot heads so throw them in jail".

In other words, you can't demonize the left for being hypocrite while you yourself does the same thing. So far I have yet to see a single rational reason why cannibis should be illegal while ethanol is legal. It always boils down to social acceptance or personal preference and I absolutely despise that reasoning. Every atrocity in the history of the world was accepted and justified using that sort of self serving reasoning.

And Kireek, since your not from the US you might not know our history involving prohibition of alcohol.

Using much of the same logic you have, they got a Constitutional Amendment passed to ban alcohol across all of the USA. Having seen a little of our government, you can realize how ridiculously difficult it is to get one of those passed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution


The results were horrifying, instead of regular business's handling the alcohol market the mafia took over the production, distribution and sale of it. This lead to lots of street violence as the various gangs crime families fought each other over control of supply and territory. Alcohol consumption itself did not go down, it was merely forced into underground bars and establishments or at people's homes.

This was all during the "roaring 20's", think "The Great Gatsby" if you want a film example of that period. Awful lot of drinking and partying going on considering the Constitutional level ban on Alcohol.

Eventually saner heads prevailed and they passed the 21st amendment which repealed the 19th.

If that seems kinda familiar, it's because the exact same scenario is playing out with cannibis. Huge public demand for a product, Big Liberal Government steps in to protect the people and bans that commodity. Illegal organizations take over the market for that commodity which in turn leads to some rather unpleasant side effects like gang wars and lots of dead innocents.

We are either for big government or against it. We can't pick and choose based on what we personally use or feel comfortable with. After all the exact same government power that lets them ban cannibis also lets then ban plastic straws, sodas and big hamburgers.

While I agree with your post you have your history wrong.

The original ban had everything to do with DuPont, nylon, selling Hearst* newspapers, and racism.

The definitive book on marijuana proibition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor_Wears_No_Clothes

*Hearst was married to a DuPont.

Yeah...so close! I work across the street from Helms Bakery District, and live a block over from Sony. My co-worker lives in Koreatown, and he left at the worst moment yesterday. It took him 1 hour & 40 minutes to drive 9 miles.

The heavy restrictions were politically motivated by radical conservatives to fight what they believed were evil communists. Many of the professors coming back from the USSR would encourage cannabis use along with the whole free love thing. There are audio tapes of these discussions happening so this isn't some conspiracy ***. The operative thinking was "we can't make communism illegal but we can make what they do illegal".

It was the rights version of "we can't make conservatism illegal but can make what they say illegal".

That's right around the corner from where I grew up. Rodeo and Clyde which is apparently Obama and Clyde now.

Ok just rechecked and yes I was right. Cannibis had varying legal status's from 1906 onward but wasn't largely enforced unless money was involved. The primary laws and regulations were food safety / poisoning laws and then later tax and revenue laws. It wasn't until the 1970's when the Controlled Substances Act was passed under Nixon that the substance was made explicitly illegal under it's scheduling along with a dedicated law enforcement organization being created to enforce the act. Today we all them the DEA.

The tapes were a discussion between President Nixon and lawmakers about the scheduling of various substances and the items on Schedule I of the list were politically motivated. They included Heroin, LSD and Cannabis and were put there because they were substances the "evil communists" were known to use.

Remember this was during the 60's and 70's when the US was involved in wars against the "evil communists" of other nations and our spy agencies were noticing those "evil communists" had infiltrated the USA, specifically the education and media industries. People in power have been known to do really stupid things in the name of "protecting the people", stuff like Japanese Concentration Camps.

This is why I oppose big government as a rule. The power of the government to do good is generally overruled by the power of government to do bad precisely because the definitions of "good" and "bad" are so damn relative. On a practical and moral level, cannabis should not be illegal at all. Or rather should be no more illegal then alcohol, which is a substance far more dangerous both in addiction and in effect.

When is Trump going to pardon the Houston Astros?

Wow, you actually managed to think of a less deserving pardon recipient than Blago, remarkable!

Roger Stone just got 40 months. Any bets on how long it will take Trump to pardon him? I'm guessing less than a week.

Isn’t that basically the sentence that Barr recommended?

They didn't set a timeframe, just less than the original recommendation. It's a fair sentence.

A lot more fair than what was proposed, for sure. But yeah, dunno if Trump will change that.

There was nothing abnormal about the sentencing recommendation, I never understood the uproar from the DOJ, they asked for 7 years to counter the defense request of no jail time, expecting the judge to split the difference which is exactly what happened.

I should clarify, the uproar from the top of the DOJ, the original recommendation was approved by the lower echelons of the DOJ.

It is not.

What the prosecutors originally proposed was fair.

Yeah. I almost forgot the mandatory double sentence for Republican offenders. Gotta make sure those liars spend more time in prison than rapists.

Was the original sentencing that the prosecution briefed to the senior Justice Department officials, before going off the reservation and recommending the Republican double penalty.